* The governor took questions from the media today. First up: “What is your stance on should schools be back in classroom come the fall? The President is pushing for it, the education secretary is pushing for it. Your stance and where do you stand on the issue?”…
Well, let’s start with our number one priority, which is the health and safety of our students, of teachers out paraprofessionals and everybody that’s involved in the schools, including the parents. That’s our number one priority. So, not just pushing everybody back into schools because the president says that he’d like to see that, but rather being careful and following the CDC guidance, the science the data that we have.
And so that’s why the ISBE has put forward guidance for schools to follow, requiring masks requiring social distancing, and so on. And there’s a lot in the guidance that’s been provided. But it’s because we’re trying to keep people safe. And if that means for a parent keeping their child at home because there’s a pre-existing condition because of the child, or perhaps somebody who lives in the home has a pre-existing condition, then the school has to accommodate that.
And school districts will make a variety of different decisions. Remember, each building is different. The capabilities of each school may be different. And so we want to provide all of the opportunities to get kids the kind of education that they should get, and also most importantly, keeping them healthy and safe in the fall.
Please remember to pardon all transcription errors.
* “Have you had any conversations with the mayor because everyone’s waiting to hear about the City of Chicago and of course it has different needs and all of that. What about the city schools, that the city of Chicago can hold school safely, buses, the numbers, in-class instruction?”…
Well, I’m not engaging in the details for each school and for each school district. But what we are providing is guidance to help school districts make the right kinds of decisions. So I know that the mayor is working hard on this. I know that the Board of Education, the school board rather and as well as the teachers’ union, are [garbled], it’s about the safety of everybody that’s in and around a school and engaged in school activities.
* “Are you considering shutting down indoor dining and bars again? At what point would you reinstate those restrictions if you’re not going to do it now?”…
Well, again, we’re watching these numbers very, very closely. I mean, I have I don’t wake up on any day and not look at those numbers first thing. And so as you know, as you’ve seen, we’ve been very measured about how we’ve reopened our state. And there are many people that complain that we are now isn’t open enough.
And so I would just say that I will not hesitate to reimpose some mitigations if we see our numbers moving upward. And so that’s, my concern, again, is all about the health and safety of the people of the state of Illinois…
* “Is there a cut-off number where you say, okay, the positivity rate is, at this point, we can’t have that? What what number do we need to be keeping an eye mostly on?”…
Well, again, I listened to our Department of Public Health director as well as to the many epidemiologists who are advising us. And watching very closely the states in the south and the west that are struggling right now. And wondering, where could we or should we dial, you know, turn the dimmer switches, they say, on some of these items? And the answer is that if we see a sustained upward movement of numbers, that’s something that is an alert for all of us in the governor’s office and in our administration to begin to look at the mitigations that we need to put in place.
* “OK, but you won’t give me a specific number and you didn’t tell me whether the bars or restaurants will be closed”…
All of the things that have beenpart of our Restore Illinois plan that have reopened in phases are things that we look at. To answer the question, if we needed to reimpose mitigations, which of these would be most effective? For example, it was not known earlier that indoor bars in particular, but bars at restaurants, too, can be places where, if it’s not managed properly, there can be significant transmission. That was not well known early on.
We had an idea, we imposed restrictions. But we didn’t have really enough data along the way. The data is now in. And so that’s one of the things we look at. Another is of course, what we watch is not just the positivity rate, but also the hospitalizations. And so when we’re trying to manage our healthcare system, we ask the question, well, how would you create more beds if you had to, or, as we’re moving up, what do we need to do to begin to move back down again? All of those possibilities exist from everything that we did in phase two, phase three are things that we would consider doing here in phase four, to move backward if we needed to.
* He was also asked about the lawsuit filed by the bowling center association…
I don’t know what to say, except that there are challenges that we all face in this world of a COVID-19 pandemic. And what we’re trying to do is to measure what things are less dangerous, that we can allow more capacity for, and what things are more dangerous. And again, I leave that to the scientists and the doctors to make decisions about, there’s nothing political about, you know, focus on one industry or another. It’s just all about, can we maintain safety and health guidance in these kind of settings? That’s all.
