*** UPDATE 1 - 1:41 pm *** He’s never explained this before, but Dr. Gill just claimed during his press conference today that the money for the ad comes from a special grassroots DCCC fund that doesn’t take corporate money and accepts contributions only up to $100 online. But Gill hasn’t yet provided the name of the fund. I’m checking with the DCCC now to see what he’s talking about.
*** UPDATE 2 - 1:46 pm *** What a stupid press conference that was. They didn’t even have the name of the alleged “grassroots” fund to share with reporters. They claimed donors came from online, but didn’t know where the website was. Ridiculous.
*** UPDATE 3 - 1:47 pm *** From the DCCC…
The funds raised for the DCCC 441ad ad in partnership with the Gill campaign come from funds raised by our online/grassroots donors, not PAC/lobbyist/corporate.
This is from our online fundraising. Like when you get an email solicit from us.
Except, of course, a lobbyist or banker would get the same e-mail solicitation and could’ve also contributed. Odds are against that, but it could happen.
*** UPDATE 4 - 2:06 pm *** This may seem a bit trivial, but it’s important. Gill claims he will never take “one penny” from corporations, Wall Street, lobbyists or whatever. So if more than a penny ends up in his fund via this DCCC website, then his ad is a lie. It may seem trivial, but he’s the one who set the bar, not me, not Rodney Davis, not anyone else. It was Gill.
Also, Gill said he’d be the one explaining the DCCC money, but then left early and handed over the presser to an aide without even saying he was leaving. Not cool at all.
These general election expenditures, known as “coordinated expenditures”, are limited under the election law. The national committees of each political party have a set amount they may spend on behalf of each U.S. House and Senate candidate. State party committees may spend equal amounts or may transfer their limits to the national committees, effectively doubling the national committees’ expenditure limits in those states or districts.
Coordinated expenditures are made in addition to direct contributions. They are allowed only with regard to the general election, and do not count as either contributions to candidates or as expenditures made by candidates. Party committees may work with candidates’ campaigns to determine how the money should be spent, but the campaigns do not receive the funds, the expenditures are reported directly by the party committees on special schedules on their financial disclosure reports.
*** UPDATE 6 - 2:58 pm *** The Illinois Review has posted raw audio of the presser. It takes a couple minutest to get started…
* As I told you yesterday, Democratic congressional candidate David Gill has made a big deal about not taking a dime from corporations or Wall Street banks. His latest ad which touts that stance, however, is partially paid for by the DCCC, which does take corporate and Wall St. cash.
Gill debated Republican Rodney Davis last night. After the debate, legendary Champaign News Gazette political reporter Tom Kacich asked Gill about his latest TV ad. Gill looked completely stumped and had to huddle with his DCCC strategist before providing what turned out to be a non-response. Watch the video…
How the heck could Gill have been so horribly unprepared to answer a question like that when the NRCC and the state GOP both blasted him on this very issue yesterday? There’s just no excuse for that.
* But then that same DCCC strategist whom Gill huddled with apparently decided that the Republican video tracker should be blocked from taping the presser. Things got a little ugly…
Ugh.
There are worse things you can do to a tracker. For example, check out how Congresswoman Judy Biggert’s people recently harrassed a Democratic tracker...
But, still. C’mon, people. Deal with it.
* The heat is apparently now intense enough that Gill plans to talk about his DCCC money today. From a media advisory…
David Gill to Address Questions Regarding DCCC in Conference Call Today
WHAT: Dr. David Gill, the Democratic nominee in the 13th congressional district, will make a statement and take questions regarding the DCCC and his campaign.
WHEN:
TODAY
October 18, 2012
1:30 PM-1:45 PM
I’ll let you know what happens.
* Meanwhile, this is a very partisan, but pretty funny story about last night’s debate between Davis and Gill. The piece captures one aspect of the debate far better than any of the other stories I’ve read…
Rodney Davis started the debate by saying his top issue is cutting the national debt. His plan for doing so is to cut taxes. Seriously. He wants to reduce revenue to bring down the debt. He doesn’t believe in that arithmetic thing Bill Clinton was talking about.
Later in the debate a student question raised the obvious. Are spending cuts alone, without a tax increase, enough to deal with the debt, and what specifically would you cut from the budget?
