Governor-elect J.B. Pritzker has taken the prospect of an immediate income tax hike off the table, telling the Sun-Times that he won’t pursue an “artificial” progressive income tax during the coming spring legislative session.
Pritzker floated the idea as a possible way to impose an immediate graduated income tax, which the Illinois Constitution forbids. He said it “could” be done by using exemptions and tax credits for the working poor and the middle class to shield them from higher income tax rates. But he hasn’t really talked about the idea since April, and he never said he was fully committed to doing it. Not to mention that an immediate tax hike — even if it is only on upper-income earners — could mar and complicate his first months in office and give groups like the Illinois Policy Institute a reason to stoke up public opposition against him.
When I asked Pritzker what he feared most about taking the reins, Pritzker said he didn’t approach the task with fear. Instead, he said he wanted to develop ways of dealing with the “real challenges” ahead.
“But we can’t do it in a hyper-partisan fashion,” Pritzker stressed, adding that was one of the reasons he’d called both Republican legislative leaders on election night. He said he made it clear he wanted to work with both of them.
“Good ideas can come from anywhere, including Republicans,” the governor-elect said. “I think we have a real opportunity to get some things done if we get rid of the partisan rancor and talk across the aisle.”
While he didn’t mention it, attempting to raise income taxes on upper-income earners right out of the gate would probably not help bring Republicans to the table. Just the opposite. A capital bill, however, would go a long way toward brightening Statehouse spirits, and Pritzker has pledged to pass one.
I asked Pritzker if he will appoint any Republicans to run state agencies. He said no decisions have been made on available positions, “but I will for sure have people from both parties serving in the administration.”
Former Republican Gov. Jim Edgar is co-chairing Pritzker’s transition committee. Edgar said nice things about Pritzker during the campaign and could be an important ally in the coming months because several legislators in both parties are graduates of his renowned fellowship program and still maintain close and respectful ties to him.
“It’s extraordinarily important that we have a dialogue, even when we disagree significantly,” Pritzker said of what he’d learned from Gov. Bruce Rauner’s dealings with both parties in the General Assembly. “That dialogue shouldn’t end,” he said. “There’s not gonna be any, you know, holding hostage.”
Asked about his first legislative priority in January, Pritzker pointed to his campaign promise of focusing on things that will “lift up the standard of living” for Illinoisans by “putting dollars back in their pockets.”
Pritzker said that would include his plan to allow people who don’t currently qualify for Medicaid to buy in to the program and then use it as their primary health insurance (which, as proposed, wouldn’t cost the government any money). Increasing MAP grants for college students was another possibility, as well as helping former college students refinance their education loans, which, he said, “would put hundreds of thousands of dollars back on the table for people.” He told other reporters he wants to increase the minimum wage.
I asked Pritzker if he was aware that over the years, the state government had been “hollowed out.” Expenditures to actually operate the government and implement programs have been diverted to pay constantly rising pension and health care costs, as well as for mandated wage hikes. Lots and lots of existing jobs aren’t filled when they become vacant because of this issue. And that has caused real problems in some crucial state agencies.
While Pritzker stressed that he still had a lot to learn, he said he was “quite well aware that there are many positions that haven’t been filled, that there are many issues that have just been sitting in a folder or file somewhere that haven’t been addressed, and some of them are very public and on the front pages, but some of them are hidden and back of the house.”
When asked to complete this sentence: “By May 31st of 2019, ‘x’ will be approved, I guarantee it,” Pritzker laughed and said, “We will have a budget.” Let’s all hope House Speaker Michael Madigan doesn’t make him eat those words.
- Stuntman Bob's Brother - Tuesday, Nov 13, 18 @ 9:37 am:
The backpedaling on the “Wealthy people like Bruce Rauner and myself need to pay more in taxes” sure didn’t take long, did it? Governor Madigan must have pulled on the reins not long after JB’s acceptance speech.
- slow down - Tuesday, Nov 13, 18 @ 9:40 am:
It’s a relief to know that we have someone in charge that appears willing and able to listen to others.
- striketoo - Tuesday, Nov 13, 18 @ 9:45 am:
It will be interesting to see if he will be able to identify some areas to cut current spending to help pay for some of his higher priority initiatives. That would take guts. We will see if he has any.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 13, 18 @ 9:47 am:
(Sigh)
===The backpedaling on the “Wealthy people like Bruce Rauner and myself need to pay more in taxes” sure didn’t take long, did it? Governor Madigan must have pulled on the reins not long after JB’s acceptance speech.===
“The backpedaling on the “Wealthy people like Bruce Rauner and myself need to pay more in taxes” sure didn’t take long, did it?”
