Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Through the looking glass?

Posted in:

Illinois

* I haven’t done any polling yet, but this may be smart local politics for a Sangamon County-area candidate…

Republican Illinois House candidate Mike Bell said Thursday he would consider keeping the Illinois income tax at its current level if the extra revenue is used to meet long-term obligations of public pension systems.

“I would look at extending or keeping the tax … that we have now if it would be used for the unfunded liability,” Bell said as he prepared to make his formal announcement entering the 96th House District race. “I would look at it.” […]

“I believe the bond we have with retirees should be kept, and I would not want any reduction for those. … That’s a sacred bond between pensioners, retirees and the government. They trusted the government to have that pension when they retired. Now they’re retired.

“Now future hires … that’s a different story.”

* House GOP Leader Jim Durkin was at the event…

Durkin said of Bell: “He’s a great Republican, great family man, and he also shares my vision for job creation in Illinois.”

* To which David Ormsby responded…

Huh?

Extending the Illinois income tax increase has, uh, rarely been part of the GOP job creation vision.

But, hey, things change.

Bell, vice president of the Edinburg School Board and, more important, an AFSCME member, is looking to challenge Freshman Democrat Sue Scherer of Decatur who is sponsoring legislation to repeal the income tax increase.

Illinois politics have just stepped through the looking glass, Alice.

Yep, and it’s a good thing. People don’t always have to follow a rigid party line. Bell obviously isn’t. Scherer is essentially following staff orders in order to not offend Republicans in her district, which makes her look out of touch with her base. This could be a heck of a race.

posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Oct 4, 13 @ 10:14 am

Comments

Too bad I don’t live in that district. This guy looks like he’s worth voting for.

Comment by Norseman Friday, Oct 4, 13 @ 10:19 am
Temporary = Permanent. Everyone except the most naive knew that. He’s just being honest that its permanent anyway.

Comment by RonOglesby Friday, Oct 4, 13 @ 10:23 am
It is rather surreal to see Quinn carrying the water for the Civvies and rating agences, while Downstate GOP legislators are holding the line on pension benefits.

Doesn’t fit the Pavlovian talking points.

Comment by wordslinger Friday, Oct 4, 13 @ 10:26 am
So, when has keeping true to your commitments been taken out of the GOP belief system? Olgivie instituted taxes when he knew they were needed. A dose of reality, no? He paid for that but likely knew it was a price he may have to pay. A dedicated civil servant.

Comment by dupage dan Friday, Oct 4, 13 @ 10:32 am
I have heard that some of the precinct committeepersons in Sangamon have told Scher that they are not going to help her. Who knows could just be rumor.

Comment by yepperdo Friday, Oct 4, 13 @ 10:37 am
=== So, when has keeping true to your commitments been taken out of the GOP belief system? ===

Dan, I’d like to know that as well. Keeping commitments was a belief of the GOP I used to believe in. Now it seems like the commitments are only to be kept if they were made to the one-percenters. Today’s GOP specializes in reneging on commitments to public workers.

Comment by Norseman Friday, Oct 4, 13 @ 10:43 am
I have actually heard Sangamon precinct committee persons say they are not going to help. She is not well liked in Sangamon County among a number of Dems.

Comment by WAK Friday, Oct 4, 13 @ 10:45 am
From the SJ-R article: “Sullivan called Bell ‘a candidate that knows the issues….’” Maybe someone (media?) should remind him that those ‘future hires’ that he wants to look at are already Tier II and have a much lower benefit package.

Comment by Anonymous Friday, Oct 4, 13 @ 11:12 am
That’s an interesting idea. Anyone know whether, and how much that would actually help alleviate the long-term obligation?

Comment by Northsider Friday, Oct 4, 13 @ 11:15 am
Is my guy Winston Taylor going to run in the Dem primary again? He almost beat her last time, 70 vote margin

Comment by Ravenswood Right Winger Friday, Oct 4, 13 @ 11:31 am
Speaking of sticking to commitments and principles, I wonder if states are required to adhere to general principles of the US Constitution, specifically the currently hot 14th amendment, section 4, which says: “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions, ……. shall not be questioned.”