Davis again repeated the magical debt-reducing tax cut theory that worked so well for George W. Bush. He didn’t name any specific spending cuts he would support. He told the university audience that his unspecified spending cuts would free up more money to spend on student financial aid for college.
In a single debate, Davis claimed that everyone will get tax cuts, that tax cuts will reduce the deficit, that only things you don’t like will be cut from the budget, and all the spending you do like will still be increased. Also, everyone gets a unicorn that [exhales glitter via its posterior].
* And Davis is running a new radio ad featuring former Gov. Jim Edgar. Listen…
* Gill lauds Obama, claims lead over Davis in 13th: A poll released today shows Dr. Gill with a commanding 6 point lead over his Republican opponent, political insider Rodney Davis. “Rodney is using the very same deceitful sales routine, one he probably picked up from the decade he spent running the political campaigns of Tea Party Congressman John Shimkus,” said Dr. Gill’s press secretary Lucy Stein, “but the voters in the 13th District aren’t buying it.”
* 13th District spending tops $4 million: The biggest spender so far is the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which has put $1.2 million into the race against Davis. But most of the money spent has come from superPACs aiming to defeat Gill. Among them: the American Action Network, $325,101; the National Republican Congressional Committee, $804,061; the New Prosperity Foundation, $139,255; and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, $500,000. Some of the groups say they have reserved hundreds of thousands of dollars’ worth of additional airtime, although they have not committed to spend it.
the democrats bungling of redistricting at the congressional level is arguably the statewide story of the year aside from blago going to prison. That video is awful for gill and you combine with this description of that woman
“Sherry Greenberg of Los Angeles is a long-time Capitol Hill insider and attorney. She is the former Executive Director of the California Democratic Congressional Delegation and continues to work on behalf of California in Washington, DC.”
and you could make a pretty nasty ad of literally a dc insider telling gill what to say.
As for trackers, next time campaigns should hire ex college/hs football/basketball players to do the tracking. I think people would think twice about messing with a 6′3 240 pound walk on tight end.
===I think people would think twice about messing with a 6′3 240 pound walk on tight end. ===
Good idea, but it would probably just kickstart an ever-escalating arms race and before you knew it trackers would be Transformer robots with laser guns.
—Good idea, but it would probably just kickstart an ever-escalating arms race and before you knew it trackers would be Transformer robots with laser guns.
An even better idea!
I just have to wonder, have campaigns not tried to hire a fairly amiable tracker who when asked who they are, they say nicely, I’m Mike from other campaign and I’m just here to videotape the event for the other campaign.
Having worked retail and done competitive shops, that kind of honesty and politeness would seem to be a much better way to disarm the supporters and just blend in better. I’d walk into a Best Buy, someone would come up to me and I’d introduce myself, tell them I was from Circuit City (or vice versa later) and assured them I wasn’t going to mess with them or their customers and would do everything I could to stay out of their way.
I never had a problem and when I stupidly locked my keys in the car, the guys at Best Buy let me call for help from their phone.
I was going to make a pro forma complaint about apples and chainsaws regarding corporate money versus national party money and it was going to be pretty great if I do say so myself
…but then I remembered this is David freaking Gill. Why is the DCCC even giving him cash?
@Will - Because the DCCC ran out of matches and giving cash to the (4th) Gill campaign is second best to burning it.
- Former Downstater - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 12:54 pm:
If that’s the case, YR, why do the Repubs and their friends feel they have to throw $3 million to save Rodney Davis? It seems like Rodney’s not the candidate they thought he was.
The guy Bill Brady hired to track Pat Quinn in 2010 was the size of a college linebacker. He was a super nice guy and actually was cordial with Governor Quinn on the campaign trail. Granted, I’m sure his size didn’t hurt, but I’m guessing Governor Quinn and his staff appreciated Brady’s guy not being a turd.
This is a Democratic-leaning district. It’s a presidential year. Tons of college students. That’s why the nationals have to spend money there. The district alone makes Gill a contender.
I’ve known Rodney for a long time and have worked with him quite often. He’s a good guy and very politically astute. But he too has run for office before and lost (twice, actually, including a run to be mayor of his hometown). He’s not the best candidate. And Rich is right: the 13th CD includes Democratic-leaning areas like the eastside of Springfield, downtown (and non-lake area) Decatur, Normal, C-U, Edwardsville-Glen Carbon (which is mixed politically at best), Macoupin County and Pana (small but typically very “D”).
