* From the Rauner campaign…
Taxpayer Red Alert: Quinn Doubles Down on Lame Duck Tax Hike
“Pat Quinn disrespects every Illinois family by pledging to ram an income tax increase down their throats the day after he gets thrown out of office. Bruce Rauner is going to win on November 4th and he’s going to do all he can to stop a lame duck governor and lame duck legislators from raising taxes.” - Rauner campaign spokesperson Mike Schrimpf
Bruce Rauner’s campaign today issued the following statement in response to Pat Quinn’s decision to double down on his pledge to push through a permanent income tax increase during the lame duck session of the General Assembly:
“Pat Quinn disrespects every Illinois family by pledging to ram an income tax increase down their throats the day after he gets thrown out of office,” Rauner campaign spokesperson Mike Schrimpf said. “Bruce Rauner is going to win on November 4th and he’s going to do all he can to stop a lame duck governor and lame duck legislators from raising taxes.”
Quinn’s comments came after Bruce Rauner this morning called on Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan and Senate President John Cullerton to block any tax votes until the new General Assembly is seated in January.
Um, wait. Didn’t Rauner say earlier today that he could also push for a tax hike?…
Whether it’s “lame ducks” or “new ducklings” voting for the thing, a tax hike is a tax hike, right?
*** UPDATE *** Quinn campaign…
BREAKING: Bruce Rauner’s Conversion on Income Tax Issue is Further Evidence He Can’t Be Trusted
CHICAGO - Billionaire Bruce Rauner, under fire for dodging responsibility for his business failures as a trial targeting his deadly nursing home chain presses on, is now conceding that he also is interested in maintaining the income tax rates.
Rauner now says he’s interested in the “possibility” of retaining income tax levels next year that he previously vowed to eliminate. But his budget plans still don’t add up. Below is the statement of Quinn for Illinois Deputy Press Secretary Izabela Miltko in response:
“Bruce Rauner cannot be trusted. Mr. Rauner is not only changing his story on his involvement with his deadly nursing home chain - now he’s changing his story about his tax plan.
“Mr. Rauner’s tax plan released earlier in the campaign would lay off 1 out of every 6 teachers and deeply reduce vital services protecting the most vulnerable.
“With the people of Illinois onto his game, Bruce Rauner is now acknowledging that he is interested in maintaining the income tax rates next year. Meanwhile, he’s running millions of dollars in negative attack ads to smear the Governor for the exact same position. How dishonest.
“Rauner’s hoax does not change the reality that the rest of his plan is predicated on harming the economic security of the middle class and irreparably damaging our education system over future years all to put millions more dollars in his own pocket.
“Mr. Rauner’s late-hour conversions still fail to provide a long-term solution to the state’s finances, as Governor Quinn has responsibly done.”
- WhoKnew - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 12:57 pm:
That’s the problem with Rauner, the right side of his mouth doesn’t listen to the left side of his mouth!
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 1:01 pm:
===“Pat Quinn disrespects every Illinois family by pledging to ram an income tax increase down their throats the day after he gets thrown out of office,” Rauner campaign spokesperson Mike Schrimpf said. “Bruce Rauner is going to win on November 4th and he’s going to do all he can to stop a lame duck governor and lame duck legislators from raising taxes.”===
So….
How will his budgetary numbers and agenda work again if Bruce doesn’t try to do the same exact thing as “Governor-Elect”?
If the Rauner Crew thinks thus campaigning is getting harder, wait until they try to govern.
- PMcP - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 1:01 pm:
Geez, painting yourself into a corner much? Why would he want to take on the burden when the threshold is so much lower and he wants to raise it too?
Rauner’s campaign completely missed the bus on picking one’s battles and letting things fall into place that allow you to not make unpopular decisions.
- archimedes - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 1:04 pm:
I would think Rauner, if elected, would be grateful if the lame ducks pass an income tax hike. He can then use it and still say he had nothing to do with it.
Of course - its more important at the present moment to win the election so there are lame ducks. And it would be dumb ducks, indeed, that would help out Rauner with a tax increase before he would take office.
- Demoralized - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 1:05 pm:
Perfect example of the Rauner campaign’s disregard for consistency. I’m not even sure they realize that they are being inconsistent.
This is yet another reason I won’t be voting for Rauner. I’ve looked high and low for a reason and he continues to disappoint me.