* “Are you at all concerned that the this judge could invalidate your executive orders?”…
Every situation in which the executive orders have been challenged at the federal level at the state level with you know, the exception of in one court in Clay County, but in every other situation the courts have sided with us because we are in a national emergency, we are in a disaster declaration within the state of Illinois. We have as everybody can see, a deadly pandemic that is among us. And so we have to act accordingly.
* Are you considering a quarantine order similar to the city of Chicago’s?”…
Well remember, our two major international airports are within the control of the city of Chicago live within the jurisdiction of the city of Chicago. And that’s already been done.
* “But statewide?”…
We don’t have a lot of international travel in other parts of the state. Just to be clear, there’s you know, there’s very little of it. So when you talk about Midway and O’Hare Airport, you’re capturing the vast majority of any international travel. Or, sorry, not just international, but to these other areas of the country. So I think the mayor has done what I think she saw was the right thing to do to manage the inflow of the potential for COVID-positive people to come to the state of Illinois, and I think it was the right thing to do.
* He was asked about growing cases among young people…
Well, I think I want to kind of go back to Mary Ann’s question too about bars. Because it is often been the case that people who are in the category of at least 21 to 29, I hope 20 year olds are not breaking the law, are going to bars and and maybe thinking, you know, as young people that they’re invincible, thinking that they can’t possibly catch it. Well, that’s not the point, you actually will be spreading it. I don’t want anybody to catch it ,but when you’re a young person, you’re often feeling invincible, you carry the virus, you can shed it to other people, may not ever feel any of the conditions that come with the virus. But all I can say is that we’re focusing messaging on young people because this is the largest cohort. It’s the area where, as you know, we focused on our senior citizens for the most part, to make sure and keep them safe and on those who are most vulnerable. But now, we have people who are acting unsafely going into these situations, as young people do. Giving it to each other and then testing positive. So we want to make sure that everybody who’s in the age category 20-29, not to mention everybody else knows the three W’s right, wear a mask, wash your hands watch your distance.
* “You’ve got the 51 million given to the graduated income tax. Why so much money? And is that all you’re going to give personally? Or do you think you might have to give more?”…
Mary Ann, you know, from day one I’ve been an enormous advocate of the graduated income tax. I think it’s the right thing to do. It’s the fairest way for us to to manage our revenues and our budget. Remember, the biggest thing that we have, the challenge we have in the state of Illinois before COVID-19 came along even, was a structural deficit. And so we’ve got to deal with that structural deficit. And so I’ve advocated for it, the legislature passed a bill. We know what the rates would be, and now there’ll be a vote in November.
Discuss.
- The Captain - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 12:45 pm:
It bothers me how absent the legislature has been in all of this. They’ve established that they can legislate when necessary, it’s now currently safer in the state than it was back in May, they could pass some bills that would clarify the Governor’s emergency powers to make these lawsuits and challenges moot, they could address police misconduct and they could potentially address other related concerns like unemployment, rent/mortgage relief and others.
They would face some health risks, but none materially different than the ones the executive branch has faced daily since March. They would have to make tough and potentially unpopular decisions, but the Governor is doing that in their stead every day.
They’ve just decided they’d rather not, and a branch of government has decided to be MIA at a time when they’re needed most. It bothers me.
- R A T - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 12:58 pm:
Open the bowling alleys. Not worth the fight and does seem odd to exclude them but allow all the other recreation.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 1:04 pm:
===Why so much money?===
“We plan to win”
Pritzker won’t be outspent. It’s up to the 3% to match.
- Louis G Atsaves - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 1:13 pm:
So Restaurants investing several thousand dollars depending upon their size to reopen including food that needs refrigeration and has limited shelf life have to hope and pray the Governor decides not to mitigate in the future? Rather than dodging the questions about numbers that may trigger or retrigger closings in that situation, he should put something out there so those places reopening can plan ahead and not get caught in the event Illinois turns into California or Florida right about now.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 1:18 pm:
===So Restaurants investing several thousand dollars depending upon their size to reopen including food that needs refrigeration and has limited shelf life have to hope and pray the Governor decides not to mitigate in the future?===
No.
It’s up to people wearing masks and social distancing and the number of infections.
