91 Comments - DTAG - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 3:21 am: I am a millennial and I was surprised how many of my friends around the same age did not support the fair tax. None of them had a household income above 200K. Most were below 150K household and I cant believe how much misinformation they bought into. - Grandson of Man - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 3:32 am: Agree. Pritzker and Vote Yes didn’t take advantage of a head start to launch the campaign and try to inoculate voters against any forthcoming misinformation. Maybe it was overconfidence and thinking there not would be a strong Vote No campaign. The lesson is, the early bird gets the worm. - The Dude - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 4:31 am: He sold it as a complicated mess. Even the ballot question was complicated. It should have been do you want rich to pay higher tax rate than poor? Yes or no - Eire 17 - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 4:57 am: I know people who make more then 250k who voted for Biden. To presume a vote for Biden would be a vote for the tax question is a mistake. Maybe—just maybe— people have watched the gas tax increase? Their local property taxes increase? Sales tax? Tolls? Cost of education? Maybe the cost of all that does increase this way to say no. Doesn’t have to make sense. Doesn’t have to be rational. But it’s a way to say no to government. As for misinformation that goes on in every campaign whether it’s two candidates or an issue like this. I would respectfully suggest though that anyone who thinks that if this passed that in 5-7 years they wouldn’t reach down below 250 and re assess is mistaken. - DownSouth - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 5:07 am: Have to agree - Gov and proponents had ample time and budget to clearly explain and to fight the tidal wave of misinformation, yet somehow failed to connect. I don’t feel it was a wholly partisan issue. Multiple Dems in my circle of friends were vehemently opposed. They simply did not understand it, and chose to ignore any explanation. Additionally here in southern IL there is so much distrust and even outright hatred of Gov that he could offer them the sun, the moon, and the stars on silver platter and they would still reject it out of hand. “Because Pritzker!” has replaced “Because Madigan!” in my neighborhood. - Curious George - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 5:30 am: It’s the total tax burden we face in Illinois that coupled with what was an open ended fair tax reality that did it in . How can the state be trusted not to just take the new source of revenue and add to spending . - Really - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 5:35 am: Eire 17 Agree. And it might not have taken 5-7 years. This does not solve the problem. It helps, but is not a complete solution. No expense reductions, no reduction of the growth in pension liabilities, just another tax increase in the heap of them that the Governor has passed in his first two years in office. It is completely a matter of trust, and the Governor and Springfield don’t have it. - Biscuit Moses - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 5:39 am: We don’t trust them. - Really - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 5:39 am: Curious George, They can’t be trusted. And that is why it failed. Miserably. By over half a million votes. The voters sent a message. Is anyone listening? - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 5:42 am: === Face it, man. You got outdone. There’s nobody to blame but yourself.=== Gotta eat it. Gotta own it. It was your way, and it lost. The Fair Tax Flop. On July… that’s July… 3rd, Pritzker poured $51 million in for the Fair Tax. It wasn’t until September that Griffin decided to dump his first $20 million to defeat it. The waiting for weeks and weeks and sitting on $50+ million to sell the Fair Tax, that’s a colossal blunder. It just is. It’s not like it wasn’t seen as a choice that wasn’t good just Tuesday… it’s also not just a blunder that wasn’t talked about, in real time. I remember in July, August, wondering aloud… “what the heck are they waiting for? After weeks, and asking aloud… I wrote this; === - Oswego Willy - Friday, Sep 25, 20 @ 9:37 am Here the realities, without the hyperbole; The Governor had “71 and 36” to get the CA on the ballot. The Governor also had GA pass the rates. Two votes, the Dems has for this tax The Governor then sat on $50 million+ for weeks and weeks and weeks. Now, with early voting and absentee ballots out, has the governor made a colossal error by not saturating a message on the 97% aspect, and by Stratton bringing in the closing argument, in September (well, people *are* voting) what is going to be discussed more; the 97% not seeing an increase or the increase that will be needed if it fails… for weeks and weeks. Then, if it does fail, will the governor find Dem votes to increase as Stratton says (they probably can) but how can you trust a governor who sat on two huge assets (time from spring passage and $50 million) to define the CA, unabated, and make time an asset, which now is squeezed, artificially now, by burning daylight. Will Dems legislators say… “Governor, you had the time and the money, why did you wait, you had the field open too?” Did Stratton go out on this alone or was this calculated… and now it makes the discussion, with Griffin’s $20 million and his time window still open, about a massive income tax increase, not the 97% seeing no change? It’ll be interesting. I dunno if the saturation of the 97% took hold.=== It proves you don’t need to be a “rocket scientist” to see the severe and damaging way this will fall if it loses… and why the heck are ya waiting? The politics too, I never understood why, there was so much you’re gambling on… when the biggest assets… time and money… you “owned.”