57 Comments - wordslinger - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 6:46 am: –I mean, if you drill down to education funding the state of Illinois provides less than a third, OK?– Maybe so overall, but many downstate districts receive much more than a third of their funding from the state. There is also this pesky section of the state Constitution: SECTION 1. GOAL - FREE SCHOOLS A fundamental goal of the People of the State is the educational development of all persons to the limits of their capacities. The State shall provide for an efficient system of high quality public educational institutions and services. Education in public schools through the secondary level shall be free. There may be such other free education as the General Assembly provides by law. The State has the primary responsibility for financing the system of public education. - CircularFiringSquad - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 6:52 am: Hey if you “drill down” into the Trib poll they provide some more exhaustive coverage of that “lightly reported” NoTaxBill real estate scandal in Champaign…”The millionaire real estate developer also has faced criticism over his votes in the legislature to help spur development near property he owned in central Illinois and for using tax laws to legally avoid paying federal income taxes the past two years….” Gotta wonder if any of the state’s news media darling want to look into the NoTaxBill biz and tell us about complaints, law suits, work comp cases, etc. Let’s see the NoTaxBill Platform expands to: Cut Min Wage Freeze Educator Salaries Right to Work Hike Property Taxes Sounds like a winner to us - Aldyth - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 7:26 am: Brady must be practicing these evasive answers in front of a mirror or his aides. How long can he deflect answering questions about specifics before the voters start paying attention? Or, are the voters so invested in hearing only what they want to hear that they’ll ignore it? - ? - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 8:08 am: How many raises has Senator Brady received in the past 8 yrs? What % of the total salary - how many were COLA? - the Patriot - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 8:26 am: I love how everyone believes that schools are somehow this well oiled machine with no waste. When you count steps, many teachers are getting very good raises when most private sector people are just happy to have jobs. Schools are the only place you can work, be guaranteed a raise, have no chance of being fired, and your salary is in now way dependent upon job performance. That has to change. Cutting the State board will have a ripple effect. Not only do you cut the immediate expense, you stop getting fed unfunded mandates they create, mostly at the request of the IEA. I still have to go back to the main point of this election. I won’t try to sell you on Bill Brady, but if you think what Pat and Rod have done over the past 8 year is working you should probably turn in your voter registraton card in the name of public safety. - RobRoy - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 8:36 am: So it really does come down to - will Cook county voters deliver for Quinn. That’s it isn’t it? Can the Machine and the unions turn out the vote? - OneMan - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 8:43 am: == SECTION 1. GOAL - FREE SCHOOLS == Emphasis on the word Goal, that argument has been tried lots of times. - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 8:44 am: wordslinger, What is your point, quoting the state constitution? All it says is that the state shall provide a SYSTEM, which I would argue is the state department of education. It does not say that the state shall provide free education, it says that the education shall be free to its citizens, which prohibits local municipalities from charging for education (we can argue about property taxes and fees to pay for public education, but we must agree there is no tuition for K-12). Your point is understood that some districts may receive more than Brady’s claim of a third of its budget, some may also receive less. It is impossible to consider every individual district when talking to reporters during an election. But Brady’s point is still valid, on average, a 2.5% decrease in overall budget on the average school district is easily doable if the teachers stopped their scheduled pay increases, or heaven forbid, an actual pay cut. Your argument is one of the toughest for a politician to counter. There is a special interest for every line item in any public budget. No cuts can ever be made if we say that government has to do absolutely ever thing it does now, in exactly the way it is being done already. Using that logic, the only thing that can happen is the size of government increases, or at a minimum is chiseled in stone at its current size. Given the rate of government growth over the past 10 years, it may be preferable to lock in the current size of government in perpetuity than to let it continue growing. - GetOverIt - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 8:53 am: The Quinn Ford add is an A+!!!!!! - wordslinger - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 9:04 am: –The State has the primary responsibility for financing the system of public education.– So by your logic, Cincy, that only means the Constitution requires the state to fund the SBOE? Give me a break. Where would that leave Brady, who wants to do away with the SBOE? The intent of the drafters was clear as they’ve said time and again. The fact is, just like the balanced budget requirement, there’s really no mechanism to enforce the provision. The Supremes aren’t interested in getting involved. - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 9:09 am: –The State has the primary responsibility for financing the system of public education.