You already know that, but as a Trumpkin, it’s important to blame governors for the actions of society that include not wearing masks or opening too early because this President says what he says.
Do you think California shouldn’t roll back? Maybe as you ponder ways to blame, look at California as an example. The opening too early with people deciding their own rules caused the roll back, not California’s Governor.
Having typed all that, I think I addressed your concerns…
=== he should put something out there so those places reopening can plan ahead and not get caught in the event Illinois turns into California or Florida right about now.===
Wear a mask, social distance, no need to push limits to open too fast.
- Pundent - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 1:23 pm:
=Rather than dodging the questions about numbers that may trigger or retrigger closings in that situation, he should put something out there so those places reopening can plan ahead and not get caught in the event Illinois turns into California or Florida right about now.=
The governor continues to rely on and defer to scientists and medical professionals to guide his decisions not political instincts. Maybe California and Florida should take note of that.
You want these places to stay open? Be smart, wear a mask, keep your distance.
- Sonny - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 1:28 pm:
The indoors and the increased risk of transmission as a problem was established months ago.
- 1st Ward - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 1:30 pm:
@OW it’s not up to the 3% to match it’s up to the 3% to provide matching or better arguments against. The biggest ones are: (1) retirement tax, (2) city income tax, (3) no property tax relief, (4) graduated income taxes not going to communities/schools to reduce inequality.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 1:37 pm:
=== it’s not up to the 3% to match it’s up to the 3% to provide matching or better arguments against.===
Their first swing was calling it a “millionaire tax”, lol
Saving the 3% will be pushed by $50+ million.
If they can’t compete, the message won’t get out there.
Are you at all… serious? This is a cornfield of straw men, lol
=== The biggest ones are: (1) retirement tax
Not happening. No bill, no sponsor, Governor won’t sign it.
Next?
2) city income tax
Gotta a bill number? Where is that bill? Who are the sponsors?
(3) no property tax relief
You think there are no “renters” in the 97%?
This is a slam dunk “The 3% don’t want to pay their fair share, and if you’re in the 97%, you won’t see your income tax raised”
(4) graduated income taxes not going to communities/schools to reduce inequality.
Rauner signed a “school funding formula”
If that’s you’re argument then the Republicans in a bipartisan way made your school funding worse?
Of course, with what money are these arguments getting out.
Pritzker has $50+ million… the 3% don’t.
- Thomas Paine - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 1:39 pm:
That was a lot of dodge ball.
I heard the governor say he was looking at positivity rates and hspoitalizations. I did not hear the governor say he was looking at the R0, which is the direct measure of how fast the pandemic is spreading.
- Proud Sucker - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 1:50 pm:
===2) city income tax
Gotta a bill number? Where is that bill? Who are the sponsors?===
Not just any bill but a bill proposing a Constitutional amendment. LGDF was the trade-off for no muni income tax.
- Grandson of Man - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 2:03 pm:
Illinois is faring better than a lot of states, thanks to not rushing reopening. The key is as Pritzker says, to listen to health experts and scientists. There’s open anti-science now by the president, who’s retweeting that doctors and the CDC are to not be trusted.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 2:04 pm:
===pray the Governor decides not to mitigate in the future?===
They need to be enforcing the rules. All of them. All the time. They’ll have nobody to blame but themselves.
- 1st Ward - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 2:07 pm:
@OW the 3% will not match Pritzkers funding. There is no doubt.
I don’t see how you can call it a millionaires tax when the tax rates go up on non-millionaires ($250M+).
The State Treasurer already said the passage would set-up the ability to tax retirement income on a graduated basis. The 3% can play the clip or quote his words in an ad.
City Income Tax will be pushed post-passage given Chicago’s own issues. Plenty of large municipalities with graduated state income rates have this already. Spread fear and compare to New York or bordering/rust belt states (MI, IA, MO, KY, IN, OH, PA). The goal is to pick-off a few that would otherwise vote for.
“no renters in 97%”. Run ads of how much rent has gone up in certain areas of Chicago and compare it to property tax increase over the last 10 years. Include how Pritzker had the task force that didn’t go anywhere on property tax relief. At a minimum, mom-and-pop landlords might be receptive. Some of their tenants might as well especially long-term ones. Block Club has ran plenty of articles.