… now the Governor owns the loss and a colossal failure, up there with the O’Malley Mistake and the Friday Fiasco… both are, and now the Flop, cautionary tales, self inflicted and long term damaging, but this one has both a political and governing bend. You can NOT sit on cash and time and then blame the game. You owned the game, the playing field, the buy-in number. The 72 and 40+ Dems in the House and Senate haveta look at the Governor and wonder themselves… “what actual cover can I get to correct this?” They did their part, they got it on the ballot, they carried the water. Now there will be pain. Constitutional amendments are difficult, I’ll be the first to admit that. Heck, if it were easy we’d all be seeing our 857th passed amendment by now. They are designed to be difficult, anytime you’re trying to change “taxes”, yikes, you just doubled the chances it might not fly. That said, what did you think you were missing, Governor, to pass this after July 3rd? Sometimes you just lose, sometimes the blame is, and was, seen from choices, not the voters who didn’t go your way. - Santa Knows - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 5:54 am: The Governor and the rest of Springfield simply don’t understand that the rest of us don’t trust them. Griffin simply evened the playing field but Springfield has been kicking the can down the road too long. This was too easy - let’s get the bad rich guys to solve our problem. Now it requires leadership - Metroeasterner - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 5:59 am: ==== Maybe—just maybe— people have watched the gas tax increase? Their local property taxes increase? Sales tax? Tolls? Cost of education?==•= Those are exactly the reasons I voted for it. It’s not like they will say now that the measure is defeated they won’t raise revenue somewhere. Continuing to raise the flat rate, gas taxes, sales taxes and fees is extremely regressive tax policy. Additionally, I’m convinced they will now go for the low hanging fruit and tax retirement - again a tax that falls disproportionately on those least able to afford it (unless they create a pseudo graduated tax and exempt the first X thousand). - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 6:01 am: === Now it requires leadership=== Here comes the pain, To you too. You really showed him. It’s actually comical, this idea, and while the Governor owns the failure, the actual glee I read from people voting against themselves. I can understand you can’t help people help themselves, but the silly and comical of folks voting against themselves to then get hurt and then complain later, it’s this; === Biden is winning DuPage County 256K-183K, while the Fair Tax is losing 182K-247K. Nobody would expect the governor’s tax proposal to equal Biden’s total, but Pritzker unmistakably missed a whole lot of people who should’ve been on his side.=== Really, maybe Santa Knows this too, but the reason it failed is that in many cases, you can’t help people who don’t understand, and they can’t understand when you wait weeks and months to explain it. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 6:05 am: === I’m convinced they will now go for the low hanging fruit and tax retirement=== After the Fair Tax Flop, no one is going to propose the Frerichs Tax. Only Mike Frerichs stands tall to even discuss the taxing retirement income - RNUG - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 6:16 am: == now go for the low hanging fruit and tax retirement == Nope. Nobody wants to touch that one. The low hanging fruit is expanding the sales tax to more services. After that, the next target will be eliminating various business deductions and special tax breaks. - tea_and_honey - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 6:44 am: The number of otherwise well educated people I talked to over the last two months that truly thought that voting yes meant “the politicians” could raise your taxes and voting no meant they weren’t allowed to raise your taxes was really high. The Vote No campaign did a great job of delivering misinformation in a way that really stuck with people. - Inverted Pyramid - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 6:54 am: The headline here says it all. Yes, not a good look at all, Governor. To me, words that come to mind with the Guv’s public statements the past few days: tantrum, blame shift. “The fact is that local officials who are not doing the right thing are the ones who are going to be responsible”. –From Tuesday’s presser regarding local officials going their own way on COVID restrictions. Agree or disagree, local officials are viewing these actions as trying to protect their constituents and their local economies. They don’t view the Guv as a partner in that effort. “But that didn’t happen. Republicans swore their allegiance to the wealthiest interests in the state, and they threw middle class families under the bus.” From Wednesday’s presser. Agree or disagree, the GOP viewed this fight as defending their values and keeping the bus from running over their constituents. They were united in that belief well before it rained Citadel Dollars on our airwaves. Collaboration is this Governor’s blind spot. Maybe being one of the richest men in the state leads to that problem? You can’t buy your way into collaboration (remember Rauner checks to GOP Members? Or the MJM Millions this year and he has a bigger problem today?), even if 60+30+1 is easier with super majorities. It comes from hard work and a willingness to sometimes accept other people’s opinions. Tantrums and blame shifting are the opposite of collaboration. - Give Me A Break - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 7:08 am: Like others have said, the message the politicians would be able to raise your taxes was burned in early and often. My daughter a college educated professional bought it hook line and sinker. When I explained to her she would not see her taxes go up and the General Assembly could already raise taxes she looked at me and said, “then those commercials are lies”?” - Techman - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 7:09 am: Out in the country there were 2 problems. One no one trusts the politicians. The 250k bottom can be lowered. 