Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: This is most definitely not the first time, and it probably won’t be the last
Next Post: Question of the day
Posted in:
* You may or may not remember this Dan Hynes TV ad from 2009…
* Script…
As state comptroller, I warned Governor Blagojevich about overspending, but he wouldn’t listen. That governor’s gone, but our problems aren’t. Pat Quinn thinks the answer is to pass a 50 percent tax increase on every Illinois family. I’m running for governor because I have a better plan. We can balance the budget by cutting waste line by line and only raising income taxes on people making more than $200,000. We can fix this mess and protect the middle class.
* This all comes from Eric Zorn’s website, including an excerpt from a Sun-Times story…
Illinois Comptroller Dan Hynes launched his campaign for governor Wednesday by proposing a ‘progressive’ income tax that would more than double the rate paid by millionaires. Hynes’ plan would change the state’s income tax from a flat 3 percent to one that tops out at 7 percent. … Hynes laid out a six-step plan to fix Illinois’ finances. The first leg raises the income tax on only 3 percent of the state’s residents, those making more than $200,000 a year, he said.
So, 97 percent wouldn’t get a tax hike, eh? Sound familiar? Hynes is now JB Pritzker’s deputy governor and Pritzker has proposed that very same framework, although the governor’s new plan starts out at $250,000 and rates top out at 7.95 percent.
* Here’s one thing Hynes pledged to do back then that Pritzker has not and will not…
Hynes said he’s proposing to cut the state budget back to 2005 levels.
Considering the state of the economy at that time, I seriously doubt he could’ve pulled that off. Still, maybe Hynes could go back to his old notes and give the new governor some advice.
* Speaking of the budget…
Illinois Comptroller Susana Mendoza’s office on Monday launched its Public Accountability Report, which houses 15 years worth of spending data on various categories and state agencies.
For the category “Human Services,” the state spent $21 billion in Fiscal Year 2007. For all spending, including federal dollars, the state spent $52.4 billion in ‘07. In Fiscal Year 2017, the state spent $26 billion in “Human Services.” For all spending, including federal funds, the state spent $73.9 billion.
For the category “Higher Education,” the state spent $2.4 billion in 2007. It spent about $100 million less ten years later, or a total of $2.3 billion.
That Human Services category includes Medicaid and medical costs always outpace inflation. Also, if you factor in CPI, level spending on $2.4 billion for higher education in 2007 would be $2.82 billion in 2017 - half a billion less than what it got.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Mar 25, 19 @ 2:45 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: This is most definitely not the first time, and it probably won’t be the last
Next Post: Question of the day
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
People or families making more than $200k Dan? And here is your chance, as Deputy Governor, to go line by line and cut those expenses.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Mar 25, 19 @ 3:03 pm
3:03pm: Did you read the Comptoller’s report? Spending is down, social service agencies are starving, we’ve underinvested in roads and transportation, and Rauner couldn’t find any more to cut. So now you can see the need for revenue.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Mar 25, 19 @ 3:13 pm
“For the category “Higher Education,” the state spent $2.4 billion in 2007. It spent about $100 million less ten years later, or a total of $2.3 billion.”
GOVERNMENT SERVICES:
STATE UNIVERSITIES RETIREMENT SYSTEM
Expenditures:
FY2007 = $ 255,770,800
FY2017 = $1,675,735,100
Comment by City Zen Monday, Mar 25, 19 @ 3:15 pm
Somewhere along the line, hynes also proposed a tax on so-called elective plastic surgery. I think the proceeds were supposed to go pay for bonds issued to fund research. Or some scheme like that. One problem was his definition of what would be excluded as medically necessary was very restrictive. Haven’t heard much about it sense
Comment by Langhorne Monday, Mar 25, 19 @ 3:18 pm
“For the category “Higher Education,” the state spent $2.4 billion in 2007. It spent about $100 million less ten years later, or a total of $2.3 billion.”
Do we really have to consider any further why Higher Ed is experiencing the crisis it is today? And these numbers do not even account for inflation.
Comment by illini Monday, Mar 25, 19 @ 4:04 pm
Everything old is new again. Yup .just like a GOP pretending to be a fiscal conservative until its his/her turn to line up at the pig trough.
Comment by Blue Dog Dem Monday, Mar 25, 19 @ 4:47 pm
maybe Mendoza could start a public accountability report on how she spends her time.
Comment by midway gardens Tuesday, Mar 26, 19 @ 5:58 am
And the CPI for Higher Education?
Comment by Rufus Tuesday, Mar 26, 19 @ 6:28 am