Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Question of the day

Posted in:

Illinois

* I’m giving a speech this morning, so I’ll post more later, so let’s get to the setup…

Gov. Pat Quinn says his Democratic primary campaign is a referendum on raising taxes to solve the state’s budget crisis.

“If I prevail on Feb. 2 - I believe I will - I think that is a message,” Quinn told the Daily Herald editorial board Friday about his upfront push to raise taxes.

And if he beats Illinois Comptroller Dan Hynes in the primary, Quinn argued lawmakers will feel safe to vote for a tax hike, and perhaps even make cuts in state pension benefits, by the end of March.

“My view is between Feb. 3 and the end of March, within the first quarter, we will deal with revenue and I think we will pass revenue,” Quinn said.

* The Question: Assuming Quinn wins the primary, do you believe the General Assembly will pass a tax hike before the end of March? Explain fully.

posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 8:44 am

Comments

MJM won’t allow tax hike to pass the house without R votes. Quinn primary victory delivers no R votes for tax hike. Gridlock continues.

Comment by My Kind of Town Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 8:54 am
I wish he was right, but I don’t see that happening. My Kind of Town hit it on the nose. Quinn winning a Dem primary does nothing to change the MJM dynamic.

Also, Hynes is for raising taxes too, albeit using a different plan, so why is voting for Quinn a statement on support for raising taxes, but Hynes not?

If this were the general election, I would look at it differently, but it ain’t.

Comment by Montrose Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 9:02 am
Please dont let me misstate your position here, Rich, but I think that you’ve made it clear that there is no way to cut our way out of this budget mess. if thats the case, and Quinn wins the primary, I think that the GA may have no choice. It is likely that Republicans will oppose it and withhold any votes, but the Dems should pass this on their own.

I realize that my answer is contrary to your question. You asked will it happen and I answered should it happen. It seems that the primary election isnt the concern for the members of the GA, but rather the general election. So, as for the tax increase, it should pass, but it probably wont pass.

Comment by Anon Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 9:03 am
It depends on which Republicans win their primaries. The antipathy to raising taxes has to do with fear of being voted out in Nov. If you have a choice between taxhiker A vs taxhiker B, then it doesn’t matter. Or if there aren’t competitive general races.

Even if they don’t vote for one Feb 3rd, the WILL vote for one Nov 3rd if a non-sympathetic governor gets elected.

Comment by John Bambenek Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 9:07 am
No Way! The reason before was that there was an primary election. That’s nothing compared to the heat that would be turned up in the general election. The Republicans are rank opportunists saying no tax increase is needed, and the Democrats are chicken because they are affraid of what the Republicans will say. Few of our leaders will step forward and show courage to do the right and necessary thing that will eventually be required.

By the way, Rich has done a nice job ignoring the rotten mouse laying in the middle of the floor. It’s not an elephant in the room that everyone should ignore, just a rotten, stincking little mouse. Everyone says we should ignore the last Governor’s insane antics but none of the media actually follows their own advice. Good job, Rich!

Comment by Romeosatan Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 9:08 am
I don’t think a Quinn primary victory is a mandate for a tax increase (and MJM won’t see it that way either). More likely Quinn’s victory will be the result of Hynes being a weak candidate and the small amount of voters that actually brave the early February weather not being of the “change” variety.

Comment by Bluefish Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 9:08 am
I don’t think Quinn winning or losing has anything to do with it. I think it once again will be dependent on X number of House GOPers going along.

Right now, that doesn’t look so good, given the tenor of the GOP gubernatorial primary.

Comment by wordslinger Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 9:19 am
Quinn would need to win really big, with long lines of people at polling places shouting “raise our taxes now,” to produce the referendum the Governor envisions. The inevitable Quinn win will be smaller, the public will be less than entusiastic about paying more taxes, and the partisan political dynamics will not have changed. So no tax hike is likely before November…unless the resulting continued fiscal meltdown portends even greater problems for the ruling Democratic party (have we run out of fiscal tricks?).

Comment by anon Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 9:24 am
No, that would take an extreme (and a very foolish) act of courage on their part. And, in fairness to these guys in the General Assembly, they aren’t as sure as Pat Quinn is that he will be their next Governor of Illinois.

The Republican candidate for Governor is going to have to be a complete moran to lose the November election. Pat Quinn is a nice guy who is highly unlikely to be our next governor. Quinn is the Democrat counterpart for Republican Sarah Palin. Both Pat & Sarah are honest, enthusiastic, good-hearted people, and yet they are miles away from being qualified for the job in question. Honest but inept. The Independent voters of Illinois are about to leave the Democrat state candidates in droves based on what they were promised but failed to receive.

Comment by Beowulf Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 9:25 am
I believe all Illinois voters should express their disgust with both parties in the next election. Both are placing their own self interest ahead of what is best for the state. This is nothing new; it’s just so much more flagrant and apparent than it has ever been. The only way this can change is if the voters rise up at the next ballot box and tell both parties that “we are mad as hell and we are not going to take it anymore”! Very tough to do when you have such low voter turnouts in elections.