– “So by your logic, Cincy, that only means the Constitution requires the state to fund the SBOE?” That is one system, yes. There can be others. If the drafters of the state constitution intended the state to provide a free education, they should not have called it a GOAL, as OneMan pointed out, and the language is totally unclear. They should not have said a SYSTEM, they should have used much better language. I contend that the state Supreme Court may not want to get involved precisely because, if challenged, there is no constitutional requirement for the state to provide any funding to local districts at all. - downstate hack - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 9:14 am: The Quinn Ford Ad is very good. The negative Ad against Brady only fair. C-. The tribune article today very harmful. Makes him look like Blago all over again. - wordslinger - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 9:14 am: Dude, you’re reading with your eyes closed. - Truth - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 9:20 am: Well, the school districts could cut spending now couldn’t they? - Emanuel Collective - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 9:25 am: The new PPP polls show Brady with a 42-35 lead, with 10% undecided. That 10% voted for Obama by a 2/3ds margin. It seems like Quinn has finally put together something resembling a coherent attack on Brady, so this race may not be as over as we think. - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 9:29 am: - Truth - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 9:20 am: “Well, the school districts could cut spending now couldn’t they?” Apparently, according to wordslinger and others who believe as he does, they can’t. The only thing that is acceptable to people who refuse to touch any line item in a state, county or municipal budget is increased taxes, followed by additional state spending over and above out already unsustainable rate. There can only be sacrifices by the taxpayers who already have to cough up the money they earn, but never a sacrifice by a teacher, unionized state worker, state construction worker (see my previous rants on “prevailing wage” contracting), illegal immigrant or person from outside the state (see AllKids). EVER. Anyone who proposes thinking about changing the current method of doing government business will be labeled a racist, hate-monger, uncaring, elitist, wealthy, or some other disparagement. Beware. - Don't Worry, Be Happy - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 9:30 am: So Brady’s point seems to be that since the State already provides such a small percentage of education funding, that it’s ok to cut it further since a big cut of a small slice is really just a small cut. Great. For the record, Illinois is currently 49th or 50th in the percentage of state funding for education. - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 9:33 am: Emmanuel Collective (which is hopefully different than the Borg Collective), Using your numbers, if the undecideds broke the same as they did for Obama (a highly speculative proposition in today’s environment of dissatisfaction with government and the fact that new polling show Obama under water in the state), Brady would still win over Quinn will still lose by 3%. - wordslinger - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 9:38 am: –Anyone who proposes thinking about changing the current method of doing government business will be labeled a racist, hate-monger, uncaring, elitist, wealthy, or some other disparagement. Beware.– You’re flopping around desperately this morning. Where do you see any of that? You’re the guy the other day who said you no longer care who gets hurt by cuts, just so long as Illinois isn’t a “laughingstock.” - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 9:40 am: Don’t Worry, Be Happy, We are 49th in the portion of state expenditures, but #11 in the amount spent by the state. We are also #5 in the amount spent on administration. Other interesting breakdowns: Illinois is a large state, and our spending proves it Illinois ranks #7 in total K-12 education spending Illinois ranks #4 in local funds spent on education Illinois ranks #11 in state funds spent on education Illinois ranks #5 in federal funds spent on education Illinois ranks #7 in instruction spending Illinois ranks #5 in administration spending Illinois spends a larger portion on administration, and a lower portion on actual instruction Illinois ranks #34 in the portion of spending devoted to instruction Illinois ranks #5 in the portion of spending devoted to administration Illinois is about average in spending per student Illinois ranks #22 in total spending per student Illinois ranks #24 in instruction spending per student Illinois ranks #18 in administration spending per student Illinois is different in the degree to which local schools depend on local taxes Illinois ranks #3 in the portion of spending paid by local taxes Illinois ranks #49 in the portion of spending paid by state taxes From:http://www.illinoisloop.org/spending.html - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 9:44 am: I truly think you are the one missing the point today, wordslinger, and seem to be proving my point, attacking me instead of debating the issue which was totally predicatble. I stand behind my previous statement that the state needs to cut, even if it hurts people, and I said our inability to address the issues makes us a laughingstock, not your convenient interpretation that we should cut solely so we aren’t a laughingstock. - Hamburgler - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 9:44 am: Cincy, Wordslinger’s right. You are flailing because your candidate is failing. - lakeview - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 9:48 am: The state could cut education funding, and it will have to if there are no tax increases. And here is what will happen: all the people in New Trier will immediately vote for big property tax increases, and while children everywhere else will be screwed. Education is an investment, which is why rich people are willing to pay for it. - A.B. - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 9:54 am: Loev AG floundering around, “I have been clear, I left the operations of the bank in 2005 and then left the bank in 