* Press release…
Republican candidate for governor Paul Schimpf says it’s time to shift the balance of power away from politicians and bureaucrats and back into the hands of individuals and working families. Today, Schimpf released his “A New Start for Illinois” plan which will put Illinois back on a path for economic success after failed leadership has led to higher taxes, slower wage growth, and increased overreach on our businesses and families.
“If the disease is powerful and corrupt politicians, then the cure is to limit the politicians and empower the people of Illinois,” Schimpf said. “My ‘New Start for Illinois’ plan begins with the premise that politicians are often the problem, not the solution. We have a state constitution that includes a bill of rights, but politicians have eroded those rights. Legislation that would have been unthinkable just a few years ago is now passing the Illinois General Assembly. I’m focused on limiting the government overreach that is hurting Illinois families and businesses.”
Schimpf’s “A New Start for Illinois” plan calls for:
• “No Tax On Tax” Constitutional Amendment that would prohibit governments from charging sales tax (or any percentage-based tax) on taxes and fees.
• A constitutional amendment clarifying that parents, not the government, determine their children’s education and healthcare.
• Make “Curriculum Transparency” is a requirement for any receipt of state P-12 education funding.
• Law enforcement (including corrections officers) and first responders are a protected class under Illinois Hate Crimes Law.
• Emergency administrative regulations and any administrative regulations that increase or create fees and penalties require an affirmative 7-member approval vote from JCAR in order to become effective.
• Assessors may only increase property value assessments upon legal transfer of the property or a change in the property’s zoning.
“This all comes back to fixing and regrowing Illinois’ economy to the powerhouse it can, and should, be,” Schimpf said. “Safer communities mean people will be more willing to go out and spend money without the fear of crime, eliminating Illinois’ excessive tax increases—from adding tax to taxes or the never ending property tax fight—means businesses, recent graduates, and families will want to stay here long-term, and weeding out corruption and government overreach will put trust back in our state leadership again.”
“A New Start for Illinois” also calls for additional first responders as a protected class to the Illinois Hate Crimes law and guaranteeing parental rights in determining education and healthcare decisions for their own children. “We need curriculum transparency because parents deserve to know what material is being presented to their children,” Schimpf said.
Thoughts?
- Anyone Remember - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 10:27 am:
” … and any administrative regulations that increase or create fees and penalties require an affirmative 7-member approval vote from JCAR in order to become effective.”
Fees are often set by statute. For those, 60-30-1 is impotent until there are 7 affirmative votes in JCAR?
- SaulGoodman - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 10:31 am:
These are all pretty ridiculous…
But does he really want to propose that a house bought 20 years ago should never increase in value for property tax purposes? So the house my neighbor bought for $200k 20 years ago pays significantly less in property taxes than the house I buy today for $400k? Even though they’re basically the same house/value in real life?
- Candy Dogood - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 10:32 am:
===“No Tax On Tax” Constitutional Amendment that would prohibit governments from charging sales tax (or any percentage-based tax) on taxes and fees.===
Is this something that is happening right now?
- SaulGoodman - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 10:33 am:
The rest of this is just silly red meat for the MAGA/anti-mask base, and would have little/no impact on “fixing and regrowing Illinois’ economy.”
- Dan Johnson - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 10:33 am:
Is the last one basically California’s Prop 13?
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 10:35 am:
=== • Law enforcement (including corrections officers) and first responders are a protected class under Illinois Hate Crimes Law.===
This is “Back the Blue” on steroids…
Thing is, Schimpf can be as ridiculous as he wants, yes he’s on the ballot, but he’s lacking an apparatus and the cash to run it to be taken seriously, unless taking votes away from another here or there is his only goal… then this kinda works for him.
It’s a “Facebook Fodder” kind of list-y thingy that looks great (I guess?) to a segment of the GOP voters, but who exactly is gonna know about it?
