Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Mendoza’s July poll showed she had a 22-point lead
Next Post: Pritzker revenue need “guesstimate” revised to $10.7 billion
Posted in:
[I’ve moved the updates to their own post. Click here.]
* Part 1 is here. From JB Pritzker’s appearance on the Here and Now program…
On Rauner running ads saying residents may have to leave the state if Pritzker’s elected because he will raise taxes
“That’s just false. Like everything else with Gov. Rauner, he’s been an utter failure and now he’s lying. I put forward a plan to implement a fair tax in the state which would lower taxes for the middle class and those striving to get there, and would raise taxes on Bruce Rauner and people like him and me. It’s a fair tax system like the ones that exist in most states in the United States, and of course the federal government has a progressive income tax system as well.”
C’mon, dude. You’ve never put forward a tax plan. You haven’t even discussed an outline. It’s barely a vague concept. If you say you have a plan, then let’s see the plan. Otherwise, don’t say you have a plan. /rant
* Full interview…
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:09 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Mendoza’s July poll showed she had a 22-point lead
Next Post: Pritzker revenue need “guesstimate” revised to $10.7 billion
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
== /rant==
I could hear Rich facepalming over the sound of the WBEZ interview this afternoon.
Comment by DarkDante Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:11 pm
“like the ones that exist in most states in the United States”
What about the provinces?
Comment by City Zen Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:12 pm
It is “a plan to implement a fair tax”. He’s said he’ll work with the legislature to determine what the specific rates are, within the framework of the principles that it “lower taxes for the middle class and those striving to get there” and “raise raise taxes on Bruce Rauner and people like him and me”.
That is the plan Pritzker has articulated very clearly and repeatedly. You can want more detail, but you can’t say it’s not his plan, or stop him from saying it.
(By the way, I think as a matter of public policy, it would be irresponsible for him to say anything more at this point. You want the governor to have principles and to work with lawmakers on the fine points of putting those principles into action.)
Comment by Reality Check Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:14 pm
===You haven’t even discussed an outline. It’s barely a vague concept. If you say you have a plan, then let’s see the plan. Otherwise, don’t say you have a plan.===
Ugh. Exactly.
They are terrible at messaging.
Yes… Rauner failed.
Ya can’t tell people you have something, when you have nothing.
To reiterate…
This is a textbook unforced error.
You never make a policy thought that requires exacting guidelines.
Mileage tax… exacting… how much a mile.
Progressive tax… exacting… what are the parameters.
These are boxed policy items that force the messaging to be far more exacting than a campaign ever wants to be.
“Shake up” and “Bring back”… versus… proposing a progressive income tax…
Unforced errors, fundamental mistakes where you are never off the hook.
Do better.
Get a plan, don’t get a plan, but don’t force me to watch bad politics at play. Can’t stand that.
This is so bad, I’d rather watch bad baseball… k… it’s that bad.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:19 pm
So, to Pritzker floating a suggestion that we should consider a mileage tax (and suggesting a trial run) is not a “proposal.” But floating the idea of a “fair tax” without details is a “plan” and a “proposal”?
Comment by anon Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:19 pm
Look, if Rauner can say JB has proposed a car tax, JB can say he’s put forward a “plan”. I don’t make the rules.
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:20 pm
We know JB won’t talk about his plan, but will Madigan? He is eluding to a property tax cut that Madigan has thwarted for decades.
Has anyone asked Madigan what he thinks about JB’s property tax cut plan?
Let’s face it, if Madigan is not in the loop, we are just trading one Billionaire who has no clue how to deal with Madigan for another.
Comment by the Patriot Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:22 pm
JP is using the same playbook that got Rauner elected 4 years ago.
Comment by Person 8 Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:22 pm
Rauner didn’t have a plan when he ran. He didn’t have one when he was elected. If he did, it’s not something he shared publicly, and it has turned out to hurt the state. I hope Pritzker doesn’t do the same. Illinois needs real leadership now, more than ever.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:24 pm
===JB is using the same playbook that got Rauner elected 4 years ago.===
Right up to the exacting policy things that they boxed Pritzker into.