It seems that just about every Democrat right now believes that the solution to the public debt is to raise taxes. The problem however, is that history clearly shows that this is precisely the wrong thing to do. Raising taxes actually reduces government revenue, while lowering taxes increases it. President Obama said this himself just two years ago when he repeated that raising taxes during a recession was the wrong thing to do. While the economy is still not growing, the President has changed his mind in order to appear to be doing something regarding our fiscal crisis.
The subject of tax changes and their impact, was the focus of an extensive study by Christina & David Romer, entitled “The Macroeconomic Effects Of Tax Changes: Estimates Based On A New Measure Of Fiscal Shocks”, published in 2007.
Their paper, which examines all the legislated tax changes in the U.S. since World War II, reveals that there is a negative correlation between increases in the level of taxation and the amount of revenue received by the government as a result of the change.
Their study demonstrates that in some instances for every dollar that taxes rose, tax revenues declined by two dollars. According to the study the reason for this, “… stems in considerable part from a powerful negative effect of tax increases on investment.”
Remember Romer? She is the former chair of the President’s Council of Economic Advisors. Then she left and was replaced by Gooslbee.
So, I don’t understand why the idea of cutting taxes raising government revenue is so difficult to understand. Unless you don’t know how business works, or understand anything beyond obsolete economics circa 1935, which is still taught sadly, among far too many universities today.
Mocking the GOP over this exposes their opponents as economic dummies who do not understand how our economy works.
Obama believed it - until Dr. Romer left, that is.
Higher taxes reduce the spending power of individuals which reduces demand for products. This, in turn, reduces the profitability of businesses. Higher taxes also directly impact the ability of a business to expand. Therefore higher taxes reduce economic activity and pull money away from the productive private sector.
I aggre that the political story of the year could be the congressional map. They drew the districts, is some cases cherry picked candidates and they still have to pour millions in to stay competeitive.
Is it the candidates? The campaigns? The election year? Or that illinois may not be as deep blue as they thought and in drawing the map they tried to take to much…
- LincolnLounger - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 1:38 pm:
How many times a day must the DCCC crowd wish that Matt Goetten was their candidate?
–Good idea, but it would probably just kickstart an ever-escalating arms race and before you knew it trackers would be Transformer robots with laser guns. —
I want sharks with lasers.
Is that Gill an empty suit or what? That wasn’t exactly a brain-teaser question.
Could be both. The maps are fine. The problem is that Illinois Democrats outside the Springfield/Chicago scenes are a lot like Illinois Republicans outside DuPage.
The Gill/DCCC explanation is utter nonsense. The disclaimer on Gill’s ad says “Paid for by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee”. Not “Paid for by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee - Super Special Grassroots, No Dirty Corporate Money Fund”. Everything the DCCC raises, from $30,000 checks from Goldman Sachs to $5 from a grade school teacher in Peoria, goes into the same pot.
VM, thanks for the thoughtful comment, which sent me racing for the Google. The Romers’ study was very well received and it has a lot of merit. A reviewer’s summary added an important detail that somehow you neglected:
===
“However, the study finds “evidence that tax increases to reduce an inherited budget deficit do not have the large output costs associated with other exogenous tax increases.”
The authors acknowledge that this area of study could be made even more precise: “There are strong reasons to expect the effects of a tax change on output to depend on such features of the change as how far in advance it is expected, its perceived permanence, its impact on marginal tax rates, and how it affects the tax treatment of investment … By systematically gathering information about characteristics of our exogenous tax changes, one could investigate whether the output consequences of tax changes depend not only on their size, but on their other features as well.”
===
So it’s less that there is a simple answer (higher taxes result in less revenue), more that there are many factors involved.
But most importantly, the reason the Obama administration is seeking to raise taxes on the wealthy to the level of the Clinton administration is to address the deficit without draconian cuts to federal spending, which also negatively impact GDP.
But that was one of your better comments. So kudos to you.
Ugh. This entire thread is a case study on why normal people despise “politics” (in general) and why they dislike politicians and distrust political spokespeople/hacks (in general). There have been more and more complaints from citizens about the quality of candidates in both parties. Well, you’d have to be almost crazy to run for office in this environment. Many who would probably make excellent public servants and legislators just won’t do it.
