Reps. Yingling, Carroll jump ship
Thursday, May 9, 2019 - Posted by Rich Miller
* I went over this pretty thoroughly with subscribers today, so let’s start here with Politico…
Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s plan to shore up the state’s financial woes by swapping out our flat income tax structure with a graduated tax after 2020 sailed through the state Senate last week. But the battle in the lower chamber is just starting to warm up, where two House Democrats tell Playbook they’d vote “no” on the new tax system as it is currently written.
“My constituents are concerned that their taxes will go up without essential property-tax relief,” says Rep. Jonathan Carroll, whose 57th District covers Buffalo Grove, Northbrook, and parts of Glenview. “We’re talking about changing a constitutional amendment. It needs to be done right.”
Rep. Sam Yingling recalled how his grandmother worked as a receptionist up until she was 90, just months before she died, to afford her property tax payments. Like Carroll, he wants property tax relief included in the graduated income tax measure. “There’s a growing contingent of colleagues who think this should be included,” said Yingling, whose 62nd District encompasses Lake County. He called for lawmakers to spend “a few months” hashing out what language to include in the legislation.
Neither Carroll nor Yingling has spoken directly to Pritzker about their concerns but say they’ve voiced them during meetings with the governor’s staff.
Somebody needs to pick up the phone.
* This mini revolt kicked off yesterday with a letter to the editor from Yingling…
For the first time since the adoption of the state constitution, the General Assembly is debating Illinois’ tax structure. While adoption of a progressive income tax might be a logical step toward achieving a fairer and more equitable overall income tax system here, we cannot address the inequities in the tax system without addressing the entire system, both income taxes and property taxes.
The House must take time to fully deliberate the issues over the next several months with constituents, and make sure that the system we adopt takes everyone into consideration so that people like my grandmother can afford to stay in their homes.
The current proposals do not adequately address the crushing burden that our property tax system places on homeowners. I will be a “no” vote unless adoption of a progressive income tax ends the state’s regressive and abusive property tax system.
* Illinois Policy Institute press release in response to Yingling’s LTE…
We applaud Rep. Yingling’s courage and commitment to protect his district from a higher tax burden through his pledged ‘no’ vote. The current progressive income tax proposals offer no serious or long-lasting relief from Illinois’ property taxes, the tax burden most significantly crushing Illinois’ working and middle class. The Illinois Policy Institute remains committed to defeating the progressive income tax and advocating for tax relief. And the only true way to help Illinoisans while fixing state finances is through meaningful pension reform that starts with a constitutional amendment to protect already earned benefits while allowing reductions in the future accrual rate of benefits
* More…
* The governor’s office sent this response…
Under Governor Pritzker’s approach, 97 percent of Illinoisans would pay the same or less in income taxes – making our current system far more fair to the middle class and those striving to get there. Those who oppose this plan are siding with millionaires and the very wealthy against everyday Illinoisans, and they need to offer an alternative that will fix our state’s long-standing fiscal challenges. The administration put forward its ideas on property tax relief as a part of that package, and we will continue to listen to members of the General Assembly about their ideas for property tax relief.
* More from the Illinois News Network…
“Personally, I like a flat tax, that’s just my personal opinion,” [Rep. Rita Mayfield, D-Waukegan] said. “I do understand the need for a graduated tax, but if we’re going to do it, we need to do it right and not just push through something that is not going to benefit the taxpayers.”
- wordslinger - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:12 am:
Further evidence that Cullerton runs a much tighter crew than Madigan.
- CPA - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:13 am:
They are right here.
Help the middle class.
The $50 you would save under the reform means NOTHING if they push forward regressive taxes or increase property taxes.
The state needs to provide actual relief to the 97%.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:13 am:
===Neither Carroll nor Yingling has spoken directly to Pritzker about their concerns but say they’ve voiced them during meetings with the governor’s staff.===
Yeah, um, it’s May 9th.
Sure, they may *think* the governor is the closer, but the margin is 3, y’all are unlikely to to get a single Republican to be Green…
… the luxury of keeping this at a Staff level long past, if it ever existed at all.
