61 Comments - Aldyth - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:03 am: Another reminder that the Illinois Policy Institute is not a source of news, but plenty of opinions. - Collinsville Kevin - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:05 am: Gee, Illnois Policy Institute is such an innocent-sounding name! - Owen, son of Gus - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:07 am: Yep, and it was opposed by the first lady: http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20150220/BLOGS03/150229996/diana-rauner-criticizes-her-husbands-budget-plans What an operation they’ve got going on here. Like a Swiss watch. - out of touch - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:08 am: Your “unclear on the concept” posts are very good, and often highlight the silly ironies that some groups fail to recognize. In this particular case, though, you may want to consider naming the post “unconcerned with the concept”. The Illinois Policy Institute is not an unwitting, casual observer; this distortion of truth is completely calculated. - Robert the Bruce - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:12 am: Even the IPI is paying attention to the working poor with kids in daycare? Strange day. - DuPage - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:13 am: Rauner: The 5% income tax is not needed. In a way, Rauner is correct. Due to his efforts, Illinois will need a 6% income tax. Or more. - Austin Blvd - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:14 am: Kristina and IPI are waving their flag as the Official Rauner Lapdog. Even IPI would probably acknowledge that Rauner’s actions have boxed the cabal in so badly that their only way forward is to mislead. - reasonable - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:14 am: how much has already been cut from the budget? we want a fiscally responsible group that does not spend more than they take in, we understand that the services we want will cost money and probably more than we are currently bringing in. We want solutions, not political gamesmanship. Rauner only wants to weaken collective bargaining, stop the nonsense and take the opportunity to straighten out the spending mess that is Springfield. - Ducky LaMoore - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:15 am: ===Another reminder that the Illinois Policy Institute is not a source of news, but plenty of opinions.=== I wouldn’t say being untruthful is an opinion. - Anon221 - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:17 am: From IPI’s website if you are looking for a job with them. They are eating cake…cupcakes that is! Jeesh… https://www.illinoispolicy.org/jobs/ We Work Hard and try to make the world a better place. It’s an honor to do the work that we do every day. In 2013, we touched more decision-makers with the economic freedom message than ever before. We’ve highlighted the stories of real people working to make Illinois great again. But we don’t always take ourselves so seriously. We do have some fun around the office, hang out after work, eat cupcakes and make amazing friends along the way. - Nick Name - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:17 am: And the IPI wonders why it can’t get press credentials. Sheesh. - My button is broke... - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:20 am: I think this is the first time I’ve seen the IPI kind of agree that higher taxes are needed… They didn’t come out and say it, but they didn’t rule out higher taxes as a total non-starter like they usually do. - Springfieldish - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:22 am: “Rauner only wants to weaken collective bargaining, stop the nonsense and take the opportunity to straighten out the spending mess that is Springfield.” True only with minor punctuation changes: “Rauner only wants to weaken collective bargaining(.) (S)top the nonsense and take the opportunity to straighten out the spending mess that is Springfield.” - Anonymous - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:22 am: Fanning the flames of hated haves verses the have nots (middle class vs. the poor) - AlabamaShake - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:24 am: **Who doesn’t get preferential treatment? Low-income working moms looking for help to pay for day care. Seniors who rely on community groups for help. ** Oh my… this takes a lot of f-ing nerve to write this, after some of the stuff they’ve written on their website. Like this article that has advocated for cuts in the Child Care program, and increased co-pays: https://www.illinoispolicy.org/budget-battle-highlights-need-for-fair-reform-to-illinois-child-care-assistance-program/ Or this one, that advocates for significant cuts in the Community Care Program: https://www.illinoispolicy.org/saving-ccp-budget-reforms-preserve-benefits-for-elderly-residents-in-need/ - Jockey - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:26 am: I once had a discussion with a few IPI’er about their views on several issues. Being right-of center myself, and not happy about the current stalemate by both sides, I asked for an opinion. I found the responses to be almost rehearsed, and lacking in any originality. The last thing IL needs is more partisanship. - Oswego Willy - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:31 am: ===With Gov. Bruce Rauner rightly rejecting calls for higher taxes until the General Assembly passes much-needed budgetary and economic reforms, a political dance will continue in the halls of the Capitol. Call it the state budget shuffle.