48 Comments - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 1:57 pm: “Smart” move to look politically inept. I get it. Money is no object. Congratulations. Wasting resources shows your financial gravitas. Again, “Fire Cullerton”, or getting “volunteers” to work for Rauner in Cullerton’s District requires a Field Apparatus. This “Call We, Maybe” won’t get a GOTV to pass muster, and is probably the best way to keep 1/3 of the General Assembly, and one Veto-Proof Chamber come 2015, less responsive to overt or covert compromise. I bet it feels good though. Calling in there. What a waste. - truthteller - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 2:01 pm: I hope the callers ask Rauner what he wants Cullerton et al to cut if the tax is not extended. Early childhood ed.? K-12? assistance to the disabled? close some Vets’ homes? Some prisons? - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 2:09 pm: What’s next for the Rauner Crew, call into Oswego, ask for a vote to repeal our local internet contract, “Willy-Nilly”? - Bogart - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 2:09 pm: It’s a Doolittle raid over Tokyo. It doesn’t have to achieve much other than letting them know, they are in reach. Good move. - CircularFiringSquad - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 2:11 pm: Very powerful. Let’s hope there is more of the same. Rd II “Hi, this is ShakeyMitt Rauner. I am the guy who paid convicted conman/pervert Stu Levine more tha $30 grand— that’s Three Zero, Zero, Zero, Zero a month and claim I don’t know the man. I am the guy who killed Grandmas. Now I want to be governor — really president — so just remember Nobody’s Perfect and vote for me.” - carbaby - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 2:13 pm: Is it just me or shouldn’t it be a little more accurate? Last I checked the question on the table is about allowing the temporary tax increase to sunset- not to increase them more than the current 5%. But then again, who really listens to robocalls. I know I certainly don’t. Those go to voicemail to be deleted. People screen their calls with this day and age of caller ID- which has been for about the last 15 years. - Anonymous - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 2:21 pm: ==Last I checked the question on the table is about allowing the temporary tax increase to sunset== Current State law states that the income tax rate next year will be 3.75%. Some want to change the law so that it raises to 5%. By definition, that is raising taxes. Describing it as “continuing the current rate” is not accurately describing what the law currently states the rate is for next year. - 47th Ward - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 2:25 pm: You’d think a guy with his resources and brains, who’d been planning this for more than a year, would have created a live call center and used it instead of robo calls. I mean, that’s how I would have done it. Train my own callers, build my own call lists, micro-target voters, etc. Instead, the billionaire goes cheap on us. You can robo-call the entire 47th Ward for like, $500. That’s tip money for Rauner. He’s going to complain that there was no infrastructure if he loses, but rather than build some, he’s paying some chump change to a fly-by-night operator that probably makes debt collection calls the rest of the year. Pathetic. I expect more from billionaire Republicans. - Anonymous - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 2:25 pm: Are these strictly robo-calls, or are the live person calls that leave an automated message if it goes to voicemail? - Norseman - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 2:29 pm: === You’d think a guy with his resources and brains, who’d been planning this for more than a year, would have created a live call center and used it instead of robo calls. === He was afraid they’d unionize and ask for a pension. - wordslinger - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 2:31 pm: Robocalls in Cullterton’s district. I can’t believe I missed out on this gravy train. Time to catch up: Mr. Rauner, let me tell you about my “Jump to Conclusions” mat….. - Yellow Dog Democrat - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 2:32 pm: Dudes, this is politics. Let’s not get into semantics about whether this is a vote to abolish the sunset or raise taxes. It is like the whole 2% Tax Increase v. 66% Tax Increase argument. Either you are for exposing 41,000 children to child abuse or trying to keep 41,000 children safe. End of story. - wordslinger - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 2:33 pm: –It’s a Doolittle raid over Tokyo.