Let’s remember what allegedly Speaker Madigan said about the Senate and their pushing the progressive tax thru, be it “floor debate” or not… and that could be MJM can count to 71 and he can’t get that high with the progressive tax.
At the very minimums… groups of 5, with only one “concern” and 4 Green… and talk for a spell. Then… the one on ones… but no contact, direct contact… by May 9th… this ain’t great.
Unless the governor wants to get everything else but the House voting on the progressive tax, then this all makes sense. Otherwise, why y’all waiting? Daylight’s a’burnin’.
- Rabid - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:17 am:
Sam going to help us like he did with his granny
- Perrid - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:20 am:
No, they are not right CPA. Cutting off your nose to spite your face is NEVER a good idea. But fine, let’s think about it.
If you want property tax relief, either the state coughs up more money for locals or locals go without some of the services they currently have. You want the state to mandate closing down services, or forcing consolidation? And you want to risk making the long term fiscal health of the state even worse (like it or not the only actual game in town is more revenue, and the only way that seems likely to happen is a graduated income tax. If someone has any actual evidence to the contrary, more than just a wish list, please speak up) for the long shot hope of the state stepping in for property tax relief seems incredibly ill conceived to me.
- Pot calling kettle - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:26 am:
Property taxes will go down when Springfield sends more money to local school districts. No extra language needed. Expenses are generally fixed, state revenue is subtracted, property tax is set to pay the rest. It’s a bit more complicated than that, but not much.
- Three Dimensional Checkers - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:26 am:
I still don’t think it was bad that the Senate passed the fair tax resolution. If these representative are serious about these property tax demands, they can pass that legislation over to the Senate before voting on the fair tax resolution. If they are not serious, then they’ll show their true colors soon enough. Either way, it was not bad for the Senate to pass a resolution it had the votes to pass.
- RetiredStateEmployee - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:27 am:
What’s the plan people? We can’t balance the budget with the taxes we have, let alone pay back the deficit. How can you get tax relief from that starting point? I’d like to see the math.
- Flat Bed Ford - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:27 am:
Never thought a Governor’s staff would rival the incompetence of the BTIA but congratulations Pritzker, you’ve accomplished the impossible in just a few short months. At double the cost too. Nice work.
- JS Mill - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:28 am:
=we need to do it right and not just push through something that is not going to benefit the taxpayers.=
Paying the states bills IS a benefit to the taxpayer. Saves us all in interest and helps the businesses that are owed money.
Unless you really increase revenue (which they will all flip out over) so that the state increases their payment to local governments there won’t be any decrease in property taxes and that isn’t a state function any way. Property taxes are local revenues needed to fund local priorities.
They want to eat their cake and still have it. It does not work that way.
Raise the revenue needed. Fund schools at . a level that will allow them to reduce the burden on local tax payers.
- Lester Holt’s Mustache - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:28 am:
What exactly is it that Carroll and Yingling want? They don’t seem to have any actual plans or amendments to offer, just complaints about what the current proposal doesn’t include. Maybe Sam could propose adding the property tax freeze that Rauner vetoed a couple years ago. You guys are legislators so why not try to, you know, write some legislation?
- CPA - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:30 am:
Perrid:
JB said in campaigning that progressive tax reform would result in property tax relief.
Where is it?
I don’t believe this is really going to help.
That is why I am in the 97% and will vote NO in 2020.
- Jibba - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:32 am:
Comments are exactly right. Property tax rates depend on state revenues to schools. Want payments to go up? Raise income and corporate taxes. Don’t like that? Then what’s your idea, Representative? The party of no is contagious.
And in any case, the progressive tax can be revenue neutral if you like. Just shifts the burden slightly to higher incomes, like most other states and the federal government, even if no additional dollars are raised, and that is an improvement for the state.
- JS Mill - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:33 am:
=That is why I am in the 97% and will vote NO in 2020.=
Exactly what the Koch Bros are hoping for. No jobs but lots of billionaire wealth growth.
- City Zen - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:37 am:
==Those who oppose this plan are siding with millionaires…==
And feel 2 married incomes combined should be treated differently than one single income of the same amount. Or those that want protection from inflation. Or those that want a rate lock.
