* Some top Dems have been asking for this new track…
Today, Think Big Illinois released a new ad highlighting why Illinois voters should have the opportunity to decide whether they want a tax system that works for everyone, not just the wealthy few. The ad, “A Chance To Vote,” also calls out opponents of a fair tax for their “nonsensical” and “completely incorrect” claims in their desperate attempts to keep our current unfair tax system in place.
“A Chance To Vote” will run on television in Chicago and Springfield, and across digital platforms. Watch the ad here.
“There are very few times where Illinoisans have the opportunity to directly decide an issue that impacts them and their families. Legislators in Springfield have the chance to give voters that opportunity, and let them choose whether they want to keep our current unfair tax system in place or want a system that works for everyone,” said Quentin Fulks, Executive Director of Think Big Illinois. “While opponents of a fair tax continue to rely on misleading claims and false attacks, Think Big Illinois will continue to stand up for middle-class families in the fight for a fair tax.”
That’s what newspapers call the attacks against the fair tax.
They can’t defeat the plan on its merits, so they’re trying to jump it on the low road.
If the General Assembly gives the green light, we’re all going to have a say at the polls next November.
The people of Illinois deserve a chance to vote on this important proposal.
This is fair and necessary.
It’s time for change.
Let’s make our tax system fair.
…Adding… To address some folks in comments who are arguing for even more constitutional questions on the ballot, I would agree with you. That’s why I strongly supported a constitutional convention in 2008. But an overwhelming 67 percent of voters rejected the convention, so they essentially agreed with the status quo. And that status quo is we can only vote on what the General Assembly puts on the ballot. The people spoke. It’ll be 2028 before that question automatically comes before them again and it was abundantly clear that would be the case in ‘08.
Not a bad ad. I give it a B. It can speak to people, like me, who oppose the graduated tax, but think that we should have the chance to vote on it. Put it on the ballot and fight that battle, not the battle over whether or not to let voters decide.
C+. It’s better than last week’s but still feels too hostile to make the inroads in public opinion they are seeking. They’d do better if they ended the ad with “let’s try to make Illinois’ tax system fairer”, rather than “let’s make Illinois’ tax system fair.” (Because any sentient adult being knows that no tax system devised will ever be perfectly “fair”.)
Many have forgotten that in 2012 the legislature voted overwhelmingly to put a pension reform referendum on the ballot — a rather modest one at that. It would have required a 3/5th vote on any bill that would enhance pension benefits. It lost.
C-
With the sound off (and even on) the beginning looks like an anti-progressive tax ad.
Is JB gonna bank on this same team to win at the ballot box?
- lake county democrat - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 1:39 pm:
The difference with a convention is that *everything* would have been up for change. One issue in particular was a ban on gay marriage, which were being passed in other states (nobody foresaw the Supreme Court holding gay marriage a Constitutional right - there were fears that if any state allowed gay marriage the Supreme Court would strike it). Rejecting the convention wasn’t a vote for the status quo, it was a vote against potential chaos.
- Moist von Lipwig - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 1:40 pm:
Sounds like some folks on here might want some 1980-Pat-Quinn-style activism to get important Constitutional Amendments on the ballot by petition, though they may have scoffed at the idea before.
I’m confident that a good many of those now demanding to let the people decide on pensions, term limits, et al were staunchly opposed to Con-Con in 2008. All the major interest groups were opposed. I predict they will be opposed to it again in ‘28.
== Rejecting the convention wasn’t a vote for the status quo, it was a vote against potential chaos. ==
Any proposals approved by a Con-Con would have to be ratified by the people to become part of the constitution. In other words, “letting the people decide” really isn’t a principle that either party really believes in. It’s invoked only when it serves temporary partisan interest.
===But an overwhelming 67 percent of voters rejected the convention, so they essentially agreed with the status quo.===
By that thinking, not only did we miss our chance for redistricting reform, term limits, and pension reform, we also missed our chance for a progressive income tax.
–I’m confident that a good many of those now demanding to let the people decide on pensions, term limits, et al were staunchly opposed to Con-Con in 2008.–
A good many of those insisting on those amendments apparently refuse to see that voters don’t cast their ballots based on tronc edit board tantrums.
–By that thinking, not only did we miss our chance for redistricting reform, term limits, and pension reform, we also missed our chance for a progressive income tax.–
Except for that bit where the guy who made it his central campaign priority won by 14 points and got the most votes since the switch to off-year gubernatorial elections.
The guy who howled for years about term limits and the map got clobbered by 700,000 votes.
- Flat Bed Ford - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 10:30 am:
=The people of Illinois deserve a chance to vote on this important proposal.=
Pension clause?
Fair maps?
Why not let the people vote on those as well?
- Rich Miller - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 10:31 am:
===Why not let the people vote on those as well?===
Fine. Pass a bill.
- wordslinger - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 10:39 am:
Just like the new ad from them last week, this one also looks like an anti-Pritzker spot at the beginning.
I don’t understand that approach, especially the use of unflattering b+w images of Pritzker. Try both with the sound down and you’ll see.
A call-to-action would be a good idea, too.
- SOIL M - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 10:39 am:
Not a bad ad. I give it a B. It can speak to people, like me, who oppose the graduated tax, but think that we should have the chance to vote on it. Put it on the ballot and fight that battle, not the battle over whether or not to let voters decide.