–This entire thread is a case study on why normal people despise “politics” (in general) and why they dislike politicians and distrust political spokespeople/hacks (in general).–
Normal people? Are those the folks outside Bloomington?
I watched that Biggert tape for a while (not all of it). What am I missing? Is there some pay off when they were particularly rude to the tracker?
- Pot calling kettle - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 2:37 pm:
I think the Gill campaign is an excellent example of what happens when a grassroots campaign ends up in a competitive contest. Gill is stronger than expected and Davis is weaker than expected. The DC folks have decided to step in to “help” both sides and end up messing with the core message that got them where they are. For Davis, this should be helpful, since his message wasn’t working. For Gill, this has lots of pitfalls, the corporate money thing being one of many problems they have encountered as the race has gotten hotter.
“No corporate money” is a helpful slogan for a candidate who is not supported by DC folks. Unfortunately, it attracts more voters than money, and money is necessary to win a campaign in a hot district. It’s hard to see how the Gill campaign could manage this. Turning down DC help would have ensured a loss, and we would be discussing their stupidity for doing so. Accepting DC help means dropping (or trying to skirt around) a core component of the campaign message and triggering accusations of hypocrisy.
I’m sorry the good Dr fell into a trap he dug for Davis. What if he changes the subject right away and claim to be a descendant of a Cherokee? Hey it took a month to disprove that claim in Massachusetts, so it buy him enough time until Election Day, right?
OK, what if he just claims to have been a descendant of a guy who portrayed Chief Illiniwek for a game or two?
**Is it the candidates? The campaigns? The election year? Or that illinois may not be as deep blue as they thought and in drawing the map they tried to take to much… **
Of course, the discussion you copied from does not seem to be an accurate discussion of what the paper found. From the paper:
—-
The results for deficit-driven tax changes are quite different. PanelB shows that these tax changes are slightly negatively related to lagged GDP changes. The p-value for the test that all of the GDP coefficients are zero in the tax regression is 0.05. This suggests that while the narrative sources how no evidence that deficit-driven tax increases occur in response to anticipated output changes,such increases are more common following periods of low growth. This would be consistent with the obvious fact that periods of low growth tend to give rise to persistent budget deficits that are occasionally dealt with through deficit-driven tax increases. However, the fact that the coefficients vary between positive and negative, and are largest at fairly long lags, suggests that the tax changes are unlikely to be highly correlated with other developments affecting output in the future.
PanelD shows that the point estimates for the effect of a deficit-driven tax increase of one per-
cent of GDP on GDP are consistently positive. However, there are too few tax changes of this
type for the effects to be estimated precisely. The maximum impact is a rise in GDP of2.48
percent (t =1.03). While one should be very cautious in reading anything into such imprecise
estimates, the results are suggestive that tax increases to reduce an inherited deficit may be less costly than other tax increases.
—-
The paper doesn’t say what you think it says in short. Deficit driven tax increases actually show a different impact from other tax increases and that impact on revenue is also explained in the paper. Take a look at the actual paper instead of relying on really bad synopsis.
great insights pot. Gill ought to figure out how to fire that staffer. really ignorant. Gill has been running for eight years. He can handle being taped while he answers questions. Instead, an idiot staffer from CA gives Davis a great tape.
As to Goetten, he wasn’t a very good candidate, as was shown in the primary. If rodney wins, the best candidates the dems have will come out next time.
all in all, pretty inexcusable that this district is this tight for the GOP.
As to the map, it’s pretty much as strong as it could get. if they lose the three suburbans, you could argue they should have gone for just two there.
You might attack Gill as being unprepared and having to huddle with a staffer, but can’t we at least give the man credit for talking to a staffer who is presumably knowledgeable about this kind of stuff. And while the bar as been set repeatedly by Gill at less than “one penny,” or nothing, if there are separate funds, then there’s really no issue here.
As for the DC/Durbin crowd wanting Goetten, he would have been as bland as Rodney Davis. I was at Gotten and Gill’s WILL-TV debate on Goodwin Avenue in Urbana before the Democratic primary and Goetten was absolutely atrocious in regards to providing any kind of specifics. Additionally, the Gotten campaign people standing next time before the debate started exuded nothing but rancid overconfidence and mean spirits towards David Gill, going so far as to mock his appearance.