JB’s holier than thou stance here is getting a bit tiring. You don’t have to be against a graduated tax plan to be against the current proposal.
- Perrid - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:39 am:
I just don’t understand you CPA. Someone gives you a piece of cake and you throw it on the ground because you want the whole cake.
I even like the idea of lower property taxes and proportionately higher income taxes to offset it. I’m also open to the idea that IL probably doesn’t need as much local government as it currently has, in many ways. I would vote for those things if I had the option. It’s probably not going to happen this year, if ever, and time is a’wasting. Just about all of our problems get a least a little bit worse the longer we sit on them. You should never let the perfect stop the good.
- SSL - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:39 am:
The so called property tax relief is all smoke and mirrors. How funny would it be if the super majority can’t deliver the votes? I still think they’ll get there, but it’s nice to think about it.
- Pundent - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:39 am:
=What exactly is it that Carroll and Yingling want?=
Fewer local services or more state funding because that’s the only way you get property tax relief. I’m sure they have a plan because it would be irresponsible to tie the graduated tax to property tax relief without it. Doesn’t matter what party you belong to math is universal.
So perhaps Reps Carroll and Yingling can tell us what the plan is?
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:45 am:
First, we’re all taxpayers, so stop, it sounds utterly ignorant to facts.
Also, if horse trading is needed, the governor needs to hear what the ask(s) are, and how far he is willing to go, or willing to move publicly on property taxes or whatever, but there needs to be on ALL this idea… who needs what from whom.
Last, again, if we’re wringing our hands, married, single, whatever, it’s still “97%”… or you side with millionaires.
That’s the ball gane.
- KA - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:46 am:
No surprise here — Sam Yingling has never met a camera he didn’t like.
- Just Me 2 - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:46 am:
What’s the rush? It can’t be on the ballot until 2020. Maybe focus on today’s problems?
- Jibba - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:48 am:
==And feel 2 married incomes combined should be treated differently than one single income of the same amount. Or those that want protection from inflation. Or those that want a rate lock.===
Every one of these things is separate from the constitutional amendment to simply allow different tax rates for different incomes. They can be added or changed at any time. See your legislator. It is difficult to believe that any of these would sway your vote unless you prefer the status quo of a flat tax.
- Honeybear - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:49 am:
Yingling and Carroll serve the privileged
They rather
the 97% suffer
to protect
coddle
and pander to
3%.
Disgusting
Revolutions are created this way
The anger
The rage
is growing
The malignantly calloused are
jerking the leash of their owned legislators
It’s not about DEM vs REP
It’s always been about
class
- Anonie - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:50 am:
TBT, Joravsky, Jan 1994, Chicago Reader.
“In addition, the property tax is regressive, bearing little relation to a person’s ability to pay. “The classic case is a retired couple living on a fixed income in a community that gentrifies,” says Fred Hess, executive director of the Chicago Panel on School Policy, a watchdog group. “Their property taxes go up, but their income remains the same.” In a nutshell, rich people in rich towns pay a smaller portion of their income for better schools, while the poor in poorer towns pay a higher percent for much less. And all because the state relies on the property tax to fund education.“
“The inequities of the state’s tax system haven’t disappeared since the early 70s, when Netsch raised the issue at the constitutional convention. In fact, they’ve gotten worse. In recent years the state’s share of school funds has declined from 48 to 33 percent, forcing schools to become more dependent on property taxes, which now account for roughly 58 percent of school funding.“
I was trying to find proposed language from Dawn Clark Netch’s tax swap proposal. The article has interesting history about how we got to my school district being funded 70% thru property tax.
- 47th Ward - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:54 am:
So these guys don’t think the voters should have a chance to make this decision?
If they are trying to “vote the district” by not letting their districts vote, how do they know they are “voting the district?”
- wordslinger - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:56 am:
–What exactly is it that Carroll and Yingling want?–
More personalized cover.
This will be revealing to see how Pritzker and crew handle this; how much carrot, how much stick. Having his top priority sunk by a couple of mushrooms really isn’t an acceptable option.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:59 am:
===What’s the rush? It can’t be on the ballot until 2020. Maybe focus on today’s problems?===
It’s the only priority that this governor is spending resources on by doing advertising and pushing publicly its passage.
