I’m writing this a few days before Election Day, but, from where I sit, if the so-called Workers’ Rights Amendment fails to pass muster with voters, a campaign fueled by the Illinois Policy Institute could take a big share of the credit.
The proposed constitutional amendment is backed to the hilt by organized labor. They’ve raised $16 million to support their cause.
Their proposal would amend the Bill of Rights section of the state’s Constitution to guarantee workers the rights already in state law to organize and collectively bargain and prohibit statutory interference with their negotiated contracts.
The anti-union Illinois Policy Institute’s Vote No on Amendment 1 committee has reported raising $3 million so far, with $2 million of that coming from billionaire Richard Uihlein and $1 million coming from Government Accountability Alliance, which has the same mailing address as the Policy Institute.
But all they have to do is prevent the proposal from receiving 60% of the vote, or to prevent more than half of all voters who participate in the election from supporting it. By design, it’s easier to kill a state constitutional amendment than pass one.
The Illinois Policy Institute and its political committee have been claiming for weeks and months the proposal would increase property taxes by $2,100 per family because unions and members would have so many rights (which they already have under state statute) that local governments would be forced to raise taxes.
Actually, the group’s own data clearly shows there would be no projected change at all in property tax increases if the amendment is adopted. They admit their projection is based on what they claim are property tax trends over the past few years.
But the group skipped over the available 2020 property tax numbers when devising their projection and instead based their entire estimates on property tax data up to 2019. Using the 2020 numbers could have lowered their projected increases because the average property tax rate statewide has fallen from 8.88% in 2016 to 8.39% in 2020. Meanwhile, the assessed valuation has risen by 14%, which is helping drive property tax bills. If your house is worth more, your taxes will rise regardless of a smallish rate reduction.
Anyway, the Illinois Policy Institute and its Vote No committee have put lots of money online and elsewhere behind that tax messaging.
The group has also added a new line of attack. Their recent blast phone text messages reflecting their previous online advertising claimed: “More than 1,100 children have died under the care of DCFS since 2010. A constitutional amendment on your ballot on Tuesday will make the crisis worse. … Mandatory background checks and bans on DCFS hiring adults deemed ‘sexually dangerous’ by the state could be eliminated.”
If you go to the Illinois Policy Institute’s website, you’ll see their argument is based on some wild and ugly speculation.
State law, the group notes, requires Department of Children and Family Services hires to undergo background checks to make sure they are not classified as “sexually dangerous” persons.
But then Illinois Policy Institute leaps to the bizarre conclusion that a state employee union would demand their union contract forbid any such background checks and, if the state refuses to comply, could go out on strike to force the issue.
This ridiculously grotesque assumption assumes DCFS workers would willingly vote to strike and give up their pay and benefits, putting their families’ economic security in danger, in order to protect pedophiles and rapists.
Long before QAnon cult followers started proclaiming that Democrats were blood-drinking pedophiles, the Illinois House Democrats would routinely label any Republican candidate who opposed state mandates on schools as someone who would allow pedophiles into the classrooms — as if local school boards would actually want that or be willing to allow such a thing.
I’ve repeatedly called out the House Democrats for this rhetoric over the years. It relies on the assumption that the opposition is evil and monstrous. The Democrats are still using this line of attack. They’ve sent campaign mailers this fall warning voters that Republicans who oppose state school mandates would allow predators to work with children.
And now the same sort of argument is being used against an issue the Democrats’ own party overwhelmingly supports. I don’t blame the House Democrats for opening the historical door to this Illinois Policy Institute line of attack, mind you. It’s not without precedent.
But this sort of thing has to stop, although I doubt it will until voters start punishing those who use it.
- Bruce( no not him) - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 10:04 am:
“…the assumption that the opposition is evil and monstrous.”
That sums up the current political climate in a nutshell.
There has to be a way out of this mindset, but I sure can’t see it. Since it seems to work.
- This Just In - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 10:04 am:
Another culprit could be confusion in terms of the language on the ballot.
