*** UPDATE 1 *** The governor’s office points to this bill which was introduced in February, but never made it out of committee as proof that it supported reinstating the tax credit program.
*** UPDATE 2 *** From the IMA…
The bill (HB2948) cited by Quinn was an IMA initiative. We drafted it and worked with Rep. Mussman who sponsored the bill.
[ *** End Of Updates *** ]
* Caterpillar spokesman Jim Dugan continued to talk to reporters yesterday about Illinois’ screwed-up business climate…
Dugan said the state hasn’t done enough recently to encourage investment in research facilities. The R&D tax credit has been a political football in the state General Assembly as lawmakers swing back and forth between curtailing and expanding tax incentives for businesses. The R&D credit has expired three times in past eight years.
“What message does that send?” Dugan said. “There’s a lack a of stability and predictability” in the state’s business policies, he added.
Under the credit program that expired at the end of 2010, companies were able to earn credits on their state income taxes based on spending increases on research and development. Quinn’s spokeswoman predicted the program will eventually be reinstated.
“The governor believes strongly in the R&D credits,” Anderson said. “He knows it’s important and he’s in support of it.”
OK, just wait a second here. If Gov. Pat Quinn “believes strongly in the R&D credits,” and “knows it’s important,” and is “in support of it.” then why the heck did he allow the tax credit program to expire in the first place?
I don’t go in for Illinois bashing, but this sort of thing is exactly why Illinois has such a horrible reputation.
* I’m sure this company used the R&D credit, but while the credit’s expiration doesn’t appear to have played a role in the board room decision to leave, it certainly didn’t help…
Consumer products giant Unilever plans to close the Alberto Culver plant in Melrose Park in 2013 and will begin laying off at least 600 employees in a few months, employees and a union representative said Thursday.
“Most of the employees are very long-term and a lot of them are either in shock or denial,” said Steven Kramer, vice president of the United Steelworkers union Local 9777. He said the union represents about 250 people at the plant, which has operated since 1961.
Kramer and employees estimated the shutdown will eliminate 800 jobs at the factory and at adjacent offices that used to be Alberto Culver’s headquarters. However, Unilever spokeswoman Anita Larsen said there are 600 jobs at the location. She said the entire office staff will be cut or transferred.
One worker said Unilever is giving up on Melrose Park because it has a largely older work force. She said that despite the plant’s age, it consistently surpassed benchmarks for productivity.
“They told us they didn’t want us even if we worked for free,” said the worker, who asked not to be named.
The governor talks a lot about creating 21st Century jobs. But doing so means fostering companies that create those jobs. Killing off a tax credit for research and development is simply foolhardy. Cat, by the way, spends most of its $1 billion on R&D right here in Illinois.
* Meanwhile, Gov. Pat Quinn yesterday said he would not support a tax cut bill that didn’t include the full Earned Income Tax Credit increase he wants…
Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn says lawmakers who question expanding a tax credit for low-income workers should read Charles Dickens’ “A Christmas Carol.”
Quinn says increasing the earned-income tax credit is about helping all those “Bob Cratchits” who work hard raising kids and deserve some tax relief too if Illinois is going to give breaks to big companies.
After lighting the state Christmas tree Thursday in Chicago, Quinn said he supports a major tax breaks package that increases the state version of the EITC to 10 percent of the federal credit, up from 5 percent.
Some lawmakers don’t even want the EITC mixed into a tax package deal that’s aimed at keeping major companies like the CME Group Inc. and Sears Holdings Corp. in Illinois.
The governor’s full remarks…
* And CME Group’s CFO Jamie Parisi sounded a bit conciliatory…
Parisi also said the CME would not give up on negotiations with Illinois lawmakers on a package of tax breaks from the state after a proposed deal was voted down by the Illinois House of Representatives on Tuesday.
The exchange has threatened to leave Illinois because of a heavy tax burden.
“Unfortunately we were not able to get something passed in this recent session that would have been a benefit for CME going forward,” he said. “We’ll continue to work there and we will continue to look at our other options.”
