Longstanding political dialogue in Illinois is that downstate Illinois does not receive its fair share when it comes to a return on state funding and resources.
While there is not an equal funding distribution across the state, research by the Southern Illinois University Carbondale’s Paul Simon Public Policy Institute shows that despite heavy rhetoric, the downstate region receives more than it pays into the state coffers. The best deals are received in central Illinois and Southern Illinois. […]
The research breaks the state’s 102 counties into six specific regions, including Cook County, a five-county suburban section that surrounds Cook County, and the 96 remaining downstate regions, which are subdivided into north, central, southwest and southern regions.
The research shows the south region receives $2.81 in state funds for every $1 generated. The central Illinois region of 50 counties receives $1.87 back for every $1.00 sent to Springfield. All of the downstate regions receive more from the state budget than they pay in taxes. By comparison, Cook County receives 90 cents for every $1, and the suburban counties only 53 cents for every $1 generated.
While gun safety measures and rebuilding trust between law enforcement and the communities they serve is critical, taken alone they will not end the violence.
To end gun violence, just as with any public health epidemic, we must address its root causes by bringing real economic opportunity to the communities affected most. I’m not talking about lip service, but true investment that seeks to build wealth and prosperity. Fostering economic inclusion and expanding opportunities for minority entrepreneurs is critically important. It’s past time that we reverse the trend of disinvestment and restore hope and economic justice to communities that need it most. We can do that by providing capital for small businesses, investing in accelerators for entrepreneurs and workers, and improving education for our young people.
Strengthening communities also requires that we invest in community-based programs working to interrupt gun violence before it happens, and give children and families the tools they need to build better lives. After-school programs, mental health services, and violence prevention organizations were decimated by Bruce Rauner’s budget crisis. These are the tools of prevention and they must be restored to full strength.
And we have to invest more intentionally in public education from cradle to career, to increase the wage potential and economic opportunity of people in communities across Chicago and our state.
Today, Mike Babcock joined Governor Bruce Rauner and three other candidates in signing “The People’s Pledge,” a commitment to give citizens a chance to vote on term limits and a promise to vote for anyone other than Mike Madigan as Speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives. Babcock, who is running for State Representative in the 111th District, called on his opponent Monica Bristow to sign the pledge as well.
“It cannot be said often enough that Mike Madigan has presided over the historic decline of our state,” said Babcock. “His leadership has failed, and his caucus has completely refused to stand up for what’s right and vote him out. This isn’t a partisan issue. My opponent was asked recently if she would support Madigan as Speaker and gave no response. Voters deserve to get an answer to that question because the vote for speaker is the most important one that a representative can make. If my opponent doesn’t take the opportunity to join me in signing this pledge, she needs to explain to the people of the 111th district what she intends to do.”
Babcock’s opponent, Monica Bristow, would not speculate how she might vote on Madigan’s reelection to the Speakership, even after Madigan’s office came under heavy scrutiny following allegations of sexual harassment. Madigan’s Chief of Staff, Tim Mapes, resigned following reports that he oversaw a culture of harassment and actively sought to coverup misconduct. Calls for an independent investigation in light of the issue have been bipartisan, signaling that the Speaker may have found himself in an uncharacteristically defensive position.
Babcock also came down strongly in favor of giving voters a say on term limits. “We hear the term ‘career politicians’ a lot, but we should remember what it really means. It means that some of the people that go to Springfield will stop at nothing to hold onto their power. They will vote for any policy, or any leader, so long as it keeps them in the game because they are there for themselves, not their constituents. I’m proud to sign this pledge today and I look forward both to casting two important votes: one for term limits and one against Mike Madigan and his record of self-serving failure.”
Democratic incumbent Monica Bristow, D-Godfrey, responded to the statement when first reached on Thursday.
“The only pledge that I’m going to make is to the people of the 111th District, not to a governor who has turned his back on downstate Illinois,” she said. “What people are tired of are the same old political games being played by Mike Babcock and Bruce Rauner. I stand on my record of creating new jobs here in the Riverbend region, promoting local small businesses, protecting our rights and values, and standing up for the middle class. That’s my pledge to the people that I represent, and if the governor and Mike Babcock would stop playing these tired political games, we could get down to the real business in the state of Illinois.”