– Yeah, just like that, lol. - Ghost - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 2:33 pm: Be careful what you wish for. If Rauner wins the race he will be handed a steaming mess budget wise. Fast talking, sound bites and emotional appeals wont help him; and if he thinks shutting donw parts of the State will leade people to cheer him he is in for a rude surprise. Long term Rauner would be better off to only slightly push back on the tax hike, let it pass, and then if he wins he can say he didnt want it…but have the funds available for operations. Then if he really can squeeze state spending donw enough he could run a tax reduction bill and come across like a hero. - Wally - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 2:43 pm: YDD, maybe the dems should have thought about using some of that money they have raised the past 3 1/2 years to keep those kids safe. Or, gave a thought to the impact a 67% increase would have on job creation and consumer spending. - Demoralized - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 2:48 pm: ==maybe the dems should have thought about using some of that money they have raised the past 3 1/2 years to keep those kids safe== Without it I guarantee massive cuts would have been made and there would have been kids that might have been less safe. Maybe some of you brilliant mathematicians could explain how you fit the square peg of the state’s expenses in the round hole of revenue without the tax increase. From what I’ve seen you all have magic calculators to do so. - Dan from Springfield - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 2:49 pm: - Anonymous - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 2:21 pm: ==Last I checked the question on the table is about allowing the temporary tax increase to sunset== Current State law states that the income tax rate next year will be 3.75%. Some want to change the law so that it raises to 5%. By definition, that is raising taxes. Describing it as “continuing the current rate” is not accurately describing what the law currently states the rate is for next year. Right now the law says tax payers will get a reduction in income tax on 1/01/2015. If the 5% income tax is made permanent the on 1/01/2015 income tax will be RAISED to 5% from 3.75%. That is an increase. - Spliff - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 2:51 pm: Tom Cullerton, John Cullerton what’s the difference ….. wow, talk about being an outsider. - Demoralized - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 2:52 pm: ==Describing it as “continuing the current rate” is not accurately describing what the law currently states the rate is for next year== Sure it is. That’s the way I would describe it. To describe it as a raise in taxes is a political description, which is fine. - Anonymous - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 2:57 pm: Given the current vote count, it’s clear who is winning the narrative game of “keep current” vs “raises taxes”…and Madigan, et al, are not the ones controlling that narrative. If the public agreed with the “keep current rate” language, it would already be a done deal. - A guy... - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 3:01 pm: It’s another complimentary level of communication, no more, no less. What makes anyone thing residents in Cullerton’s district are any less dissatisfied with government or don’t want their taxes raised. It will do what it’s designed to do. - wordslinger - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 3:08 pm: –What makes anyone thing residents in Cullerton’s district are any less dissatisfied with government or don’t want their taxes raised.– Election results? - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 3:18 pm: ===What makes anyone thing residents in Cullerton’s district are any less dissatisfied with government or don’t want their taxes raised.=== Who us going to drag ALL these less than satisfied Raunerite voters to the polls? Useless. Waste of political resources by someone who is not into conspicuous consumption. - Wally - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 3:20 pm: On 1/1/15 , for every 50 grand a person makes, they will pay $1875 in state income taxes if the dems keep their word and the “temporary” tax sunsets. Otherwise, they will pay $2500 in state income taxes if the dems don’t keep their word. That is an increase. My calculator tells me so. - A guy... - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 3:21 pm: First off “think” not thing. Sorry. Secondly, you gotta do better than that Word. I didn’t know there was an election that asked if you wanted your property taxes raised, your income taxes raised, etc. I’m not sure if John C. has even had an opponent in a primary or a general lately- even the guy he traditionally chose himself and brought from the House races to the Senate-lol There is such a guy. John won’t have to hear anything via rumor. He can just answer his own phone and listen. If a lot of his neighbors voice a little doubt, it may have some impact on him. Maybe not. It’s $500 well spent in my opinion. Betcha the folks in Jacob’s district pay attention. - Louis G. Atsaves - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 3:25 pm: Hmm. Democrats had four years to figure out what to cut before dropping all of us off the fiscal cliff of this “temporary” income tax thingy they created. That four year period started after they were all safely reelected or elected. Since the Democrats had 4 years, doesn’t Rauner also get four years to figure out what to cut, after he gets elected? Fair is fair, right? - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 3:30 pm: ===Since the Democrats had 4 years, doesn’t Rauner also get four years to figure out what to cut, after he gets elected?