* Related…
* Next stop - smart grid
* Tenaska bill passes Illinois Senate
* CME: Will Continue To Work With Illinois Lawmakers On Taxes
* VIDEO: John Bradley on CME impasse
* VIDEO: Roger Eddy on CME impasse
* Quinn: No ‘bidding war’ over Sears
* Quinn: Sears help ‘more than adequate’
* When are jobs worth the big cost?: “We’re so desperate for jobs that we’re vulnerable to this,” said Patton, a senior associate at Policy Matters Ohio, a Columbus-based think tank. “It’s a sad thing that our leadership has decided this is what they want to do.”
* Illinois Sports Facilities Authority finds shortfall not as big as originally thought
- bored now - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 5:09 am:
=== I don’t go in for Illinois bashing, but this sort of thing is exactly why Illinois has such a horrible reputation. ===
spot on. IF we’re going to have loopholes, and we do, then the R&D credit needs to be at the top of the list. it’s not just cat that takes advantage of this, and r&d spending does help the economy…
- hisgirlfriday - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 5:49 am:
Why were/are Sears and CME a bigger priority of the GA and governor than the R&D credits that would benefit companies like CAT? Is it because CAT is a primarily Downstate company and no one in leadership in this state (Dem or GOP) really cares about Downstate business?
It seems to me an R&D credit is one that could actually be an investment in business that create jobs whereas what was being proposed for Sears and CME were just blackmail money.
Or is it not a Downstate thing but just that CAT didn’t resort to blackmail like Sears and CME did to try to get what they wanted and blackmail is the only thing that the General Assembly and governor understand enough to actually act upon?
I’m wondering.
- Observer - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 6:08 am:
Apparently Quinn is unaware of the many programs availiable to the so called poor in this state and now wants to give them even more. Nothing like a new income redistribution plan to make the entitlement voters happy
- Anonymous - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 7:34 am:
Aha, now I see Quinn’s secret budget plan– he is counting on Santa Claus to bring new revenue!
And here I was worried.
- WazUP - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 7:58 am:
> After lighting the state Christmas tree Thursday in Chicago…
It’s official the State Capitol is now Chicago!
- Gregor - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 8:05 am:
Government is broken, big surprise. The legislative culture is that you must trade favors for everything. Everything. But the current zero-sum-game attitude in the legislature between the parties creates this Gordian Knot. You can’t move THIS forward until THAT piece gets moved forward and THAT one gets opposed…. Add to that a governor who exhibits signs of ADD, and no wonder hat things like this tax credit fall between the cracks.
- Michelle Flaherty - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 8:07 am:
Hisgirl, The R&D credit is in the “CME bill” and, to my knowledge, has been from the beginning.
- PublicServant - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 8:21 am:
Well they need to break the R&D Credit out of the CME bill, and pass it, now that Cat has made them (and us) aware of the “oversight”.
- hisgirlfriday - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 8:26 am:
My mistake, Michelle, but I had thought that the R&D credit was only added after the House Republicans prodded its addition and that it was taken out of the bill to bring down the cost and the bill that passed the Senate was just CME, Sears and the EITC expansion.
If the R&D credit was in the bill that passed the Senate and died in the House then I am even more mystified at and disgusted with Cross for voting against it.
- PublicServant - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 8:31 am:
Am I to understand, Observer, that our poor aren’t poor enough for you to be called poor, they have more than enough programs, and you don’t like “income redistribution” that we euphemistically call taxes here in the real world, even with Illinois’ flat tax whereby you gated-community guys make off like bandits with the great share of this country’s wealth?
Just wondering if I have your position clear.
- walkinfool - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 8:37 am:
Gregor: You got it man. It’s a Gordian knot, approached by a man without a sword.
- CircularFiringSquad - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 8:38 am:
Hmm CAT is enjoying record prfits due in large to productive IL workers, access to IL capitol, reliable utilities…hardly the chaos the flack likes to talk about.
Would the tax break help them make more? Sure
Does everyone in IL want CAT to stay and expand absolutely
Maybe the flack needs to call some GOPies and urge them to vote like they live in the same state as the CAT HQ
BTW has Capt Fax recovered from his bout with malaria?
- OneMan - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 8:40 am:
“Gov. Quinn now supports program he killed this year”
In other news, water is wet, the Gaming Board hates gaming and Rod has interesting hair…
You almost wonder if he realizes he cut it in the first place.