“if you’re in the 97%, you won’t see your income tax raised”. The 97% just got a $1.1Bn tax increase for FY 2020 through higher DMV/sales tax/parking garage tax.
Not to mention Chicago’s 97% for 2020 got Uber/Lyft, Chicago Park District, property tax by the maximum under state law (for Sunday Library hours and schools), garage parking.
With the election in November i’m curious if there will be leaks out of city hall in regards to more tax/fee hikes for FY 2021 as the budget process starts in October. Also, what will the county push for.
CPS controls school funding formula for Chicago. The rest of the state is controlled by the state.
The goal will be to pick off enough people from Chicago which is possible. I would imagine downstate and suburbs are slightly against if they were polled.
- 1st Ward - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 2:42 pm:
@OW agree there is no way the 3% will match Pritzkers funding.
It’s not a “millionaires tax” when the tax applies to non-millionaires making $250M.
Retirement tax was already stated as a goal by the Illinois Treasurer. Run an ad with the quote or him saying it if it’s on audio/video recording.
City income Tax. Don’t need a bill number. I can cite the sun times and other local publications. Plenty of quotes to cite.
https://chicago.suntimes.com/crossroads/2019/11/22/20971340/chicago-city-income-tax-municipal-pension-budget-crisis-property-taxes-zotti-city-crossroads
Also can look at New York along with Midwest/rust belt states (IN, MI, IA, KY, OH, PA,) which have city income taxes already. This side can scare some people into voting against.
“You think there are no renters in the 97%”. I rent and am part of the 97%. I know why my rent is so high because property taxes are so high. Run an ad showing the increase in property taxes and rent over the past 10 years. It won’t look good. Mom and pop landlords know this is a problem and so do some of their tenants. Plenty of articles by Block Club on this issue. Also, the property tax task force was not successful last year/early this year. This will pick off some votes.
CPS is not controlled by the state school funding formula.
97% got the brunt of the $1.7Bn tax /fee increase from the state for FY 2020 already so no this doesn’t lower taxes for them plus the city increased various fees/taxes as well.
You can mount an against campaign on these arguments. I would assume a slight majority of suburban and downstate voters are against the “fair tax”. The people against need to pick off some city votes. Some of these arguments would work.
Timing might be key for Pritzker or for the against crowd with Chicago. Budgeting process starts in October what new taxes/fees will be increased? Will these be leaked prior to the election? Will that persuade people for or against based on the above?
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 2:53 pm:
=== Retirement tax was already stated as a goal by the Illinois Treasurer===
Don’t tell me that, tell that to Todd Maisch, LOL
=== Retirement tax was already stated as a goal by the Illinois Treasurer.===
Although he pines to be relevant a lot, Mr. Frerichs claim to fame is he’s tall, and not too much after that.
=== Run an ad with the quote or him saying it if it’s on audio/video recording.===
With.
What.
Money?
Pritzker has $50+ million. They *had* $1.2 million, spent it… now what?
=== City income Tax. Don’t need a bill number. I can cite the sun times and other local publications. Plenty of quotes to cite.===
This isn’t a dorm room, they’re closed, and this ain’t Facebook.
It ain’t happening. No votes for it, sorry.
This ain’t New York or any other silliness you want to compare, only the foolish ignore 60/30, 71/36… or those who know it’s impossible.
Political will is a thing. Keep up.
=== I rent and am part of the 97%===
… and if you vote to protect the 3%… that’s on you, lol
Protecting phony threats to “well, if we threaten the rich… “ that’s such a sad way to see policy or governing that the wealthy need appeasing first and always.
=== 97% got the brunt of the $1.7Bn tax /fee increase from the state for FY 2020 already so no this doesn’t lower taxes for them plus the city increased various fees/taxes as well.===
Narrator: the 97% still won’t see an income tax increase.
No matter the phony straw men, the bottom line is, even you (lol) the 97% won’t see an income tax increase.
Apples are not oranges.
=== I would assume a slight majority of suburban and downstate voters are against the “fair tax”.===
Polling disagrees with you. Rich has the polling, use the google.