- 47th Ward - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 1:06 pm:
Rauner is either stupid or he’s lying.
- Wensicia - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 1:08 pm:
==Rauner is either stupid or he’s lying.==
I’d say both.
- Precinct Captain - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 1:09 pm:
47th, it is both.
- Not Surprised - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 1:10 pm:
47th Ward: It has to be both. There is no other possible explanation other than also delusional.
- Macbeth - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 1:13 pm:
Man, if there was a way to accuse Rauner of “rhetorical cheating” — I’d do it.
He literally is trying to agree to everything — everything. No social agenda? Yet he’s pro-choice.
Um, dude — that’s a social agenda.
Tax hike? No. Yes. Well, yes. No.
Um, dude, come on — you know you’ll do it. You have to. What, you’ll skip pension payments? For the pension that made you rich?
Come on, dude. Rauner, man, you’re a double-talking creep. That’s not nice. But you’ve painted yourself that way. You didn’t have to.
Good luck with your GOP base, btw. The “pro-choice” stuff is gonna play well with the people you’re, um, supposed to be allied with, no?
Wow.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 1:13 pm:
===Rauner is either stupid or he’s lying.===
In Rauner-ese; “Yes”
It answers it, kinda, but you’re still confused to the response.
- Jocko - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 1:16 pm:
===pledging to ram an income tax increase down their throats the day after he gets thrown out of office.==
Because on Nov. 5th, Pat (and MJM)’s first thought will be “How can I help subsidize Bruce’s outrageous campaign promises?”
- Not Surprised - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 1:16 pm:
I just can’t wait to read how the Tribune and Crain’s will have to twist themselves into a dozen connected pretzels to find a way to endorse someone like Rauner for whom the truth is so profoundly elusive. It could be Pulitzer worthy!
- Demoralized - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 1:21 pm:
Bruce Rauner reminds me a bit of Jim Trott from the Vicar of Dibley. You kind of have to know the show to get this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRlqmTKyQx0
No no no no no no . .. yes
- anon - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 1:25 pm:
I think this highlights why there isn’t going to be a debate between Quinn Rauner before the election.
Quinn’s record isn’t pretty and Rauner puts his foot in his mouth as soon as he gets off script. Both parties benefit from taking potshots from the cheap-seats instead of stepping into the ring and knocking each other out
- DuPage Mama - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 1:25 pm:
Pro-Choice? This could be the first election ever where pro-choice and pro-life people completely agree: Bruce Rauner is lying to everyone and believes nothing. He wants to unite people and bring them together. He may succeed when both groups proudly vote against him.
- Slow Down - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 1:32 pm:
There simply isn’t a rationale for Rauner’s candidacy other than really rich guy wants to be the Guv. I have no idea what he stands for at this point, and frankly don’t think he has any idea either.
- Macbeth - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 1:33 pm:
He’s pro-choice before the election — and then he suddenly turns pro-life after the election.
His social agenda is glaringly obvious — yet the editorial boards will bend over backwards endorsing him. And the media folks? They’ll give him a pass — as they are now.
it’s crazy. Rauner may be the luckiest rhetorical liar in recent memory. Folks appear to be believing him at his various promises — depending on the audience, of course.
- DuPage - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 1:36 pm:
If Rauner wins, I think the house and senate are going to let the tax go down. Then they would watch Rauner demonstrate how to increase the budget with less revenue, and fail. Rauner would find he can’t declare bankruptcy with a state the way he did with nursing homes.
- Grandson of Man - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 1:47 pm:
The Quinn campaign should hit Rauner’s budget ideas hard, in my opinion. The ideas would blow a hole in our budget.
I’d like to see an ad about this, tying the ideas to a trickle down philosophy that benefits the very wealthy and burdens so many others.
Plus, how will a Rauner income tax increase proposal seem to libertarian types of voters?
Rauner also has been slamming Quinn’s income tax hike for months, and now he might raise the tax. If you’re a candidate like Quinn, who would probably lose in many other scenarios, you have to be grateful to face this type of opponent.
- Hit or Miss - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 1:54 pm:
===I would think Rauner, if elected, would be grateful if the lame ducks pass an income tax hike.===
If Rauner wins the election why should there be a vote to pass an income tax increase? Would it not be better, from a political point of view but not a financial point of view, to do nothing on taxes during the lame duck session? I think that allowing Rauner to ask for a tax increase to balance the budget would be something MJM would love.
