29 Comments - wordslinger - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 9:38 am: Brady, Dillard and Rutherford have been running for governor non-stop for years, yet Rauner got the drop on all of them first time out of the box. It’s not just Rauner’s personal wealth (although that’s important). Rauner out-hustled them to lock down other big GOP contributors. There’s no crying when you get out-hustled. - Demoralized - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 9:39 am: It’s a pretty tame ad. I think they should have couched it in terms of moving from a flat tax to a progressive tax, and the only reason I say that is that some people might not understand what they are talking about. I think that might get people’s attention a little better. - wordslinger - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 9:45 am: Wrong thread, sorry. - Toure's Latte - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 9:48 am: Does Illinois really tilt like that? er, what did the commercial say? - walkinfool - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 9:51 am: Nationally, this group will tell you that a smaller government and a flat tax, are the magic keys to turning around our country, our economy, and our states. Well, Illinois already has had the smallest state government in terms of employees per capita, and a flat income tax for decades. How’s that been working for your simplistic mythical economics? - Dan Johnson - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 9:53 am: Interesting that they must think “progressive tax” polls worse than “graduated tax” They do have an uphill battle. The Paul Simon poll from a few years ago had majority support for a progressive tax. I take this as a hopeful sign that the 1%’ - ers are scared that we might actually get a chance to vote on a progressive income tax! That would be awesome. - Vacationer - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 9:54 am: If a progressive tax is so bad how come there isn’t a large push to move the federal income tax to a flat rate? I don’t understand the rationale that a federal progressive tax is good but it’s bad on the state level. (I know these groups are for flat all the way or consumption taxes but I’m talking about the average voter.) - mugwump - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 9:58 am: Is there a specific proposal? Where do they get that 85% figure? - Just Observing - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 10:09 am: === Well, Illinois already has had the smallest state government in terms of employees per capita, and a flat income tax for decades. How’s that been working for your simplistic mythical economics? === Measuring the size of government by state govt. employees per capita is about as simplistic and mythical as one can get. The size of government can be better measured by overall expenditures, and including local governments. - walkinfool - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 10:14 am: The supporters say that 90% would pay lower taxes. I’d trust Martire’s analysis way before that of AFP. Truthfulness aside, the ad plays well for the choir, and maybe that’s all it’s for, justifying more donations. - Dana Heupel - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 10:19 am: As many may know, Americans for Prosperity was founded by David Koch, and he and is brother, Charles, are significant contributors. http://www.factcheck.org/2011/10/americans-for-prosperity-2/ - wordslinger - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 10:21 am: The big takeaway is the 85% claim, which I doubt has any basis in reality, at all. I think the Civvies and AFP types “concerns” about pensions and corporate income taxes have been smokescreens to hide their real fear of a progressive personal income tax. The Big Dogs don’t care about corporate rates because their companies don’t pay state income taxes anyway. But if a Miles White or a Dick Uihlein had to pay a top personal rate of 8.98% like Iowa or 7.75% like Wisconsin, we’re talking real money out of their pockets. - Grandson of Man - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 10:44 am: Notice what word this ad omits? Income. This add is grossly misleading and therefore sucks. It says that the progressive tax will raise taxes for up to 85% of people. I believe the progressive income tax campaign is based on the CTBA tax plan, in which the income tax will increase for only those earning $150,000 or more, or over $150,000. That’s nowhere near 85% of tax payers. I’m glad, however, that Americans for Prosperity, is noticing the campaign. - walkinfool - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 10:45 am: ===The size of Government can be better measured by overall expenditures, including local governments.=== I agree with you on that point. I wish that the advocates for this view took more seriously local government expansion and waste, but they often get a pass, in favor of attacking states and feds. On the mythic benefits of a flat tax, I’ll stand firm. And as Word has pointed out, the real issue for AFP is what the highest income folks would pay, and they do pay more in surrounding states with progressive rates. - PublicServant - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 10:48 am: It’s a great ad, as long as they mention Americans for Prosperity. When they mention them, I immediately know that I’m most likely for whatever it is they’re against. - A guy... - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 10:50 am: Just rating the ad; good production quality, but very poor messaging technique. Saying tons of nice things about the state and ending with a photo of the person you’re trying to pound is bad imagery/message coordination. It’s a pretty ad, but a bad ad to reach an objective. Just can’t do all of this in :30. If you’re gonna whack ‘em, do it for all 30 seconds. - Roadiepig - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 10:50 am: walkinfool - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 9:51 am- Your point about the flat tax here in Illinois is well made, no matter what other might say. If a flat tax works so well, why haven’t we raised that flat tax high enugh to cover day to day government obligations (the state obviously doesn’t bring in nearly enough to pay its bills, fund