Since you want to equate to different things, the progressive income tax is in reference to this like Bruce and JB paying more, any tax increase that’s not a progressive tax means we ALL pay more. Either learn what is happening, or try to be honest to moments.
“Governor Madigan”
… who is now at, I think, 74 seats in the House, even with “because Madigan”….
“…must have pulled on the reins not long after JB’s acceptance speech.”
I’ve already addressed your willful ignorance or blissful unawareness on the whole progressive tax thing.
Keep going after Madigan. The GA is more “blue” than before Rauner became governor.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Nov 13, 18 @ 9:48 am:
–While he didn’t mention it, attempting to raise income taxes on upper-income earners right out of the gate would probably not help bring Republicans to the table. Just the opposite. A capital bill, however, would go a long way toward brightening Statehouse spirits, and Pritzker has pledged to pass one.–
Going with a capital program right out of the box makes so much sense.
It’s a core state responsibility that’s been neglected, and you might be able to pull it off in a bipartisan way.
If you’ll recall, Rauner’s first move as governor was the Right-To-Work state tour. That set the tone for four years of damage and dysfunction.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 13, 18 @ 9:52 am:
===While he didn’t mention it, attempting to raise income taxes on upper-income earners right out of the gate would probably not help bring Republicans to the table. Just the opposite. A capital bill, however, would go a long way toward brightening Statehouse spirits, and Pritzker has pledged to pass one.===
Knowing that 2020 is most likely the first Pritzker can get this completed, it’s the logical move to prioritize what can get done and completed quickly.
Just raising taxes, without a carrot like a capital plan, isn’t very tasty right now.
- dbk - Tuesday, Nov 13, 18 @ 10:01 am:
–A capital bill, however, would go a long way toward brightening Statehouse spirits–
What a lovely phrase, especially in light of (a) the upcoming holiday season blitz and (b) the fact that a capital bill would also raise a lot of other people’s spirits.
Allowing IL residents w/o health insurance to buy into Medicaid and enabling student loan recipients to re-finance their loans would also be pretty popular and help tens of thousands of people speedily.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 13, 18 @ 10:16 am:
Finally, to the Post,
Thanks Rich for getting a few minutes with Gov-Elect Pritzker, and if I haven’t done so before, congratulations Governor-Elect.
What is the takeaway I have reading?
The pragmatism and thoughtfulness to task, and grasping first there are things Pritzker admits he doesn’t know, but will learn in a way to be inclusive and cooperative, a real breath of fresh air after the last administration.
The inclusion of Radogno and Edgar is the best sign that Raunerism and being a Republican are not only different, but those who are Republicans who fought Raunerism will be rewarded in very small ways that symbolize not only bipartisanship, but a realization that those who sold out to Raunerism were never about the governing of Illinois. Powerful.
The challenges thru May of 2019, with super majorities in both chambers, will be “change” but “massive, incremental” change, where we will see the shifting, but measured and thoughtful to keep the GOP not only engaged to want to be a bipartisan partner, but the loyal opposition within a constrain to define.
You can change the culture, the way of doing business, the politics and policy and still have the measured moves to keep coalitions happy. The sweeping changes for change’s sake is the way Rauner found such animosity, and while having “the votes” on paper, doesn’t mean the politics equate perfect GA vote totals.
I’m hopeful. I really am. Even with the GOP GA Caucuses.
The dark cloud of purposeful destruction is leaving, the Governor-Elect wants better for Illinois that we haven’t seen in a long time.
Pritzker will be learning, not “teaching”, and that might be the best schooling to government we’ve all seen in quite some time.
- Nick Name - Tuesday, Nov 13, 18 @ 10:18 am:
===If you’ll recall, Rauner’s first move as governor was the Right-To-Work state tour. That set the tone for four years of damage and dysfunction.===
That, plus the attempt to confiscate, via executive order, fair share fees. What an absolute disaster he was.
- SSL - Tuesday, Nov 13, 18 @ 10:18 am:
I am not a JB fan, but he sure sounds good right now. Saying all the right things, and what a great thing it would be to see collaboration across party lines to get things done.
He has the toughest job of any governor in the country, and the devil is always in the details. For starters, a revenue plan to pay for the capital plan would be most interesting.
He deserves time to get his priorities set. Unfortunately that time will be impacted by the current state of the state.
- Stuntman Bob's Brother - Tuesday, Nov 13, 18 @ 10:18 am:
==…the progressive income tax is in reference to this like Bruce and JB paying more, any tax increase that’s not a progressive tax means we ALL pay more.==
Unless of course, you apply a large exemption so some base amount, say, $50,000 or even $100,000 for individuals, that would effectively nullify the increase for folks under that level. Which was JB’s original plan, as Rich states in the article. So no dishonesty here. Since the progressive tax is “not doable” for at least two years, why not do the doable? The truth is, Madigan has no stomach for a progressive tax no matter how it’s implemented.