- Team Sleep - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 1:58 pm:
Really, Governor Quinn?! Your own words from late July 2010 prove that you had your own “conversion”.
http://abc7chicago.com/archive/7582808/
- Team Sleep - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 2:03 pm:
Or perhaps this?!
http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20110112/news/701139825/
- Formerly Known As... - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 2:04 pm:
Passing major legislation during the lame-duck session has always left a bad taste in my mouth.
It feels dirty and a bit dishonest somehow.
Also, the Rauner crew either picked the wrong day to attack on this, since Mr. Rauner’s earlier comments will distract from their attack. Or, they may have picked the perfect day in an attempt to deflect the blow from Mr. Rauner’s earlier comments. It can be difficult to tell at times when on the outside looking in, and only November will be the judge of these choices.
- Formerly Known As... - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 2:07 pm:
== is either stupid or he’s lying ==
Used to be, we could say this and know it referenced one candidate or another, rather than both.
Now, it is both candidates. We really got the cream of the crop this time around.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 2:11 pm:
===It feels dirty and a bit dishonest somehow===
The Catholic Conference pushed hard for lame duck approval of a ban on the death penalty, then denounced a lame duck vote on civil unions.
It’s all in the eye of the beholder. But an elected official is elected for two full years.
- Precinct Captain - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 2:13 pm:
Congratulations Team Sleep, you have managed to point out that a politician running for office supporting a tax increase then went on to increase taxes! Bravo Encyclopedia Brown, what will you come up with next?
- Team Sleep - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 2:22 pm:
PC -
Thanks for the insult. That was very mature of you.
Quinn vociferously ran on a pledge to not raise taxes if he were elected Governor. And he lied. I apologize if “lie” is too strong a word, but campaigning on an idea and then doing the opposite is certainly not truthful.
- ghost - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 2:24 pm:
=== There simply isn’t a rationale for Rauner’s candidacy ===
He can get really richer if he moves the State employee pensions to a 401k style investment and gets to earn those 25% fees off of all that money. Not to mention clouting in tax breaks for the wealthy and using government money to build things for his friends.
The State has 50 + Billion, he just sees it as an untapped market just waiting for a bust out….
- circular firing squad - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 2:28 pm:
At least Mitt is against taxing pension income. ..at least for today…wing nuts must be upset…they brought a pro choice pro Marriage Equality tax hiker…maybe Proft can explain…maybe not
- Team Sleep - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 2:28 pm:
Pardon me. I stand corrected. He said he only wanted a 1% increase but then pushed for a 2% increase. That is still disingenuous.
- Demoralized - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 2:32 pm:
I’ve never bought into this lame duck nonsense. They are still elected officials until their term ends. Don’t like it? Move to have elected officials removed from office as soon as the election is over. Otherwise quit whining.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 2:33 pm:
===Quinn vociferously ran on a pledge to not raise taxes if he were elected Governor===
Not true. He said he wanted to raise income taxes by a point. He also said he’d veto anything over a point.
- Demoralized - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 2:35 pm:
@Team Sleep:
He said he wanted an increase. Didn’t hide from that fact. Sure it turned out to be more but circumstances warranted it. And now he has come out and said the income tax rates need to be made permanent (or at least extended).
Rauner, on the other had, has said . . . well, I have no idea what he has said. He wants the tax increased rolled back, but he doesn’t really, might want it phased, no, wait, he might vote to increase it again when it drops and then phase it out, no wait . . .
- Team Sleep - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 2:38 pm:
Rich - I corrected my post. I do not know how to delete previous posts, so I corrected myself before opening my comment to an onslaught of corrections.
- Skeptic - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 2:51 pm:
“going to do all he can to stop a lame duck governor and lame duck legislators from raising taxes.” Um, ok…so what exactly can he do? Stomp his feet and hold his breath?
- walker - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 2:56 pm:
Team Sleep: Thanks for setting it straight.
Quinn ran on a tax increase, and then pushed for a higher rate than promised. Fair to call it “disingenuous,” but very few would have the political courage to run on any tax increase in the first place.
Rauner says he will “phase out the tax rate increase over four years,” which is the same as saying he favors raising the rate on January 1, (or else there is nothing to phase out.)
Would be nice for him to simply admit that and tell us how much.
Rauner’s first campaign pledge was “no tax increase.” He has already apparently backed off that in his Blueprint.
