The Tribune coverage of yesterday’s Topinka speech was the most upbeat, but still repeated the Blagojecich campaign mantra that Topinka has failed to offer specific proposals.

Republican candidate for governor Judy Baar Topinka offered business leaders Monday what she called an “hors d’oeuvres” version of her plans for increased spending on education and public works projects but offered no taste of how much it would cost taxpayers.

“I don’t have all the answers,” she told the annual meeting of the Metropolitan Planning Council at a downtown hotel.

And the Daily Herald claimed JBT missed a major opportunity.

Republican Judy Baar Topinka had a perfect opportunity Monday to spell out exactly what she’d do if elected governor — a vision critics from both parties say has been lacking from her campaign. […]

But instead of offering specifics on key topics like education and transportation to the Metropolitan Planning Council’s annual gathering, Topinka turned to the same line several times in her speech. “I don’t have all the answers,” she said.

I went back and checked coverage of the 2002 MPC forum with Jim Ryan and Rod Blagojevich. Here’s a telling paragraph from Crain’s.

Mr. Blagojevich said Illinois could come up with more money for schools by cutting budget waste, but he did not indicate how he would stare down legislators who might have their own priorities. He also called for integrating planning concerns into any decisions about building new roads and the like, and said the state should “focus” incentives for economic development in communities that have sufficient affordable housing.

And here’s how his education proposals were summed up.

First of all, I do not think Illinois provides enough money to local schools. I want to direct more of our resources to education. Back in 1977, when the Democratic governor was leaving and a new governor came along, 48 cents on every single dollar that was spent on a child’s education came from the state. After a generation of the same people, basically, with the same ideas and the same approaches, we’ve seen that go down to as low as 33 cents on the dollar.

I would codify that [51 percent of new state revenues being set aside for education] in a law, so that there is no flexibility; that any new dollar that comes from revenue growth, 51 cents, at least, should go to incrementally move that level of education funding upward.

There’s a study by Augenblick and Myers that suggests that student spending per pupil, two-thirds of them will do better in school, will actually perform at the levels and the standards that we require, if pupil funding is up to $5,000 or $5,500. In Illinois, we spend about $4,500 per child. Money alone, however, while it’s necessary and you cannot do it without the money, will not solve the big problems. And we need to focus our resources in the classroom. We need more teachers, we need to train them better, pay them better.

I just think it’s a question of leadership and priorities — where are you going to put your priorities — and I do not think that we need to raise taxes to get there. Having said that, a new administration has the opportunity … to get into that state budget, turn it upside down, go line by line, because I know — having been a legislator and now a member of the Congress — how the Legislature works.

Not exactly specific, except for the 51 percent of new state revenue proposal - which he never did.