2 out of the 3.4b increase there was not near enough of the pension problem solved. No one wants to hear this, but Springfield has to solve the lucrative pension problem before many people in my area care. - Dan Johnson - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 7:11 am: You know one of the *real* problems is that so many people think of the state as a separate, alien entity from themselves. As if state debt isn’t their debt as well. Or that state “spending” isn’t related to their families — not their kid who goes to a public school or their local hospital or their alma mater (public or private). That’s our real problem. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 7:12 am: === enough of the pension problem solved=== This was not discussed in any of the ads, for or against. That’s voters bring their own IPI wants… This idea leading up to, and now, it’s “pensions”… it wasn’t pensions, that’s nuance. Trust, yep, debt, yep… “pensions”, that’s next level nuance. - Dl - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 7:15 am: Finger pointing always easier than taking responsibility. The assignment of blame is the only thing politicians truly excel at. - Techman - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 7:20 am: That is what is so interesting about the commenters on this site. “pensions, that’s next level nuance”, nope that is reality out in my world. I am self employed and deal with mostly farmers and other self-employed individuals, the pension problem is destroying this state and nothing can seem to get done about it. Taxes were going to be raised, spending would increase, and nothing to solve the underlying problems in this state would happen. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 7:21 am: === nope that is reality out in my world=== Anecdotal is like that. - Howard - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 7:36 am: The Dude Absolutely correct - Really - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 7:49 am: Techman, 100% correct. Was there any guarantee that the money raised from the Governor’s tax would go against the pension shortfall or the 8 plus billion dollars if unpaid bills or to reduce the budget deficit? Nope. A couple of years back they created a lockbox guaranteeing that certain new revenues would only go against transportation spending. I call that the Local 150 jobs guarantee law. Why couldn’t legislation have been passed guaranteeing where the monies raised went? Because then they wouldn’t have the flexibility to play with it. Based on past history people don’t trust them. And with good reason. - Da Big Bad Wolf - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 7:53 am: === We don’t trust them.=== Yet you trust Ken Griffin, IPI? Lol Who voted for Griffin? At least your fellow citizens voted for the other folks. - The Elephant In The Room - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 7:59 am: The drive to implement the graduated tax would have been stronger but for the Covid related recession that regular voters are feeling. There simply isn’t an appetite in Illinois for more taxes, of any kind. In the end, Pritzker’s close connection to the effort, and his own rich person tax problems made him seem, again, out of touch with regular Illinoisans. - Smile Politely - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 8:04 am: I understand Rauner’s failures, but how does he put historical blame with republicans. Be better than that. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 8:06 am: === Why couldn’t legislation have been…=== If that’s your argument, no matter what side is spending, you made up your mind, now you’re just justifying your… thoughts. Like you knew your taxes were going up no matter what, but voted against yourself. To this, and the post, Chasing everyone’s nuanced takes to taxing is, and always is, a losing way to sell a tax, a great way to sink it. Deciding to let the discussion be framed as a way to tax retirement income, a new way to easily tax, they’re coming after us next, it’s not a tax cut… none of those are nuanced. The “97% cut” was never saturated enough, it didn’t even clear 50% in votes. If your argue this to the nuance(s) outside above or a want of what the CA was never about, that’s on the Governor for not clarifying his message simply, and the closed minded already likely to vote against themselves and help Griffin, which Griffin counted on… and got. The anti-tax out-hustled, out messaged, basically owned the playing field as the Fair Tax folks needed to respond because saturation never occurred. The simplicity helped where the base of nuanced voters, angry voters, already resided. Props to them. - 47th Ward - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 8:18 am: In addition to the various pro-fair tax commercials, I saw some people putting door hangers up and what appeared to be a paid crew putting signs up near polling places. I understand the pandemic prevented a lot of the traditional Democratic ground game, but I noticed something else. There was no face on this campaign, and in my area at least, no other pols were pushing it. I’m sure they all endorsed it, but nobody really wanted to be outspoken about it, especially legislative candidates. It was almost as if they knew it was a loser and didn’t want the stench of it near their campaigns. I voted for it because it’s the right thing to do and I would have save a tiny bit of money. But there were not enough cheerleaders for it when it mattered, and the anti side was able to