That’s the rush.
It can’t be sunk by a handful of wishy-washy members wanting their own press pops at the governor’s expense.
- Sue - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:59 am:
All of you are missing the point to all of those-Pritzker’s proposed rates and salary cut-offs don’t raise enough money to allow for much if any property tax relief
- OneMan - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:04 am:
Considering I get a piece of mail every two days or so from Big Idea, I can only imagine what people in these two districts are going to be getting from them.
- Jocko - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:04 am:
==Punishing people for being successful==
To paraphrase Helen Lovejoy “Won’t somebody please think of Ken Griffin’s children”
- MG85 - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:06 am:
==Never thought a Governor’s staff would rival the incompetence of the BTIA but==
Let’s calm down, the BTIA literally made history by being part of an Administration by owning the longest running tenure without enacting a state budget. Until Pritzker’s staff does that, BTIA is still the worst.
That said, I find it astounding that 2 Dem legislators voting no have not had face to face conversations with the Governor nor even a phone call.
If your landmark piece of legislation is coming down the pike, you pick up the phone and make the ask. You don’t send out Caprera, Mitchell, or any other staff person. You have your staff talk to legislators’ staff and set up a meeting. Then you take an account of what you have and your maybe’s and no’s get triangulated.
Some tepid public response of “siding with millionaires” will not get it done.
Now, I agree with the comment above about these legislators worrying about “regressive property taxes” so they won’t vote to repeal a regressive income tax system is some “cut off nose to spite face” activity, but when has consistency or logic ever stopped a politician before?
That said, these sound like the cries of those who have been given no love or reason to fear, and that is political malfeasance.
That falls on Pritzker. Time to come down off the perch and get your hands dirty big guy.
- Lester Holt’s Mustache - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:16 am:
==Fewer local services or more state funding because that’s the only way you get property tax relief. I’m sure they have a plan ==
Lol, you’ve got more faith in these clowns than I do. They’re Illinois dems hedging with an Illinois republican stance, so they probably want more local services and more state funding to get property tax relief at the same time, without offering an actual plan to do it. Maybe they’ll propose a fictitious “cutting waste, fraud and abuse” amendment together
- Nick Name - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:16 am:
I think neither Yingling nor Carroll have any idea how property taxes are calculated. Maybe one or both could pledge to introduce a bill to increase state funding of education, take some pressure off school districts, consistent with Article X, Section 1 of the state constitution?
Nah, too hard.
- A guy - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:25 am:
Why would you tell the Tribune (in an op-ed no less) before the Governor or his administration or your own leadership?
Maybe so you can lock in your position before the discipline dogs descend. Hmmmm.
- Grandson of Man - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:26 am:
So what do these neoliberals prefer, that millionaires and billionaires continue to be taxed at the same rate as everyone else while the rest of Illinoisans bear the financial burdens? That the most vulnerable and middle class workers again bear the brunt of fiscal shortfalls? Where were these people in the last four years?
These opponents have important positions in the state. What are their plans?
Why are they Democrats, again? Raunerites are not needed in the Democratic Party, pro-choice but fiscally right wing.
If we don’t change our tax structure and make it fairer, property taxes may keep going to keep going up anyway, and everyone may get hit with a flat tax hike. Then what will the neoliberals have accomplished? Because sacrifices aren’t coming from them public sector while the rich skate by with the same income tax rate. No.Bloody.Way.
Pritzker the billionaire is more progressive than the anti-marijuana legalization and anti-fair tax Democrats, as is the rest of the state. Pritzker should absolutely should not hold up the budget if he can’t get his policy aims, but he should fight them in other ways. That’s what we the voters elected him for, by an overwhelming majority.
- Iggy - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:27 am:
Honeybear,
there is and never will be a revolution in this state. you guys had your chance in Biss, corporate democrats gonna corporate democrats. keep your revolution predictions to your manifesto, it aint happenin’ anytime soon.