You assume… wrong.
=== Timing might be key for Pritzker or for the against crowd with Chicago. Budgeting process starts in October what new taxes/fees will be increased? Will these be leaked prior to the election? Will that persuade people for or against based on the above?===
Meh.
One battle at a time.
Tell Todd Maisch how incredibly ridiculous he was, and how silly he looked. He’ll appreciate it.
Oh. Polling?
In March? It was at 65%
https://capitolfax.com/2020/03/03/simon-poll-65-percent-support-graduated-income-tax-51-percent-favor-constitutional-change-for-pensions/
- cermak_rd - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 3:12 pm:
I can understand Pritzker’s inclination against going against hard numbers (i.e. not saying 10000 new infections, that’s the cutoff or 3.5% positive, that’s the end of the line) because to be honest, we do not want any of the numbers getting out of hand. And if more variables are to come forward from researchers like the k I have heard about for the strewing variable (to account for superspreader events) then those may feed into the thought process or if all of our neighboring states start seeing surges then smaller surges for us become more important.
I mean we’re living through the disaster while building the scaffolding to manage it. That’s not easy.
- Lucky Pierre - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 3:27 pm:
The 34% of people who rent their home in Illinois will be shocked to hear they don’t indirectly pay property taxes.
They should pay no attention to the failure of JB’s property tax task force to produce a single recommendation to help municipalities lower property taxes.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 3:32 pm:
=== The 34% of people who rent their home in Illinois will be shocked to hear they don’t indirectly pay property taxes.===
Good thing the discussion is about income tax, that 97% won’t see a raise, lol
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 3:34 pm:
=== They should pay no attention to the failure of JB’s property tax task force to produce a single recommendation to help municipalities lower property taxes.===
Between cleaning up the mess Rauner left, by nearly every measure Illinois was worse off with his governorship, and a global pandemic also going on right now, you’d be better off talking about IDES than trying to say Pritzker isn’t doing anything on things.
Good try, but…
- Lester Holt’s Mustache - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 3:46 pm:
== They should pay no attention to the failure of JB’s property tax task force to produce a single recommendation to help municipalities lower property taxes.==
That’s funny, I remember someone who used to post comments under the same name who was happy that Rauner rejected a property tax freeze when the ILGA offered one. You should track that guy down, give him a good talking to.
- 1st Ward - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 3:58 pm:
@OW i saw the poll. Times have changed as that was pre-pandemic. Polls are a snapshot in time. I’ll pay more attention to polling data as we get closer to election and the public is more informed.
To say there are no votes for a city income tax is ignorant of who is on the city council. There is support for this by some. The DSA wing would certainly push this as most are looking for more “progressive revenue”. They think anyone making over $100k is “wealthy”.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 4:07 pm:
=== Times have changed as that was pre-pandemic===
You think a global pandemic where the 97% are losing jobs, health insurance, might face eviction, they will wait to save the 3%
That’s delusional.
The wealthy famous folks were able to get testing. Poor areas were struggling to get testing sites.
I know you want to protect the 3%, as you are not a 3%er, but this idea the pandemic hurts racing the wealthy? Hmm…
=== To say there are no votes for a city income tax is ignorant of who is on the city council.===
Are you ignorant that it’s a state thing? Need to change state law.
===They think anyone making over $100k is “wealthy”.===
Well, what’s on the ballot is those over $250K
You’re running out of straw for men.
Look up how to change city income tax, it doesn’t matter what Lightfoot or the aldermen want.
- Jibba - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 4:10 pm:
They think anyone making over $100k is “wealthy”
Relatively speaking, yes. Well above the median.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 4:11 pm:
=== I’ll pay more attention to polling data as we get closer to election and the public is more informed.===
LOL….. lol
That $50+ million saturating, that’ll hurt..,
- Ike - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 4:15 pm:
1st Ward - didn’t IL voters vote for a Millionaire taxes before (like literally a tax on income over a million in a year) but Rauner just let it die because he needed to save a few dollars. Did you support that tax? Maybe if we had that tax, we would be won’t talking about a progessive tax today. Just a thought
- 1st Ward - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 4:23 pm:
@OW I’m not defending the 3% i’m simply saying there are arguments that can be made against this passage.