- wordslinger - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 8:46 am:
–Nothing like a new income redistribution plan to make the entitlement voters happy.–
The biggest supporter ever of EITC was Ronald Reagan. You must be one of those new-breed of “conservatives” who love tax cuts, but only for big corporations and millionaires.
- Peter Snarker - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 8:57 am:
I think we all understand (though perhaps do not agree) with large employer/corporate tax cuts - both from a political/power standpoint and a theory standpoint of the ripple effects keeping those employers has.
I think we also all understand both politically and in theory why, when we have a flat-tax state income tax, that an “element of progressiveness” by utilizing an EIC can make sense.
That does not mean that everyone on here agrees with both of those premises, of course.
I think what is “of concern” to some extent is at least the appearance, if nothing else, that the “average ‘middle class’” person/family is left out of the equation. The tax relief that some argue makes sense for the top and others argue makes sense for the bottom (however you define those groups - it can vary) - well, why doesnt it apply to the middle?
And, also, if tax increases were absolutely necessary (and not saying they werent or were), how can we be rolling them back, ad hoc, before those “temporary” tax increases are even 12 months old?
- PublicServant - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 9:06 am:
Well put Pete. Agree with everything you said.
- wordslinger - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 9:07 am:
It’s too bad about Alberto Culver in Melrose Park, but given the rather hostile “business climate” that’s existed over the years in that town, it’s pretty amazing that any of those big factories remain on North Avenue.
This is the town where then Chief of Police Vito Scavo strongly encouraged businesses to hire his “private security firm,” which often was staffed by on-duty police officers.
I guess when the Chief of Police says you need extra security, you get the message.
Heck, Vito even shook down Kiddieland (out of business, now a big box store).
He got only got six years for that.
- Anonymous - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 9:27 am:
Well said PeterSnarker. Exactly right on all points.
- Michelle Flaherty - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 9:53 am:
So is CAT leaving or not? The erroneous reports of them threatening to leave were the genesis of the woe-is-me business climate coverage. Except they never said they were leaving, except they certainly don’t seem to mind the media universe the erroneous stories of their departure have created.
Apparently Jim Dugan and Brooke Anderson are grads of the same PR school.
- ArchPundit - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 10:00 am:
==You almost wonder if he realizes he cut it in the first place.
Almost, but you know he doesn’t realize it.
- OneMan - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 10:03 am:
ArchPundit –
It’s the Holiday season, trying to be more positive
- OneMan - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 10:04 am:
Guess I am old school conservative I have no problem with EITC…
- Michelle Flaherty - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 10:09 am:
In order to realize he cut it, he’d have to realize we had one to begin with. So I think its safe to say he doesn’t realize he cut it and is therefore free and unhindered in announcing his support of it.
- Small Town Liberal - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 10:13 am:
- Apparently Quinn is unaware of the many programs availiable to the so called poor in this state -
Wait a minute, isn’t that pretty much Scrooge’s answer to the guys asking for donations in “A Christmas Carol”? You have to keep reading, Observer, he changes his mind.
- soccermom - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 10:25 am:
I never thought I would long for the good old days of Ronald Reagan, but….
The EITC was created to encourage people to work — to counteract the “perverse incentives” that could make it more fiscally responsible for a single mom to stay home and accept public assistance instead of going out and getting a low-paid entry-level job. It’s smart to “redistribute income” in a way that gets people into the workforce.
Observer, this isn’t a “new” program. It’s been around for decades. The trouble is, Illinois’ state EITC is way below other states. In Indiana, it’s 9 percent, compared with 5 percent here. I guess somebody should talk to that well-known Communist, Mitch Daniels. (who also — gasp! — raised the state income tax.)
- soccermom - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 10:33 am:
Hey, Observer — your social policy guru, Ebenezer Scrooge, thought we should put poor children in prisons and workhouses. But those, of course, would require additional hires of state employees to run them. And could we find vendors willing to provide gruel and slops despite the State’s extended payment cycles? Oh goodness, what a conundrum!
Wait — I have an idea! We should advise Illinois’ “”so-called poor” to bump themselves off, and “reduce the surplus population.”