Comment by One of the 35 Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 9:32 am
ummm…no? If a tax hike is gonna happen, it won’t be until after November now. I thought the best chance for an increase was when Quinn first became governor, with him being used as the fall guy for the tax hike (and paving the way for Lisa Madigan to make her way into the office). But, the legislature didn’t see things that way, so this ain’t happening for a while.

And I’m the guy who has been shouting “raise my taxes!”

Comment by jerry 101 Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 9:33 am
I’d put the odds at somewhere just north of not a chance. The GOP smells blood in the water, and simply being associated with failing to outright reject any tax increase has made for negative campaign fodder (see McKenna, Andy - fresh off a Mothership endorsement). And since MJM won’t expose his cabal to a party line vote on taxes, I can’t envision any scenario in which Quinn’s prediction becomes a reality.

Beowulf, some pretty wild statements in there. What’s a “moran”?

Comment by The Doc Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 9:37 am
Well, I assume most legislators are running essentially unopposed as usual so they won’t be worried about not getting re-elected this time if they pass Pat’s middle class tax hike. But with redistricting coming up, and with the uncertainties that entails, can they afford to pass an income tax hike on the middle class during a recession that has fallen particularly severely on the middle class. A tax that could lead to a Republican governor in the redistricting mix.

Legislator is a great gig. Better to play it safe and hold out for a nice federal bailout. After all the WH wants a Democrat to win in November too.

Comment by cassandra Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 9:40 am
ChiTrib endorses McKenna? Really? He says he won’t raise taxes and will balance the budget by cutting the budget. And the “Mothership” buys that nonsense? Really?

MJM won’t bring a tax increase to a vote unless he can skewer some GOP folks along the way. No GOP votes, no new taxes.
Tax hikes in an election year? Really?

Comment by DuPage Dan Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 9:47 am
No,
MJM will not risk losing any seats and a tax vote even with some R’s on it will cost him seats.

Comment by OneMan Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 9:49 am
Is anyone thinking here?
NO WAY!
It is an election year during tough economic times. A tax increase is difficult enough without having to face voters in ten months time. To raise taxes during an election year? Suicidal!

Quinn is delusional. Voters will not be endorsing a tax increase by voting for him because there are many other reasons Quinn voters will deliver for him next month. Illinoisans want stability. I predicted last year that Quinn benefits from the sheer nervousness of voters to oust a guy who hasn’t been in office very long, and only a year after the previous governor’s impeachment and removal.

Quinn’s problem is that by November 2010, voters will be ready for a change they are not yet ready for in February 2010. Quinn’s freshness date will not have yet expired with Democratic voters next month, but by November, you bet all Illinois voters will be looking at him like he is some kind of curdled milk.

So Quinn doesn’t seem to have a clue why he is poised to be nominated. His idea that it is some kind of mandate to gouge Illinoisans is totally crazy.

And it seems that there are enough crazies in the Democratic party to think that his nomination would give them a license to do it too. Talk about being blinded with greed.

Comment by VanillaMan Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 9:50 am
I am reserving judgement until after the State of the State address Wednesday…Pat needs to lay it out in the most dire yet objective manner possible…more revenue have the legislators including MJM make up a list of programs and services that will be further cut/eliminated…

Comment by Loop Lady Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 9:56 am
oops! more revenue or…

Comment by Loop Lady Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 9:57 am
Maybe we need to start mandating drug tests for gubernatorial candidates because Quinn is smoking something!

Comment by 4 percent Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 10:02 am
Quinn primary victory doesn’t influence a scenario whereby GOP votes on dem initiated tax hike are exchanged for GOP seats in the redistricting process.

Comment by My Kind of Town Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 10:02 am
MJM called the income tax vote and he voted Yes. Cross prevented any members of his caucus from voting for it. Unless and until Cross gives the green light, there will be no income tax hike.

Comment by Reformer Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 10:05 am
Hard to see it, and really, wouldn’t the general election really be the referendum? BTW, notice that the Dem governor of Montana led a successful effort for a 5% across-the-board budget cut — it’d be a lot easier to sell a tax cut if it accompanied something like that. Yes, it’s a hatchet, but sometimes that’s necessary.

Comment by lake county democrat Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 10:11 am
Reformer,

Thanks for the historic reminder. I wonder, would MJM have known that Cross couldn’t deliver, thereby allowing MJM to look good no matter how it came down?

Comment by DuPage Dan Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 10:14 am
I should have said wouldn’t deliver, not couldn’t.

Comment by DuPage Dan Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 10:15 am
If there are enough “retiring” and extremely safe Republican legislators who are willing to vote for it, I think they might do it. The reason? Both sides and the gov all want a capital bill. That’s great for everybody’s election.

And while a tax increase turns the volume up on the Republican campaign call of “No more tax increases” (Now we really mean it!), those running don’t have to support the hike and PQ gets a big, meaningful success under his belt. MJM is assured of not having another budget session like last year’s, and the State (e.g., Legislators) have a cash flow they can work with again.