Gill just might win this time. I see more Gill signs than Davis signs. Up until the past week or so Gill ads on TV out of St. Louis outnumbered Davis.
- Concerned Professor - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 3:17 pm:
The only thing “legendary” about the News-Gazette’s Tom Kacich is his newspaper love affair with Republican Tim Johnson. Johnson just sends press releases to Kacich and he prints them verbatim. There isn’t even an attempt to make it look like any reporting is being done. I wonder if Kacich will fall as hard for Davis.
- Concerned Professor - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 3:19 pm:
Hey VanillaMan - I AM a descendant (well, by marriage) of a guy who was Chief Illiniwek. Should I run next time?
- Shore - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 12:25 pm:
the democrats bungling of redistricting at the congressional level is arguably the statewide story of the year aside from blago going to prison. That video is awful for gill and you combine with this description of that woman
http://www.camajorityreport.com/index.php?func=display&module=roles&uid=285
“Sherry Greenberg of Los Angeles is a long-time Capitol Hill insider and attorney. She is the former Executive Director of the California Democratic Congressional Delegation and continues to work on behalf of California in Washington, DC.”
and you could make a pretty nasty ad of literally a dc insider telling gill what to say.
As for trackers, next time campaigns should hire ex college/hs football/basketball players to do the tracking. I think people would think twice about messing with a 6′3 240 pound walk on tight end.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 12:30 pm:
===I think people would think twice about messing with a 6′3 240 pound walk on tight end. ===
Good idea, but it would probably just kickstart an ever-escalating arms race and before you knew it trackers would be Transformer robots with laser guns.
- ArchPundit - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 12:41 pm:
—Good idea, but it would probably just kickstart an ever-escalating arms race and before you knew it trackers would be Transformer robots with laser guns.
An even better idea!
I just have to wonder, have campaigns not tried to hire a fairly amiable tracker who when asked who they are, they say nicely, I’m Mike from other campaign and I’m just here to videotape the event for the other campaign.
Having worked retail and done competitive shops, that kind of honesty and politeness would seem to be a much better way to disarm the supporters and just blend in better. I’d walk into a Best Buy, someone would come up to me and I’d introduce myself, tell them I was from Circuit City (or vice versa later) and assured them I wasn’t going to mess with them or their customers and would do everything I could to stay out of their way.
I never had a problem and when I stupidly locked my keys in the car, the guys at Best Buy let me call for help from their phone.
- Will Caskey - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 12:42 pm:
I was going to make a pro forma complaint about apples and chainsaws regarding corporate money versus national party money and it was going to be pretty great if I do say so myself
…but then I remembered this is David freaking Gill. Why is the DCCC even giving him cash?
- YeahRight - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 12:51 pm:
@Will - Because the DCCC ran out of matches and giving cash to the (4th) Gill campaign is second best to burning it.
- Former Downstater - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 12:54 pm:
If that’s the case, YR, why do the Repubs and their friends feel they have to throw $3 million to save Rodney Davis? It seems like Rodney’s not the candidate they thought he was.
- Team Sleep - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 1:01 pm:
The guy Bill Brady hired to track Pat Quinn in 2010 was the size of a college linebacker. He was a super nice guy and actually was cordial with Governor Quinn on the campaign trail. Granted, I’m sure his size didn’t hurt, but I’m guessing Governor Quinn and his staff appreciated Brady’s guy not being a turd.
- capncrunch - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 1:08 pm:
“…but then I remembered this is David freaking Gill. Why is the DCCC even giving him cash?”
Because Rodney Davis isn’t Erica Herald.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 1:10 pm:
===Because Rodney Davis isn’t Erica Herald. ===
Give it up, man.
This is a Democratic-leaning district. It’s a presidential year. Tons of college students. That’s why the nationals have to spend money there. The district alone makes Gill a contender.
- Team Sleep - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 1:16 pm:
I’ve known Rodney for a long time and have worked with him quite often. He’s a good guy and very politically astute. But he too has run for office before and lost (twice, actually, including a run to be mayor of his hometown). He’s not the best candidate. And Rich is right: the 13th CD includes Democratic-leaning areas like the eastside of Springfield, downtown (and non-lake area) Decatur, Normal, C-U, Edwardsville-Glen Carbon (which is mixed politically at best), Macoupin County and Pana (small but typically very “D”).
