Rauner tax hike claim ruled “Mostly False”
Friday, Dec 15, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Politifact…
Speaking to reporters after a speech in Chicago on Dec. 4, Gov. Bruce Rauner predicted a re-election victory in next year’s gubernatorial race and warned of dire tax consequences if any of the three main Democratic candidates for the post win.
“You know what will happen? We will get a massive income tax hike. The candidates controlled by (House Speaker Michael) Madigan, all of them have said, ‘The answer to our problems is a massive income tax hike,’ ” Rauner said, referring to Democratic candidates Daniel Biss, Chris Kennedy and JB Pritzker.
All three have stated they support replacing Illinois’ flat-rate income tax with a system in which those with higher incomes pay higher rates. […]
Despite Rauner’s examples, a progressive income tax system does not necessarily mean a tax increase for the middle class. And there is no evidence that anyone in Illinois politics has a blueprint for income and tax brackets under a potential Illinois system. The closest such blueprint, from 2012, had the vast majority of voters paying the same or lower taxes.
Nor is that decision up to the governor. It would take three-fifths of the General Assembly and a majority of voters to bring a progressive tax to reality. Recent history does not point favorably to this happening without significant Democratic gains in the Legislature.
Pritzker was squishy when discussing immediate revenue needs with Crain’s, but Rauner cites the Crain’s article as Pritzker’s solid endorsement of a “massive tax increase.” We rate Rauner’s statement Mostly False.
- DuPage - Friday, Dec 15, 17 @ 11:08 am:
Nothing unusual. Most Rauner statements have turned out to be “mostly false”.
- Nick Name - Friday, Dec 15, 17 @ 11:09 am:
The one are where a governor really is not in charge — amending the Constitution — and Rauner blames the Dem candidates for being in charge of it.
- Pundent - Friday, Dec 15, 17 @ 11:17 am:
=You know what will happen? We will get a massive income tax hike.=
Well in all fairness he didn’t define “we”. It’s quite possible that the “we” Rauner speaks of is not you or me but the people that matter the most to Rauner. In that sense “we” could very well get a massive tax increase.
- Real - Friday, Dec 15, 17 @ 11:19 am:
@John
So none of whar they reported was fact?
- Jocko - Friday, Dec 15, 17 @ 11:25 am:
==Bruce Rauner predicted a re-election victory in next year’s gubernatorial race==
Was this rated “Mostly False” as well?
- Kevin Highland - Friday, Dec 15, 17 @ 11:27 am:
I’m pretty sure if one proposed a bracketed income tax where people making less than $250k paid less in taxes the rank & file voters would pass it as it seems many want the rich to pay a higher percentage in taxes.
- Henry Francis - Friday, Dec 15, 17 @ 11:27 am:
Show the Guv some respect and rate it mostly baloney.
- Demoralized - Friday, Dec 15, 17 @ 11:33 am:
Somebody should ask the Governor how he intends to manage the budget with his plan to roll back the latest tax increase.
- UIC Guy - Friday, Dec 15, 17 @ 11:41 am:
@Demoralized: Yes!
@ OP: Because the mean household income (total divided by number of households) is significantly higher than the median (income of the household in the middle of the income distribution), it’s easy to devise a tax regime in which most households pay LESS and the state raises MORE in total. And the state needs more: we need to pay down debts, improve education at all levels, make the streets safer….
- IMissBentohs - Friday, Dec 15, 17 @ 11:50 am:
So frustrating:
3 options:
1) Increase revenue
2) Decrease spending
3) Continue increasing debt
No one wants 3.
1 is against conservatives beliefs. (not true as even I know it can be needed but it is believed to be true, especially around election time)
So 2 is it …. and you still have not offered one thing to cut. Dang it man, at least offer 10% across the board cut if you are going to put no time or effort into the governmental process.
- don the legend - Friday, Dec 15, 17 @ 12:21 pm:
— We rate Rauner’s statement Mostly False.—
That’s a step up from the usual Completely False.