Comment by KeepSmiling Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 10:26 am
Scenario for getting GOP votes now: the GOP gubernatorial nominee primary gives the high sign to Cross and Radogno to free up votes for a tax increase which gives the GOP guv candidate the opportunity to run against the tax-and-spenders while knowing he won’t have to raise the income tax on his watch (in the event of a Republican win this fall.)

Comment by ilrino Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 10:26 am
Quinn is delusional. How does beating Hynes consitute a mandate on anything? They’re both proposing raising taxes, the only difference is by how much and on whom.

Besides, as noted above, MJM will not touch it without Republican support. And he won’t get that in an election year when, notwithstanding their kamikaze campaigning, one of them might actually win the governor’s seat.

Comment by Reality Check Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 10:30 am
ilrino,

Just which GOP members would be sacrificed for this scenario? How many are needed to make this work? What golden parachute will be offered them since they would surely be voted out.

Comment by DuPage Dan Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 10:32 am
Quinn knows the state can’t make it to the general election without paying our bills so he is trying to buck up the courage of the legislature to do what is needed. An excercise in futility, no doubt.

Comment by Phineas J. Whoopee Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 10:34 am
The best that Quinn can hope for is for a Jerry Lewis type 2010 when Illinoisans watch with concern over their government’s pending bankrupsy without picking up their phones to call in to make their donations.

There will be a lot of sympathetic eyes and ears, but wallets will not be opening. This means that Democrats willing to appear with Quinn and do their song and dance with him might think their message is getting through. However, by the end of the campaign, they will discover that they fell too far short in support with folks willing to give them earnest applause for their efforts.

Comment by VanillaMan Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 10:38 am
–Both sides and the gov all want a capital bill.–

The bill passed last summer — it just hasn’t been funded through bond issues.

Sometimes you wait too long hoping for “things to bet better” before acting. The state’s been pounded with bad fiscal news since the bill passed.

But none of the bad news was really a surprise, either. Our market position did not improve by waiting.

Comment by wordslinger Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 10:39 am
Quinn is disappointing in new ways every day.

If the premise is that the state circles the drain until there is a tax increase, it is/was a defective policy to wait after the primary to try to do the ‘right’ thing. All it does is make the mountain to climb out of this mess higher than it needed to be. It further complicates things when projects which, while worthy in normal times continue to be funded with new debt when everyone agrees that there is no money available for day to day operations.

I think the Republicans would be crazy to support any tax increase because of the way the Democrats have handled the current money problems.

Democratic spending habits and the way the revenue stream had been leveraged are what has sunk the budget to such a low. They had the votes to pass tax increases on their own and should be forced to do so.

It seems like a suicidal game of chicken, but it is what it is.

Comment by Plutocrat03 Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 10:44 am
I think he is living in a fantasy land to believe that a victory in the primary is tantamount to a referendum on raising taxes. But maybe if he says it long and loud and often enough he can get more than himself to believe it.

Comment by Fed Up Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 11:06 am
No. Quinn is delusional or blowing smoke.

Comment by RobRoy Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 11:11 am
adding: MJM and Cross want to hold as many seats as possible and they fear voter backlash at the Nov. polls.

Comment by RobRoy Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 11:17 am
Two candidates running on raising taxes. The only difference apart from the plans themselves is that one states he will have a “mandate” if he wins the primary. Does this mean that Hynes will NOT have a mandate if he wins the primary?
So then if Brady wins the Republican primary, does that mean there is a “mandate” on not raising taxes?

Comment by Richard Afflis Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 11:17 am
DuPage Dan: Cross has nine members who were ready to vote for a tax increase the last three years but they weren’t allowed off the reservation. Most of these seats are as safe as they come. An income tax vote was/is no threat to their re-election. Radogno had some as well, as evidenced by Dillard’s willingness to consider a tax increase as governor.

Comment by ilrino Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 11:20 am
Stick to the question, please.

Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 11:21 am
Someone behind the scenes is spouting political nonsense to the Gov. about that March date and it being a mandate should he win the primary–and he is regurgitating it publicly. Most on the Dem side have figured out that a campaign slogan which in effect says, “those nasty Republicans are standing in the way of us raising your taxes so vote for us!!” is not a sure fire winner. And the state Repubs are happy to sit on the sidelines for now without saying a whole lot about revenue increases while the governor further self-immolates.

That said, John Bambenek’s earlier comment about Taxhiker A and Taxhiker B points up what will be a major factor in the general. The question (subtly)put to voters will be “whom do you more trust to oversee the raising of necessary taxes/revenues in a prudent way while also overseeing the cutting of waste and graft in a prudent way?”

With that on the table how can it not end up being a Republican year?

Comment by Responsa Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 11:23 am
Those who take more than they give to the state and local coffers, the IEA, IFT, AFSCME, SEIU and patronage workers, construction unions, and contractors, will be dominating the voting and contributing in the February Dem primary.

In November, those who give more than they take will level the playing field.