2006.” Ok, so when did you leave the bank ‘05 or ‘06? Both? Huh? He is going to get blisters from the attack ads that are being built. - Dirt Digger - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 9:56 am: So is Quinn’s plan with that ad to put all the Brady voters to sleep so they don’t vote? - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 10:00 am: - Hamburgler - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 9:44 am: “Cincy, Wordslinger’s right. You are flailing because your candidate is failing.” We’ll see if Brady wins, or if Quinn pulls off an upset. The CNN poll has holes in it you can drive a truck though and is so far out of whack with other reputable polling that, until other polling verifies its findings, I will consider an outlier. I would be interested to hear Rich’s and bored now’s opinion on the CNN poll results. - Small Town Liberal - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 10:04 am: - I would be interested to hear Rich’s and bored now’s opinion on the CNN poll results. - Maybe you should subscribe. - wordslinger - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 10:06 am: Cincy, you need to take a breath, man. You’re seeing attacks and throwing around words like racist, hate-monger, blah, blah, blah that aren’t there. I just disagree with your interpretation of things, dude. It’s nothing personal, it’s just business. - Adam Smith - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 10:09 am: So let me get this straight, the smoking gun Quinn trots out to claim that Brady “admits” he his plan will raise property taxes is the statement, “well there are some natural property tax increases that will go into effect.” ????? More proof that reporters have no fundamental understanding of the topics they are covering. LOCAL TAXING AUTHORITIES levy property taxes. Almost every one raises the levy every year to the maximum allowed by law. Until the real estate bubble burst the consistent increase in assessed valuation was a reasonable offset to taxpayers and allowed the locals to keep RATES consistent. As Bill Brady knows, local authorities will continue to increase levies, property values will again rise (in some parts of the state they have stayed flat or risen slightly even in the recession). Anyone with any understanding of how the system works knows that this is what Brady is talking about. Also, Quinn is being dishonest when he says Brady’s plan will raise property taxes. As just explained, the state does not levy property taxes. Every local jurisdiction has the CHOICE as to whether they will raise property taxes. If the locals get less from the state they have a choice. To claim that they are being forced to raise taxes is a cowardly excuse, but the natural default of someone as enamored with taxes as Quinn. As Brady rightly notes, the locals, including schools, municipalities and mosquito abatement districts, have to continue to tighten the purse strings too. Rich, you are rightly critical of media (mostly the Trib) when they get their facts wrong. But you have let this Quinn property tax line go unchallenged. - Bill - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 10:09 am: Cincy gets a little excited once in a while. There must be something in the tea today. They better start inviting Scott Lee to the parties. - Small Town Liberal - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 10:12 am: - As just explained, the state does not levy property taxes. Every local jurisdiction has the CHOICE as to whether they will raise property taxes. - Yeah, and when the other choice puts their children’s education and future at risk, that’s not much of a choice is it? Sure there can be cuts, but right now cuts aren’t enough by themselves. - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 10:13 am: wordslinger, Let’s be clear, my warning was to Truth, and said he had to be careful what he says so that he is not accused of being a (insert disparaging remark here), which is a tactic commonly used, you must admit. And Bill. Trust me when I say I am not excited, just sick and tired of any idea that does not conform to the “conventional” liberal wisdom being discounted out of hand. - Amalia - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 10:14 am: “…..some natural property tax increases that will go into effect.” like it’s automatic, or a natural progression? no, more like the natural look in makeup….it still requires artificial enhancement, or in this case, artificial changes. there is nothing natural about a property tax increase. vote for Brady, he’ll raise your property tax….naturally. - Scott Summers - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 10:21 am: Re: “The State has the primary responsibility for financing the system of public education.” (Article X, Section 1 of the Illinois constitution) Settled 37 years ago. Blase v. State of Illinois, 302 NE 2d 46 (1973): “…it cannot be said that the sentence in question was intended to impose a specific obligation on the General Assembly. Rather its purpose was to state a commitment, a purpose, a goal.” Accordingly, the state — to its shame — has ratcheted down funding ever since. Full text of opinion is at http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3586458777230303754&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 10:22 am: - Small Town Liberal - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 10:12 am: “Yeah, and when the other choice puts their children’s education and future at risk, that’s not much of a choice is it? Sure there can be cuts, but right now cuts aren’t enough by themselves.” Please explain how freezing teacher pay for 5 years, or 10 or 15 years jeopardizes the kids? The only thing it jeopardizes is the teachers, who have been largely protected from the overall effects of the recession. This common tactic of confusing the kid’s welfare with that of the underperforming education establishment is vacuous. Brady’s suggestion that a 10% cut in education spending, part of his across the board cuts, is a serious first step to reign in spending. It is also the first step in balancing