- City Zen - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:32 am:
==They can be added or changed at any time. See your legislator. It is difficult to believe that any of these would sway your vote ==
Those things might sway many more votes than you think. If the first graduated proposal - years in the making, mind you - comes out of the gate with none of these provisions included, why would anyone think they’ll ever be addressed?
Comes back to trust. Lots of voters on the fence based on lack of trust. How does JB and the Gang address trust? Might be the difference between passage and failure.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:36 am:
The 3% dictating to the 97% they don’t wanna pay more… you trust the millionaires?
The 60% isn’t a slam dunk, but framing it as “Bruce Rauner wealthy folks don’t want to pay more” helps.
- Pundent - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:48 am:
=I think neither Yingling nor Carroll have any idea how property taxes are calculated.=
Of course they know how property taxes are calculated. They’re counting on their constituents having no clue and believing that all of these problems can be solved with magic fairy dust. It’s pure and simple pandering.
- Grandson of Man - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:55 am:
It was cold the way they did it, too, in public and the media. Did they want to embarrass the governor? Couldn’t they have communicated their concerns to him and to their many colleagues who support a fair tax in private?
One of the opponents complained that property taxes are too regressive. What does he want then, an even higher income tax on the rich to add even more state funds to education, so property taxes can be cut more?
If you’re going to threaten to blow up a key pillar of your own party or act Republican after a time when many of your party’s voters and supporters got whacked with huge cuts, you should put out your own plans for the state at the very least. Think about the old people who lost their personal caretakers and all other vulnerable people who lost social services.
It’s also Pritzker’s responsibility to listen to concerns and work the legislation to a successful conclusion.
- Da Big Bad Wolf - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 11:00 am:
==The state needs to provide actual relief to the 97%.==
So what’s your price?
- NoGifts - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 11:03 am:
His grandmother probably worked as a receptionist until she was 90 because she didn’t have a pension or retirement savings.
- Springfieldish - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 11:07 am:
Yingling is a safe ‘no’ and this combats the repeated attempts by Americans for Prosperity at his district. Millions of dark (IPI) money went to beating him, twice, so, forgive the knee-jerk shrill about property taxes. Maybe when the state shoulders more of it’s burden, we’ll see property tax relief down the road.
- Responsa - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 11:08 am:
It helps if people try to understand that Carroll is representing his constituents and broad issues which concern his district –not representing the governor or the entire state–which is the reason why there are discrete House districts in the first place. Of course he is speaking out publicly so his voters know he is hearing them.
- anon2 - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 11:12 am:
Significant property tax relief would be costly. If that relief comes out of the new income tax revenue, then there would be less money left to pay state debt, and to boost funding for education, DHS etc. Would the Representatives be willing to support a higher increase in tax rates to fund the property tax relief they seek? Or not?
- Jocko - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 11:18 am:
==Carroll is representing his constituents==
…who moan about paying taxes, but offer nothing constructive to the conversation.
- MG85 - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 11:25 am:
==Did they want to embarrass the governor? Couldn’t they have communicated their concerns to him and to their many colleagues who support a fair tax in private?==
Probably. From what I’m hearing, and I’m hearing it frequently, Pritzker hasn’t done a very good job at building relationships with legislators and political leaders.
He’s let his “staff” take the lead on the relationship building and that is quite baffling. He’s surrounded by political novices while being a novice himself.
Pritzker has no direct legislative experience. Stratton had an extensive 2 year career in the IL House. Mitchell did 6 years in the House. This isn’t exactly the deep rooted resumes you need to get legislation thru.
Pritzker has bought into the hype that defeating the “worst Governor” in America somehow translates into the entire Democratic Party blindly following his leadership without any work to form strong relationships. That theory is getting tested.
On this blog, I rated Pritzker after his first 100 days on this comment here:
https://capitolfax.com/2019/04/22/question-of-the-day-2863/?fbclid=IwAR1doo3aHNAJtoYjP4J03WoUdNnqP6oELnuADz04gKWqT1mjJ_b2rNNtJ5w#comment-13116550
I wrote then that Pritzker has tremendous advantages that Rauner did not enjoy, but his weaknesses are showing through with these 2 very vocal no votes. He’s losing control of the situation and it seems he’s done little to build good will with those who he will need to rely on.