Does any of this sound like “shake up” or “bring back” policies?
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:25 pm
JB’s entire campaign is basically ‘Raunner sucks’ which isn’t a bad approach.
However, a rich guy without government experience spending a lot of money and spreading it around his party to get elected, who has a vague plan didn’t work out so great before.
I am not following that close is anyone using the…
‘Call Bob Smith and ask if supports JBs plan to increase income taxes and ask him to explain to you how much someone has to make before they pay more’ in legislative races.
Seems like trying to get legislative candidates on the record if they are going to vote for a constitutional amendment and what they think the tiers should be wouldn’t be a bad idea poliically (or use their evasion against them)
Comment by OneMan Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:25 pm
Glad to hear the only people targeted by JB for higher tax rates have over 100 million dollars in assets, like Governor Rauner and him.
Comment by Lucky Pierre Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:26 pm
This is the one legitimate issue that will help to make Rauner competitive to the very end - and it is the one issue that resonates with every Illinois taxpayer. And Rauner is winning this messaging battle.
Hoping voters will not be fooled again with the say nothing polemics and promises that Rauner ran on 4 years ago.
This is the only issue Rauner can run on and is only an issue because JB has not forcefully outlined his plan. Unless he has a plan he will continue to be called out on this and the weak response from JB is doing nothing to move those flexible and undecided voters to his side.
Put the specifics of your plan out now or stop complaining when you are getting these hit pieces. And it is not helping any down ballot candidates either.
Comment by illini Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:29 pm
===a rich guy without government experience spending a lot of money and spreading it around his party to get elected, who has a vague plan didn’t work out so great before.===
The irony that DPI got so eagerly behind Pritzker is stunning.
Comment by People Over Parties Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:33 pm
A goal without a plan is just a wish. A plan without data is is just politics. As usual.
Comment by BlueDogDem Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:34 pm
@Willy IMO you are just fundamentally wrong about this. Pritzker’s approach on this issue is the opposite of “terrible messaging” and “bad politics”. It is effective messaging and winning politics. If we saw the polling on the specific concepts and phrases, that would be clear.
The criticism from some here is that it’s not specific enough on policy. I have yet to see a candidate doomed by lack of specifics on policy. As Rich often says, voters don’t do nuance.
There is plenty of time for the policy debate when the time for policy-making arrives. Right now it’s campaign season, which is about values, and Pritzker’s values are crystal clear: Make rich people pay more and give middle class folks pay less. I strongly believe those values are popular (ie good messaging, good politics).
Comment by Reality Check Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:37 pm
Unless and until Pritzker has polling that says not putting out details on his progressive tax “plan” is hurting him, why would he? I get folks would like to see specifics to analyze, but, as has been said before, there is just no upside to it for Pritzker.
If he say the income tax rate will go down by 1% for ll folks making under $300,000 and up by 3% for all folks making more and that change will result in $2 billion in new revenue (all made up numbers of course), there will be a ton of Rauner ads saying “JB wants to raise Illinois taxes by $2 billion (exclamation point, exclamation point, exclamation point)” It won’t matter if he is lowering taxes for the majority of people. They will both assume they aren’t the ones getting the cut and focus on taxes going up.
I think that if JB is smart, he sticks with his current talking points through November.
Comment by Montrose Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:39 pm
===If we take Pritzker at his word, my guess was too low by maybe $5 billion. So my earlier guesstimate of $5.7 billion for new net revenue needs should be revised upward to $10.7 billion.===
Ok.
Now message that.
Either you’re talented enough to show value for those billions you had Rich measure for you, or you’re not and you never should’ve got yourselves into these policy with exacting guidelines, with no plan to make your own case.
Why do I like watching Abdon and his crew go about their business?
With Mendoza, she’s out there, she’ll discuss a policy, and her crew, they break it down, in the best pithy way, and attach the politics to it, and backstop Mendoza, giving real credibility,
This stuff from Pritzker… isn’t that.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:41 pm
Tell me about Rauner’s new capital bill and the way he pays for it?