dominate the coverage of it. JB was all alone on it, and he was also sidelined by managing the biggest public health crisis in modern history. He should be angry that so few Democrats were helping. He should be angry that the Tribune and the plutocrats lied about it. But he shouldn’t be angry with Republicans, who were only doing what they do. - Bruce( no not him) - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 8:18 am: People I know absolutely don’t trust the current political class to protect them from increases across all income levels. Logic has little to do with it. It is trust and trust alone. - foster brooks - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 8:20 am: when you just doubled the gas tax and raised trailer fees 500% not a big surprise this went down in flames - Anonymous - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 8:22 am: @- Techman - == That is what is so interesting about the commenters on this site. “pensions, that’s next level nuance”, nope that is reality out in my world. I am self employed and deal with mostly farmers and other self-employed individuals, the pension problem is destroying this state and nothing can seem to get done about it. Taxes were going to be raised, spending would increase, and nothing to solve the underlying problems in this state would happen. == Serious question: Do these folks you mention believe that the debt that all of Illinois owes to the pension funds is just not real debt? Or do they understand that it _is_ real debt, but just want a way out of having to pay it? Or, mostly just frustration that the debt is just not being paid off right now? Please elaborate, I am genuinely interested in exploring this matter further. - Hieronymus - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 8:22 am: Anonymous at 8:22 am was me. - Cheryl44 - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 8:23 am: If you don’t trust elected officials why vote at all? - Chill - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 8:23 am: Maybe we could just all have a drink and chill out. I propose a day of all positive posts on cap fax. - Candy Dogood - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 8:24 am: Two things can be true at the same time. - Responsa - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 8:31 am: On a number of occasions on-the-street observations about issues and concerns surrounding the Fair Tax, including how it was being perceived out in the general public were posted on this site (and other media sites) over the summer. In many cases those comments and examples were ridiculed and minimized as merely anecdotal. The final Fair Tax vote on Tuesday should serve both as a reminder (and evidence) that observable anecdotes do in fact have the ability to at least provide clues and insights to potentially real and solid problems in messaging and/or product that might be addressed. I don’t know what the date was that the Fair Tax momentum changed irrevocably for the Governor but there surely were observable warning signs that his staff and advisors passed by and/or ignored for months before Nov. 3. - OneMan - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 8:36 am: == Yet you trust Ken Griffin, IPI? Lol == Has pointing out who is funding the other side of a proposition/candidate ever really worked? Do you think the ‘average’ voter knows or cares who the IPI is? Ken Griffin is? I think the money spent on complaining about the ‘millionaires and billionaires’ would have been spent better explaining what the measure did and did not do. The question is not who do you trust more? The question is who do you trust? I suspect to the average taxpayer in Illinois the idea of ‘vote for this and your taxes will go down’ was about as trustworthy as those robocalls I get that say they can get my credit cards forgiven. == Who voted for Griffin? == Besides for the Governor who else who gave real money to the effort did anyone vote for? == At least your fellow citizens voted for the other folks. == It has been shown over and over again while citizens may like and trust their rep they do not trust other elected officials to the same degree. - BigDoggie - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 8:42 am: I don’t believe it was lack of explaining. Maybe a lot of voters actually were more educated than Pritzker was counting on. It was touted that a majority of other states use a graduated income tax system. Maybe a lot of voters took the time to look into that and they discovered that in a majority of these “other states”, the highest tax rate applies to the middle class. Maybe a lot of people suspected that is what would happen within a few years in Illinois if it passed. And the lack of trust in Pritzker? Yeah, that’s a given. A big given. - Amalia - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 8:50 am: oh, there’s more blame to go around than just the gov. he’s right to be angry about the failure of the amendment. it’s going to be difficult and snapping about it is the first step in letting people know that this will mean cuts. government costs money. people do not seem to get that until something they want is gone. - Candy Dogood - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 8:56 am: I should elaborate. The Governor can be both beaten at the polls on his own proposal, and Ken and the gang can spend millions of dollars lying to voters to get them to vote against their own interest. The Governor can lose a ballot measure and the voters of Illinois can vote against their own best interests and I agree that the campaign was inappropriately run and think it probably wasn’t staffed with people who had the right back ground and experience for issue advocacy, but this isn’t a Governors own situation. This is a voters own situation. The voters are responsible for the impact of what happens because they bought into lies delivered