Perhaps another billionaire from birth who has never had to cultivate a relationship he didn’t want wasn’t the best choice to be the chief relationship maker of Illinois.
- Fav human - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 11:26 am:
“What do they want”?
The last time they had to take a tough vote they were able to avoid it. They want more Republican patsies to take the tough vote for them.
- Honeybear - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 11:39 am:
-you guys had your chance in Biss-
I fought tooth and nail against Biss.
He was no friend of labor.
An Evanston elitist can never understand
the working class.
We simply had to defeat Rauner.
Pritzker did.
But now a progressive income tax is threatened
because of privileged legislators.
So yeah, I’m going to go after them.
No permanent enemies
No permanent friends
only
permanent interests.
- Jibba - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 11:46 am:
==It helps if people try to understand that Carroll is representing his constituents ===
I have the same problem with this as I did with most of Rauner’s magic beans nonsense. Generally, if you oppose something, you need to have an alternative. They have no alternative proposal to deal with the state’s budget crisis, so they have no credibility with me.
- Grandson of Man - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 12:09 pm:
“Punishing people for being successful is very shortsighted.”
Those are right wing words. Many thousands of people who are not rich are successful, and they’re punished by having to carry the fiscal burdens of the richest.
- Radio tower - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 12:11 pm:
They want the state to pay to local governments more so property taxes are less. Well ok, but there is an order to doing this. When you climb a tower you attach the second lanyard before you release the first. You don’t release both.
- PublicServant - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 12:20 pm:
I think MG85 is spot on. JB, you’re at the dance now, bud. Time to learn the two-step. Develop them there relationships. Stop sending novices to do that for you.
- Pundent - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 12:27 pm:
=But now a progressive income tax is threatened
because of privileged legislators.=
Yingling and Carroll are clearly telling their constituents what they want to hear. But demonizing anyone who disagrees with you as a “privileged legislator” only makes you look intolerant. Purity tests only make compromise more difficult.
- Grandson of Man - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 12:36 pm:
“He’s losing control of the situation and it seems he’s done little to build good will with those who he will need to rely on.”
That can go both ways. Do they want to be seen by the entire Democratic Party and its voters as those few who blew up the party’s agenda?
- Alex Ander - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 1:08 pm:
All the while these people worried about their income taxes pay a much smaller rate of social security tax than the lower income brackets.
- City Zen - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 1:22 pm:
==All the while these people worried about their income taxes pay a much smaller rate of social security tax than the lower income brackets.==
Which is why they’re penalized with a smaller return on their social security contributions investment than the lower income brackets.
If retirement fairness is your concern, ask the pension systems how they redistribute wealth among their participants.
- Honeybear - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 1:32 pm:
-But demonizing anyone who disagrees with you as a “privileged legislator” only makes you look intolerant. Purity tests only make compromise more difficult.-
Yes absolutely I am intolerant of the privileged self-described “successful” claiming unearned and undeserved privileges to not pay their fair share towards the greater good of the people of Illinois.
Yes I am absolutely intolerant of people
who can pay
but feel better than others
so they exercise their privilege to
get out of it.
And for the record
This isn’t about purity
This is about morality
This is about decency
This is about the common good
This is about democracy
I am intolerant of oligarchy
I am intolerant of plutocracy
I am going to fight it
It’s very simple math
You either are with the 97%
or with the
malignantly calloused privileged 3%
Look are you so callous that you can’t see the direct correlation between Rich’s Our Sorry State, Hollowing Out of State Government, DCFS posts
and the
Revenue Crisis in this State
And you want to deny
The People of Illinois
a
Chance
to
Vote
on a constitutional amendment
for a progressive income tax
They aren’t voting for the progressive income tax
they are voting
on whether
to let Illinoisans as a whole
vote to have a progressive income tax.
Yes intolerant
you advocate denying Illinoisans a vote
you advocate austerity
just because of your first world problem, high property tax
Which would go down if we raised more revenue.
Oh My God
I’ve just had it.