(Thank goodness Matthew 25:31-46 is not usually part of the Christmas liturgy…)
- Michelle Flaherty - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 10:39 am:
Observer stopped at “the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come” believing the outcome was fine — he died rich.
- Anonymous - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 10:51 am:
“Wait a minute, isn’t that pretty much Scrooge’s answer to the guys asking for donations in “A Christmas Carol”? You have to keep reading, Observer, he changes his mind.”
Right, he changes his mind to donate HIS OWN MONEY.
In Quinn’s version he wants to donate OTHER PEOPLE’S MONEY.
Big difference.
- Lincoln's Penny - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 10:59 am:
I’m no tax lawyer but as i understand it, in order to benefit from the EITC you have to actually be earning income (some people call it working). So the GOP argue that increasing it will encourage low-income workers not to work.
Do they really think that low-income people can (1) dictate how many hours they work and thus their salary and (2) do they think that these people actually base these decisions on an extra $200 dollars a year?
Someone help me here
- Peter Snarker - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 11:03 am:
I just find the whole conversation/discussion, in general, not just this one, constantly at the extremes. What can we/are we going to do for the richest of the rich (ie. Wall Street, CME, whatever) and what are we going to do for the poorest of the poor (ie., the single mom of a baker’s dozen working 3 jobs, whatever).
That is important stuff - I dont deny it - but our conversation focusing on the “margins” just mirrors our political environment - which focuses on OWS, the tea party movement, etc.
The vast majority of people arent tea party, OWS, on the Civic Club or raising a dozen kids on their own, are not unemployed or employed as CEO’s of major corporations, yet the amount of attention paid to those margins is incredible compared to their relative numbers.
That’s just how I see it. Take that opinion it for what you paid for it. I just see in this conversation a total absence of discussion on the middle. It’s all very top vs very bottom.
- Small Town Liberal - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 11:13 am:
- Right, he changes his mind to donate HIS OWN MONEY.
In Quinn’s version he wants to donate OTHER PEOPLE’S MONEY. -
I’m sure if it had been around Mr. Scrooge would have supported increasing the EITC at the end of the book. I’m sure of it.
- Irish - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 11:14 am:
Spot on Pete!
The tax issue might seem to be the elephant in the room and is grabbing all the headlines. And allowing a R&D credit for business when we are clamoring for new jobs and touting our state as the best place for technology and green start-ups is inconceivable. I think the biggest reason many businesses feel they have to look elsewhere is the fact that there is no stability in Springfield. Before businesses can lay out a plan for the next five years they have to know what the playing field is going to be. And with no plan or stability being demonstrated by the GA or the administration they have no idea what to expect. There was probably more damage done by the demonstration that no one in our government seems to know what they are doing than the act of allowing this to expire. Who wants to build a facility when they don’t know if there will be a need for it in a few years. No one!
- Dean - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 11:17 am:
It’s not Illinois bashing to discuss the horrible financial condition our State is in thanks to our inept Governor and legislature.
- Observer - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 11:19 am:
Mr Scrooge decided to reach into his own pocket and give to the poor. It was his personal decision, not one made by someone else to confiscate private property for public use.
- wordslinger - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 11:23 am:
–It was his personal decision, not one made by someone else to confiscate private property for public use.–
Who’s doing that?
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 11:41 am:
I’m all for Research and Development, but if the purported purpose of the credit is to “create 21st Century Jobs”, then the tax credit should be tied to evidence of actual job creation. Offering companies a blank check for R&D spending simply pads expense accounts, executive salaries, and shareholders’ pockets.
This is exactly how the tax credits for the movie industry work.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, tax credits for giant companies for job creation need to be held to the same Return on Investment, Budgeting for Results standard that we hold the tiniest non-profit job training programs in Illinois.
As for Quinn, I’m a big fan of the Earned Income Tax Credit, and applaud Quinn for sticking to his guns. I just pray he doesn’t cave on this issue like he has on so many others.