The Gov and JB are running around both talking about spending more than is taken in. Truthfully neither gets taken to task except here because it is too long of a narrative to play out.
How are you going to increase funding JB? How are going to do a massive capital bill Governor? Both want increased funding for Higher Ed, neither has proposed how to do it?
Election theatrics and demanding answers 55 days outs not going to get any new traction.
Most Chicagoland reporters have started going with the Mayor’s race- who’s in, who’s out, who’s passing petitions, what type of money has been raised etc etc. The wind is out of this race sail.
Comment by DuPage Bard Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:42 pm
Reality. Because the term “progressive income tax” is so broad, it won’t surprise me a bit if taxes are increased down to the $50k/ yr level. Good messaging then?
Comment by BlueDogDem Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:42 pm
Treating these proposals seriously, what rate would be needed long term? A couple years ago Madigan proposed a 3% surcharge on income over $1 million. Lang said it would reap $1.9 billion (which seems high). If right, Pritzker would need to tax more than 17% of income over $1 million to raise an additional $10.7 billion. (Likely considerably higher to offset the removal of income from Illinois). Or he has to raise taxes on people well under $1 million.
Comment by #1 anon Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:43 pm
Right now it’s campaign season, which is about values, and Pritzker’s values are crystal clear: Make rich people pay more and give middle class folks pay less. I strongly believe those values are popular (ie good messaging, good politics).
How is this for a Reality Check
And Cayman Island stashing, toilet removing JB’s crystal clear on his personal values he has practiced for decades, pay as little as possible.
Actually campaign season should be about articulating what is needed to fix our state and attract more businesses to expand here and stop the population exodus
Comment by Lucky Pierre Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:43 pm
===you are just fundamentally wrong about this. Pritzker’s approach on this issue is the opposite of “terrible messaging” and “bad politics”. It is effective messaging and winning politics. If we saw the polling on the specific concepts and phrases, that would be clear.===
Nope. I’m not. Not conceding this point.
Again.., here’s why.
This is a textbook unforced error.
You never make a policy thought that requires exacting guidelines.
Mileage tax… exacting… how much a mile.
Progressive tax… exacting… what are the parameters.
These are boxed policy items that force the messaging to be far more exacting than a campaign ever wants to be.
===Make rich people pay more and give middle class folks pay less. I strongly believe those values are popular (ie good messaging, good politics).===
That is an exacting policy.
How much, who is rich, what will be the numbers.
I’m not saying Pritzker has a plan… Pritzker is… did you ignore that?
Ya can’t say you have a plan… with no plan.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:45 pm
===I have yet to see a candidate doomed by lack of specifics on policy.===
The only thing that gets doomed, then, is the state. People here should demand the specifics of someone who wants to run a state that has been in a lousy situation for decades. It’s a familliar game Pritzker is playing, and we’re undoubetly worse off for it.
Comment by People Over Parties Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:46 pm
I find it hard to believe that this state will ever pass a constitutional amendment to allow a progressive income tax. However I am sure if one ever passes the real estate taxes will not go down at least in the collar counties which will probably have some sort of way to still fund the schools
Comment by DuPage Saint Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:48 pm
@Willy see my first post on this subject, 2:14 p.m.
@Pierre, Pritzker is clearly saying that what’s needed to fix our state, grow jobs, raise wages etc is to invest in our schools and universities, shore up our safety net, pay our bills, reduce property taxes - all things Rauner has failed to do. And he adds, honestly, part of being able to do that is instituting a fair tax system that requires the rich to pay more, the middle class pays less.
Comment by Reality Check Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:52 pm
I’m frustrated more by politicians that go on about high property taxes, but never acknowledge this is how we fund our schools. Pritzker is right on this point. If you want to have a conversation about property taxes you have to talk about school funding.
Comment by Highland, IL Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:58 pm
@illini, dream on if you think this race is going to be within several percentage points at the end.
I’m not claiming to be the math expert on here but I know that just raising taxes on millionaires won’t provide enough revenue. There are other ideas that have been discussed over the years such as a consumer tax on certain services that will have to be looked at.