It’s no trick getting people who will get 4% raises from a 1% tax hike to support it.

The challenge will be getting voters who will be losing private sector jobs and having food taken off their families’ tables support the tax eaters in November.

Quinn should be smart enough to know this. I KNOW MJM is.

If we had anything other than an impotent GOP “leadership” in Illinois, raising taxes before November would be a nail in the coffin of MJM and Quinn.

Unfortunately, I wouldn’t out it past Radogno and Cross to sell out the people with a tax increase if they get their 30 pieces of silver.

Comment by PalosParkBob Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 11:28 am
There are four possible outcomes given the Feb. primary and legislative action this spring. Scenario One: Quinn wins the primary and Democrats pass a FY11 budget that increases revenue (taxes)and meets minimum fiscal responsibility levels. Quinn campaigns on the benefits this fall and hopes voters give him credit for cleaning up the mess. Given the Speaker’s political history, this is the least likely of the four, but the only one that Quinn has any chance of winning in the general election.

If Hynes wins the Feb primary his fall campaign is less dependent on the spring legislative action. Therefore, both scenario two, Hynes wins primary-legislature acts; and scenario three, Hynes wins primary and legislature punts, conceivably could lead to Hynes winning in the fall.

The only sure loser is also the most likely Scenario: Quinn wins the primary and continues to mismanage both his legislative agenda (increase taxes) and state government operations. Once again, the key player is the Speaker, and ironically, who wins the republican primary will have more impact on his decision to become a team player.

Comment by Louis Howe Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 11:31 am
At some point bucks are needed. Do a 5% across the board cut to every organization. Fire every state employee. It simply does not cover the existing debt the state has. How many vendors (human services, education, medical, suppliers) can keep their doors open, avoid layoffs (with increased unemployment costs for the state), or will simply stop service without payments for contracted services? Those pesky pension costs, loan repayments, and endless operating costs (electric,gas,phone,rent, mortgage,repairs) don’t go away simply because you want to act like they do not matter. Without dollars how will the infrastructure issues be solved? Throw all the politics in you want. Make all the “cut taxes/reduce spending” statements you want. Does not solve the problem when a couple thousand seniors stop getting meals to help them stay in their home, some tragedies hit when mental health centers aren’t functioning, towns reduce their police/fire service, and schools move to much larger classes.

When the public starts screaming because of lost services it simply will not matter which party is in control. No tax increase before April because it is too soon, not enough real pain, and too much room to jockey for position. After the election because both chambers will have jobs for two years.

Comment by zatoichi Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 11:37 am
No, the GOP rhetoric has shifted far right; and that rhetoric says no support for a tax increase.

If Ryan wins the election it will be interesting to see how he handles the current finacial crisis.

Right now IL is posied to carry 8+billion in bills to the next fiscal year. I think manmy struggle with really understanding the enormity of the problems IL has. We are second to last right now and going down hill. If you think unemployement is bad now, just wait until those billions of dollars start shurtting down all those small buisness’s who are directly and indirectly dependent on that spending.

Comment by Ghost Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 11:37 am
If Ryan or Dillard gets elected, taxes will be a simple “Nixon goes to China” moment, just as it was for previous Illinois GOP governors.

Voters trust a party that opposes taxes and raising them, to a party that favors taxes and raising them. There is a belief that the GOP raises taxes when it has to, and that the Democrats raise taxes because they like to. We can thank Mr. Madigan and Mr. Blagojevich for preventing the Democrats from doing to Illinoisans what would end the Democrat’s majority in Springfield by driving voters away.

When we see how badly the Democrats on taxes have wrecked California and New Jersey, there is real reason to believe that if Mr. Madigan or Mr. Blagojevich wasn’t around, our state would still be facing bankrupsy, with higher taxes already hurting Illinoisans.

A GOP governor can thread this tax needle. A Democratic governor cannot. We have history clearly demonstrating this, repeatedly.

Comment by VanillaMan Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 12:01 pm
Depends completely on Madigan. The members of the General Assembly are mostly sheep, and won’t budge unless led. Cullerton has already shown a willingness to pass a tax increase, but Madigan has not and no primary victory by Quinn will change that. A landslide in the fall, maybe.

I would bet that the closest we’ll come to a tax hike is a resolution to amend the constitution to allow a graduated tax. That will allow both pro and anti taxers to claim victory come November.

BTW, Beowulf, I agree with your post except that it is unfair to call Palin “inept.” She never got the chance to prove her competence, Gott sei dank. But you’re right about Quinn.

Comment by Anon Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 12:03 pm
=== it is unfair to call Palin “inept.” She never got the chance to prove her competence===

Her track record up until she quit suggests that “inept” is more than fair. In fact, I’d say it’s generous.

Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 12:19 pm
At an event last month in Rosemont, that both Quinn and Madigan attended, Madigan signaled rather clearly that he was not in favor of a tax increase at this time. He cited the recession.

This weekend news reports of Madigan spokesman Steve Brown saying that he highly doubted that the House Dems could muster the needed votes to pass a tax increase surfaced.