=== So Bruce Rauner is no smarter or better than the Democrats? Ok, got it. - wordslinger - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 3:32 pm: A Guy, you raise a ridiculous strawman. then you knock it down. Gets you nowhere. I was serious earlier about the alarming state of docility in today’s Illinois GOP. I grew up Main Street GOP. You have to bring more to the party than you are now. For crying out loud, 19 senate members? Seriously, did you think that was even possible 20 years ago? The laziness that writes off Illinois as a “one-party state” is astounding. If big-money Republicans hadn’t been playing footsie with Blago, then JBT might have had the resources to fight back on TV. For crying out loud, the dude had Club Fed written all over him. Don’t be a victim, dude. Be a Happy Warrior and attack, with substance. What do you have to lose? - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 3:40 pm: How can My Party say they are standing up for something , and at the same time be fighting for nothing? Passive aggressive in relationships, … in life, rarely yield a bountiful harvest of something good. Why anyone feels, the entire way, you go about the political realities of being a “party” needs to be; playing a victim, passively being an aggressor of nothing of substance, and complaining about being outworked dumbfounds me. - wordslinger - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 3:51 pm: –doesn’t Rauner also get four years to figure out what to cut, after he gets elected?– No. He want’s the big chair. There’s no “fair.” This ain’t pee-wee soccer, where everybody gets a trophy and a jello-cup at the end. Rauner’s electoral strategy is to not say anything. So be it, he’s not the first guy to do it. But you don’t have to respect it. - Skeptic - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 3:56 pm: So if I paid $2500 in taxes this year and I pay $2500 in taxes next year, my taxes have gone up? If forget to lower my flag at sunset, by doing nothing the next morning I raised it? I know, there I go being all logical and stuff. - Skeptic - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 3:59 pm: “Yes Officer, I was driving 70 in 45 zone, but I had slowed down…before that I was driving 70 in a 35 zone!” - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 4:32 pm: === === You’d think a guy with his resources and brains, who’d been planning this for more than a year, would have created a live call center and used it instead of robo calls. === He was afraid they’d unionize and ask for a pension.=== - Norseman - that made me spit out coffee. Good stuff there. Wonder if they would have built up that call center if they would have done a YouTube video? If you are going to use the CYR playbook, go all the way. - Wally - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 4:52 pm: Skeptic, if you paid $1500 in taxes in 2010, then paid $2500 in taxes from 2011-2014 and someone promised you that your taxes on the same wages would be $1875 in 2015 and then they yanked your chain, said fooled ya, its gonna be $2500 again, yeah, that is an increase. A HUGE increase from 2010! - low level - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 5:11 pm: Another brilliant, ahem, move by the Rauner machine. Cullerton will be Senate President after the next election. Great way to start a positive, working relationship with any legislator - esp a man who controls 41 votes. If Bruce is elected, Illinois will find itself in much worse shape; but the show would sure be fun. Pass the popcorn. - Archiesmom - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 5:32 pm: Skeptic, thank you. - Anonymous - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 6:15 pm: Consider this in the Rauner strategy. The Governor in Illinois has line item veto power. Democratic power in Illinois is based upon pandering to special interest groups through legislation and irresponsibly spending more than the state can reasonably afford to pay off enough entitlement, public employee and contractor groups to keep well funded for campaigns and get foot troops on the ground come election day. If Rauner is elected, and the impotent GOP somehow manages to kill a veto proof majority in at least one house, he can use the line item veto to cut the pork grants that may have won the election for Quinn the last time around. That’s an incredible sword to wield in the GA, and a significant number of Dems may find allying with Rauner is more