to their doorstep. Just like the voters own four years of Rauner wrecking the state, the voters own the consequences of not changing this amendment. The real question should be are the voters of Illinois finally going to take responsibility for a decision they make at the polls, or are they going to find some convenient way to shift responsibility off of the consequences of their own actions? With the way so many people talk about their elected officials in Illinois — who continue to get reelected by the same people who complain, I just assume that Illinois is a State where dogs are blamed for 99% of household farts. At some point we might need to recognize what this is — it’s the voters fault. JB’s money was spent poorly. Ken’s money was spent unethically. The voters of Illinois made a bad decision and we should be hanging the consequences on their necks at least as much as complaining about JB blowing it. More than one thing can be true and I don’t think it’s a fault for the Governor to want to acknowledge the feckless lies that were mailed to millions of people so that Illinois richest man could save some money. The taxpayers of Illinois voted to [banned word] themselves and I don’t think we should be blaming the Governor for that. - Six Degrees of Separation - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 8:58 am: ===If you don’t trust elected officials why vote at all?=== The “lesser of two evils”…many elections are decided for the candidate voters distrust the least. - Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 9:00 am: I really liked the part about JB complaining about millionaires and billionaires spending tens of millions of dollars to influence elections and public policy. That was really great. - 62468 - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 9:02 am: “…It’s a matter of trust, It’s always been a matter of trust…” A Matter of Trust by Billy Joel Those lyrics seem very relevant to this post and several comments here. - iggy - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 9:03 am: Here is how this played out in real life. Person A: we all need to support the fair tax, 97% of the state will either pay the same or less. woo Person B: I heard that the rates are not on the ballot and Springfield legislators will be the ones who determine the new brackets. Person A: no response that’s the problem with JB’s messaging, it totally hinged on people being excited by the face value proposition but not putting in any critical thinking beyond that point. maybe JB could have campaigned on the rates, and promised a veto on anything that didnt lock in the rates for X amount of years. just some thoughts. - willowglen - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 9:06 am: BigDoggie - you are correct - by and large the voters knew what they were voting for, and the failure of the amendment was not due to a lack of explanation. The problem is that taxpayers are in a dilemma in Illinois. Live in Wisconsin? Sure, taxes are relatively high. But they go towards the delivery of current services. People can wince a bit at the taxes and say ok, but in some sense I am getting what I pay for. In Illinois, taxes go towards work already performed and high debt service costs. And with the lack of trust in politicians, all too many Illinois residents intuit that tax increases are tantamount to throwing good money after bad. At some point Illinois’ numbers are inescapable. I am not sure Pritzker did a good job selling the amendment, but it is also fair to state the the financial headwinds in Illinois in and of themselves eclipsed that amendment’s chances. - Arock - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 9:06 am: First off don’t start with the lie that the State is in the mess it is in because the millionaires and billionaires haven’t been paying their fair share in the past. The State is in this mess because the politicians in Springfield passed bogus balanced budgets for decades and failed to contribute the required amounts to the pension systems each year. The only real fixes in the last couple decades is some cutting back on pension spiking and Tier II that screwed new workers so old workers got all their bells and whistles. Fix the problems first that drive the need for the additional revenue and then come back to us with an honest tax proposal with limitations so it doesn’t appear as a blank check for the politicians to spend as they please as they have done in the past. And get over blaming the Treasurer for letting the cat out of the bag. The more truthful and transparent you are up front the better for everyone. - SAP - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 9:11 am: The first real messaging I heard was the Governor’s proposal will tax your retirement income. The Governor had a huge head start on messaging and we got nothing but crickets from the Governor. JB has to eat this one. - Anonymous - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 9:18 am: A more important question; now what? How does the state move forward? The voters have spoken, and the “fair tax” failed. The budget still needs to be balanced, and there won’t be any help from the Feds. Instead of pointing fingers and blaming others, we need to get busy to solve this. - KSDinCU - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 9:19 am: The way I explained the Fair Tax to my 20yo second-time voter son, who pays little attention to politics or the news: “It would mean people with higher incomes would pay a higher percentage than people with lower income, just like with federal income tax.” His response: “How come we don’t do that already?” A simple message making the comparison to federal taxes might have worked a lot better. - Just Me 2 - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 9:20 am: ===How does the state move forward?