At least JB seems serious about investing in the state and paying down our bills. That’s going to take money though.
Comment by The Dude Abides Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 2:59 pm
What if Pritzker put a detailed plan out, but instead of rates and numbers, it just said “Working Together” and came up balanced? Would that be OK?
I get your frustration. I really do. Rauner didn’t just campaign in vague terms, he governed in them, although obviously “governed” is too strong a term for what Rauner did.
Keep asking. Maybe you’ll get some specifics from him. But please also ask Governor Rauner for specifics of how he expects to lower Illinois’ current income taxes.
Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 3:02 pm
===It is “a plan to implement a fair tax”. He’s said he’ll work with the legislature to determine what the specific rates are, within the framework of the principles that it “lower taxes for the middle class and those striving to get there” and “raise raise taxes on Bruce Rauner and people like him and me”.===
This is not a plan.
Not in the neighborhood, of the parking lot, of the bill park of a plan.
It’s Seinfeld.
“The plan about nothing”
Plus, you pointing me to that “non-plan plan”
This “non-plan plan” can’t even happen… until 2020.
You want to tell Pritzker or should I?
Fundamentals.
Boxing yourself into exacting parameters for policy… “not great”
How is Pritzker going to pay for all this if the progressive income tax can happen in 2020 at the earliest?
No. I’m not conceding this.
Respectfully.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 3:05 pm
For those just voting their pocketbook, Rauners attacks are effective. Rainer can’t cut spending, but Pritzker can expand it.
I live in DuPage County, which is already a large net contributor to the state. Our schools get little state money now. I doubt we would have a net gain under the new plan.
A graduated income tax will hit DuPage County particularly hard. It costs more to live here than in Ford County and wages are higher. Higher wages means more taxable income.
I despise Rainer. Now I worry if I can afford Pritzker.
Comment by Last Bull Moose Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 3:08 pm
- 47th Ward -
You’ve done the best trying to work this for Pritzker.
They have to STOP saying they have a plan.
They don’t. Otherwise they’d also show how all these monies fit into Pritzker spending Rich Miller had to measure too.
Ugh.
Be well, - 47th Ward -
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 3:10 pm
===“Working Together” and came up balanced? Would that be OK?===
No, it wouldn’t and it wasn’t when Rauner did it. Everybody but, as I recall, the Tribune editorial board piled on him for that. Rightly so.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 3:11 pm
Rauner not Rainer. Autocorrect
Comment by Last Bull Moose Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 3:11 pm
===Now I worry if I can afford Pritzker.===
You may never know.
They decided to say they have a plan (Ron Howard Narrating: They dont.) in which exacting parameters are not only omitted, it can’t even happen until 2020…
Why say you have a plan… in which that plan requires exacting parameters?
You don’t.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 3:13 pm
JB needs to make the case that punishing successful small businesses with higher taxes will incentivize them to create more jobs here so that the population exodus will not continue..
Moving from lower property taxes to higher income taxes won’t make a lick of difference if the burden is the same, much less higher as he proposes.
What he won’t say is that Government must consolidate and that the pensions are unsustainable.
Illinois can’t afford to have so many overlapping units of government.
Comment by Lucky Pierre Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 3:13 pm
===won’t make a lick of difference if the burden is the same===
Actually it will because property taxes aren’t based on the ability to pay.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 3:16 pm
the debate happening here is not a debate happening among voters. Voters are either for the progressive tax for the reasons articulated by Pritzker, or they’re against it because they believe the state needs to “live within its means.” All the details y’all are arguing about are so far beyond the realm of what people are talking about, it’s kinda shocking tbh. Reality Check is right
Comment by SWIL Voter Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 3:19 pm
===All the details y’all are arguing about are so far beyond the realm of what people are talking about===
So?