Yes I’ll demonize and shame you for it.
it’s deserved in my opinion.
Think about it
3% pay more
vs
100% pay more because we have to raise the flat tax because
you whining privileged wouldn’t pay
what you can pay and
What is fairly assessed
and because of your choices
DCFS and critical agencies
are understaffed
are undertrained
are husks
and living breathing Illinoisans
have died
vulnerable children
honored veterans
have died
and continue to die
because we won’t raise the revenue
to fix it.
Yes, people will continue to die even when we do fund our government and it’s programs
but at least
then if will because of error/circumstance
rather than choice
because we didn’t want to pay more in
fairly assessed taxes.
Especially those
Who could pay more.
We have lost our moral foundation
- truth - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 2:39 pm:
==That can go both ways. Do they want to be seen by the entire Democratic Party and its voters as those few who blew up the party’s agenda?==
I’m sure you were singing that tune when Sam McCann and others were refusing to go along with Rauner’s agenda, right?
- Pundent - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 3:53 pm:
=Yes I am absolutely intolerant of people who can pay but feel better than others so they exercise their privilege to get out of it.=
I’m not sure who these “people” are that you’re referring to but it must be someone other than Yingling’s grandmother.
You seem not to grasp the larger point. I fully support the progressive tax. It’s needed. But I can also understand Yingling’s and Carroll’s articulating their constituents call for property tax relief without demonizing them as
“privileged.”
- Honeybear - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 4:12 pm:
-Yingling’s and Carroll’s articulating their constituents call for property tax relief without demonizing them as “privileged.”
Wah?
I don’t seem to grasp the larger point?
So Illinois voters probably won’t get to vote on the form of income taxation the majority of Illinoisans want because……
Two legislators are bringing up a different subject which they could have already addressed even in the last administration….
So the new DEM governor who has staked his whole administration on this goes down…..making it a lot more likely that we will have a REP governor next time…..
Because they are listening
or
because they are (my words) owned
by the privileged wealthy?
I think that’s it.
They are scuttling everything
because of their and I’ll say
constituents moral inadequacies
against the wished of the majority of Illinoisans
denying Illinoisans
the
change
of making their
tax system more fair
instead of biased
towards the wealthy.
Did I get that right?
or am I still not grasping the larger point?
- Demoralized - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 4:44 pm:
==I can also understand Yingling’s and Carroll’s articulating their constituents call for property tax relief ==
So can I. But those same constituents are also gonna be peeved if they don’t get that lost revenue for their local schools and governments replaced by the state. Which means higher tax rates, including possible on that 97%.
- Grandson of Man - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 5:20 pm:
“Last, again, if we’re wringing our hands, married, single, whatever, it’s still “97%”… or you side with millionaires.
That’s the ball gane.”
That’s what it boils down to. The voters overwhelmingly rejected Raunerism, the ILGOP and the anti-tax, anti-union right wing. The voters support progressive taxation and have done so for at least a year, since the 72% who supported it in a poll a year or so ago.
“Personally, I like a flat tax, that’s just my personal opinion,” [Rep. Rita Mayfield, D-Waukegan] said. “I do understand the need for a graduated tax, but if we’re going to do it, we need to do it right and not just push through something that is not going to benefit the taxpayers.”
Here’s somebody who’s screaming out for a primary opponent.
- Honeybear - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 5:50 pm:
anonymous, you mean hardworking highly compensated people who have privileges that most others don’t?
The 3%
Guess what?
I don’t care.
I’m glad you’re bothered enough to insult me.
It means I’ve got your attention.
Exactly Grandson
Primary Opponents
- Grandson of Man - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 5:52 pm:
“Honeybear, your rants against hard working people are tiresome. Makes you look bad.”
Hoenybear looks great. It is malignant callousness to continue exposing the most vulnerable, students and public sector to harsh cuts or the prospect of them, while those crying phony tears about how bad Illinois is are making hundreds of thousands of dollars to a billion a year and are taxed at the same rate as everyone else.
- Enviro - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 5:58 pm:
== the crushing burden that our property tax system places on homeowners.==
When property taxes are a crushing burden on homeowners it is often because people buy a home they can’t afford. Property taxes are part of the cost of owning a home. The solution may be buying a different home.