On Thursday, [former Sen. Rickey Hendon] also defended [Willie Wilson] by saying that he isn’t buying votes, then added that he’d be overpaying if he was. Vote-buying is illegal.
“They’ve accused this man of buying votes, and I just have to say it … buying votes on the West Side, South Side, votes about $5, $10,” Hendon said. “So if Willie Wilson is giving somebody $3,000, as an adviser, I’d be like, you’re overpaying by 1,500 percent. Because if we wanted to buy votes, it’s 5, 10 bucks on the West Side and South Side, so let’s just be real about that.”
Hendon, a flamboyant former West Side politician who goes by the nickname “Hollywood,” has been paid at least $22,000 by Wilson’s campaign as an adviser, state campaign finance records show.
Lincoln never said that, according to three top Lincoln scholars.
* As Hannah Meisel just pointed out on Twitter, the fake Lincoln quote has reappeared at an Illinois State Fair tent…
DoIT is all set-up at The Governor's Tent at Illinois State Fair! We're looking forward to meeting you and talking up the digital transformation revolutionizing the state.
Wanted to send this your way based on the post from earlier today. As you know, this quote has been widely attributed to President Lincoln for many years. We have checked with our partners at the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum and confirmed there is no evidence that he indeed said it. We will be replacing the sign with the verified quote below.
“If we never try, we shall never succeed.”
Abraham Lincoln - October 13, 1862 in a letter to Major General George B. McClellan
Gov. Bruce Rauner signed a bill Thursday afternoon requiring the default location for all new and vacant state positions to Springfield and Sangamon County.
Existing employees won’t be relocated.
A 2016 study estimated the action would bring roughly 400 jobs to the area. […]
This law takes effect immediately, meaning any new hires in state government will be calling the Springfield area home unless there’s a specific reason why they should be working in another location in Illinois.
House Bill 4295 makes Springfield and Sangamon County the default location for employees of most state agencies. The director of Central Management Services would have to establish a geographic location for each state job and specify why positions located outside the capital city need to be there.
The legislative and judicial branches are exempt, as are the offices of the state’s constitutional officers and those employed directly by the governor’s office.
The legislation addresses longstanding suspicions by some that state positions are being systematically poached from Springfield for other parts of the state, fears exacerbated by the general decline in the total number of state jobs in the past few decades. […]
State jobs are scattered across all counties of the state, but the lion’s share are in Sangamon County and Cook County. While the latter — home to Chicago — has a significantly higher population, workforce studies have shown other state capitals having far more state jobs than their state’s largest city.
* The Question: Do you agree or disagree with this new law? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
* Organized labor in Missouri collected 310,000 signatures (more than three times the minimum requirement) to repeal that state’s so-called “right to work” law. The referendum was scheduled for an August vote because the GOP thought they’d have a better chance of beating it than they would in November. But labor spent millions and won the referendum 67-33. The Illinois Policy Institute’s Austin Berg tut-tuts the whole thing…
Is this a sea change for unions in the Midwest? A signal that worker freedom will forever be squashed in non-right-to-work Illinois?
No.
In fact, the union strategy in Illinois’ southwestern neighbor should leave some rank-and-file members scratching their heads. The victory was expensive, potentially short-lived and may even cut against some of the unions’ other political priorities. […]
The union-backed We Are Missouri Coalition raised more than $16 million from labor organizations and spent nearly $7 million on ads in July alone. They outspent two opposing groups combined by a nearly 5 to 1 margin, according to the Wall Street Journal’s analysis of state filings. […]
Unfortunately for union members who saw millions of dollars in dues money flow to this fight, that gamesmanship is still very much on the table. If Missouri Republicans hold on to their supermajorities in November, which is not unlikely, a right-to-work bill will certainly bubble up yet again in 2019. […]
Missouri U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill is perhaps the most vulnerable Democratic senator in the country. Millions of union dollars that flowed to the right-to-work battle will no longer go to support her. And millions of dollars that weren’t spent trying to outmaneuver unions in that fight will flow to her opponent, Republican Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley.