=== How about we look at the State’s biggest financial problem? Anyone? Anyone? If the Democrats had even attempted to solve this problem I would have voted for this referendum, but they didn’t even try. - Montrose - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 9:20 am: A few thoughts: 1) I don’t think JB or the Pro-Fair Tax groups fully appreciated how the economic anxiety caused by the pandemic shifted the landscape. When they started this, the economy was booming and folks were feeling pretty good. I feel like JB and friends were still coasting on polling from the before times. 2) To 47th’s point, JB did not get much support from dem politicians (save folks further to the left), including Lightfoot. She did exactly what she wanted - signaled she didn’t like it and didn’t support it while giving superficial lip service in favor. It was clear she didn’t like it (in part because of who it would hurt and in part because she feels it hurts her ability to raise new revenue for just Chicago) 3) As others have pointed out, people don’t understand how taxation works. The Fair Tax people assumed people already understood politicians could raise their taxes. This is one spot where JB really dropped the ball early by not drilling it in that this about changing how they tax, not if they tax. - Jibba - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 9:21 am: I didn’t see his remarks as petulant or arrogant, but more as a sad reality that the average person will now feel more pain than they would have otherwise. He didn’t say “you’ve got it coming”…he said you’ve been lied to by the rich and by Republicans, which was absolutely true. Their way is for the rich to pay less, the average person to pay more, and to use the resulting anger to find their way back to power. Sad and Machiavellian. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 9:21 am: === And get over blaming the Treasurer for letting the cat out of the bag.=== This is wholly disingenuous to facts, yet again, as you keep trying to make this a fact. No one… not one person… besides Mike Frerichs… thinks, believes, or is willing to even discuss putting an actual bill in play, have sponsors, vote for it, and a governor sign it. Sincerely, are you willfully ignorant or blissfully unaware. Your thought in this, here again to remind you, is not only not in play, but the 3rd rail of Illinois politics. Mike Frerichs standing tall to tax retirement income has Mike Frerichs standing tall alone. A major reason, not the only, sole, or most hurtful reason the Fair Tax failed is blatant misinformation never refuted or curbed early in with an earlier start. I’ll let you choose, willfully ignorant or blissfully unaware, but gotta tell ya, you keep trying to say it… - Rich Miller - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 9:27 am: ===If the Democrats had even attempted to solve this problem=== They did. Twice. Supreme Court rejected one of them. Maybe stop reading the Tribune editorial page. - Publius - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 9:28 am: I think is was more a vote that people don’t want taxes raised on anyone. People don’t trust Springfield but all the Democrats were still elected and there look to be a few pickups. - Ducky LaMoore - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 9:29 am: The governor needs to move on and never talk about this again… until after he proposes his next budget. Basically, scorched Earth proposal, and let the Raunerites who wanted scorched Earth go insane. That is the only path forward. I would not be proposing an income tax or any other tax increase any time soon. - Candy Dogood - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 9:44 am: ===I would not be proposing an income tax or any other tax increase any time soon. === This is a pretty big argument from fallacy. Can you identify the several billion dollars in cuts you’re planning to make? - Odysseus - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 9:45 am: “Or do they understand that it _is_ real debt, but just want a way out of having to pay it?” This. Almost everyone that I have talked to thinks that pensions should be reduced or simply not paid. They are completely cool with breaking the contractual relationship. I have had exactly one conversation that suggested that there might have been collusion between the governors and the unions to increase salary without being honest about the damage that would do to the state budget. But for almost everyone, it’s a combinations of “I don’t get a pension why should they?”, “retirees making six figures”, etc. No recognition of the exception from Social Security. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 9:46 am: === At some point we might need to recognize what this is — it’s the voters fault.=== No. Campaigns are designed to not only educate voters, but be able, be it candidate or in this case a CA, to clearly put voters in the best place to decide. You can’t say voters were wise if they happen to agree or uneducated. The campaigns, be it messaging, candidate, whatever, failed to put their argument to voters for a favorable outcome. The voters indeed, we know this in Illinois, get what we deserve, but it’s not the voters fault… if it was, why even have campaigns, even have campaigns spending tens of millions of dollars. The trade of politics and campaigns pay well for those that can win. Devaluing the trade to blame voters is not an answer. === JB’s money was spent poorly. Ken’s money was spent unethically. The voters of Illinois made a bad decision and we should be hanging the consequences on their necks at least as much as complaining about JB blowing it.=== The voters are going to pay for whatever happens, had it passed, voters would’ve felt that change too. Campaigns can be great… and lose. Campaigns can be awful… and win. But awful campaigns that lose, that’s not on voters. - Dr X - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 10:01 am: either way illinois is a one party crap hole will continue to lose people fleeing this sinking state - fs - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 10:02 am: == The “97% cut” was never saturated enough, it didn’t even clear 50% in votes.