- ArchPundit - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 1:23 pm:
=== I’m guessing Governor Quinn and his staff appreciated Brady’s guy not being a turd.
Cool–and I bet it goes both ways. They didn’t harangue him either since he was polite.
Next, I’ll be yelling at the kids to get off my lawn.
- VanillaMan - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 1:30 pm:
It seems that just about every Democrat right now believes that the solution to the public debt is to raise taxes. The problem however, is that history clearly shows that this is precisely the wrong thing to do. Raising taxes actually reduces government revenue, while lowering taxes increases it. President Obama said this himself just two years ago when he repeated that raising taxes during a recession was the wrong thing to do. While the economy is still not growing, the President has changed his mind in order to appear to be doing something regarding our fiscal crisis.
The subject of tax changes and their impact, was the focus of an extensive study by Christina & David Romer, entitled “The Macroeconomic Effects Of Tax Changes: Estimates Based On A New Measure Of Fiscal Shocks”, published in 2007.
Their paper, which examines all the legislated tax changes in the U.S. since World War II, reveals that there is a negative correlation between increases in the level of taxation and the amount of revenue received by the government as a result of the change.
Their study demonstrates that in some instances for every dollar that taxes rose, tax revenues declined by two dollars. According to the study the reason for this, “… stems in considerable part from a powerful negative effect of tax increases on investment.”
Remember Romer? She is the former chair of the President’s Council of Economic Advisors. Then she left and was replaced by Gooslbee.
So, I don’t understand why the idea of cutting taxes raising government revenue is so difficult to understand. Unless you don’t know how business works, or understand anything beyond obsolete economics circa 1935, which is still taught sadly, among far too many universities today.
Mocking the GOP over this exposes their opponents as economic dummies who do not understand how our economy works.
Obama believed it - until Dr. Romer left, that is.
Higher taxes reduce the spending power of individuals which reduces demand for products. This, in turn, reduces the profitability of businesses. Higher taxes also directly impact the ability of a business to expand. Therefore higher taxes reduce economic activity and pull money away from the productive private sector.
- VanillaMan - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 1:34 pm:
Seriously.
- Todd - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 1:36 pm:
I aggre that the political story of the year could be the congressional map. They drew the districts, is some cases cherry picked candidates and they still have to pour millions in to stay competeitive.
Is it the candidates? The campaigns? The election year? Or that illinois may not be as deep blue as they thought and in drawing the map they tried to take to much…
- LincolnLounger - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 1:38 pm:
How many times a day must the DCCC crowd wish that Matt Goetten was their candidate?
- wordslinger - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 1:41 pm:
–Good idea, but it would probably just kickstart an ever-escalating arms race and before you knew it trackers would be Transformer robots with laser guns. —
I want sharks with lasers.
Is that Gill an empty suit or what? That wasn’t exactly a brain-teaser question.
- VanillaMan - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 1:50 pm:
No big deal.
So Gill CHOCKED.
- TooManyJens - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 1:51 pm:
Matt Goetten wasn’t that great either. I felt like his heart was in the right place, but he was totally unprepared.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 1:53 pm:
===Is it the candidates? The campaigns? ===
Could be both. The maps are fine. The problem is that Illinois Democrats outside the Springfield/Chicago scenes are a lot like Illinois Republicans outside DuPage.
- so.... - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 2:02 pm:
The Gill/DCCC explanation is utter nonsense. The disclaimer on Gill’s ad says “Paid for by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee”. Not “Paid for by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee - Super Special Grassroots, No Dirty Corporate Money Fund”. Everything the DCCC raises, from $30,000 checks from Goldman Sachs to $5 from a grade school teacher in Peoria, goes into the same pot.
- wordslinger - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 2:04 pm:
–Raising taxes actually reduces government revenue, while lowering taxes increases it.–
And up is down and black is white. Simple.
Gee whiz, then after the tax cuts during the Bush administration and those in the Obama stimulus the federales should just be rolling in dough.
Wha’ happened?
–The problem is that Illinois Democrats outside the Springfield/Chicago scenes are a lot like Illinois Republicans outside DuPage.–
I’m pretty sure there’s an insult in there. And a broad one at that, lol.