If Quinn is really committed to the tax increase, helping the social service agencies and fixing the state’s budget problems he is going to have to fight Mike Madigan for the tax increase, anything less in that will mean that Quinn didn’t really try or care.

The dems control BOTH chambers of the GA, so any talk about repubs and what they will or won’t do is really unnecessary. If it can’t be done by the democrats then it just won’t get done.

Comment by Will County Woman Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 12:24 pm
The problem is that Quinn can’t do what’s needed to be done to cut entitlements and unnecessary spending to gain voter trust that a iron-clad TEMPORARY bond repayment tax increase will solve the problem.

He needs the IEA, IFT, SEIU and the other unions and patronage leeches to get elected.

He knows what’s fair and needs to be done, but he won’t, or can’t, get it done.

He needs to protect the road funds (motor fuel tax, fuel sales taxes) from plundering to ensure that the safety related infrastructure repairs can be made in a timely matter. That would mean paring down the massive “pork” in the capital bill and sticking to what needs to be done.

He can’t do that.

He has to cut Medicaid entitlements, and scrap the ineffective “pay and chase” approach to combatting fraud and waste.

He needs to limit the Blago-intiated health insurance subsidies to those earning below the poverty level, not the 400% of the poverty level currently provided.

He’s got to end families with other health coverage available to them to stop “piggybacking” onto the “All Kids” program. Poor kids are already eligible for Medicaid. We shouldn’t be subsidizing insurance for those who can afford it without sudsidy.

He should convert the current medicaid system to one similar to that used by the credit card companies. The infrastructure and system is there, he just needs find a way to implement it.

This system limts fraud to about 1% of billings in the credit industry. Medicaid fraud runs about 10-20%, probably closer to the higher figure in Illinois.

He needs to do everything possible to minimize public retiree costs, including ending early retirement options when current legislation comes due and taking steps to reduce pension obligations by any constitutional means.

This means charging retirees making over some fixed amount, say $50K per year, for their full health care costs.

It means ending counting those “end of career” raises from penison calculations, and excluding “extra” income from things like coaching, payout of unused vacation and sick time and collecting a pension while employed. either as a direct or contract hire, for ANY state, federal, municipal, county or other governmental body job.

He needs to stop double and triple dipping of public pensions by consolidating public pension funds.

According to Dan Proft, over 3,000 public retirees are getting two or more public pensions. a far greater number are likely to be collecting a public pension while on a government payroll.

He needs to end “prevailing wage” requirements from non-state governments as a minimum, and preferably including state construction to have public construction performed at market rates.

In order to slow the excessive growth of government, he should require limiting all government collective bargaining salary and benefit increases to the natural growth of that government’s revenues.

He also needs to promise to hold all future budgets to 2006 levels, adjusted for inflation and new revenues EXCEPT bond retirement taxes.

In short, he should repair all the problems that got us into this mess in the first place.

If he were to do this, and request to levy a tax to repay our current indebtedness to bondholders (NOT for bloated pension obligations for unretired employees), I think I could support him for that bond repayment tax, as could many fiscal conservatives.

The problem is that what Quinn would have to do to convince those giving more than taking through a tax increase would be closing off the spigots to those patronage folks feeding at the trough, and he needs them to get elected.

Only a Republican governor could have a chance of proposing a temporary bond repayment tax to restart with a clean fiscal slate after cutting unecessary state spending and entitlements.

The situation is indeed bleak.

Comment by PalosParkBob Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 12:50 pm
Quinn should never have run, he should have accepted that he was a transitional figure and the sacrificial lamb to push thru a tax increase and then walk away, for the good of the state and his party. But he thought the only way he’d be taken seriously is if he was not a lame duck, so he ran. Lost respect for him right there.

If he loses the primary, he will have no juice left to push thru a tax hike, badly needed as it is. If he wins the primary, he’s going to keep waffling and trying to please everyone at the same time, to try and survive the general, as he’s been SO successful at so far. Again, the tax hike will not materialize, only more anger and bitterness and dissatisfaction, resulting in a general “throw the bums out” anti-incumbency vote in November. So many dems got in on the coat tails of an anti-george-Ryan backlash vote the last time this happened.

THAT is what Madigan should be worrying about. Risk a little to back a reasonable tax plan now, or risk a lot more by doing nothing and being painted as selfish obstructionists. Madigan had the excuse of resisting Blago’s insane agendas before. No longer.

Now he’s going to be holding up paying state vendors, holding up needed services, preventing construction and recovery from happening, without Blago to blame.

We need the tax hike, we really do. Madigan should shape the best plan he can along with Quinn and Cullerton, and advance it, now, just like ripping a band-aid off quickly is better than doing it slowly. Do it fast and do it right, and you’ll have time to answer November critics on the repubs side with actual results.

Keep fiddling while Illinois burns, and the voters will get the torches and pitchforks out. Again.