it’s pensions, etc. for many years now)? - Bill White - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 11:22 am: In my opinion, the progressive income tax is pretty much a straw man. I just don’t see any widespread support for it, especially given the need for a constitutional amendment. Therefore, when GOP candidates make it a centerpiece of their campaign, it’s pretty much just theater. - Bill White - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 11:31 am: === Measuring the size of government by state govt. employees per capita is about as simplistic and mythical as one can get. The size of government can be better measured by overall expenditures, and including local governments. === State and local government taxation does need to be aggregated. Even so, Illinois still qualifies as a low tax state, even with its all aggregated. As for property taxes, sure we pay more in per capita property taxes; that’s because IL has far more wealth than a great many states. For example, compare the total fair market value of all of the real estate located in Indianapolis with the fair market value of all of the real estate located in Chicago. Or home prices in Western Springs versus Fort Wayne. - 4 percent - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 11:45 am: Naomi Jakobbson, sponsor of the constitutional amendment, expressed rates that would increase taxes on everyone making more than $50,000 per year. Martire’s numbers are compared to the current 5% and 7% rates that expire on December 31. He wants you to compare the graduated rate to the current high rates not the 3.75 and 5.25 percent rates that take effect on January 1. - bk - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 11:58 am: Are we going to chase the last few high wage earners out of IL? Do you think the upper 1% are going to pay this. They are going to take there ball and go home. Stop looking for more funding and cut spending for a change. Taxing has gotten out of control. STOP spending. Then lets talk about revenue. A progressive tax is just an excuse to raise more revenue and it will not work! Liberals for once need to look at what they have created in Illinois. The experiment has failed and its time for all these social expenses to be evaluated for results. - wordslinger - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 12:08 pm: –Are we going to chase the last few high wage earners out of IL?– The Eternal Pessimism of the Spotless Mind. The states ranked by per-capita millionaires. Where do you see Texas on the list? http://www.netstate.com/states/tables/state_millionaires_household.htm - A guy... - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 12:19 pm: Dummy me, I thought we were asked to rate an ad. - Grandson of Man - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 12:38 pm: I didn’t see Rep. Jacobsson’s proposal, so if that’s what’s coming down the pike, I stand corrected. I definitely do not want to intentionally mislead anyone. I apologize. Statistics still show that Illinois ranks higher in per capita income than states with higher income tax rates and lower average incomes. There is room for maneuvering on changing the tax code. As we can see, Illinois is higher in total per capita income than many other states with progressive income taxes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States_of_the_United_States_of_America_by_income We can also see this in the data provided to us by our friends at the IPI: http://illinoispolicy.org/progressive-tax-hike-proposal-attacks-illinois-working-and-middle-classes/ So Illinois is ranked relatively high among average per capita income and low in income tax. There is a gap here that we can close. I believe that for the sake of fairness we should have income tax rates that are commensurate with our economic standing. The current rates are not commensurate with this, in my opinion. - Just Observing - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 12:43 pm: === As for property taxes, sure we pay more in per capita property taxes; that’s because IL has far more wealth than a great many states. For example, compare the total fair market value of all of the real estate located in Indianapolis with the fair market value of all of the real estate located in Chicago. Or home prices in Western Springs versus Fort Wayne. === Doesn’t that, really though, speak to the issue of demand than actual wealth. For example… two families… one in Chicagoland, one in Indy… each making a $100,000… the family in Indy may be able to buy a 2,000 sq, ft. home for $250,000… whereas it may cost the Chicagoland family, for the identical home, $350,000. Does that mean the Chicagoland family is wealthier? - Grandson of Man - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 12:54 pm: “Does that mean the Chicagoland family is wealthier?” I’m not a big fan of COLA-adjusted incomes, because these incomes are lower in big cities. This simply means that people are willing to pay the price to live somewhere. This is the case with Chicago. Plenty of people are willing to pay higher prices to get the city’s amenities: its roads, schools, entertainment, business opportunities, other amenties like great restaurants, etc. If it was all about COLA-adjusted incomes, wouldn’t we all live in places like Alabama and Mississippi? - Demoralized - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 1:00 pm: ==Liberals for once need to look at what they have created in Illinois. == Yeah, all those liberals like Thompson and Ryan. God I get so sick and tired of the talking points that people put out there. There is plenty of blame to go around in Illinois but when it doesn’t fit your particular viewpoint you ignore facts. People need to use their freaking brains instead of parroting the pathetic talking points of partisan lunacy. - Former Merit Comp Slave - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 1:06 pm: Interesting timing……I just got an email from Henry and he’s rallying troops to circulate petitions, in a big hurry, for the graduated tax, to get on the ballot next year. This is gonna get entertaining! - Rich Miller - Friday, Dec 20, 13 @ 1:17 pm: === for the graduated tax, to get on the ballot next year=== What ballot? He’d have to do it by county, even by ward. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.