=== Then… Gov. Rauner owns all the “bad” that happens, the fallout, because… “..,Gov. Bruce Rauner rightly rejecting… until the General Assembly passes much-needed budgetary and economic reforms,… . Ball game. The rest? The rest is the IPI trying to pass off Rauner talking points as “well thought-out analysis”. Im sure this was easy to “write”; throw in a few connecting words to bullet points, and bingo, a 3rd party, non-partisan, laundering of boiler plate rhetoric and divisive language peddled as “outside” thoughts. Maybe Kristen McQueary can help, or hurt. She’d fit in great there. - Wordslinger - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:33 am: Wow, how did she miss that memo? That’s the boss’ program. Every GOP legislator is on board. - VanillaMan - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:36 am: The moment she roped Munger into her plotline, I knew what she was attempting to do - salvage a governor currently on the defense regarding his refusal to do his constitutionally mandated job. Then she throws in “rightly”, “essentially”, “rigged”, and effectively guts her own attempt to present the governor’s side of this issue. There is no original thought anywhere. She fails to help. Governors are not supposed to be pitied. Rauner campaign might have appeared pitiful to Democrats, but Bruce Rauner touted himself as someone who can do, not someone who needed us to feel sorry for him. It is appalling that any governor has gotten so bad at communicating, that others feel a need to step in and speak for him. What Governor Rauner wants to sell Illinoisans isn’t what Illinoisans thought they bought when he was elected. Bruce is failing to deliver what he promised and failing to take responsibility for that failure. Until he has an honest conversation with citizens beyond excuses - he won’t find many following him, beyond those who are afraid of him, or have been bought by him. A governor without ideas, or whose ideas are rejected by a majority of citizens, needs to change his tune, or get a clue. This continue head bashing we see coming from Bruce Rauner, this lame one-note Nelly song of “lower wages for everyone!”, this finger-pointing, is a complete waste of time. You have the cash Governor, go out and get a few clues as to how to do your job. - Oswego Willy - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:39 am: The repackaging and redefining of the “cuts are a bug, not a feature”… is that the IPI refusing to have Rauner own his choices? Is this a rehab job the Governor can point to? - Secret Square - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:42 am: In all fairness, I would like to point out that the IPI article on CCAP, while it does advocate higher co-pays, does NOT advocate “cuts” to program enrollment or eligibility. It states: “That the program would have to shut down entirely to new families – even the poorest of the poor – is a stunning indictment of the lack of leadership shown by the General Assembly in coming up with a reasonable spending plan”. The premise of the article — whether you agree with it or not — is that co-payments had actually decreased for many CCAP families in recent years and if they were raised, it might help stave off any need for enrollment freezes or waiting lists. - Honeybear - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:49 am: This is frankly offensive from IPI. Wow, the unmitigated whatever. I’m just stunned. Have they NO SHAME? I mean really. I guess I shouldn’t be stunned but if they want to be considered journalists isn’t there an ethical line that is being crossed here? I think this is just unethical. This seems very symptomatic of the whole problem, failure to compromise and lack of self-differentiation (Bowen) to the point of becoming a bizarre group narcissism. Now I get that political entities fight for their “vision” but what the Raunerites exhibit goes beyond that. It’s as if compromise, “bargaining” etc, threatens their very existence! Thus they act out, lash out, attack, and LIE as if their very individual lives depended on it. - Obamas Puppy - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:50 am: IPI motto “We don’t let facts get in the way of a good quote.” - VanillaMan - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:54 am: The premise of the article — whether you agree with it or not — is that co-payments had actually decreased for many CCAP families in recent years and if they were raised, it might help stave off any need for enrollment freezes or waiting lists. LOL - Wrong. You are reading what you want to read into this. - Honeybear - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 10:04 am: Now in reflecting on my own post, I wanted to mention that the Dems aren’t really compromising either but I still maintain there is a difference. - Dance Band on the Titanic - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 10:07 am: “The huge child care program cuts are a feature, not a bug.” More proof that the $30,000 per month contract with Donna Arduin is still paying dividends even after she’s gone. - X-prof - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 10:15 am: @Dupage “A 6% income tax. Or more.” In fact, this is an important part of what Illinois needs as a permanent reform to its revenue system to meet recurring reasonable budget requirements and to start paying off its pension debt. Provided that the income tax hike is paired with cuts to sales and pension taxes to protect the 80% of tax payers with a total burden greater than 10%. New revenue would come from those who pay substantially less than 10% of income, roughly the top 10%. Since this group receives about half the state’s income, this reform would be revenue positive and an important part of addressing the state’s long-term problems. One cost of the immediate crises generated by Rauner’s insistence on his TA agenda is that it has shifted the policy discussion to short-term issues involving the current-year budget and away from reforms that would address the state’s massive long-term debt. That’s bad, no matter what you think should be done about it or who you think is responsible. - Soccertease - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 10:16 am: The IPI article is dated 09/21/15-and not particularly revealing even at that date. But Rasmussen’s point is ‘why should lawmakers, state employees’, etc., be paid before low-income working moms’? A good question. From the CF comments it seems like she’s