- 47th Ward - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 2:20 pm:
VM, thanks for the thoughtful comment, which sent me racing for the Google. The Romers’ study was very well received and it has a lot of merit. A reviewer’s summary added an important detail that somehow you neglected:
===
“However, the study finds “evidence that tax increases to reduce an inherited budget deficit do not have the large output costs associated with other exogenous tax increases.”
The authors acknowledge that this area of study could be made even more precise: “There are strong reasons to expect the effects of a tax change on output to depend on such features of the change as how far in advance it is expected, its perceived permanence, its impact on marginal tax rates, and how it affects the tax treatment of investment … By systematically gathering information about characteristics of our exogenous tax changes, one could investigate whether the output consequences of tax changes depend not only on their size, but on their other features as well.”
===
So it’s less that there is a simple answer (higher taxes result in less revenue), more that there are many factors involved.
But most importantly, the reason the Obama administration is seeking to raise taxes on the wealthy to the level of the Clinton administration is to address the deficit without draconian cuts to federal spending, which also negatively impact GDP.
But that was one of your better comments. So kudos to you.
- wordslinger - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 2:22 pm:
–What a stupid press conference that was. They didn’t even have the name of the alleged “grassroots” fund to share with reporters. –
It’s called “The Double Secret Probation Grassroots Fund.”
- Responsa - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 2:22 pm:
Ugh. This entire thread is a case study on why normal people despise “politics” (in general) and why they dislike politicians and distrust political spokespeople/hacks (in general). There have been more and more complaints from citizens about the quality of candidates in both parties. Well, you’d have to be almost crazy to run for office in this environment. Many who would probably make excellent public servants and legislators just won’t do it.
- wordslinger - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 2:24 pm:
–This entire thread is a case study on why normal people despise “politics” (in general) and why they dislike politicians and distrust political spokespeople/hacks (in general).–
Normal people? Are those the folks outside Bloomington?
- Responsa - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 2:29 pm:
lol–Normal people are the kind of people who do not frequent this blog. You know what I am talking about.
- Skeeter - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 2:36 pm:
I watched that Biggert tape for a while (not all of it). What am I missing? Is there some pay off when they were particularly rude to the tracker?
- Pot calling kettle - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 2:37 pm:
I think the Gill campaign is an excellent example of what happens when a grassroots campaign ends up in a competitive contest. Gill is stronger than expected and Davis is weaker than expected. The DC folks have decided to step in to “help” both sides and end up messing with the core message that got them where they are. For Davis, this should be helpful, since his message wasn’t working. For Gill, this has lots of pitfalls, the corporate money thing being one of many problems they have encountered as the race has gotten hotter.
“No corporate money” is a helpful slogan for a candidate who is not supported by DC folks. Unfortunately, it attracts more voters than money, and money is necessary to win a campaign in a hot district. It’s hard to see how the Gill campaign could manage this. Turning down DC help would have ensured a loss, and we would be discussing their stupidity for doing so. Accepting DC help means dropping (or trying to skirt around) a core component of the campaign message and triggering accusations of hypocrisy.
- VanillaMan - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 2:39 pm:
I’m sorry the good Dr fell into a trap he dug for Davis. What if he changes the subject right away and claim to be a descendant of a Cherokee? Hey it took a month to disprove that claim in Massachusetts, so it buy him enough time until Election Day, right?
OK, what if he just claims to have been a descendant of a guy who portrayed Chief Illiniwek for a game or two?
- dave - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 2:42 pm:
**Is it the candidates? The campaigns? The election year? Or that illinois may not be as deep blue as they thought and in drawing the map they tried to take to much… **
Yes. Yes. Yes. And yes.
- Whatever - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 2:43 pm:
“Schakowsky backs Gill” — now there’s some breaking news. C’mon Bernie!