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 10:38 am:
=== • Assessors may only increase property value assessments upon legal transfer of the property or a change in the property’s zoning.===
“I’m for local control… until I’m not for local control…”
=== • A constitutional amendment clarifying that parents, not the government, determine their children’s education and healthcare.===
Is this an anti-vaxx stance? Sure reads like one.
- Lake Effect - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 10:41 am:
the parents not government and the curriculum transparency items are very good for capturing independents in the general.
- vern - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 10:41 am:
I’d be curious to see the language of his parent-focused constitutional amendment. Lots of possible unintended consequences in that one sentence.
Other than that, the policy bullets seem like a non-sequitur to the rhetoric. There are a few ideas that kinda limit the power of local governments, but that power isn’t “returned to the people” in any meaningful sense.
- Candy Dogood - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 10:42 am:
===Law enforcement (including corrections officers) and first responders are a protected class under Illinois Hate Crimes Law.===
Can we get someone to take Mr. Schimpf aside and explain to him what exactly a hate crime is and may fill him in on whatever amount of American history from oh, the 15th century through today, that he’s missed out on so he can understand the context of designating a protected class for a hate crime?
Does he really want protesters of police violence, misconduct, and just plain being terrible to be facing Trumped up hate crime charges for yelling ACAB or calling a cop a pig before they’re beaten and arrested because the cop didn’t like their protest? Or suggest that someone’s response to the police dragging innocent people from their vehicles and beating them should be grounds for charging them with a hate crime?
Paul is throwing whatever was left of his public dignity on the pyre of a campaign he was never going to win hoping that the sacrifice will some how translate into meaningful support. With this proposal not only does he demonstrate that he is unfit for office, he’s demonstrated that the fact he was never appointed to a federal bench during the Trump administration was a good thing for the people of this country.
Elevating police to the same legal protected status as the minorities they have targeted, beaten, abused, raped, and framed with impunity for the entire history of civil police forces in the United States is absurd and offensive on its face. Whoever came up with this idea is either an unapologetic white supremacist or a woefully ignorant human being.
It is disqualifying.
Paul Schimpf should do us all a favor and just surrender his licenses to practice law. This proposal is obscene and is not reflective of the person he has been pretending to be.
- Arsenal - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 10:42 am:
As I said with Sullivan, any plan is better than no plan, which is what Irvin and Bailey have offered.
…but man, Schimpf is really testing that. This is all either super technical tax policy or constitutional amendments to keep people from ever being mean to me. Just absolute fooferaw.
- Person 8 - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 10:43 am:
***• A constitutional amendment clarifying that parents, not the government, determine their children’s education and healthcare.
“”"
So I guess this eliminates the need for DCFS
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 10:45 am:
=== the parents not government and the curriculum transparency items are very good for capturing independents in the general.===
What do you base this on, in Illinois specifically, for November.
Illinois specifically.
- Ryan - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 10:46 am:
Make “Curriculum Transparency” is a requirement for any receipt of state P-12 education funding.
It already is transparent and grammar matters.
- Demoralized - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 10:48 am:
The Constitutional amendment on heathcare is just an attempt to get around any sort of vaccine mandate. Totally oppose that. I’m also uncertain about his fee proposal with JCAR. Fees aren’t created out of thin air. There has to be statutory authority to create them. It’s the levels that are set in rule. If he doesn’t like fees being charged then he should take it up with the General Assembly when they pass the enabling statute.
- TheInvisibleMan - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 10:49 am:
“If the disease is powerful and corrupt politicians, then the cure is to limit the politicians and empower the people of Illinois”
Because the republican party thinks it had such a great track record in responding to a disease, to now use it as a metaphor in a campaign?
- OneMan - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 10:52 am:
== A constitutional amendment clarifying that parents, not the government, determine their children’s education and healthcare. ==
Would love to see the language on that. I get to determine what Timmy has to do to get an HS diploma? I can opt Timmy out of anything in school without risk or repercussion for Timmy? As his parent, I have determined that he shouldn’t have to do any assignments he doesn’t want. Better yet, I have determined that Timmy should be taught in a class with only 4 other kids. Man the field day academically pushy parents in Naperville could have with this.