“it doesn’t matter what Lightfoot or the alderman want”. That makes no sense see Casino Bill and real-estate transfer tax. Both of these have been pushed by Lightfoot with the former occurring.
The G.A. has to pass a bill deferring to home rule on the city income tax. I don’t see why this would backfire on the G.A. if the mayor or city council pushed since the G.A. is not the body that would ultimately pass a city income tax.
- 1st Ward - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 4:28 pm:
@Ike I was not a resident during the Rauner years. Was pre and now post-Rauner. Spent 5 years between Columbus, OH and NYC.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 4:29 pm:
=== i’m simply saying there are arguments that can be made against this passage.===
You’ve yet to make any logical one, you think money don’t matter, you’re clueless to political will and how to change a city income tax, and all you think are counter arguments fail to negate…
… only 3% will see an increase in income tax
Unless the opponents can muster, say $30 million… they will get run over as protecting the wealthy from higher taxes as Amazon sees its highest profits and unemployment is at depression levels… I’m not seeing your arguments piercing that $50+ million pummeling that’s coming.
=== “it doesn’t matter what Lightfoot or the alderman want”. That makes no sense see Casino Bill and real-estate transfer tax. Both of these have been pushed by Lightfoot with the former occurring.===
… and yet it was the will of the General Assembly that made it happen.
Sincerely, you’re not good at this.
=== The G.A. has to pass a bill deferring to home rule on the city income tax. I don’t see why this would backfire on the G.A. if the mayor or city council pushed since the G.A. is not the body that would ultimately pass a city income tax.===
Show me your votes. I don’t see any clamoring in the legislature to push it, and definitely not by the Senate President or House Speaker.
Dorm room think isn’t even in the ball park of honest policy discussions.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 4:33 pm:
=== “it doesn’t matter what Lightfoot or the alderman want”. That makes no sense see Casino Bill and real-estate transfer tax. Both of these have been pushed by Lightfoot with the former occurring.===
Is the governor willing to help pass a Chicago income tax?
Hmm… that’s what happened with the casinos.
- JS Mill - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 4:37 pm:
=CPS controls school funding formula for Chicago.
CPS is not controlled by the state school funding formula.=
Incorrect, go read the legislation. The EBF applies to the entire state. CPS does get guarantees for percentage funding in some MCAT areas but that is it.
- 1st Ward - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 4:46 pm:
“and yet it was the will of the G.A. that made it happen”
They have nothing to lose supporting it.
“I don’t see any clamoring in the legislature to push it, and definitely not by the Senate President or House Speaker”
The same Senate President who wrote an op-ed in the NYT about needing a pension bailout a couple months ago? No one was clamoring for that but suddenly he was.
Certainly, a city income tax isn’t going to be pushed this year as it would not help the cause to pass the “fair tax”. You really don’t think there have been backroom talks on this? They know the issues the city and obviously the state has.
The GA could free up more money for other obligations if there was a city income tax. The city would have another source of revenue and be less dependent on state money. It would be a win-win from their perspective in dealing with future budgets.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 4:51 pm:
=== They have nothing to lose supporting it.===
(Sigh)
What Raunerite is going to vote to have a city income tax?
None.
You think there’s 60/71 for city income tax, put them on the stairs
You have nothing.
=== The same Senate President who wrote an op-ed in the NYT about needing a pension bailout a couple months ago? No one was clamoring for that but suddenly he was.===
Show me your 30 or 39….
You have nothing.
You know that, yet here you are.
=== Certainly, a city income tax isn’t going to be pushed this year as it would not help the cause to pass the “fair tax”. You really don’t think there have been backroom talks on this? They know the issues the city and obviously the state has.===
Take off your tin foil hat. Show the votes, or move on. Facebook conspiracy drivel is not how discussions here work.
=== The GA could free up more money for other obligations if there was a city income tax. The city would have another source of revenue and be less dependent on state money. It would be a win-win from their perspective in dealing with future budgets.===
Show the votes, or move on.
List them. List the members. Go on.
Geez Louise, make another hot pocket already.