- Pundent - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 6:07 pm:
=Did I get that right? or am I still not grasping the larger point?=
“We’re talking about changing a constitutional amendment. It needs to be done right.”
While I think Yingling and Carroll are disingenuous in calling for property tax relief, I also recognize that these are competitive districts that can easily flip. They’re positions are rooted in the realities of their districts not “moral inadequacy.” And I see daylight in these positions. Advocating for “doing something right” is not the same as saying no. It’s a gesture to get Pritzker what he needs for something in return that they can tout in their district.
And if they aren’t progressive enough for you then the alternative is to primary them with a candidate further to the left and concede the seat to a Republican.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 6:13 pm:
===these are competitive districts that can easily flip===
Not Carroll’s, Yingling’s only marginally so.
- Anonymous - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 6:27 pm:
Honeybear, wrong again and embarrassing yourself. People like you always lose.
- wordslinger - Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 6:33 pm:
–I’m sure you were singing that tune when Sam McCann and others were refusing to go along with Rauner’s agenda, right?–
If I recall, McCann cast one meaningless vote for a labor arbitration bill that didn’t pass.
Rauner went apey over it, but he won the vote.
That’s a little different from being the votes that would kill Pritzker’s main priority.
As far as the Republicans who voted for a tax increase in Year 3, Rauner wanted that money more than anyone before his campaign. That’s why he vetoed it immediately so it could be overridden right away.
- Honeybear - Friday, May 10, 19 @ 6:56 am:
You see anonymous, I feel I have already won
I’ve made several folks disturbed enough to respond.
I’ve made several folks think
about how our taxes
translate directly
into the care of our people
Paying taxes
gives schools to kids
rest to our veterans
food on our tables
medicine for our sick
jobs for our unemployed
roads to drive on
and so much more
so no
I take it personally as a moral affront
when folks
complain about taxes
that they very well know
they have the capacity to pay.
They exert political force
on their owned legislators
Yingling and Carroll
so that they don’t have
to contribute to the greater good
because
they
are
selfish
period
exclamation point
- Anonymous - Friday, May 10, 19 @ 8:16 am:
Honeybear, why do you think you have a right to my money? Selfishness?
- Oswego Willy - Friday, May 10, 19 @ 8:21 am:
===why do you think you have a right to my money? Selfishness?===
It’s what’s legally owed.
I don’t expect you to grasp that, as you can’t grasp picking a name, but we’re all taxpayers so even state workers pay taxes too.
Oh, and if you don’t want state workers, or you want to contract out work, that’s still tax dollars towards a service that they also pay taxes for too.
This isn’t Facebook. Please troll other places or pick a name and make an argument.
- Honeybear - Friday, May 10, 19 @ 9:09 am:
anonymous, I’m not asking for your money.
Look, my taxes this year were 24 times last years taxes.
Buddy, it wreaked havoc on our finances. I had to borrow a twenty from my daughters birthday money to pay a Dr. copay last week.
Nobody likes paying taxes.
Yet, I am lucky that I get to see our tax money at work as a Human Services Caseworker.
Good people, my people, my community
Food on tables (SNAP)
Medicine for health (Medicaid)
A bit of cash for parents (TANF)
I “determine and maintain eligibility for benefits” in order to help eligible Illinoisans overcome the barriers to self sufficiency.
I get the cool job
of helping
every single day.
I see your tax money at work.
I also protect your tax money by
making sure those who aren’t eligible
don’t get benefits.
So I get that it might be hard for you
to understand
That the remittance of lawfully assessed taxes
means
life
support
a job
a chance
another day
a meal
a way to work
dignity
but it does.
I don’t mind folks not knowing
I mind greatly folks who
are calloused to not know
I mind greatly folks who
choose willfully
motivated by selfishness
to not know
That your remitted lawfully assessed taxes
mean the world
to Illinoisans all around you
- wordslinger - Friday, May 10, 19 @ 9:10 am:
===why do you think you have a right to my money? Selfishness?===
Anonymous trolls are the saddest cry for attention.