So a parent can make a healthcare decision that leads to the death of a child without any legal ramifications? No more school physicals, I don’t care if Timmy is bleeding you can’t make him not play in the game, or so he was knocked unconscious, he’s awake now, he can go back into the soccer game. You can’t send him home with a temp, that’s my decision to make.
== Law enforcement (including corrections officers) and first responders are a protected class under Illinois Hate Crimes Law. ==
What does that even mean? Is any crime against them a ‘hate crime’?
== Assessors may only increase property value assessments upon legal transfer of the property or a change in the property’s zoning. ==
Looking forward to see how he proposes funding schools.
- Lurker - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 10:57 am:
Dang Candy. You have written some good stuff but you may have outdone yourself. I bow to thee.
- TheInvisibleMan - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 10:59 am:
== Is this an anti-vaxx stance? ==
Yes it is.
He means a lack of vaccination(healthcare choice) should not impact their ability to be enrolled in a public school(educational choice).
We’re setting ourselves up for some nasty outbreaks of things long-forgotten about. You know, like the good old days of Tuberculosis.
- Pundent - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 11:11 am:
= A constitutional amendment clarifying that parents, not the government, determine their children’s education and healthcare.=
Schimpf coming in hot and wanting to abolish both public education and public health in one fell swoop. And through a constitutional amendment no less.
- Just Me 2 - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 11:14 am:
Candy Dogood - the current way the State taxes motor fuel includes a federal gas tax, state gas tax, and frequently local gas tax. The state sales tax is then applied to those other dedicated taxes, so it can correctly be described as a “tax on a tax.”
- Just Me 2 - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 11:15 am:
I’m not sure how I feel about this one: “Assessors may only increase property value assessments upon legal transfer of the property or a change in the property’s zoning.” The complications of freezing someone’s tax assessment forever seems like bad policy. What is the problem this solutions is attempting to fix? Perhaps instead of addressing a symptom of the problem we should address the underlying problem.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 11:17 am:
=== == Assessors may only increase property value assessments upon legal transfer of the property or a change in the property’s zoning. ==
Looking forward to see how he proposes funding schools.===
Exactly.
So taking away local control in funding schools, “ok”, how will the state meet the needs for school districts?
- Huh? - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 11:19 am:
“limit the politicians and empower the people of Illinois”
May as well do away with State government and revert to the pre-territory wild west.
- JS Mill - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 11:27 am:
What OneMan said x2.
I always enjoy when a pol suggests a law that is already in place as a solution to a problem that does not exist. School boards are locally elected and even in communities the size of Naperville, single votes matter. Shimpf may also want to take a look at the list of mandated courses of study, many of which he voted for, and then look in a mirror.
What a hack.
- Benjamin - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 11:32 am:
Wow. What state does Paul Schimpf live in again? It sounds horrible there. Glad I live in Illinois, instead.
- Donnie Elgin - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 11:32 am:
=Looking forward to see how he proposes funding schools=
Freezing assessed value does nothing to prohibit schools from getting funded as per usual under PTELL. The freeze would just make the costs much more visible to property owners as the levy rate % increase would not be hidden by the EAV increases.
- 47th Ward - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 11:35 am:
Who is going to tell Mr. Schimpf that any proposed Constitutional Amendment must first be approved by 60% majorities in the General Assembly?
This is not a serious plan. He is not a serious candidate.
- Friendly Bob Adams - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 11:39 am:
My son Jimmy won’t be taking algebra or chemistry this year. Or civics. Or PE. Or sex education.
And on the property tax proposal- is this retroactive so I can go back to paying the same taxes I did when I moved into my house 30 years ago? Why not?