Comment by cod Friday, Oct 4, 13 @ 11:44 am
Northsider @ 11:15 am wrote:

=== That’s an interesting idea. Anyone know whether, and how much that would actually help alleviate the long-term obligation? ===

I’m assuming you are talking about the idea of dedicating some income tax to the pension funds.

If the income tax “dedicated” to the pension funds was the 1.25% set to expire, that generates about $4.2B at FY12 collection levels. The problem you’ve got is that money (and more) is already being spent on the pension funds … so it isn’t “new” money and it will make zero difference. I agree with the sentiment of dedicating a revenue stream, but it’s going to take a higher tax rate (or different method like a progressive tax) to generate enough revenue to make a difference.

As I posted the other day, Illinois (FY12) is taking in about $35B from all revenue sources (personal income tax is a bit under $17B) and spending about $38B. Even with the various spending cuts, that gap has been consistent the last several years. The about $4B of income tax that is set to drop out would have the State (without adjusting for growth or inflation) taking in about $31B and still spending about $38B.

My guess is that under the flat rate income tax, just to get even, the rate needs to be about 6.50% and if we want to get ahead the State needs to look at a 7% - 8% rate.

Comment by RNUG Friday, Oct 4, 13 @ 12:18 pm
I don’t know Scherer, but Bell is a good guy. Scherer should ask her handlers what spending cuts she’s going to have to vote for given her current position on the tax, and then re-evaluate the orders they’re giving her

Comment by steve schnorf Friday, Oct 4, 13 @ 12:40 pm
It’s hard to believe today, but in 1990, Jim Edgar ran for governor advocating making permanent Big Jim’s temporary income tax hike. Hartigan opposed it.

Comment by reformer Friday, Oct 4, 13 @ 12:44 pm
@reformer

Wow! I love this 1990 Tribune editorial:

=== It`s too bad that the public debate in this race has focused almost exclusively on taxes, and that Hartigan has played to anti-tax forces that believe they can elect Walt Disney and spend four years in Fantasia. ===

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1990-10-14/news/9003260079_1_anti-tax-surcharge-on-state-income-voters

Comment by Bill White Friday, Oct 4, 13 @ 1:58 pm
=== Illinois politics have just stepped through the looking glass, Alice. ===

=== People don’t always have to follow a rigid party line. ===

This factor is at play on both sides of the race. Scherer is not necessarily a “pure” Democrat on every issue while Bell does not tow the “pure” Republican line on every issue. The same element is at work on both sides of this race to an extent.

It is not earth-shattering on the part of Bell or Scherer, despite the stereotype some apparently hold that Republicans cannot think for themselves.

Believe it or not, there is a whole crop of them, both Democrats and Republicans, out there. I expect we will soon begin seeing this with more frequency, not less.

Comment by Formerly Known As... Friday, Oct 4, 13 @ 3:04 pm
Apparently there is one GOP candidate who won’t go along, Norseman. Durkin likes him as well. Who knows, the new faces of the party of Lincoln?

Comment by dupage dan Friday, Oct 4, 13 @ 3:10 pm
I have yet to meet a Democrat in the district who has found any reason to be impressed or enthusiastic about Scherer. People think she’s a Madigan puppet who doesn’t stand up for the district. A district that heavily Democratic shouldn’t even be a close race. It may be lost because the party picked such a poor candidate.

Comment by Brass Doors Friday, Oct 4, 13 @ 3:11 pm
Dan, Durkin belongs to the darkside. He’s an aggressive advocate for pension reduction.

Comment by Norseman Friday, Oct 4, 13 @ 3:13 pm
@Norseman, it seems worth noting that Durkin still spoke positively of Bell, attended the event and is helping him raise money.

It’s a change in rhetoric and leadership by example. That matters in the larger picture.

And even though you may feel Durkin is a member of “the darkside” on pensions, his efforts may directly help add a vote to the “brightside” on that very issue.

Comment by Formerly Known As... Friday, Oct 4, 13 @ 3:39 pm