- Matts - Tuesday, Nov 13, 18 @ 10:20 am:
Infrastructure expenditure is sound, necessary, and offers a rare point at which parties can agree, generally. Who gets how much for what, and when, is the bugaboo to be overcome. It’s a leadership issue that Pritzker can take advantage of, or lose face.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 13, 18 @ 10:27 am:
===Pritzker floated the idea as a possible way to impose an immediate graduated income tax, which the Illinois Constitution forbids. He said it “could” be done by using exemptions and tax credits for the working poor and the middle class to shield them from higher income tax rates. But he hasn’t really talked about the idea since April, and he never said he was fully committed to doing it.===
Since April, Pritzker hasn’t talked about it, and further, what was discussed was this idea of the full blown progressive tax, because it was a play to Democratic voters, and more obvious to campaign ads.
===Since the progressive tax is “not doable” for at least two years, why not do the doable?===
If that were to pass, and pass constitutional muster, and then signed, those wanting a real progressive income tax replacing the flat tax would face a steeper hill, as this half loaf isn’t what they want. It could bring a revolt?
I’m all about doing the doable, but the politics here might be “too much” of too little to appease.
===The truth is, Madigan has no stomach for a progressive tax no matter how it’s implemented.===
Maybe. We’ll see.
- Cubs in '16 - Tuesday, Nov 13, 18 @ 10:39 am:
===I’m hopeful. I really am. Even with the GOP GA Caucuses.
The dark cloud of purposeful destruction is leaving, the Governor-Elect wants better for Illinois that we haven’t seen in a long time.
Pritzker will be learning, not “teaching”, and that might be the best schooling to government we’ve all seen in quite some time.===
I think these three sentences capture perfectly the optimism many feel regarding the new administration. Well said OW.
- Captain Obvious - Tuesday, Nov 13, 18 @ 10:42 am:
Capital plan. With what money? The state can’t pay workers what they are owed now. Not raising taxes. What is he going to cut? All lovely talk but the math remains the same.
- Ole General - Tuesday, Nov 13, 18 @ 10:42 am:
Saying the right things, however, math isn’t persuaded by rhetorical elegance. Hope JB proves me wrong for the sake of my family.
- Norseman - Tuesday, Nov 13, 18 @ 10:46 am:
=== … attempting to raise income taxes on upper-income earners right out of the gate would probably not help bring Republicans to the table. … A capital bill, however, would go a long way toward brightening Statehouse spirits … ===
While the invitation has to be made, the GOP will never come to the table on the graduated income tax. Despite the talk about some contrived graduated income tax maneuver, IMHO it’s waste of political capital and would be thrown out by the courts. We’re talking about passing a proposed constitutional amendment next year. This year’s focus on that front is the negotiations among Dem leadership on a proposed enabling legislation on graduated rates to use as a selling point when the CA is proposed. Bottom line is no income tax bill will be passed in year 1.
Priority 1 in year 1 is the budget. Priority 2 should be a capital bill to improve things. Working on priority 2 with the GOP would be helpful with priority 1 and hopefully with JB priorities …
JB promised way too much. Even the most important and needed promises will have to wait for money. His first year must focus on stabilizing the good ship Illinois and stemming the constant negative news coming out of Springfield. Given the weakened position of the GOP, hopefully it’s leaders will lend a hand to show it’s own relevance.
Good luck JB and I pray Illinois’ 201st year starts out in a positive direction.
- Langhorne - Tuesday, Nov 13, 18 @ 10:56 am:
Good not to pursue an artificial prog income tax. It squanders time, energy, and political capital needed for the real one. It is unconstitutional. So even if passed. Even if somehow found constitutional, you then plan to come in and say lets do it all over again, but this time do it right? Tough enuf to do it once.
- PublicServant - Tuesday, Nov 13, 18 @ 11:34 am:
===The truth is, Madigan has no stomach for a progressive tax no matter how it’s implemented.===
The truth is, you don’t know what you’re talking about.
- Blue Dog Dem - Tuesday, Nov 13, 18 @ 11:36 am:
I am going to predict that the Illinois progressive income tax will mirror Missouri’s.
- Stuntman Bob's Brother - Tuesday, Nov 13, 18 @ 12:31 pm:
==The truth is, you don’t know what you’re talking about==
Oh, yeah, I forgot about all those times in the past thirty years, with Governors of both colors, that MJM proposed a progressive tax in the House. Why not?
- Blue Dog Dem - Tuesday, Nov 13, 18 @ 6:06 pm:
I don’t care that former governor Edgar receives $330k/yr in income from Illinois. I know he will do a good job representing moderates when it comes to taxation issues. His heart has always been in the right place.