profitable than kissing Madigan’s ring. As titular head of the Illinois GOP(if he wins), Rauner can protect rebel Dems from being in contested races. Those who don’t do his bidding now on this tax issue could be subject to having their “pork” pulled over the next four years should Rauner win. Some Dems come from districts that trend more conservatively, and standing against this tax increase may well be in their best interests through representing the will of their constituents and currying favor with Rauner. If Rauner loses, they vote for the enlarged tax increase in the lame duck session. The 3.75% is still a 25% tax increase over the previous 3% rate, which is pretty large in and of itself. Following that logic, it’ll be tough for Madigan to get that increase before the election. Holding out for the election results is just smart politics for the hold-outs. Make sense? - Demoralized - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 6:17 pm: @Wally: You must have been taught the new math. We were old school when I went to school. If I’m paying the same next year as this year my taxes didn’t go up. I’ll give you a calculator if you are having trouble with the math. - Demoralized - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 6:19 pm: ==A HUGE increase from 2010! == Sorry. Should have referenced this little gem in my thoughts above. This is 2014 in case you weren’t aware. If I’m paying the same taxes in 2015 as 2014 it’s not an increase no matter how hard you try to make it so. Again, must be that new math. - Precinct Captain - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 6:32 pm: ==Skeptic, if you paid $1500 in taxes in 2010, then paid $2500 in taxes from 2011-2014 and someone promised you that your taxes on the same wages would be $1875 in 2015 and then they yanked your chain, said fooled ya, its gonna be $2500 again, yeah, that is an increase. A HUGE increase from 2010!== So you are still whining about a tax increase from after the 2010 election even though the status quo has been a 5% rate for 3 and a half years? And you’re still doing it with the bizarre idea that the law, is stagnate forever? For chrissakes, I might as well complain that they changed from an indeterminate sentencing system to a determinate sentencing system! After all, they made a promise all those years ago! - Wally - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 7:59 pm: Well spoken by a few dems. Want to figure some “new math?” Say someone will pay $1000 extra in income taxes for the 4 years so $4000 total. $4000 that could have been used to buy a new lawn mower, take a weekend trip, buy new clothes, go out to eat quite a few times. You know, pump up the economy a little. Now, multiply that $4000 by 100,000 people. Or 200,000 people. What a boost to the economy while we watch incredibly high unemployment in the state and record number of people on welfare because we gave money to the dems and they frittered a lot of it away. - Demoralized - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 8:29 pm: @Wally: I wasn’t aware math was a partisan issue but maybe I’m wrong. I have been before. I’ll keep an eye out for Republican math and Democratic math. I believe the point some of us are trying to make is that if you are paying the same thing next year that you are paying this year that isn’t an increase. And, sure, I could have done something else with the money I paid in taxes. But that’s not the argument you were making. - Wally - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 9:29 pm: The argument I am making is 2 fold. Quit raising taxes and taking money out of people’s pockets, it is an economy killer. The tax is SUPPOSE to be 3.75% on 1/1/15. If somehow we get bamboozled once again and have to pay 5%, well…………. - Michelle Flaherty - Wednesday, May 21, 14 @ 10:03 pm: Wally, if you’re going to shout it, please get it right. “SUPPOSED to be” That $4K might buy you some grammar lessons since it won’t be going to public education anymore. - Precinct Captain - Thursday, May 22, 14 @ 1:21 am: ==Quit raising taxes and taking money out of people’s pockets, it is an economy killer.== 1) No one’s taxes are being raised. Again, where is this idea that law is stagnate forever coming from? 2) Where do you think tax money goes? Right into the economy! - VanillaMan - Thursday, May 22, 14 @ 7:43 am: Competition for voters has been sorely lacking in Illinois. This is a good thing. I’d like to see the same done in Bloomington for Quinn. - Toure's Latte - Thursday, May 22, 14 @ 9:29 am: Speaking of Republican math, where’s their budget? - low level - Thursday, May 22, 14 @ 2:21 pm: “Democratic power in Illinois is based upon pandering to special interest groups through legislation and irresponsibly spending more than the state can reasonably afford to pay off…” Really? That’s what explains all the Democratic seats in the upper middle class and wealthy suburbs? Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.