== One reason they didn’t start using that lie (and it was a lie) was due to them using a contradictory statement at first: “97% will see their taxes stay the same or be lower”. That contradiction stuck out, and highlighted the fact that the actual rates weren’t set by the amendment, they were set by simple legislation, that can change at any time. And most people didn’t trust that the “97%” line would be true for very long. - Spending - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 10:13 am: % Growth in State Expenditures 2000-2020 Pensions 501% Health Ins. 127% Education 21% Other Spending -32% Total Spending 15% - Grandpa2 - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 10:17 am: Agree with Ducky mostly, except don’t agree with term “scorched earth.” Governor needs to propose a truly balanced budget to show voters and their representatives what that actually looks like. I wish Rauner had done that rather than attempt to foment a crisis. Almost all voters have no idea how draconian the cuts would be. Until people see real numbers, there will be no meaningful progress. - Stas - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 10:23 am: —- -fs- “97% will see their taxes stay the same or be lower”. That contradiction stuck out, and highlighted the fact that the actual rates weren’t set by the amendment, they were set by simple legislation, that can change at any time. And most people didn’t trust that the “97%” line would be true for very long.—- That hit the nail on the head. Also, the commercials kept on saying that the CA would “make millionaires and billionaires pay their fair share”, but the “current floor” on the graduated tax on income started at $250,000 - which is way lower than $1 million. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 10:24 am: - Spending - Cite please, thank you. === One reason they didn’t start using that lie (and it was a lie) was due to them using a contradictory statement at first: “97% will see their taxes stay the same or be lower”.=== Yeah, I always thought the best line was “97% will not see any increase in their taxes, none” This idea that first trying to sell a cut, then selling it was a cut for ALL the 97%, it got a less “tight”, and added to “nuanced confusions” when simple and clean is always best. Good point. - Jocko - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 10:24 am: ==I am self employed and deal with mostly farmers and other self-employed individuals== The roads, services, and other societal things that support your ’self-employment’ are the basis of OUR debt. Your idea that pensions are someone else’s problem might hold water in 1890…not today. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 10:33 am: - Spending - It’s an IPI cite… isn’t it? (It is) - a priori - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 10:45 am: Norine Hammond (District 93) is my representative. Her radio and TV ads stated she wanted to cut wasteful spending and balance the budget. I can’t wait for the balanced budget to eliminate the SoS office in Macomb, the State Police Station, cuts to WIU, and maybe even closing the women’s prison in Monmouth. /s Fair tax failed miserably here probably b/c of al the folks making more than 250K. FYI, I voted for the CA’s progressive tax. Good times are coming to District 93. I hope Norine owns it since it’s her campaign promise to balance the budget. - CookR - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 11:46 am: === At some point we might need to recognize what this is — it’s the voters fault. === Same can be said about the people they elected and the mess that our state is in. When Madigan, the leader of the political party that dominates, bases his long career on lies and manipulation, it should be no surprise that no one trusts. - Glenn - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 12:04 pm: With 55% of voters thinking that they are voting their interest it’s apparent that more than half of the Illinois electorate are earners of $250,000.00 per year or more, or think that they will be shortly. I propose a new party, a Party for a New Electorate; we need to elect a new electorate, one better able to understand their own interests. I also favor the repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution so that Washington will have to beg money from the states and explain its unaccounted for 20 trillion dollar Defense Department spending on undeclared wars. Illinois now gets back less from Washington than it pays in. Let’s spend more of that money more usefully within Illinois. - Father Ted - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 12:08 pm: I voted for it and remain a little surprised it didn’t pass. I wasn’t sure how I would vote for it until I read the words of it on the ballot that noted it matches the federal system and that tipped it in for me. Simply stating that “billionaires should pay their fair share” just came off as rhetoric to me and the nebulous nature of “fair share” doesn’t seem like how we should measure policy decisions. Bottom line, the Vote No groups did a better job of using messaging that resonated with voters, but I would imagine that the actual reason why individual voters chose to vote the way they did are wide and varied. - City Zen - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 12:56 pm: ==Illinois now gets back less from Washington than it pays in.