Despite the right-to-work proposition being the star of the primary election, Missouri Republicans cast about 60,000 more votes than Missouri Democrats statewide. That’s not a good sign for McCaskill.
So at the end of the day, what did union members get in exchange for millions of dollars?
An opportunity for union officials to pat themselves on the back, a weaker position in a key congressional race and a few more months, though possibly years, of compulsory dues.
Um, if Republicans cast 60,000 more votes than Democrats, that means a whole lot of rank and file Missouri Republicans sided with organized labor in the referendum. And when labor achieved the same sort of result in an Ohio “right to work” referendum, the GOP backed off their attacks on unions.
…Adding… From Austin Berg…
Hey Rich, I’m aware of the Ohio comparison and don’t take it lightly. The return of a right-to-work vote in Missouri was simply the mood among Republican operatives I spoke with for the column. This KCUR story also says as much. Re: turnout, agree to disagree on the implications for the Senate race.
This was obviously a win for Trumka and Co., but as the column says, it was expensive, potentially short-lived and could cut against other priorities. I wish all workers there had a choice on whether to fund fights like this.
In a year that is expected to draw far more Democratic voters to the polls than the typical midterm election, Republicans in blue states will depend on the Democrats who helped them win in the first place, and who might be tempted to split their tickets this time. To woo them, most have signed on to policies that appeal to those voters. […]
A possible exception is Illinois, where Gov. Bruce Rauner, a Republican, has adopted a largely combative stance against the state’s Democrats. At the same time, he has annoyed his own party so much with his moderate social positions and budget woes that he barely survived a primary in the spring, inspiring a third-party bid from a conservative candidate.
“Bruce Rauner thought he could be Scott Walker when he got elected,” Thomas Bowen, a Democratic strategist and former political director for Mayor Rahm Emanuel of Chicago, said, referring to the Republican governor of Wisconsin. “He forgot that Walker had a supermajority in the state legislature and he did not.”
“There was a playbook for how to be a Republican in Illinois that’s been replayed over and over,’’ Mr. Bowen said. “Be fiscally astute, compromise and don’t pick fights unnecessarily.”
Thoughts?
…Adding… Former Gov. Jim Edgar appears to agree with Bowen…
JIM EDGAR: “You don’t go out and call a person a crook today and then tomorrow think you’re going to sit down and solve problems. That’s a huge mistake we’ve seen some politicians make in this state."
Holocaust denier Art Jones and 9/11 and Sandy Hook conspiracy theorist Bill Fawell are Republican challengers to Democratic incumbents in Congress. The governor says you have Democrats to thank for that.
“If a district is rigged, it’s hard to get them to recruit,” Rauner told reporters at a news conference following a bill-signing in his Springfield office Thursday. “I believe in the last couple of election cycles, in a significant majority of the general election races, there was no opponent. When that happens, that creates a vacuum, and that allows nut cases or despicable people like Nazis to sneak in, because there is nobody looking at it, nobody working on it, nobody running for the position. That’s the biggest problem. We’ve got to stop the gerrymandering.”
“It’s hard to get people to run in races in districts that have been rigged for the incumbent under our gerrymandered system by Speaker Madigan,” Rauner said.
An avowed Nazi is running as a Republican in the Third Congressional District in Cook County. And Republican Party officials have disowned a GOP candidate running in the 17th Congressional District who holds conspiracy theories about 9/11 and the Sandy Hook school shooting.
The district is currently represented by Democrat Cheri Bustos, although President Donald Trump carried the district in 2016.
Gov. Rauner himself won that Bustos district by almost 10 points in 2014. And he only lost the Lipinski district by a single point that year.
* Republican attorney general candidate Erika Harold on WLS AM…
Rauner says he’s investing $4M to chip away at Speaker Madigan’s House majority and $1M to Harold because she’d prosecute Madigan for corruption.
That would be hard to do because she’d be barred by law from convening a grand jury to consider political corruption, but she told Bill Cameron on a recent “Connected to Chicago” program, how she’d get around that.
“There is statutory authority under the current law that enables the attorney general to conduct investigations if any of the inspector generals find evidence of misconduct. I would use that authority and that ability robustly.”