the budget, which even I admit may require a tax increase. I have stated on numerous occasions on this board that a “grand compromise” is achievable. First - real, sustainable (not one time) cuts in current spending, after which, Two - Tax increase which has a sunset provision (3/4 majority to revoke) to eliminate it after some time like 5 years. Three - Future budgets to phase back spending to some level (pick a year, how about 2006) - Small Town Liberal - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 10:26 am: Cinci - Hey, genius, I said there were cuts that could be made. There is still going to need to be a tax increase. Only talking point parrots like you maintain that a tax increase isn’t absolutely necessary. - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 10:26 am: Four - Future spending caps to changes (up or down) in inflation and population - Bill - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 10:28 am: Cincy, You do make a valid and often overlooked point about the abnornmal perentage of ed spending that never reaches the classroom, i.e. administration. One reason for this is the unreasonably large number of school districts in Illinois each requiring their own various levels of bureaucracy. It seems that, especially downstate, every 15 citizens must have their own school district. A lot of this has to do with preserving old football rivalries from the 1950s. Every time consolidation is even suggested the republicans down there go nuts. A lot could be saved by consolidating small districts and forcing unit districts. The quality of education wouldn’t suffer and Ky. and Mo. would be flooded with resumes from unemployable six figure administrators. - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 10:28 am: STL, Perhaps you should read my 10:22 post. It looks like you and I may actually partially agree, as much as you hate to admit it. I guess that makes us both geniuses, huh? - Small Town Liberal - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 10:32 am: Cinci - What do you think I was responding to? You suggested that I said any cuts would jeopardize students, when I said nothing of the sort. - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 10:34 am: Bill, Interesting point, and I think you are right. There is, however, one big however! By the state propping up the local districts, they are never really being forced into a position of making the hard choices you outline (consolidation). Instead, we hear talk about the kids being decimated. If Republican’s are to blame here, Queen of Hearts them. Actually, it would seem that if it is true that downstate Republicans are the problem, Brady’s proposed cuts are going against the grain of his most ardent supporters (good for him). Have we ever seen anything like that from Quinn (c.f. no-layoff pledge to the unions)? - anon - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 10:36 am: Candidate Brady is misleading with his comment that the state pays one third of education so a 10% across-the-board cut would be 2.5% of local budgets. First, his simple minded math is just wrong. One third of 10% is 3.3%. And “if you drill down to education funding”, many of the 700 school districts at the foundation level receive well over 50% of their operating budgets from state funding, some has high as 80%. So Brady’s cut for education is draconian for many many school districts. Senator Brady is, at best, guilty of fuzzy math. At worst, doing real harm to rural community schools in an around Bloomington-Normal. - Wumpus - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 10:37 am: Is Alexi a tax cheat or mob banker? - Louis G. Atsaves - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 10:45 am: Quinn “Hey I’m an Honest Guy” governor seems to be grasping at straws. Yes there is natural revenue growth from property taxes, thanks to the various taxing bodies that keep hiking and adjusting their rates. Just ask any property tax owner. Quinn however has been withholding education payments forcing layoffs of teachers and curtailing of programs, and forcing higher property tax levies. He never wants to mention this, because he is the “honest governor.” Interesting Tribune Article this morning about Quinn “Hey I’m Honest” the Governor taking a series of campaign contributions in exchange for appointments to boards and commissions. One of them was that magic Blago number of $25,000. His response: “Hey, I’m Honest!” “Honest!” Reminds me of the union endorsements received “coincidentally” around the same time Quinn guaranteed no layoffs. “Hey, I’m Honest!” Reminds me of the huge campaign contributions received from unions just before the McPier amendatory vetoes, which thankfully were overridden by the legislature. “Hey, I’m Honest!” The more you dig into Quinn “Hey I’m Honest” the Governor, the more you have to ask: “Who Is This Guy?” - Fan of the Game - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 10:55 am: Brady promises no loss of jobs in education id the state cuts 10% of its funding? It’s a promise he can’t keep. If Brady wants to move the school funding issue to the local level, districts WILL May cuts. It’s the only way to get to 10%. Passing referenda on Education Fund initiatives is so very difficult. It won’t happen in the vast majority of the cases. So for those districts that rely heavily on state aid (i.e., poorer districts), the only viable way to cut those funds is by a reduction in force, and that is done on the local level. Brady can promise no education job losses, but he will be implementing a budget that will make those cuts necessary. He’s just not the person who will be making the cuts. - Truth Seeker - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 11:01 am: This from Time Magazine. “Many state and local governments have made the mistake of courting the votes of public employees by fattening salaries and benefits, all the time imagining that pension-fund investments could only go up,” the tirade warns us. With tales of “lavish retirements for relatively youthful public servants” illustrating the “ugly…issue of