Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

The Harris appointment will pay political dividends

Posted in:

Illinois

* One very practical reason for bipartisanship means the majority party has “political cover” for doing certain things. That could partially explain why former Rep. David Harris (R-Arlington Heights) was named the new director of the Illinois Department of Revenue by JB Pritzker…

Harris also said that unlike his GOP colleagues in the House, he didn’t sign on to a resolution opposed to a graduated income tax. Moving the state to such a system was a key campaign issue for Pritzker, who says the rich would pay more and those in the middle class and “striving to get there” would pay less.

Rauner and many Republicans said most people would pay more, and Pritzker hasn’t revealed proposed graduated tax rates, saying he wants to work with lawmakers on brackets.

“I believe that the graduated income tax is a question of fairness,” Harris said.

The Department of Revenue, of course, is the perfect spot for a Republican who supports the concept of a graduated income tax. He’ll likely be called upon about the constitutional amendment when it’s eventually taken up by the General Assembly.

* Speaking of the graduated income tax, here’s the SJ-R editorial board…

This newspaper editorial board did not endorse Pritzker, largely because of unease over his unwillingness to share specifics about major initiatives, like his plan for a progressive income tax and how he would pay for the many initiatives he wanted to pursue. We’re still wanting to hear those details, hopefully soon after he takes office, perhaps in his budget address.

As you know, I tried and tried and tried to get those details out of him during the campaign. His response always was that he wanted to wait and negotiate details with the General Assembly and other stakeholders. So, I do not expect him to preempt that process by showing his full hand during the February budget address.

Besides, that budget address which will cover this fiscal year (2019) and next fiscal year (2020). The constitutional amendment won’t go before voters until November of 2020, which will be in Fiscal Year 2021.

* Meanwhile, Director-designate Harris has Pritzker’s back in other ways, too…

“A lot of the Republicans have said, ’Well, Speaker (Michael) Madigan is going to dictate to him, or (Senate) President (John) Cullerton is going to dictate to him,” Harris said. “I don’t think anybody is going to dictate to anybody else. … He’s going to listen, …. but he’s not going to be dictated to, and, at the same time, he’s not going to try to dictate to them — which (is) maybe what our incumbent has tried to do.”

posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 10:54 am

Comments

I never expected specifics in the campaign. But now is the time to govern.

Harris and his Gov staff contact have a mission this year to work on the enabling legislation to support the proposed amendment. No, not to pass it (at least this year). To provide a document to help sell the amendment to the GA and the people voting on it.

Comment by Norseman Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 11:02 am
With Director-Designate Harris all day. All day and the tomorrows too.

This appointment gives me great hope that the Pritzker Administration sees and lives up to bipartisan governing when the overwhelming numbers suggest there is no need for such governing.

Looking forward to seeing, hearing and analyzing this administration and moves like this are favorable to making Illinois better.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 11:04 am
Republicans can support higher taxes and shape them or say “No way.” and be irrelevant. The state needs additional revenue. That means someone must pay more taxes.

Comment by Last Bull Moose Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 11:09 am
Very pleased about this and hope Rep. Harris will bring a balance that will result in fair tax rates, should a progressive income tax make it to the GA floor and then to the ballot.

Comment by Grandson of Man Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 11:11 am
I didn’t have a problem with no specifics on a graduated income tax. Obviously, it’s a long-term initiative that will require a lot of GA and citizen buy-in; rates could not be dictated by a candidate or a governor.

The concept itself was risky enough for a general election campaign.

Comment by wordslinger Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 11:12 am
I saw the title and thought that it was referring to Greg Harris not David Harris. It applies in both instances.

Comment by Langhorne Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 11:23 am
When Harris agreed to the last tax increase, he said on the house floor it was because Madigan promised pro-growth reforms, and he was willing to take Madigan on his word. Where are they?

Comment by Driveby Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 11:37 am
“I believe that the graduated income tax is a question of fairness”

If it was a question of fairness, a certain type of income would be taxable.

Comment by City Zen Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 11:43 am
CZ, are you objecting to only a partial victory like Rauner would, or just using an opportunity to criticize that they are not doing the difficult part of it when you really oppose the whole thing?

Comment by Jibba Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 12:14 pm
Jibba - You understand the concept of fairness, no?