Have spoken to more than a few individuals who found the language of the referendum difficult to dissect.
- Big Dipper - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 10:24 am:
IPI’s entire goal seems to be to lie and confuse the voters with those lies. What a shameful purpose to devote one’s short life to.
- JS Mill - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 10:25 am:
Politics has always had a healthy share of spin. But the level of outright lies, easily proven lies, is astounding.
The property tax lie almost changed my vote from a “no” to a “yes” and it may still succeed. I have a keen desire to punish these liars on the property tax topic, which is an issue that is important to me.
- Responsa - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 10:29 am:
==Their proposal would amend the Bill of Rights section of the state’s Constitution to guarantee workers the rights already in state law to organize and collectively bargain and prohibit statutory interference with their negotiated contracts.==
This is a key statement which I think affects negative/ambivalent positions on the amendment. Since it is already law many voters do not see the need for this constitutional amendment and (true or not) they feel there may be a hidden agenda .
- Norseman - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 10:30 am:
=== … until voters start punishing those who use it. ===
Sadly, that would require voters to take the time to educate themselves on the topic and analyze the arguments. Too much time for the average voter. They like to pick their bubble and simply except the information from that bubble.
- Norseman - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 10:31 am:
Whoops … “accept the information”
- Techie - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 10:36 am:
@This Just In
I talked with a coworker who was similarly confused. He thought the amendment was somehow a negative thing for unions and was inclined to oppose it until I explained what it is, what it does, and why it’s being proposed.
I also received that disgusting text message from the IPI crew. Quite the desperate tactic. I was unaware Democrats have used this same type of attack, and am equally offended by it.
- Union4thePeople - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 10:37 am:
== “…their argument is based on some wild and ugly speculation”. ==
To quote David Gilmour, “there’s no way out of here…” seems appropriate. Should Workers’ Rights Amendment donors cough-up the last of the coffers and simply shoot out a commercial comparing outlandish IL Policy findings as flase (displaying actual, written text of the proposed amendment)? Or, rally the troops over the next 30 hours by messaging, knocking doors, placing yard signs and debunking the errant ‘$2,100 tax increase’ claim?
To the post: blood is indeed on all hands when you peek at the unlovely history of mud-smearing TV ads, regardless of who started it first {playground, sing-song voice playing in my head}.
- Donnie Elgin - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 10:47 am:
(which they already have under state statute)
Exactly - so the question that is begged is why pass it? The Pro-union side fails to mention that the only sure outcome is to prevent any future legislative move toward RTW. Any honest observer of Illinois political climate would conclude that with a supermajority and control of the Governor’s seat - unions have massive power and the likelihood of RTW is slim to none. And why should the electorate vote to create a fundament right to organize for the 13.9% that is unionized?
https://tinyurl.com/ymz3r5fa
- Rich Miller - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 10:50 am:
===Exactly - so the question that is begged is why pass it?===
Bruce Rauner.
Also, nothing is ever permanent in legislative and gubernatorial politics.
Nothing.
- Demoralized - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 11:05 am:
==And why should the electorate vote to create a fundament right to organize for the 13.9% that is unionized?==
That is exactly the kind of union hating that this Amendment is meant to deal with.
- Demoralized - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 11:10 am:
==IPI’s entire goal seems to be to lie==
I wasn’t aware that IPI did anything besides lying. It’s just what they do.
- JS Mill - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 11:11 am:
=Any honest observer of Illinois political climate=
If you are really being honest then you would acknowledge that majorities do not last forever and since labor laws are in statute and not the constitution they are far easier to change if there is a change in leadership. Thus the reason labor would like the protections enshrined in the constitution versus simply having them only in statute. Wisconsin would be a prime example.
That would be honest.
On my reading of your comment, I see that you did not state all of that.
- H-W - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 11:27 am:
I have actually had friends who are Democrats, ask me if I know where they can find the information on taxes going up, before they are willing to vote for worker rights.
In that context alone, the ad is effective.
Republican politics in Illinois always seems to say, anything at all (including breathing) will result in higher taxes.