proposing killing kittens. - walker - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 10:19 am: They know this childcare issue doesn’t play well for the Governor, and that the decision was made and implemented by him, long before we had a “budget impasse.” Searching for an out. Only the already on board will believe it. - nixit71 - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 10:42 am: ==Provided that the income tax hike is paired with cuts to sales and pension taxes…== A pension tax cut?! Sure, what’s 50% of zero? - Political Animal - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 10:44 am: But Rich, the cuts to that program via emergency rule are only necessary because the governor has so little flexibility on the rest of the spending. If all the big ticket items weren’t tied up by Court order, legislative intransigence, and Constitutional provisions, I highly doubt you’d be seeing any cuts to child care. That’s probably what IPI is talking about. - Mama - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 10:51 am: ++- Honeybear - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 9:49 am:++ I agree with you. - MasterPiece - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 10:57 am: P.A. - how far would that ConAgra subsidy go toward easing the child care cuts pain? Just asking. - Niblets - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 10:58 am: Articles like this make me need an additional cooling off period. I think the correct name for the initials I. P. I. is Illinois Propaganda Institute. - Liberty - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 11:03 am: She neglects to say Rauner has not given up vetoing budgets. - Political Animal - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 11:05 am: MasterPiece, That’s a point well taken and I’m fully against corporate welfare, because I don’t think it benefits the economy long term or ends up being worth the cost. But the administration would probably counter by saying we need to keep attracting businesses to provide jobs (ease the burden on social programs) and keep growing tax revenues. If you think the budget is tough now consider how bad it will be after a few more years of hemorrhaging jobs and big companies. - VanillaMan - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 11:07 am: ‘why should lawmakers, state employees’, etc., be paid before low-income working moms’? For the same reason you pay your mortgage, utilities and overhead before giving your kids their lunch money. It doesn’t mean they’re not important - it means you can’t help them when the other things are not in place first. Then you have this thing called the constitution which requires that our government support itself so that it can help other be supported. Rauner is the kind of guy who would tell you that it costs too much for school buses and bus drivers to pick up your kids and until they agree to lose their jobs, cut their wages and outsource the rest - he won’t let your kids go to school. - nixit71 - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 11:08 am: ==I think the correct name for the initials I. P. I. is Illinois Propaganda Institute.== Then they could face off against the Center for Tax and Taxit Taxability. - Wordslinger - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 11:30 am: PA, you obviously didn’t read the post. The governor changed the rules to shut down the program in February. It was an ideological, not a fiscal move. - late to the party - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 11:43 am: ++If all the big ticket items weren’t tied up by Court order, legislative intransigence, and Constitutional provisions, I highly doubt you’d be seeing any cuts to child care.** Wrong. The governor announced cuts to child care on June 2nd, before anyone was sued to make any state payments. And, as Word pointed out, he proposed cuts in February. Nice try, though. What’s the next talking point? - X-prof - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 11:59 am: @Nixit71 Pension taxes was a typo, make that Property taxes. - RNUG - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 12:08 pm: == But the administration would probably counter by saying we need to keep attracting businesses to provide jobs (ease the burden on social programs) and keep growing tax revenues. == Tough to grow tax revenues when your stated agenda is lower wages for the middle class. - RNUG - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 12:13 pm: == But Rasmussen’s point is ‘why should lawmakers, state employees’, etc., be paid before low-income working moms’? A good question. == Maybe, just maybe, because you need some State employees to run the program and process the payments? - RNUG - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 12:15 pm: == If all the big ticket items weren’t tied up by Court order, legislative intransigence, and Constitutional provisions, I highly doubt you’d be seeing any cuts to child care. == Rauner made the decision to veto the budget rather than amend it, so he made the choice to have the courts run the State … and owns the resulting child care cuts. - X-prof - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 12:20 pm: Nixit71, would you care to explain why the wealthy should be taxed at a lower rate than the middle class? Or how, fairness aside, we can afford to tax more than half the state’s income at one half to one-third the rate others pay? BTW, if you are in the first 80% of income earners, you would get an overall tax cut by what I'’m proposing. In the next 10%, a small increase. As you work your way up from there, you would see say a 3-4% increase or so, but you’d still be taxed at a lower rate than the middle class. Unfortunately, there’s no way to combine a flat tax with regressive taxes to avoid an overall regressive tax system. In any case, what’s your proposal for addressing the state’s structural fiscal problems? - Union Man - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 12:21 pm: I P I is wrong