== Any my hometown gets back less from Springfield than what it pays in. What’s your point? - Mama - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 1:25 pm: Some people seems to think the government can print more money whenever it needs money. They don’t understand what their taxes pay for, but most of all they only care about one’s self - what they need. They don’t want to pay taxes for the people who can’t find work and need to support their family. They do not understand there are more unemployed people than there are jobs. I suggest JB’s team needs to do a better job educating people to what is and isn’t necessary. - What Do We Do Next - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 1:53 pm: Trust in Springfield: we have none. They’ve blown it over and over and over again. At this point in time, giving them more money is not the solution they need or we need. First 2 steps are easy ones: (1) do not elect Madigan as Speaker (2) all new state employees get no pension but rather a 401K with a 2-4% match - Cheddar Curtain - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 4:01 pm: As has been said above, here in Lake County I heard this repeatedly. Until they fix the pension problem, I’m not giving the state an extra cent. I don’t trust the politicians and they have to earn the right to ask me for additional money. Then the Wall Street Journal article about state debt during the pandemic again identified Illinois as having the worst fiscal situation - and that reinforced what that same group was saying. Most of those people were parents, with school aged kids (we were talking at lacrosse drill sessions), and no we didn’t talk about who they supported for president. - Common Sense 171 - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 4:14 pm: the bottom line is given the history of governance in this state the electorate didn’t trust anything the politicians wanted to do. - SSL - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 4:23 pm: The voters decided to kick the can down the road. Now where did they learn that? - RNUG - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 6:26 pm: == Until they fix the pension problem, I’m not giving the state an extra cent. == Two known legal ways to fix the pensions: One way to ‘fix’ the pension problem is pay what is owed … and that takes MORE revenue, not less. Or buy out the pensions from those who will voluntarily take the deal … and takes also takes MORE revenue, not less. Those are the hard facts. - RNUG - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 6:34 pm: == all new state employees get no pension but rather a 401K with a 2-4% match == I believe that would have to be a 457 (Deferred Comp) plan since they are government employees. They actually have more favorable terms than a 401K, including being able to pull your money out at any age without penalty once you have left government service. Two down sides to such a retirement plan setup. 1) the State will NOT be able to contribute less that the stated amount … something they consistently do today 2) the State will likely have to increase salaries in order to hire people - Jocko - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 7:02 pm: RNUG, as always, wins the day (exclamation point). It can’t be said often enough “Don’t wanna” is a thought…not a constitutional argument. - Common Sense 171 - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 7:13 pm: State wont have to pay more in salary. people want the job. - Jibba - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 8:14 pm: RNUG, would a 457 plan as described also require employees to be enrolled in social security? If so, that is an additional cost. - RNUG - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 8:17 pm: == State wont have to pay more in salary. people want the job. == Not with the benefits cut like they have been on both health insurance and retirement. A lot of the job title requirements have been rewritten to require a college degree, often a master’s. That started as far back as 2002 in a (misguided?) attempt to get a more ‘professional’ workforce. But the salaries weren’t raised to be competitive with private sector jobs having similar requirements. - east central - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 8:32 pm: Perhaps this situation would be a good time to sell bonds to resolve the pension fund deficits. It might push some expenses out into the future. Limit the investment options of the retirement funds to assure at least market returns. To some degree this might take arguments about pensions out of the annual budget debates. Also, it might clarify the trade-off between government services and required revenues. - Commonsense - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 8:33 pm: Put out the jobs on line and see how many people apply. - RNUG - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 9:13 pm: == Perhaps this situation would be a good time to sell bonds to resolve the pension fund deficits. == Don’t expect that to happen. Bond payments have to be made on time; pension fund payments are deferrable in times of tight budgets … Yes, that deferral is how we got into this pension debt mess. On the other hand, if it was all bonded and HAD to be paid every month / year, then the budget choices / impacts would be immediate … and there would be no magic beans to balance things. - Hieronymus - Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 11:21 pm: @RNUG Yes, no more magic beans, or the expectation of more. That’s what I was trying to say in earlier posts. It goes to the trust issue. Get to actuarially sound payments now. No more can-kicking. And more importantly, if bonded out, then it takes most of the steam out of further attempts at unconstitutional pension default pipe dreams that only waste time and consume all of the oxygen in the room. A big ask, yes, and maybe as you say, too bold a step for the politicians. - Da Big Bad Wolf - Friday, Nov 6, 20 @ 4:56 pm: ===State wont have to pay more in salary. people want the job.=== Do you believe in Santa Claus too? Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.