You can believe a graduated income tax is the right thing to do, but in its current proposed state, is inherently unfair.

Comment by City Zen Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 12:34 pm
I have a tremendous amount of respect for Rep. Harris, but I adamantly oppose legislators being appointed into Director roles. Those should be reserved for people with education, background, experience, and credentials in the area of expertise that they will be overseeing. If there’s a legislator that has those 4 things, then fine, put them in the spot. But, to appoint legislators because they have experience with the deal-making process, chaired the committee with oversight of the agency, or for just plain political reasons is not the best thing for the State of Illinois.

Comment by Anon Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 12:36 pm
It’s great to see a Republican in favor of tax fairness. I’m hoping almost against hope that some other Republicans join in and help craft an excellent progressive income tax plan. I would love to see some join in.

But unfortunately Republicans are not change people. We can’t continue with the status quo. We have to right-size the tax code. Why should the rest of us continue carrying the fiscal burdens of the wealthiest in this state?

Comment by Grandson of Man Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 12:37 pm
CZ, It is arguing dishonestly to nitpick about not taxing pensions when you don’t want any graduated tax at all. Or would you support it if pensions were included? Asking for a friend.

Comment by Jibba Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 12:41 pm
My hope is we give JB a fair start. He seems to come in not as snarky as Rauner, but I wish him the best because we need it. I do think there needs to be some fiscal realities here in Illinois. Maybe, it won’t be as personal with JB? Here’s to hope!

Comment by Echo The Bunnyman Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 12:54 pm
I generally agree with Anon. It will be a steep learning curve for Harris as IDOR is probably one of the most “technical” agencies. But I feel he can absolutely do the job because of one factor.
He’s been a flag officer.
That’s what makes me hopeful.
But he’s going to have to pick his team
very very carefully.
He’s going to have to root out the Raunerites
who would throw wooden shoes into the machinery.
Find the technocrats
Beware the slick ones or the ones who avoid conflict.
But see, a general has seen these types before in the military.
That’s why I have faith that he’ll pick well.
and if he doesn’t. Well…..
The immense tasks and lifts assigned to IDOR
will not happen.

Comment by Honeybear Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 1:30 pm
== The concept itself was risky enough for a general election campaign.==

Not many candidates run on raising taxes. He would’ve gained nothing by giving specific rates and income brackets before the election. It’s doubtful the SJR would’ve endorsed him, for example. But he would’ve given grist for the GOP mill to attack him with.

Comment by anon2 Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 1:40 pm
**I adamantly oppose legislators being appointed into Director roles. Those should be reserved for people with education, background, experience, and credentials in the area of expertise that they will be overseeing. **

https://www.sj-r.com/news/20190112/bipartisan-duo-of-former-lawmakers-among-pritzker-cabinet-picks

“[David Harris] also served in a diplomatic post, as chief of staff for the Iraq Reconstruction Management Office, for just more than year starting in the summer of 2005. The office oversaw spending of about $21 billion that Congress appropriated for reconstruction of Iraq.”

Comment by SaulGoodman Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 2:46 pm
Aside from political dividends, David Harris is just a really smart, reasonable guy. He’s interested in making government work, not scoring political points. If JB fills his administration with folks that are open to reasonable suggestions and want to focus on the work of governing, then I will be a very happy person.

Comment by Montrose Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 2:47 pm
SaulGoodman - I really do respect Rep. Harris, but he can’t have learned much, having served “for just more than year starting in the summer of 2005.”

Comment by Anon Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 3:42 pm
So yeah, nice choice with D. Harris. But we know that IDOR is less about budget priorities and bi-partisan legitimacy. It’s way more about managing a bureaucracy with lots of internal HR/legal issues and public expectations on efficiency. We wish him all the success possible.

Comment by The Bashful Raconteur Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 3:50 pm
Applaud Pritzker crossing the aisle, but a tax professional (i.e., CPA) would have more credibility. Seems to me Harris will be beholden to JB.

Also agree with TBR above that IDOR is a cesspool for personnel, union, legal and a lot of other issues. I would still prefer a director who knows tax theory and practice.

Comment by justacitizen Monday, Jan 14, 19 @ 7:14 pm
Time to eliminate the most unfair aspect of the state Constitution, pension protection.

Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Jan 15, 19 @ 12:25 am