This is not a blog for everyday voters. People who patronize my commenters by saying they should dumb it down are the goofiest people ever. It’s not my nor my commenters’ responsibilities to just sit back and take whatever drivel any politician spews. It’s our responsibility to challenge. That’s what civil society is about. What you’re arguing for is fake news and docility. So, you can just bug right off.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 3:22 pm
==Pritzker is clearly saying that what’s needed to fix our state, grow jobs, raise wages etc is to invest in our schools and universities, shore up our safety net, pay our bills, reduce property taxes==
lol. Name a politician, any politician, anywhere who doesn’t sing this identical song to get elected. Who can possibly argue against these broad ideas? But they remain vague, un-fleshed out ideas. JB is supposed to be better, unique, smarter, more inspirational, etc. Why then does he increasingly seems to be a passive observer in his own campaign?
Comment by Responsa Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 3:23 pm
Can Pritzker’s plan without a “detailed” plan be good messaging? The lefty people I know want to hear this progressive taxation stuff, they want schools to be state funded. These are words to buy votes. They don’t have to be promises. In fact if you believe Mr. Madigan with short stop any action regarding the state funding schools they could also be deliberately misleading. Now you see me now you don’t I’m there and gone.
Comment by Matt Vernau Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 3:26 pm
No one was promised a debating society or a policy conference. It is a political campaign. Which if JB Pritzker wins on this basis, is going to give him a mandate to … wait for it … implement his plan for a fair tax system under which rich people pay more and the middle class pays less.
Comment by Reality Check Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 3:26 pm
Buzz word JB has no plan = MJM has not given him one yet.
Sad the State is in the financial state is and we have to consider these guys.
Comment by cannon649 Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 3:28 pm
==So?==
I’d say the general theme of many of the comments is that Pritzker risks alienating some important block of voters unless he describes his plan in great detail. He’s even being chastised for calling it a plan. There are commenters saying his messaging is unraveling. I’m just observing that such a conversation isn’t happening among the voters. My comment is directed at those folks exclusively.
I’m obviously interested in the details too, and I have my own doubts about JBs sincerity on this issue, but he’s not going to provide those details to be held accountable to unless the voters are demanding it, which they aren’t.
This is the era of big ideas. The details get hammered out later
Comment by SWIL Voter Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 3:30 pm
It’s a case study of politics, messaging, and wonkiness.
Why this infuriates me to no end…
The policy wonks that do the heavy lifts, or the math Rich continues to be required to do for the Pritzker Crew, they are the stop gap to the politics in a campaign and save messaging from fundamental mistakes like this.
For the love of Pete…
One of the most important reasons the wonks in campaigns exist is so the candidate, and the campaign don’t say they have a plan… when they don’t.
Y’all look foolish to the policies of the campaign, and it’s self inflicted.
A progressive income tax can’t happen until the earliest 2020
You have no exacting parameters.
You have costs needing funding, those numbers seemingly aren’t changing.
And here’s the rub… ready?
If it doesn’t matter to the Pritzker Crew to look at this honestly as the candidate says these things… what are they actually saying?
“We have a plan to win, we just pretend we have plans, without any plans at all”?
Huh?
Fundamental errors.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 3:33 pm
When Rauner said “Shake Up Springfield…”, did he provide specifics? JB says he’ll work to implement a progressive income tax in Illinois that will lower taxes on the middle class, and raise them on people making higher incomes. That’s infinitely more specific than Rauner’s mantra was. Expect the same amount of additional specifics you got from Rauner because JB knows that additional specifics now will only be used as fodder for additional Rauner lies, and it serves no purpose since the details will need to be worked out by, get this, actually working with the legislature, instead of demonizing them, and blaming them for all of Illinois ills when there’s more than enough blame to be shared by all branches of government and both parties.
Comment by PublicServant Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 3:34 pm
===There are commenters saying his messaging is unraveling. I’m just observing that such a conversation isn’t happening among the voters. My comment is directed at those folks exclusively.===
Speaking for voters, are you?
If it’s no big deal, and it’s just politics, or it doesn’t matter, or…
Wonder why there is no plan. Why do you think? You say it’s the time of big ideas. Maybe it’s because they have no plan, so they can’t message a plan they don’t have.