for stating the agiv is right to reject any tax increase. True conservatives believe in paying the bills. - nixit71 - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 12:46 pm: @X-prof-Sorry, just noticed your second reply… My proposal? Simple. Tax. Retirement. Income. Either we believe in generational equity or we do not. BTW, If you make over $75,000, you’re part of the 20% of the taxpaying population in this state paying 80% of the total state income taxes. That’s a pretty scary stat. And while we all may disagree on what’s fair, the solutions to place heavier burdens on increasingly smaller segments of the population may not prove to be a sustainable plan. - RNUG - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 12:54 pm: == My proposal? Simple. Tax. Retirement. Income. == I’m going to assume that a portion of retirement income would remain un-taxed, say the average SS level in the State. So what do you propose for the rest of the needed revenue? - Dale Cooper - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 1:04 pm: Speaking of preferential treatment, how about those police/firefighter pensions? - nixit71 - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 1:25 pm: @RNUG-Only Social Security goes un-taxed because taxes have already been paid on that income (and it’s a tax, it’s redistributed downward…). Everything else is taxed. 401k and state pensions alike. Many states already have this model. Then what’s next? Well, you still might have to raise taxes, but at least it will have a multiplier effect now that you’re capturing another $1.5-2B of income. And now my $80,000 salary is treated the same as the retiree’s $80,000 pension. All under the umbrella of a reduced budget. - Austin Blvd - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 1:49 pm: What a travesty that Madigan made Bruce amend the child care rules do fewer families could qualify. - Bulldog58 - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 1:53 pm: Dale Cooper - What about those police/firefighter pensions? Please elaborate or present an opinion. - Politix - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 2:40 pm: I’m sure IPI “hates” and is “devastated” by these cuts and rule changes as much as BVR. Truly tough time for all. /s - Political Animal - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 3:07 pm: Wordslinger, Are you contending that the state didn’t have a fiscal crisis back in February? The cash shortage didn’t start this summer. - Rich Miller - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 3:09 pm: ===The cash shortage didn’t start this summer== Correct. However, the leaders worked out a deal on the FY15 problem. - Federalist - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 3:27 pm: Tax retirement income. Cdertainly will raise money. Interesting that there are some $8.9 billion ‘lost’ in taxes due to a variety of exemptions yet that is never discussed. All you get is this very old and very tired refrain of taxing retirement income. - Secret Square - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 3:27 pm: “The governor changed the rules to shut down the program in February” There was no rulemaking activity involving the CCAP program at that time. The program was not “shut down” by rule until July 1. - nixit71 - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 4:16 pm: ==Interesting that there are some $8.9 billion ‘lost’ in taxes due to a variety of exemptions yet that is never discussed.== Good point. Here are the top tax expenditures in the state: 1. $2.2B Retirement and Social Security Deductions 2. $1.6B Food and Drugs Sales Tax 3. $1.1B Standard Deduction 4. $0.5B Property Tax Credit …then a lot of machinery exemptions So retirement income is #1. There are plenty of arguments that our flat income tax is regressive, but excluding a classification of income from taxation entirely is even more regressive. Raise the food tax? You could, but that will be deemed even more regressive. Removing #3 and #4 is especially regressive to the only folks paying income taxes. Unless you do #1, #3 and #4 probably shouldn’t be touched. I agree, all exemptions should be considered. But retirement is by far #1. And the top 2 alone account for $4B, which is about how far we’re apart in the budget impasse. - RNUG - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 4:23 pm: == Only Social Security goes un-taxed because taxes have already been paid on that income (and it’s a tax, it’s redistributed downward…) == How do you propose to treat the state retirees who were not allowed to pay into SS? Could be an unequal treatment lawsuit there. - burbanite - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 4:32 pm: “If you think the budget is tough now consider how bad it will be after a few more years of hemorrhaging jobs and big companies.” How bout the parents who lost their jobs b/c they couldn’t pay for the day care and the day care workers that lost their jobs b/c the kids are gone from the day care and how about the workers for the caterers at the VA homes that lost their jobs? The social services employees who are losing their jobs? Or are those jobs not important enough of jobs to consider? We are hemorrhaging jobs as a result of the lack of budget, failure to negotiate and draconian cuts to social services. - nixit71 - Friday, Oct 9, 15 @ 4:38 pm: ==How do you propose to treat the state retirees who were not allowed to pay into SS? Could be an unequal treatment lawsuit there.== I wish I wasn’t allowed to pay into SS… True, I would expect that argument, but the treatment is already unequal. Taxes have already been paid on that income. A flat exemption (say $30K on all retirement income) is unequal because if private sector guy gets $20K in SS and $10K in IRA income, he’s already paid taxes on 2/3 of that retirement income. Public sector guy still goes untaxed on his $30K pension. So you’d have tax inequality there as well. All retirement income is not created equal. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.