In honor of the Holiday Season, I’d like to suggest the state go even further: repeal the state’s sales tax exemption for food and pharmaceuticals and use that money to:
1) Triple the EITC to 15% (current state EITC’s range from 3.5% to 45%);
2) Eliminate the backlog of Medicaid reimbursements;
3) Protect funding for foodbanks, substance abuse treatment and pharmaceutical assistance programs.
4) Balance the state budget and/or roll back the individual income tax rate.
There are several problems with Illinois’ current sales tax exemption for food and drugs:
1) It is the most expensive tax expenditure in Illinois: $1.5 billion annually. That’s more than all corporate tax loopholes combined, and only the standard deduction for families and income tax exemption for retirement income are even close in size.
2) It provides tax relief for people who don’t need it: not just the Pritzkers, but 169,000 other millionaires in the Chicago area alone.
3) There’s no real evidence that the tax expenditure provides any significant return on investment to the state: a man can only eat so much cabbage.
- soccermom - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 11:50 am:
YDD — it’s an interesting idea, but I’m not sure I can go there. Sales tax is extremely regressive, and you don’t have to be foodbank-dependent to feel the pinch at the grocery store. (I have started grocery shopping in DuPage, since I’m working out here; over time, the savings add up.) While the lower tax on groceries and pharmaceuticals helps out the millionaires, it’s much more beneficial to lower and middle-income folks, who spend a greater proportion of their incomes on food and drugs.
- Grandson of Man - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 11:55 am:
On one hand, we have corporations and individuals who are doing very well in Illinois, like CME, yet that doesn’t correct Illinois’ or the nation’s economic problems. Losing thousands of jobs through CME’s departure would be horrible, of course, but having CME here is not saving our economy, unless you count prevention from further deterioration as saving the economy. This seems like race to the bottom stuff.
Having many poor people who lack affordable health care probably benefits corporations and businesses more than taxpayers, because corporations and businesses cut costs by not paying for healthcare, but taxpayers get the bill in paying for Medicaid. I know I see it at my job in the thousands of employees who have no choice but to get Medicaid. I also heard that corporations are hiring in part-time shifts to avoid helping pay for benefits. If these people provide a valuable service to employers and consumers through lower costs and cheaper products, it’s not unreasonable to afford these people with some help for basic needs, but it’s expensive for the public.
I understand the sentiment of Cat in not being happy with the lack of “stability and predictability” in Illinois political environment. I read that some countries with strong socialism, like Denmark, have a highly-rated business environment. I saw a TV ad last night on Bloomberg that was advertising how Germany has such a great business climate. Germany has universal healthcare. We spend more on healthcare than some of these “socialist” countries, yet this is what we get.
- PublicServant - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 12:07 pm:
Pete, I understand where you’re coming from. Why isn’t the discussion more about the Middle Class than the extremely rich, or the extremely poor. If we help the middle class, we’d be helping the vast majority of the American people, so why isn’t our political discourse directed towards that goal? I don’t know the answer to that, but I do know that it is the extreme positions at both ends of the spectrum that monopolize the political arena, so my take is that we, as middle class Americans, need to determine which extreme has our back to a greater extent than the other, then give them our conditional support.
Take the extension of the payroll tax reduction for instance. The Democrats want to pay for it, since deficit reduction is so important in these recessionary times by creating a surtax on the top .1% of the American populace. That payroll tax deduction helps middle class Americans and the Poor the most. And they in turn spend that money thus increasing consumer demand, benefitting business.
The Republicans are also for that payroll tax reduction extension, which helps the middle class and the poor, but they want to pay for it by freezing the salaries of middle class public sector workers, pretty much offsetting the extra money injected into the economy from the extension, by limiting the income of other middle class Americans.
So, I conclude that given the extremes on both sides, we middle income Americans are much better off having a bias towards the policies of the democrats than the republicans. That’s my take for what it’s worth.
- soccermom - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 12:21 pm:
Pete, I think part of the issue is that folks in the middle don’t have many lobbyists — mainly those who represent the unions. The rich corporations and associations of high-paid professionals have lots of lobbying muscle, and there are strong advocacy groups to speak for those most vulnerable. But not a lot of advocacy on behalf of the middle that I can think of.
We vote, but we don’t pay for folks to help craft legislation that will promote our interests.