If Pritzker can’t handle this, wait until he lets down voters when his progressive income tax is in limbo in 2021…
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 3:39 pm
–his plan for a fair tax system under which rich people pay more–
After his 2014 state return, I’ll be happy if he pays anything, for starters.
Comment by Ron Burgundy Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 3:43 pm
@ PublicServant - Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 3:34 pm:
That was a lovely essay. What you did not address, though, is the valid concern that nobody knows if JB or his staff really have any idea of the actual extent of the monetary problems and fiscal obligations that Illinois faces, or if he has realistically calculated the future costs of his new policy initiatives, or that he even understands how his “progressive tax plan” pipe dream could falter in the cold grey light of Illinois politics. Then what?
Comment by Responsa Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 4:00 pm
==Now I worry if I can afford Pritzker.==
“Can I afford Pritzker?”
That would be a very effective theme for a political ad. Very effective. Patricia Heaton as narrator.
Comment by City Zen Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 4:04 pm
I’m with 47th on this. Sure, it’s aggravating to say the least - but this is how elections are won these days and it seems Pritzker is sticking with his plan. So the question becomes what would we all prefer? Four years of a guy who offers nothing but vague outlines but at least acknowledges the reality that the state’s underfunding of schools is what drives our ridiculously high property taxes? Or four more years of total war from the guy who promises unicorns and rainbows if we just abolish all the unions and somehow convince voters in Madigan’s district to kick him out? For me, I’ve been lied to by Rauner far too many times and there are too many holes in his logic. I’ll take my chances with vague outline guy.
Comment by Lester Holt’s Mustache Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 4:06 pm
JB winning will magically flip 10 no votes on the graduated income tax in the GA to put the issue on the ballot in 2020?
Middle class people will pay less?
Show your work JB the voters demand substance on policy, not beatboxing nonsense and making promises on spending there is no way you can keep.
Comment by Lucky Pierre Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 4:34 pm
===the voters demand substance on policy===
Lol.
Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 5:04 pm
As I said yesterday - the 1996 Nobel recipient for economics contends that Pritzker raising taxes on the wealthy and reducing taxes on the non- wealthy will result in less revenue then is generated by the current flat tax. Look up James Mirrlees who died last week and read about the study he did in winning the Nobel Prize. Chances are he is smarter then JB
Comment by Sue Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 5:31 pm
“You have to vote for the bill before you can see what’s in it.”
Other than “What difference does it make, anyway?”, that was probably the quote that angered voters enough such that they voted for Trump. And the equivalent of this quote is the focal point of JB’s campaign?
C’mon, JB, you can do better than simply saying “Details will be worked out with the Legislature”. Obviously, the Legislature will be involved in the process. But what will your starting point in those negotiations be? As Governor, What will you be advocating for? If you can’t answer that, you don’t deserve to be Governor.
Comment by Stuntman Bob's Brother Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 6:37 pm
==So the question becomes what would we all prefer? Four years of a guy who offers nothing but vague outlines…==
What if those vague outlines cost you your entire savings for the year? Your deposit into your daughter’s college savings fund?
When offered vague parameters, folks should plan for the worst. Some will ride the blue wave. Some will drown. Many will be left to deal with the erosion.
Plan for the worst.
Comment by City Zen Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 6:41 pm
===JB winning will magically flip 10 no votes on the graduated income tax in the GA to put the issue on the ballot in 2020?===
Then i guess you can stop with all the “Pritzker is raising your income tax bit”
You says it yourself. It’s not happening, lol
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 6:53 pm
The graduated income tax is the one trick pony and the answer to almost everything according to JB. Other than a few commenters here and a few reporters, nobody much seems to want to talk about the length of time involved (years) and the process/difficulty in amending the IL Constitution, or the unliklihood of its solving Illinois’ financial problems even if it were to be enacted.
Comment by Responsa Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 7:10 pm
great comments. Exactly why I am less than enthusiastic about our potential new governor. Not enough ideas from JB about future growth in our state. New Taxes won’t make any politician popular.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Sep 11, 18 @ 7:41 pm