Comment by Gregor Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 12:52 pm
The 10:30 post under my handle was not me. Impostor, begone.

Comment by Reality Check Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 12:57 pm
The economy is likely to recover slowly before November and the recovery will likely result in a high percentage of low-paid retail type jobs and few high paid or even well paid ones. Economic uncertainty combined with the Blago trial over the summer is an unpredictable mix. Plus I don’t think our Blago is too fond of the guy who took over his job, so if there are any zingers he can send our Pat’s way as part of his defense, I bet he will.

Given these uncertainties, do the Dems want to put through an unpopular tax increase on the middle class that could provide billions for the
Republicans to gorge upon next year. All the blame and the opposition gets to spend it? I think not. Dems want to be cutting those ribbons and, more importantly, they want to make sure that whatever parts of the increase fall off the truck fall off on Dem turf. And they can’t be sure who’ll benefit until after November. They’ll probably wait.

Comment by cassandra Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 1:40 pm
Call me cynical but this is self preservation time…..no need to be trying to get our house in order when we might be held accountable for actually trying to do it. In good conscience those running in the primary will, for our own good, defer from taking action till after the general.

Thank goodness we have people that are looking out for their own jobs. Why, if they weren’t there their staff would be out looking for work. So, for the good of their staff, and for the good of their constituents, who are dumb and naive, they will defer till the proper time.

Yeah, right!

Comment by Justice Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 1:57 pm
It’s kind of funny that the Tribune rails against financial mismanagement. How are the Trib’s books looking these days?

Comment by nice kid Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 2:30 pm
If the Republicans try to cut $12B worth of services, what kind of shape does everyone think the state will be in? Quinn is being realistic about what needs to be done, while the GOP are back to their old song-and-dance. Trust me, you’ll end up paying in the end. Maybe not on your tax bill, but you’ll feel it. School quality down so you’ll have to send your kid to private. CTA service cut, so commuting costs more. The city’s homeless population soared after Reagan cut funding to mental institutions. These are *real* costs. No one wants to hear it, but Quinn is saying it–gotta raise more revenue somehow. Deal with it.

Comment by MarkMac74 Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 2:32 pm
The posts on here have strayed from the QOD,in fact, they resemble the telephone game.
No tax increase after the primary, no matter who wins it, voters will not support those that passed one.

Comment by really? Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 2:50 pm
If Quinn took just half of PalosParkBob’s 12.50 post suggestions and implemented them, Illinois would be on the road to recovery. Give him a “75 Day Contract” Pat, sounds like he understands your situation.

Comment by Louis Howe Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 2:54 pm
No, no ,no

Comment by Just the basics Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 3:18 pm
PP Bob - You actually think there is a way out of the state’s financial situation other than a tax increase? I think Rich has shown numerous times that the state cannot cut their way out of this deficit.

I happen to be one of those who take more than I give. I work for a wage less than what I would get in the private sector. I make my insurance premium payments but have to fend off the collectors because those dollars are used elsewhere and my claims are not being paid. I have paid into the pension system for 35 years and evidently subsidized numerous projects for the benefit of all taxpayers because the money was not going to the pension system. When all of that was going on no one complained because they were all benefitting from the borrowing that was being done against my retirement. I went five years with not one raise so I actually lost money due to inflation. Now that it is time to pay the piper all of a sudden it is the state employee who is the fall guy because he/she just wants what is fairly theirs. Also as hard as it is to believe I also pay taxes.

It is said we get what we deserve and I guess that applies to the position taxpayers find themselves in now. Deep down everyone of us knew that the fiscal shennanigans that have been the modus operendi of the GA and the Administration for the last two decades were not good fiscal policy but as long as no one raised taxes to pay for all we were promised we were okay with it. So the MJM’s, the Thompson’s, the Phillip’s, and all of the other pay for it later folks did waht they wanted and we all said okay. Now it is time to bite the bullet and raise taxes before there is nothing left to save.
Even if he wins the primary Quinn will not raise the taxes. This is another in the long line of Quinn’s If I get my chance I will do what I say! (unless I later realize I might be better off not doing it then I won’t) So he lends no vote of confidence for the legislators. I do not believe MJM will let a tax increase go through unless Repubs are on board and no Repubs will lend support as they want the Dems to take the heat. MJM is still haunted by the backlash at the polls in the 90’s. And he would rather be a Captain of a sunk ship than a First Mate on a battered but seaworthy vessel.
The Repubs will not support a tax increase unless they can blame someone else. So everyone will sit back and watch the train wreck rather than throw a switch and prevent it.

The only way a tax increase will go through is if each member of the GA had to take the same 15% cut in their individual budgets as all the other state agencies will be asked to take and if the GA pension and insurance package is threatened as the rank and file’s are.