And Illinoisans of all levels of intelligence and political orientations seem willing to consider that argument potentially valid in the absence of evidence.
We always live in interesting times.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 11:40 am:
First, Rich, good stuff as you dig deep into this and in the weeds where IPI likes to pretend it’s an honest broker.
This is… well, this is IPI and their whole existence;
===The Illinois Policy Institute and its political committee have been claiming for weeks and months the proposal would increase property taxes by $2,100 per family because unions and members would have so many rights (which they already have under state statute) that local governments would be forced to raise taxes.
Actually, the group’s own data clearly shows there would be no projected change at all in property tax increases if the amendment is adopted. They admit their projection is based on what they claim are property tax trends over the past few years.===
There’s not a worse resume in Illinois governing, one that has IPI and Rauner Administration on it.
That Paprocki, IPI, Tillman, feel this unethical need to grift and mislead for the wealthy who bankroll their existence… it’s not that IPI wants to be honest… it’s that IPI wants it’s dishonesty unanswered and left as an alternative fact (or usually facts)
I’m embarrassed for them, they actually exist to propagate phony ideas and ideal… and seeming hate all things Illinois too.
If this fails this will be on Labor
All IPI did was remind the in-law uncle with whole cloth untruths… that he is a victim, and should t take it… anymore.
A pathetic lot, IPI
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 11:52 am:
Also…
Roe was “settled”
Nothing is settled. That’s the old/new lesson.
Enshrining workers’ rights would be like pensions.
Folks will always come after pensions… but that pesky constitution.
- Pundent - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 11:58 am:
=so the question that is begged is why pass it?=
Isn’t the better question “would the next Republican governor look to shut down government as Bruce Rauner did? There were a whole bunch of GOP legislatures that were perfectly willing to go along with that. What would stop them in the future?
- Big Dipper - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 12:01 pm:
If the amendment would have no practical effect why is the right so rattled by it?
- Roadrager - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 12:31 pm:
==There has to be a way out of this mindset, but I sure can’t see it. Since it seems to work.==
You cut off the firehose of money, you cut off the firehose of increasingly absurdist lies that comes along with it. But since the people with all the money to spend on elections do not want that to change in the slightest, here we are and here we shall be.
- Joe Bidenopolous - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 2:49 pm:
For lying to voters about things small and large, Republicans deserve so, so much more than this.
- Lucky Pierre - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 4:43 pm:
If it fails the #1 reason will because of the over reach of Teachers unions in Illinois, who disregarded public health officials and put their interests before their students, not the IPI who most people have never heard of
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 5:23 pm:
===There are municipalities in Illinois that occupy multiple counties. So yes, getting the county wrong can happen.===
That’s the feature, not the bug, as IPI, awful as they are to governing and honesty to politics too… the reason IPI is shady is that honesty ruins the grift.
I notice you didn’t say IPI was right, so I’m guessing you know IPI is misrepresenting things, you just don’t want the credit/blame to go to IPI
I bet Paprocki and Tillman want the credit, lol
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 5:31 pm:
Apologies… I guess the cut and paste “failed”
===not the IPI who most people have never heard of===
- Big Dipper - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 6:11 pm:
==because of the over reach of Teachers unions in Illinois==
The right loves cops and farmers, teachers not so much.
- Travel Guy - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 6:46 pm:
==The right loves cops and farmers, teachers not so much.==
The educated voter is the enemy of the right, so their hatred makes sense.
- Huckleberry1926 - Monday, Nov 7, 22 @ 6:52 pm:
Why is 150 pumping so much money into this? They hate the fact that “subcontractor language”, and forced employee membership after so many days of employment contained in their CBA’s with contractors could become illegal if Ill passes a law barring such language. 150 wants contractors to do their organizing for them because….well, I guess they feel they can’t sell their product. I really can’t voice an opinion on the public sector CBA’s as I’m not privy to their contracts nor their negotiating. I do know my argument on the private sector is correct. NLRA section 14 (b) describing limitations to the Act is 150’s fear.