- 1st Ward - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 5:10 pm:
The ballot measure for the “fair tax” was passed due to the “promise” of property tax reform via the task force. This didn’t occur.
It’s not hard to look at a budget; city and state to see more will be needed. I don’t see it as conspiratorial to look beyond 2020 but continue to be dismissive.
I got Chipotle instead.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 5:14 pm:
=== The ballot measure for the “fair tax” was passed due to the “promise” of property tax reform via the task force. This didn’t occur.===
Trying this, lol
Again… 97% won’t see a raise of their income tax.
Why do you ignore that?
=== It’s not hard to look at a budget; city and state to see more will be needed. I don’t see it as conspiratorial to look beyond 2020 but continue to be dismissive.===
Show which year income taxes will rise…
The earliest political will might exist is 2025… maybe.
So… you have no 30/36 or 60/71
That’s fun.
- 1st Ward - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 5:29 pm:
They just raised $1.7Bn last year after making what was a temporary tax hike permanent in 2017. Now they need another $3Bn 1.5 years after? That’s why I ignore the 3% argument. These aren’t idiosyncratic events.
“show which year income taxes will rise” judging by the amount of taxation thats been raised and if the fair tax passes will be raised in just 4 year period it’s not going to be 2025. That’s laughable.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 5:36 pm:
=== They just raised $1.7Bn last year after making what was a temporary tax hike permanent in 2017. Now they need another $3Bn 1.5 years after? That’s why I ignore the 3% argument. These aren’t idiosyncratic events.===
So you are in favor of higher taxes?
You want more than the 3% taxes higher?
That’s an odd position for a person *against* the progressive tax, and *not* in the 3%
It’s like thinking that the coronavirus is a hoax, while having a family member or friend pass away with the virus.
You must like the Illinois Policy Institute, as you’ve gone chapter and verse in their takes, while “saying” you’re not a 3%er.
=== judging by the amount of taxation thats been raised and if the fair tax passes will be raised in just 4 year period it’s not going to be 2025. That’s laughable.===
… and you still can’t show 30/36 AND 60/71
It’s laughable that you think your IPI talking points are part of a political will or possible.
As a 97%er, your reason(s) you think won’t pass have zero salient policy structure or commercial appeal that can defeat…
97% won’t see an income tax increase
That’s the ball game.
- 1st Ward - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 5:55 pm:
What i want is a 3 or 5 year budget plan without government accounting. The state has continuously received more and more tax revenue yet still wants more while everything is chronically underfunded.
We went through a 10 year bull market were states like California faced chronic budget issues but were able to figure it out and build up a significant reserve. Illinois didn’t.
We lead the country in political corruption convictions as a state since the start of 2000. Sorry don’t trust them thus no more money.
At this stage it shouldn’t be hey look you won’t get a tax increase if you vote for this but will if you don’t. That’s a poor selling point if you look at the overall mosaic/history of the state.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jul 14, 20 @ 6:04 pm:
=== What i want is a 3 or 5 year budget plan without government accounting. The state has continuously received more and more tax revenue yet still wants more while everything is chronically underfunded.===
(Sigh)
The progressive income tax is on the ballot.
Your wants are not policy in the discussion or the possible.
=== We lead the country in political corruption convictions as a state since the start of 2000. Sorry don’t trust them thus no more money.===
You say there’s a need for no revenue to pay for things, but in reality, you want no money towards anything.
“Ok”… lol
=== At this stage it shouldn’t be hey look you won’t get a tax increase if you vote for this but will if you don’t. That’s a poor selling point if you look at the overall mosaic/history of the state.===
… and yet it polls incredibly well, and is close enough to get that constitutional threshold.
So… I learned you’re angry… you say there’s a need for more money… you see no need to find the needs, “because corruption”… you have ideas that are political impossibilities within 60/71 and 30/36… can’t show support fir a city income tax and see taxes going up before 2025 without showing support for that by the Governor, the senate president and the house speaker.
The only thing missing is “because Madigan” and a cite from John Kass or Dan Proft.
The CA question is this…
“Do you want the 3% to pay their share as the 97% see no increase?”
It’ll have $50+ million behind it, and the opponents have little, as you showed, in policy or political through that knocks that idea down.
“We’ll see”