Comment by Irish Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 3:18 pm
I doubt that the Dems will ram through a tax hike even if Quinn wins, given the proximity of the general.
The blurb itself is more interesting, though. Quinn is saying, essentially, that the primary is a referendum on his 50% tax rate hike. Is this wise? Hynes evidently believes that attacking that tax hike is a political winner, and this gives him more to work with.
Also, Quinn’s comments about pension benefits, while admirable, might be better saved until after Feb. 2.
For Quinn to say “we will deal with revenue” is hardly sufficient. Almost all Dems agree that a revenue increase is needed; the question is how. Hynes has a plan that reflects economic reality — the middle and lower classes have stagnated over the past 30 years while the rich have prospered. Quinn’s tax hike socks it to those who are struggling. And would the 50% rate hike be permanent or temporary? Quinn has derided Hynes as a Johnny-come-lately to a graduated income tax, but is Quinn willing to push for it if he’s elected?
Quinn’s tax message is rather muddled, while Hynes seems to have a clear plan, though a challenge to implement.

Comment by Rambler Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 3:23 pm
Tax hikes without HB174 provisions for property taxrelief and per pupil increase will not fly with voters HB 174 Now and before was and remains the best bet to get past this economic nitemare. But since MM can diss the feds. over campaign caps, what makes anyone believe unles its his way or the highway…oh wait the highways have potholes due to NO CONSTRUCTION $$$$

Comment by some people call me "Maurice" Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 3:27 pm
Her track record up until she quit suggests that “inept” is more than fair. In fact, I’d say it’s generous.

That is a flat out lie. Ask the Democrats in her state what they thought of her before he was picked by as a running mate, and they would have told you she was an excellent bipartisan governor that got more done in two years than previous governors got done in a full term.

One might quibble over the length of her experience in office, but there is no doubt of her accomplishments.

This Democrat doesn’t like hearing lies about anyone just because they are Republican. Palin was an excellent governor.

Find another excuse not to vote for her.

Comment by VanillaMan Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 3:29 pm
Yes, after the primary there would, and SHOULD, be an income tax hike. Look, I don’t like paying taxes any more than the next person, but jeez, the state has trimmed so many employees over the past 5 years (at least front line) that there hardly is anyone left.

There are enough safe seats in both houses to have it passed on Dem votes alone. Then the targets who vote no can campaign on how they “stood up to their own party and voted no”.

Comment by this old hack Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 3:53 pm
–If Ryan or Dillard gets elected, taxes will be a simple “Nixon goes to China” moment, just as it was for previous Illinois GOP governors.–

That’s almost like Kerouac. Is that in code? Can anyone translate?

Seriously, I know the primary is getting closer, but some should hit the return button on their posts. No one’s offering extra credit here.

Comment by wordslinger Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 3:59 pm
No, I don’t think they will. They will all be lookign next at the general election and besides the public has not really been made to hurt yet. The state budget debacle is still largely an abstraction to the guy on the street. Furlough some over-paid state employees and college profs? So what? Most people really don’t see a problem because they haven’t been made to bleed, and until they do the legislature’s safest political course is to pretend the problem doesn’t exist.

Comment by Skirmisher Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 4:22 pm
If you don’t understand the “Nixon goes to China” reference, I guess you should be glad that Vanillaman didn’t refer to Disraeli’s “Tory Liberalism” instead.

Comment by Anon Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 4:25 pm
vanillaman -

you and bill are drinking the same koolaid, just out of different glasses.

i think quinn’s deluded if he thinks there’s going to be a tax hike passed this spring.

It makes me very worried for his campaign. What, exactly, is he going to propose to the general assembly in his budget address next week?

The same tax hike he couldn’t pass last year, or an even bigger one?

They say its a mark of insanity to keep doing the same thing over-and-over again. I like Pat Quinn, but if he is expecting a different outcome via the same approach this year, he’s delusional.

Introduce a Doomsday budget next week, blame it on the Scarecrow (brainless), Tin Man (heartless), and Lion (cowardly)…and then watch as the Republicans swallow their tongues when you propose:

- ending the suburban hold harmless for schools;
- eliminating special education grants;
- closing Western, Eastern, Northern, and ISU;
- closing all corporate tax expenditures;
- eliminating road funding for all projects in GOP districts;
- Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

Comment by Anonymous Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 4:36 pm
PPB, why would we need or want a special tax to pay off bonds?

Comment by steve schnorf Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 5:41 pm
VanillaMan,

Calm down my friend. It’s an opinion not a lie. It helps if you understand the difference.

Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 6:30 pm
No, I don’t believe the GA will pass an income tax increase in March. The votes are not there.

Comment by Emily Booth Monday, Jan 11, 10 @ 6:47 pm
Steve Schnorf:

I believe we need a focused way of dealing with debt other than a revolving “charge account”.

If we make a permanent income tax increase, it’s a virtual certainty that nothing will be reformed and little of the irresponsible spending practices would be changed.

Steve, I’m sure you’re familiar with the way funding and working cash bonds are financed in public schools.

Once the board ok’s the bond sale, the repayment of those bonds is financed through real estate taxes for the specific purpose of bond repayment, and the taxes for those bonds ends after they’re repaid.

I believe that all such bonds should only be able to be sold through binding referendum rather than 4 out of 7 board members voting for it, but that’s another issue.