- City Zen - Friday, Dec 15, 17 @ 12:26 pm:
==I’m pretty sure if one proposed a bracketed income tax where people making less than $250k paid less in taxes the rank & file voters would pass it as it seems many want the rich to pay a higher percentage in taxes.==
With a guarantee that would not change. That’s the one issue with a graduated income tax. Once you allow it, the legislature is free to play with the rates however they want. What once was a millionaire’s tax can become a hundred-thousandaire tax. Or your $250,000 break even becomes $75,000.
- SSL - Friday, Dec 15, 17 @ 12:29 pm:
Does anyone really believe that the revenue needed to address the dire fiscal condition of this state can be raised through a tax on the 1%. Or even the top 25%. Look at large states such as Illinois, and review the progressive tax tier structure. You may not like what you see.
Bottom line is that there is plenty of pain going to get spread around.
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Dec 15, 17 @ 12:37 pm:
===Does anyone really believe…===
Actually, no, no one actually believes that.
The consensus is cuts and revenue to get to an equilibrium.
If you could try just a smidge more honesty, and a big cut from the hyperbole, “that would be great”
- Lester Holt’s Mustache - Friday, Dec 15, 17 @ 12:55 pm:
==Does anyone really believe that the revenue needed to address the dire fiscal condition of this state can be raised through a tax on the 1%. Or even the top 25%. ==
So, your suggestion is to do nothing at all? And yes, I do think so - it’ll take a while, but it can be done unless we keep electing fraudulent “conservatives” like ya boy Bruce Rauner.
===Look at large states such as Illinois, and review the progressive tax tier structure. You may not like what you see==
Since Illinois doesn’t have progressive tax structure, that would be hard to do. But I can look at Minnesota, at Wisconsin, at Iowa - looks like it working just fine to me
==Bottom line is that there is plenty of pain going to get spread around==
It’ll be spread around more fairly if we don’t listen to those who will throw out any bit of nonsense they can think of when this issue comes up. Millionaires tax referendum passed overwhelmingly a couple years back, and a progressive structure amendment would pass by just as much if not more. Poor and middle class Illinoisans are tired of having to prop up our system with ridiculously high property taxes just so Bruce, JB Pritzker and ken griffin can pay an absurdly low state rate.
- City Zen - Friday, Dec 15, 17 @ 1:09 pm:
==Does anyone really believe that the revenue needed to address the dire fiscal condition of this state can be raised through a tax on the 1%. Or even the top 25%.==
If the state targeted the “top 25%”, that would include anyone making over $60,000. It’s probably necessary to go that far down the income scale, so don’t count on any of the candidates telling you that, Bruce included.
- City Zen - Friday, Dec 15, 17 @ 1:10 pm:
== But I can look at Minnesota, at Wisconsin, at Iowa - looks like it working just fine to me==
Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa tax retirement income.
- Lester Holt’s Mustache - Friday, Dec 15, 17 @ 1:28 pm:
==Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Iowa tax retirement income==
This statement is true. We thank you for your contribution to the discussion on why Illinois should have a progressive tax structure.
- Nick Name - Friday, Dec 15, 17 @ 1:44 pm:
===Somebody should ask the Governor how he intends to manage the budget with his plan to roll back the latest tax increase.===
His usual MO: veto everything and blame everyone else for not compromisin’.
- Former Hillrod - Friday, Dec 15, 17 @ 1:51 pm:
Hillrodifact rates the Rauner Administration as mostly false
- wordslinger - Friday, Dec 15, 17 @ 2:55 pm:
– We rate Rauner’s statement Mostly False.–
That’s an improvement, I guess.
- Sir Reel - Friday, Dec 15, 17 @ 3:36 pm:
Rauner sounds more and more like Trump. Massive this, massive that. Next, he’ll be saying, “like the world has never seen.”