- A guy - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 10:39 am:
The look of this ad is simply too close to all the political ads that people often find deceptive.
- Just Me 2 - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 10:44 am:
I’d also like to vote on pension reform, redistributing reform, and term limits for legislative leaders.
- Rich Miller - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 10:52 am:
===redistributing reform===
Huh?
I’d like a vote on a lot of things, but we can only vote on what the GA passes.
That’s why I strongly supported a constitutional convention in 2008. It got 33 percent of the vote.
The people have spoken. You get what the GA gives you and almost nothing more.
- Responsa - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 11:06 am:
C+. It’s better than last week’s but still feels too hostile to make the inroads in public opinion they are seeking. They’d do better if they ended the ad with “let’s try to make Illinois’ tax system fairer”, rather than “let’s make Illinois’ tax system fair.” (Because any sentient adult being knows that no tax system devised will ever be perfectly “fair”.)
- Roman - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 11:34 am:
Adding to Rich’s…Adding…
Many have forgotten that in 2012 the legislature voted overwhelmingly to put a pension reform referendum on the ballot — a rather modest one at that. It would have required a 3/5th vote on any bill that would enhance pension benefits. It lost.
https://ballotpedia.org/Illinois_Public_Pension_Amendment,_HJRCA_49_(2012)
- Arsenal - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 11:46 am:
Including images from the anti commercials seems like a bad choice.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 12:16 pm:
I’d go a step further;
The past administration’s lone goal was names to build lists.
The money they spent to advertise these proposals… they couldn’t find solid legal counsel to get things to pass constitutional muster?
Those concerned about “well, what about”…
Ask yourself. Why all the money to advertise when the petitions themselves, and the process was flawed?
No “anger” towards being duped?
- Lucky Pierre - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 12:19 pm:
Term limits, Redistricting reform, pension reform and fair tax legislation should be joined at the hip as a constitutional amendment
They all enjoy about the same support
Pretending another permanent tax increase is all that is needed to fix Illinois is foolhardy
- Moneybag - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 12:40 pm:
C-
With the sound off (and even on) the beginning looks like an anti-progressive tax ad.
Is JB gonna bank on this same team to win at the ballot box?
- lake county democrat - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 1:39 pm:
The difference with a convention is that *everything* would have been up for change. One issue in particular was a ban on gay marriage, which were being passed in other states (nobody foresaw the Supreme Court holding gay marriage a Constitutional right - there were fears that if any state allowed gay marriage the Supreme Court would strike it). Rejecting the convention wasn’t a vote for the status quo, it was a vote against potential chaos.
- Moist von Lipwig - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 1:40 pm:
Sounds like some folks on here might want some 1980-Pat-Quinn-style activism to get important Constitutional Amendments on the ballot by petition, though they may have scoffed at the idea before.
- Rich Miller - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 3:30 pm:
===Term limits, Redistricting reform, pension reform and fair tax legislation should be joined at the hip as a constitutional amendment ===
Funny, but I don’t recall you demanding that a “fair tax” be included on this list during the Rauner administration.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 3:33 pm:
===Term limits, Redistricting reform, pension reform and fair tax legislation should be joined at the hip as a constitutional amendment
They all enjoy about the same support===
LOL
Aren’t you angry that Rauner messed up the language and the petitions so bad by inept legal means those other proposals never made it on the ballot?
Or was that the feature, not the bug, not doing it right to make it on the ballot?
- wordslinger - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 3:35 pm:
–Term limits, Redistricting reform, pension reform and fair tax legislation should be joined at the hip as a constitutional amendment
They all enjoy about the same support–
I guess that explains why Rauner couldn’t break 40% and suffered the worst defeat of any incumbent governor in more than 100 years.
- anon2 - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 3:58 pm:
I’m confident that a good many of those now demanding to let the people decide on pensions, term limits, et al were staunchly opposed to Con-Con in 2008. All the major interest groups were opposed. I predict they will be opposed to it again in ‘28.
- anon2 - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 4:04 pm:
== Rejecting the convention wasn’t a vote for the status quo, it was a vote against potential chaos. ==
Any proposals approved by a Con-Con would have to be ratified by the people to become part of the constitution. In other words, “letting the people decide” really isn’t a principle that either party really believes in. It’s invoked only when it serves temporary partisan interest.
- Just Me - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 4:16 pm:
===But an overwhelming 67 percent of voters rejected the convention, so they essentially agreed with the status quo.===
By that thinking, not only did we miss our chance for redistricting reform, term limits, and pension reform, we also missed our chance for a progressive income tax.
- wordslinger - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 4:20 pm:
–I’m confident that a good many of those now demanding to let the people decide on pensions, term limits, et al were staunchly opposed to Con-Con in 2008.–
A good many of those insisting on those amendments apparently refuse to see that voters don’t cast their ballots based on tronc edit board tantrums.
- wordslinger - Monday, May 13, 19 @ 6:55 pm:
–By that thinking, not only did we miss our chance for redistricting reform, term limits, and pension reform, we also missed our chance for a progressive income tax.–
Except for that bit where the guy who made it his central campaign priority won by 14 points and got the most votes since the switch to off-year gubernatorial elections.
The guy who howled for years about term limits and the map got clobbered by 700,000 votes.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 14, 19 @ 12:16 am:
===won by 14 points===
16, but close enough.