The full audio is here. I asked Harold’s campaign yesterday afternoon for the statutory citation and never heard back.
* But this is from the attorney general’s office…
1) For non-criminal ethics act actions, that’s correct. If an IG wants to bring an action before the EEC (or LEC) we handle those cases. And even if the IG does not want to pursue an action, there are a few very narrow routes where we can still push the case forward. We use that authority robustly and have worked very closely with all of the Executive IGs. But this work requires referrals from the IG or EEC/LEC. The idea of originating/initiating investigations using that authority - separately and independently from the IGs - is incorrect.
2) When an IG has a complaint/is conducting an investigation and believes he or she has identified possible criminal conduct, the ethics law requires a referral to an appropriate prosecutor. The IG can choose to refer to a US Attorney, a State’s Attorney (in the appropriate county) or our office. But if we get that referral, we have to ask the permission of the appropriate State’s Attorney to use his or her grand jury - which means we have to ask permission to handle the case and if the State’s Attorney wants to take it or do it jointly with us, we do not have an option. If the idea is that the ethics law/IG referral process somehow gives us access to a grand jury that we otherwise do not have or expands the criminal law and gives us original/primary criminal jurisdiction that we otherwise do not have, that is incorrect.
Discuss.
*** UPDATE 1 *** From the Harold campaign…
Erika never suggested in her interview with Cameron that the AG has prosecutorial authority under the Ethics Act. Rather, Erika said this to Bill Cameron: “There is statutory authority under the current law that enables the attorney general to conduct investigations if any of the inspector generals find evidence of misconduct…” That authority is found within the State Officials and Employees Ethics Act (linked/copied below), and those are the statutes Erika was referencing in her interview with Cameron. Accordingly, your assertion that AG Madigan “[shot] down” a “prosecution idea” from Erika based on those statutes is incorrect.
One final note, contrary to what anyone else says, Erika has been clear for quite some time that she will not use the office to punish political opponents: “…And by public corruption, I’m not talking about using the office as a way to punish political opponents…”
* And here’s Lt. Gov. Evelyn Sanguinetti on WTAX today…
REPORTER: Yesterday we’ve been running a story this morning that the governor said he’s given money to Ericka Harold and if she wins, she should prosecute Mike Madigan. What are your thoughts on that? Does that put Ericka Harold, should she win, in kind of an awkward position that the governor says, look I donated to her campaign here and she should prosecute Mike Madigan?
SANGUINETTI: Well, Ericka Harold is a fine young woman in her own power, and I admire her a lot, she is a wonderful attorney and I am sure she is going to be an amazing attorney general. And I know she will have a focus on corruption because Illinois, unfortunately, is popular for that very reason and that’s the whole reason why Bruce Rauner and I signed on. We’re simply tired of being known worldwide as the state that has all the corruption, so I’m very happy that Ericka Harold will focus on that and I know she will be completely independent.
REPORTER: So you agree with the governor there?
SANGUINETTI: Well I agree that we have a corruption problem and the governor is spot on in that regard. You know Michael Madigan has been around since I was three months of age. That’s a lot of time in which to amass power, have people around you and have the sort of clout, the sort of power that he has, and it simply has to stop because we need to look out for all Illinoisans, not just his special interest powers.
*** UPDATE 2 *** Gov. Rauner made good on his pledge to contribute $1 million to Erika Harold’s campaign. Click here for the A-1.
As JB has said since he decided to run, Illinois’ tax system is unfair and needs to change. JB believes people like him and Bruce Rauner should pay more to help solve the state’s budget problems and fund education while lowering the tax burden on the middle class and those striving to get there. The large majority of states in America have fair tax systems in place and there are many ways to institute one here in Illinois without asking middle class families to pay more.
Bruce Rauner’s a failure. So, instead of talking about his own record, he distorts mine. When it comes to taxes, Illinois has the most unfair income. tax system in America and. It’s time for that to change.
A fair income tax will raise taxes on people like Bruce Rauner and me to support education and help solve the state’s budget problem while reducing the burden on the middle class. Don’t believe Bruce Rauner’s attacks. Let’s make our tax system fair and bring real change to Illinois.