To so strongly attack Quinn for doing in January what Rauner also wants to do in January, is ridiculous — but it’s politics.
- steve schnorf - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 3:04 pm:
Mike, I hate to rain on your parade, but Pat Quinn will be every bit as much Governor on Nov 5th as he was on Nov 3rd. I want to vote for the Republican nominee for Governor. I have in every election since I became eligible to vote; Ogilvie, Ogilvie, Thompson, Thompson, Thompson, Thompson, Edgar, Edgar, Ryan, Ryan, and Brady.
But you guys need to study up on Illinois’ Constitution and statutes; your lack of grasp on those two important fixtures troubles me a great deal.
>if Quinn loses the election, he will leave office in Jan. “Bruce” (as you always put it) shouldn’t show up on 11/5 with a bible looking for someone to swear him in.
Too many of the things you swear “Bruce” will do, or demand that Quinn do (immediately throw out the IDOT patronage hires) just don’t reflect how the law and our constitutional protections work. You either don’t know that, or know it and disregard it. Wanting to be Governor and not knowing little things like that is quite bothersome. Knowing and being willing to just disregard is just downright scary.
When “Bruce” starts acting like Governor material (or at least your portrayal of him does), I can comfortably continue my unblemished voting record, and I will be happy to.
- SAP - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 3:10 pm:
Um, if Quinn loses the election, Rauner won’t have a lame duck tax increase to repeal.
- Anonymous - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 3:12 pm:
red alert is that like a kmart blue light special,act now time is running out. don`t think, vote for bruce( shoping for the impulse vote)
- Formerly Known As... - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 3:18 pm:
== The Catholic Conference pushed hard for lame duck approval of a ban on the death penalty, then denounced a lame duck vote on civil unions. ==
Did they really? Ugh. So much for consistency.
In general, I don’t like it for major legislation. That applies regardless of whether the legislation is “GOP” or “Dem” in nature. Small, technical, operational stuff? Fine. But controversial legislation? Passing it then feels like circumventing the public will of those who have declined to reelect someone, possibly on the basis of that very issue. Particularly if lame ducks provide the decisive votes.
Though two years is two years, and I get the practical advantages to trying to force controversial bills through at that time, it still “feels” off to me somehow. Maybe I need to “evolve” on this, lol.
- Grandson of Man - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 3:21 pm:
“Would be nice for him to simply admit that and tell us how much.”
Didn’t Rauner just pull a Romney and tell us that budget details will be worked out with the ILGA after the election? Romney had a budget plan whose tax cuts were analyzed and found to have benefited the wealthiest the most. During one of the debates Romney said we’d get the goodies after we elected him.
Remember, Rauner is torching Quinn for the “67%” income tax increase. Now he wants to follow in Quinn’s footsteps, after investing so much in attacking him for it. If he does it will be yet another flip flop, and a big one.
- Chris - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 3:38 pm:
” tax plan released earlier in the campaign would lay off 1 out of every 6 teachers”
Must’ve missed where Rauner had a plan that was specific enough to call for a firm number of layoffs.
The intestinal fortitude of both of them saying “you’re calling for a tax increase on November 5″ is pretty fun, tho. However, the cynicism of both of them is making my headache worse. Can we get the Nevada ‘none of the above’ on the ballot?
- Mighty M. Mouse - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 4:01 pm:
===I just can’t wait to read how the Tribune and Crain’s will have to twist themselves into a dozen connected pretzels to find a way to endorse someone like Rauner for whom the truth is so profoundly elusive. It could be Pulitzer worthy!===
@Not Surprised:
There are two things I can’t wait to see.
The first thing is exactly what you said. What kind of tortured, convoluted, illogical rationale will some editorial boards, primarily the Chicago Tribune, use to justify endorsing Bruce Rauner?
The second thing I am dying of curiosity to know is who Rauner will blame for his loss, because I’m pretty darn sure that it is NOT going to be his fault!
- wordslinger - Monday, Sep 29, 14 @ 5:27 pm:
The lame duck excuse is always lame, but especially in this instance.
Because there’s no way in the world that if Rauner wins that the GA would pass a tax increase or that Quinn would sign it before Rauner takes office.
That’s just crazy wishful thinking by Shrimp (by the way, you and your guy should get on the same page regarding this minor detail of policy).
They’ll let the new governor show his hole cards. because right now, it looks like he’s got nothing.