- ArchPundit - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 2:46 pm:
VM–You ought to link to what you are copying.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/840561-governments-have-it-backwards-it-s-lowering-taxes-that-increases-revenue-not-raising-them
Here’s the actual study
//www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&ved=0CDIQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Femlab.berkeley.edu%2F~dromer%2Fpapers%2FRomerandRomerAERJune2010.pdf&ei=RFKAUMmXNaWMygGqo4GgBQ&usg=AFQjCNEsk3SwyLH_-eL1u1RHKikfFjhXlA&sig2=wJaD960mJ2hPU0s-G7Yo9g
Of course, the discussion you copied from does not seem to be an accurate discussion of what the paper found. From the paper:
—-
The results for deficit-driven tax changes are quite different. PanelB shows that these tax changes are slightly negatively related to lagged GDP changes. The p-value for the test that all of the GDP coefficients are zero in the tax regression is 0.05. This suggests that while the narrative sources how no evidence that deficit-driven tax increases occur in response to anticipated output changes,such increases are more common following periods of low growth. This would be consistent with the obvious fact that periods of low growth tend to give rise to persistent budget deficits that are occasionally dealt with through deficit-driven tax increases. However, the fact that the coefficients vary between positive and negative, and are largest at fairly long lags, suggests that the tax changes are unlikely to be highly correlated with other developments affecting output in the future.
PanelD shows that the point estimates for the effect of a deficit-driven tax increase of one per-
cent of GDP on GDP are consistently positive. However, there are too few tax changes of this
type for the effects to be estimated precisely. The maximum impact is a rise in GDP of2.48
percent (t =1.03). While one should be very cautious in reading anything into such imprecise
estimates, the results are suggestive that tax increases to reduce an inherited deficit may be less costly than other tax increases.
—-
The paper doesn’t say what you think it says in short. Deficit driven tax increases actually show a different impact from other tax increases and that impact on revenue is also explained in the paper. Take a look at the actual paper instead of relying on really bad synopsis.
- CU Voter - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 2:52 pm:
great insights pot. Gill ought to figure out how to fire that staffer. really ignorant. Gill has been running for eight years. He can handle being taped while he answers questions. Instead, an idiot staffer from CA gives Davis a great tape.
As to Goetten, he wasn’t a very good candidate, as was shown in the primary. If rodney wins, the best candidates the dems have will come out next time.
all in all, pretty inexcusable that this district is this tight for the GOP.
As to the map, it’s pretty much as strong as it could get. if they lose the three suburbans, you could argue they should have gone for just two there.
- TooManyJens - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 3:00 pm:
“If rodney wins, the best candidates the dems have will come out next time.”
What were people waiting for this time?
- Precinct Captain - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 3:05 pm:
You might attack Gill as being unprepared and having to huddle with a staffer, but can’t we at least give the man credit for talking to a staffer who is presumably knowledgeable about this kind of stuff. And while the bar as been set repeatedly by Gill at less than “one penny,” or nothing, if there are separate funds, then there’s really no issue here.
As for the DC/Durbin crowd wanting Goetten, he would have been as bland as Rodney Davis. I was at Gotten and Gill’s WILL-TV debate on Goodwin Avenue in Urbana before the Democratic primary and Goetten was absolutely atrocious in regards to providing any kind of specifics. Additionally, the Gotten campaign people standing next time before the debate started exuded nothing but rancid overconfidence and mean spirits towards David Gill, going so far as to mock his appearance.
- Precinct Captain - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 3:10 pm:
“standing next time” should be “standing next to me”
- steve schnorf - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 3:11 pm:
Very, very much ado about very, very little. A tempest in a teacup analogy would greatly exaggerate it’s importance.
- MontgomeryCo - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 3:16 pm:
Gill just might win this time. I see more Gill signs than Davis signs. Up until the past week or so Gill ads on TV out of St. Louis outnumbered Davis.
- Concerned Professor - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 3:17 pm:
The only thing “legendary” about the News-Gazette’s Tom Kacich is his newspaper love affair with Republican Tim Johnson. Johnson just sends press releases to Kacich and he prints them verbatim. There isn’t even an attempt to make it look like any reporting is being done. I wonder if Kacich will fall as hard for Davis.
- Concerned Professor - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 3:19 pm:
Hey VanillaMan - I AM a descendant (well, by marriage) of a guy who was Chief Illiniwek. Should I run next time?
- Cheswick - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 4:21 pm:
The emails I get from Gill direct you to actblue to make a donation up to $1,000.00. (I’m still reading this post, so sorry if this has been covered.)
- Will Caskey - Thursday, Oct 18, 12 @ 6:23 pm:
“The maps are fine. The problem is that Illinois Democrats outside the Springfield/Chicago scenes are a lot like Illinois Republicans outside DuPage.”
Come on Rich, that’s extremely generous to Democrats inside Chicago. http://www.3rdcoastresearch.com/blog/i-wish-was-chicago-style