Of course Schimpf doesn’t believe any of this stuff. It is all a batch of word salad designed to press a few buttons among the electorate.
- cermak_rd - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 11:45 am:
If parents are the only ones who determine their child’s education, then perhaps they should pay tuition and leave the taxpayers out of it?
If the community tax payers are going to be paying for the schools, then the community should have a say in the education and requirements to access that education.
- Narc - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 11:46 am:
“Assessors may only increase property value assessments upon legal transfer of the property”
Now just watch as valuable properties are no longer owned by a person, but by a trust or corporation, which then changes hands but stays the legal owner of the property.
- Just a Citizen - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 12:20 pm:
Elimination of the tax on tax is a good thing.
- duck duck goose - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 12:22 pm:
It’s hard to read this list and not feel at least a little bit embarrassed for Mr. Shimpf. It’s uncomfortable to watch somebody struggle when they are so obviously in way over their head.
- JS Mill - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 12:24 pm:
=Freezing assessed value does nothing to prohibit schools from getting funded as per usual under PTELL. The freeze would just make the costs much more visible to property owners as the levy rate % increase would not be hidden by the EAV increases.=
First, not all districts are under PTELL.
Second, nothing is “hidden” in PTELL. If people are to lazy to educate themselves on how their taxes work that is their own fault. Laziness does not equal “hidden”.
And, under PTELL, the “taxpayer” actually benefits during times of rapidly rising property values because the district never captures the full value of the increase because the district only gets CPI or 5% whichever is lower.
So their self deception is beneficial.
- Facts Matter - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 12:41 pm:
Freezing assessed value shifts the property tax burden to new purchasers from long time owners.
Example: I’ve been in my house for 20 years. A young couple buys the house next door. The houses are of equal value should each be sold in an arms-length transaction. Under the proposal, my assessed value is frozen at what it was when I purchased the house 20 years ago. My new neighbors’ assessed value is set at the time of their purchase. The amount of property taxes levied are divided up among property owners each year - based on assessed value. As a result, my new neighbor will pay more in property taxes than me. My new neighbor will be taking on a portion of the property tax burden that would be mine - under the current provisions of the constitution.
- cermak_rd - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 1:35 pm:
Facts Matter,
And there might be something to that formulation, that the exiting homeowners are partially why someone wants to relocate to a given place so they should get a break. BUT a major problem is that sale price 20 years ago was paid for in 20 year ago dollars and even calculating in inflation adjustments does not account for those years when inflation was concentrated in the real estate sector. The other problem is who is a person? A corporation could own a bunch of real estate and since corporations only due at failure it could hold the property for a century.
- The Old Man - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 2:55 pm:
At last someone with common sense headed to the governor’s office. Taxpayers need the Schimpf Plan.
- 47th Ward - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 3:04 pm:
===My new neighbor will be taking on a portion of the property tax burden that would be mine - under the current provisions of the constitution.===
The uniformity principle is important. It doesn’t matter that your neighbor paid more last year than you did 20 years ago, you both get roughly the same amount of services. Your municipal government, schools, parks, library, etc. are similar so your tax payments should be similar.
One homeowner cannot consume more school district value than another. I don’t get more municipal government than my neighbor. Assessed valuations try to take that into consideration instead of simply using market value.
But this is also partly why gentrification raises everybody’s property taxes. Like a knife, uniformity cuts both ways.
- Skokie Paul - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 3:22 pm:
Mr. Schimpf should attend his local School Board meetings. Curriculum and policy are regularly on the agenda. Frankly, I do not want Mr. Schimpf to tell me what is good for my child. I want to leave it to the wisdom of the group.
- RNUG - Monday, Mar 21, 22 @ 3:56 pm:
== Assessors may only increase property value assessments upon legal transfer of the property or a change in the property’s zoning. ==
Sounds like he wants to pass the equivalent of CA’s Prop 1 … which has had both good and bad effects.