- hisgirlfriday - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 12:37 pm:
Peter Snarker,
“I just see in this conversation a total absence of discussion on the middle. It’s all very top vs very bottom.”
You may not believe this, but some past or present recipients of the EITC consider themselves middle class.
Here. I’ll out myself as a recipient of the EITC. I grew up comfortably middle class, both parents working, been working myself constantly since I was 15, graduated from a Big Ten school in 4 years, but when the job market got bleak in my chosen career I changed gears and went back to school for a professional degree.
To supplement my income and avoid taking on any more debt than I had to already in pursuit of this degree, I worked part-time and lo and behold when I went to do my taxes I found out I qualified for the EITC.
It was not much (I would guess less than $200) and I didn’t work more because of the EITC, but it made my life a little easier as I tried to work to better myself and my financial position in the world. I certainly didn’t feel like the deadbeat who wasn’t contributing anything to society like those 43-percenters would have you believe.
I do agree with you though on not enough attention paid to the middle. But increasing the EITC threshhold (Illinois has the lowest EITC of any state I believe) is a way to get benefits closer to the middle at least because it makes more people eligible for the EITC.
- Grandson of Man - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 12:39 pm:
==Pete, I think part of the issue is that folks in the middle don’t have many lobbyists — mainly those who represent the unions. The rich corporations and associations of high-paid professionals have lots of lobbying muscle, and there are strong advocacy groups to speak for those most vulnerable. But not a lot of advocacy on behalf of the middle that I can think of.==
Maybe the middle class needs its own pledge.
- Peter Snarker - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 1:27 pm:
Hisgirlfriday - I agree that the EITC can help more than the most extreme poor… just like I agree that having CME and Sears probably on balance is a nice thing too.
Yea! I am for helping rich and poor alike! But I feel like while these things tangentially touch on the middle class, it’s not directly speaking to “us” and we’re constantly put in this (media-induced?)weirdly disconnected fight-by-proxy over “am I more sympathetic with OWS and the welfare mom or am I more sympathetic with the tea party and the CME CEO”. Well, gee, I get it, can make the arguments and counter-arguments, but this isnt really speaking to me.
Perfect example is housing.
The housing market has collapsed further than it did during the Great Depression. Some people were greedy, some people were dumb, blah blah, but EVERYONE’s home equity, the biggest asset for nearly every middle-class person (for renters in the middle, probably their car the biggest asset?), is sharply down. Yes, some middle class people were “smart” and others were “dumb” - regardless, the market is down 30% across the board, paying no mind to the smart and the dumb. No passover for this plague.
The federal “fix” programs for middle class homeowners were under-utilized and poorly designed. The state GA - well, havent heard any ideas from there, have you?
This is the sort of thing that affects the vast middle. I guess it’s tough to look at those issues though when you have to roll back the necessary, politically-killer, temporary tax increase for the richest and the poorest within 12 months of passing it.
And the beat goes on.
- King Louis XVI - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 2:29 pm:
Quinn’s incompetent, inconsistent, unstable governing is crippling this state.
- 1776 - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 2:51 pm:
The bill cited by Quinn was the initiative of the Illinois Manufacturers’ Association - not a gubernatorial initiative and was not supported by Quinn or the Department of Revenue in committee.
- Old Milwaukee - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 3:34 pm:
Let me get this straight. Quinn’s office says he supports the extension of the R&D credit, except he won’t sign an R&D credit without an increase in the EITC.
Then, to prove their claim, they point to a bill that was filed in the legislature, but never went anywhere. Further, on this bill, there is no record of the Governor ever supporting it. In fact, when he had a chance to support it in committee, he did not and neither did anyone from his administration.
Note to this Governor’s office and all future Governor’s offices, a lesson that should have been learned from the Blagojevich group including Rebecca Rausch, Abby Ottenhoff, and Sheila Nix.
When the Governor, or his spokespersons lie about issues, you lose all credibility and lessen your ability to effectively govern.
Knock it off!
- Anonymous - Friday, Dec 2, 11 @ 3:45 pm:
I would vote for PeterSnarker for Governor. Heck, even President.
His every point speaks to the frustrations I feel about the insipid soundbites that pass as “debate” from both sides of the political aisle.