This is also the case for school and municipal construction bonds.

I believe the best approach to deal with this is to prioritize NECESSARY and SMART spending, giving priority to low cost programs such as the largely minimum wage home health care programs, assistance to the truly poor, education funding for the DESERVING poor districts that give fair, not exhorbitant, salaries and benefits to staff, and funds to repair state controlled roads and bridges. The latter should be adequately funded from motor fuel, license and fuel sales taxes.

After downsizing entitlement, pension, and discretionary spending through means such as I previously described and other economies, we still need to deal with debt and unfunded liabilites even after public pensions have been fairly reformed for both the short and long term.

Once we have sustainable budgeting in place,and safeguards to minimize the chances of the current excesses from happening again are implemented, we need to ante up to clean up the existing debt, otherwise the borrowing, spending expansion, cutting and taxing circle will never end.

Steve, I know you’re probably the most knowledgeable person concerning state finance on this board.

Is there any Illinois constitutional prohibition from special state tax levies to pay off bonds as is allowed for other Illinois governments?

I think this approach is the only chance we have to become financially stable again.

Permanently increasing income taxes will simply allow Springfield to AVOID implementing necessary reform and changing the way we do business, IMHO.

A one time reprieve, after serious reforms as I previously described, is as much as I would trust Springfield to have.

I know the political difficulties involved, but from a financial management perspective I think it’s the only way out of this mess.

Comment by PalosParkBob Tuesday, Jan 12, 10 @ 12:20 am
PPB, the state doesn’t (for all practical purposes) use the “working cash bond” stuff. The state does cash-flow borrow short-term, either thru the end of a fiscal year, or for 12 months, depending on the type of borrowing. An exception would be the recent 5 year pension obligation note.

More likely you are talking about long term bonds. At any given point in time the state has legislatively set limits on long term borrowing, and that authority, once used, expires and doesn’t recur when the debt is paid off. During the duration of an issue, the state can re-finance if interest rates make it advantageous. The refinancing can’t extend beyond the original period of indebtedness.: e.g., a 30 year issue refinanced after 20 years can only be refinanced for 10 years.

On all the state’s long term debt, either the full faith and credit of the state, or some specific piece of revenue (for example, in the case of Build Illinois bonds, a percentage of sales tax revenue)is pledged toward repayment.

One possible use of a mechanism like you suggest could be the repayment of what I have come to think of as the state’s off-the-books debt; the growing backlog of bills we have incurred but not repaid. Some sort of relatively short term borrowing to pay off that debt with a new dedicated revenue source would let us get back to even, where, with discipline, we could theoretically start afresh (apart from the fact that our recurring revenues won’t pay our recurring expenses, so we would very quickly be right back in the same old hole).

Comment by steve schnorf Tuesday, Jan 12, 10 @ 12:42 am
Thanks for the info, Steve.

I agree with you that unless we cut the recurring expenses, the financial “clean up” won’t make much difference.

If I understand you correctly, the state can create a dedicated revenue stream, either through fees or temporary income tax,to repay bonds which would be sold to get current on payments. liabilites, and debt.

I believe this is the only “carrot” that should be offered in return for extensive fiscal reform to pare operating expenses to annual revenue levels.

I strongly believe a permanent income tax increase will only raise the ceiling for overspending and prevent necessary reform, since there would then be no incentive for Springfield to solve the spending problems and become more prudent with a permanent new revenue stream.

I’ve seen this same scenario played out many times in school districts that raise taxes.

They first create a financial “crisis” by givng raises and benefit increases far in excess or revenue increases and inflation, borrow to their limit, then push for a referendum.

Once a refendum passes “for the children” the board and unions continue to plunder the students’ resources by giving excessive raises and bloating administrative and non-certified hiring.

Between five and seven years later, the districts find themselves in “crisis” once again because they grew expenses faster than revenues.

Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

The trick is finding a mechanism to give the state breathing room for fiscal reform, and find ways to make it very difficult to increase spending faster than current tax revenue growth.

I think the “bond repayment tax” after serious and deep reform is the most effective way of doing that.

The two needs we have are keeping the essential services going and getting vendors supplying essential services current and restoring a high credit rating for the state through living within our means.

If there’s a better way of accomplishing this besides what I’ve proposed, I’d love to hear it.

Comment by PalosParkBob Tuesday, Jan 12, 10 @ 7:39 am
Calm down my friend. It’s an opinion not a lie. It helps if you understand the difference.

Then your lie is based on bad opinion.
Try reading “Sarah Takes On Big Oil” by the publisher and executive editor of Petroleum News an independent news-driven weekly. These authors have no political agenda, and they simply report the facts regarding how then-governor Palin was able to resolve Alaska’s 30 year long oil issues.

Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Jan 12, 10 @ 9:23 am
Seriously VM,

Buy a dictionary. Then re-read what I’ve posted and look up the big words if you don’t know what they mean.

Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Jan 12, 10 @ 11:22 am