…Adding… Rauner campaign…
What’s unfair is that JB Pritzker is a tax cheat pushing tax hikes. Pritzker hides his money in the Bahamas to avoid paying income taxes and has ripped toilets out of his mansion to dodge property taxes. It’s unfair to hardworking taxpayers that JB Pritzker plans to raise taxes while dodging his own.
*** UPDATE 1 *** Pritzker’s ad references a study by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. He did the same sort of thing last year and we took a look at it…
* There’s a problem with Pritzker’s analysis.
If you look at ITEP’s Illinois analysis [click here], you’ll see that the share of family income going to the state’s personal income tax is actually quite a bit less for the lowest 20 percent of earners than it is for the highest earners. That’s likely because of the Earned Income Tax Credit.
The real culprits are sales and property taxes. The bottom 20 percent pay 7.1 percent of their family income to the sales tax, compared to 0.8 percent for the top 1 percent. And the bottom 20 percent spend 4.9 percent of household income on property taxes, compared to 1.8 percent for the top 1 percent.
So, while he’s right that our tax system is unfair, his solution won’t do anything about the really regressive taxes.
The study, Who Pays?, provides insight into the drivers behind the unfairness encoded into Illinois’ existing tax system. Illinois relies heavily on taxes that are not based on ability to pay, but rather on a flat rate. Further, unlike most other states, Illinois does not have an income tax where taxpayers with higher incomes pay a higher rate and taxpayers with lower incomes pay a lower rate. As a result, the income tax doesn’t bring more balance to the overall tax system by offsetting the higher share of income that poorer taxpayers pay in sales and property taxes.
One positive aspect of Illinois’ tax system is the state’s Earned Income Tax Credit, which lets low- and moderate-income working families keep more of their earnings to help pay for things that help them keep working, such as child care and transportation. To improve tax fairness in Illinois, lawmakers should increase the value of the state’s Earned Income Tax Credit.
*** UPDATE 2 *** From Rep. Martwick…
Recently, my progressive tax proposal has been the subject of discussion on the blog. In defense of JB Pritzker, I’d like to offer the following: First, my bill was developed in late 2016 and filed in early 2017, long before JB announced his run. My bill was conceived during the height of the budget impasse as I couldn’t believe that we were limping along accumulating $6 billion of debt per year while literally killing people who were denied critical social services. There was not a single proposal to fix any of problems, except for the much panned and silly IPI proposal. Everyone knows that we would have to amend the constitution in order to adopt progressive rates and as such, I had no delusions that my bill was going anywhere. What it was designed to do was begin a discussion about how we could possibly solve our problems by changing the structure of how we raise and spend money. I specifically chose the Wisconsin tax structure because it is the flattest and most predictable of the progressive rates structures, and it is from the state that we are often told to be more like. I used the revenue to fund education, pay down our pension debt, create the biggest property tax decrease in the history of the state, lower property tax rates, and re-invest in higher education and infrastructure. This addressed nearly every major problem we have in Illinois (even our business climate, as lowering property taxes is the single most effective way to improve the bottom line of every single business in our state). My proposal was based on math, the realities of our condition and it addressed problems. In other words, it worked. Does that mean it was the best solution? Not at all. We can debate about that. But it was A solution and it was offered when no one else, especially the Governor, could be bothered with such a task. The Governor and the Republicans demanded to see a rate structure and as soon as one was provided immediately criticized it, and of course they only ever talked about the income tax increase, without ever mentioning the record property tax and sales tax reductions. Now they want to tie my proposal to JB and that is nothing short of deceptive. Yes, the rates matter, but those can be and should be determined by the legislature. Clearly, JB wants to accomplish the same things I tried to accomplish and every single Illinoisan should want: restoring financial security by paying down our debts, and lower property taxes through more equitable school funding. That can be done by an infinite combination of rate structures, including ones that lowers the overall tax burden on the middle class while requiring those who have been so successful to pay a fair burden. I’m happy to have that discussion on what exactly the best rate structure is, but I can only do that with a Governor who is open to a progressive tax so that we can fix our problems and reform the 5th most regressive tax state in the country. JB is ready to have that discussion. Rauner is not.