public-employee pay and benefits,” the jeremiad estimated that state governments are anywhere from $1 trillion to $3 trillion short of their public pension commitments. Any talk of education finance has got to start with the cost of labor. Yet, in this campaign we have not heard much about how our candidates are planning on dealing with the liabilities of current and past public employment. - A.B. - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 11:19 am: @ Wumpus Is both another option? - Anonymous - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 12:42 pm: Yeah, just like every poor person has a CHOICE between medicine and food. I’m pretty conservative on the budget side of things (for a moderate), but it gripes me that so many people on both sides of this budget debate want to pretend that if only the “right” solution is picked, it will be almost painless. No it won’t! It makes me think that all of you are afraid of the truth about your proposed solution..you have to hide the reality from people or they won’t support your approach. That is the sort of simplistic thinking that has kept us floundering on this problem for years now. Rising taxes will cause pain for some people. Cutting spending will cause pain for some people. The only part of the equation that is debatable and subject to change is on whom, in what form, and in what proportion should the pain be imposed. - steve schnorf - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 12:43 pm: Sorry, the 12:42 post was me - Cincinnatus - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 1:02 pm: steve schnorf, Well, I think there is a lot of validity to your argument, which is why I propose a compromise. Your point about the pain is well taken, but I think it also supports a proposal that, at least as a first step, cuts spending some percentage across the board. This eliminates the infighting among special interests (meant here in the most generic sense) while the legislators get their poo-poo in order to make the targeted cuts necessary. And no doubt that a tax increase will be across the board for the very same reasons. Grand Compromise is posible. - steve schnorf - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 1:08 pm: C, I’ve hoped so for a long time now, but I’m losing faith… - Cook County Commoner - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 1:14 pm: Educational funding based primarily on local property taxes seems destined to a long overdue demise regardless of who wins the coming elections because; 1. Increased foreclosures will naturally diminish the property tax flow; 2. The aging population will apply in greater and greater numbers for Senior Citizen Prop Tax Deferals, thereby diminishing the property tax flow; and, 3. Homeowners will realize that property taxes are precluding many new buyers from entering the market and demand change so they can sell their properties and get out of Illinois. The teachers’ unions will continue to press for burdensome local property tax funding and achieve some early success based on campaign contributions. However, remaining homeowners who end up picking up a bigger and bigger share (tax caps will have been removed by this time) will display long overdue rational self interest. The continuous deterioration of most public schools will assist in the process. Those that can’t get out will opt to rent and leave on the best terms possible, usually renting to Section 8 tenants which will place an increased burden on school funding. We’re circling the drain, folks, and there appears to be no alternative but go down it in order to achieve any meaningful change. - 10th Indy - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 2:04 pm: Alexi is shameless. In March of 2006 he described himself as: “I’m senior loan officer and vice president, so I oversee a $600 million loan department.” Days after the Rezko loan was signed he was claiming he oversaw the loan. That’s a major inconsistency from his statements about winding things up. - bored now - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 4:52 pm: 10th Indy: alexi is shameless so we should elect an admitted liar who NO ONE in the senate will trust, let alone follow? i’d ask if we define logic in the same manner, but your twisted reasoning already indicates otherwise… - steve schnorf - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 5:28 pm: And C, I hope the grand compromise, if it is ever reached, will include an effort to make Illinois’ tax system more fair. In my mind that entails at least less reliance on property taxes, a progressive (or at least progressive-like) income tax, taxing of retirement income, elimination of business income taxes, broadening the sales tax base. Even with a more fair tax system lower income families will pay a higher percentage of their income in state and local taxes, but it doesn’t have to be as regressive as it is now. - Okay Then/ Will County Woman - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 8:58 pm: The Tribune editorial board session audio w/ all the guv candidates was excellent! I hope that video of it will be made available. I thought the second tier candidates all did well, and I liked that Bruce Dold and the other ed board members held firm on getting their questions answered (e.g., making sure Pat Quinn answered whether or not it was good to give $75 million to Illinois Works, while service providers wait months and months and months…for payment) - Anonymous - Thursday, Sep 30, 10 @ 9:09 pm: I obviously am not getting this Alexi thing at all. He says he left his operational responsibilities in 05, but was still transitioning…whatever…in 06, which I suppose from a business perspective is feasible. Kirk says (in a Sun-Times interview) that to get the tax break, Giannoulias would have had to have been working at the Bank in 06, but he told “other people”, including the S-T he left in 05. Fox say they checked their archives and Giannoulias always said he’d left in 06. And yet Kirk’s team is “promoting” that video. Like I said, what am I missing here? Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.