Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Compare and contrast two new ads supporting the “Fair Tax”

Posted in:

Illinois
YouTube

* Press release…

Today, Vote Yes For Fairness released its first television ad on why Illinoisans need to pass the Fair Tax in this election. The ad, “Lived In,” highlights how our current tax system is unfair, forcing Illinoisans, including our essential workers, to pay the same tax rate as millionaires. The Fair Tax would set things right, while keeping taxes the same or less for at least 97% of Illinoisans and only asking those making more than $250,000 a year to pay more.

“Illinois has one of the most unfair tax systems in the country, forcing our working families to pay the same tax rate as millionaires and billionaires,” said Quentin Fulks, Chairman of Vote Yes For Fairness. “Illinoisans don’t have to accept the status quo any longer, and can bring fairness to our tax system in this election by voting yes on the Fair Tax. With only 75 days until Election Day, we’re committed to ensuring Illinoisans know the truth about the Fair Tax and how it will help our families, our communities, and our state.”

Vote Yes For Fairness is funded by Gov. JB Pritzker.

* The spot…

* Script…

If she lived in Wisconsin, she’d pay a lower tax rate than millionaires.

In Iowa, so would he.

But not in Illinois, because we have one of the most unfair tax systems in America.

We’re one of the only states where everyone is forced to pay the same tax rate.

Passing the Fair Tax will change that.

97% of Illinoisans will pay the same or less in taxes.

Only people making above $250,000 will pay more.

It’s time for change.

Vote Yes For Fairness.

* On to the next ad. Subscribers saw this yesterday, but I’m also curious what you think about the new AARP Illinois-funded ad in support of the Fair Tax…

* Script…

If you’re not a billionaire, why are you taxed like one?

You didn’t mismanage the state budget. Why should fixing it fall on you?

The flat tax we have is hurting Illinois workers and families. And it’s not fixing the budget. New tax money has got to come from somewhere, so why not from the people with the most?

Vote “Yes” on the graduated income tax to raise taxes on the top 3 percent, generate almost $3 billion a year and protect your retirement income. That’s the fair way to fix this.

posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:13 am

Comments

Meh, don’t think either is changing any minds. I give Lived In a C- and AARP a C.

Comment by AD Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:20 am
I mean, they’re both pretty good, I guess. But my script would say “because of the way our tax system works, the very rich in Illinois pay a lower percentage of their income in taxes than the middle class. A graduated income tax, which you can vote yes for on Nov 3rd, is the way to make sure that they pay their fair share — and you don’t pay more than yours.”

Comment by Matthew Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:21 am
“If she lived in Wisconsin…”

Her retired neighbor would pay state income taxes on his pension while both enjoyed lower property taxes.

“In Iowa…”

He would be able to deduct his federal income taxes paid on his state income tax return, reducing his tax burden by thousands of dollars.

Comment by City Zen Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:21 am
I don’t think it works. I think between blame Madigan and fairness. We are a partisan mess. I think people know we can’t tax our way out.

Comment by Fighter of Foo Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:22 am
=You didn’t mismanage the State budget. Why should fixing it fall on you?=

Um . . . .the group asking for the Fair Tax borrowed $5 billion to “balance” the budget just this Spring. The payback plan appears to be asking on bended knee for the feds to cover the loan.

Conversely, the underlying premise that the IL budget has been mismanaged for years is pretty universal.

Comment by Say It Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:25 am
“Why should fixing it fall on you?”

AARP is asking this question? To working people? While their members pay no state income tax on their retirement income? Are they self-aware?

Bad news, AARP, it has always fallen on us. Why don’t you join the party so we can solve this problem together?

Comment by City Zen Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:28 am
The AARP ad is better, because it’s punchier, plays up the class warfare angle which has more emotional resonance as opposed to the geography angle, and at least makes an effort to explain how the FairTax would make the viewer’s life better (i.e., current tax is hurting families/FairTax will generate revenue and protect your retirement income).

Comment by Quibbler Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:28 am
C - middle class knows they are coming for us next. New York has chased high wealth folks. This is a big country when you have the money to leave anyplace.

Comment by Fighter of Foo Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:28 am
=== The payback plan appears to be asking on bended knee for the feds to cover the loan.===

Prolly with a bunch of other states. You forgetting the pandemic crisis and the economic downturn brought on by not addressing the pandemic?

You think Illinois is alone? Hmm.

=== Conversely, the underlying premise that the IL budget has been mismanaged for years is pretty universal.===

For a whole GA, there was no state budget.

Guessing you think that helped, or…

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:29 am
Really like the first one, simple and direct, and comparing us to states with a graduated income tax is good to highlight the flat tax unfairness. I give it an A.

The AARP one is angrier and maybe more suitable for downstate. Was just thinking about something like this, where an ad would say stop giving more of your tax dollars to “corrupt” Madigan and Springfield, vote for a tax cut. Great to see AARP supporting the graduated income tax. B-

Comment by Grandson of Man Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:30 am
The AARP spot gets my vote. No heavy analysis here.

Comment by tomhail Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:30 am
To the ads,

Liked the top one. Simple message, it’s about the 97%

The AARP is a bit nuanced, but it doesn’t damage the bottom line message.

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:30 am
I like the first one. The first ad explains why it is caused Fair tax. The AARP one kinda implies rich people causes Illinois’ problems. While I agree rich people got low taxes for decades in Illinois, it seems a little unfair.

Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:31 am
AARP is better, but both are good. Framing this as rich people already getting a break is the best message. Hammer that we are just moving to the same system as the feds and most states.

Comment by Jibba Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:31 am
=== New York===

NYC has a city income tax.

Does any city in Illinois have a city income tax?

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:32 am
I like the first one, but I’d take out the “We’re one of the only states where everyone is forced to pay the same tax rate.” - feels like that detracts from the ” you’re not a billionaire” theme.

Comment by lake county democrat Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:37 am
== This is a big country when you have the money to leave anyplace. ==

The notion that the rich flee states willy-nilly to avoid taxes is largely a myth:

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0003122416639625

Comment by Quibbler Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:41 am
anybody checked the tax rates in Iowa and Wis. for middle-income earners?

Comment by jim Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:41 am
I would give them a solid B. At some point they’ll need to counter the pushback that a tax increase is unnecessary. Once it’s clearly understood that an increase is inevitable, it’s an easier sell for voters to have the burden fall on someone else.

Comment by Pundent Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:42 am
My first reaction to the AARP ad was, “Billionaires didn’t mismanage the state budget, either.”

I also think that “people making above $250,000″ is more understandable than “top 3 percent”. Folks know what their income is; they don’t necessarily know where they fall relative to others.

Comment by JoanP Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:48 am
== At some point they’ll need to counter the pushback that a tax increase is unnecessary. ==

This, although they’ll need to go further: “Because of COVID, our state faces an unprecedented crisis.
It’s time to make the rich pay their fair share, or we won’t be able to meet our state’s basic needs.”

Comment by Quibbler Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:49 am
Unless there is a generous Fed bailout to address the impact of Covid on state financials, the tax picture in Illinois will be dismal. Nothing anyone can do about that right now.

We don’t know how much the fair tax will deliver in reality. The $3B may be a really good projection, but if the Feds don’t deliver, it won’t be nearly enough, and everything will have to be on the table. A broader income tax rate increase and taxing retirement income included.

The ads are fine. Not sure there are a lot of undecideds on this issue.

Comment by SSL Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:52 am
“anybody checked the tax rates in Iowa and Wis. for middle-income earners?”

Yes, tax rates for middle income people are significantly higher in Wisconsin and Iowa compared with the Fair Tax.

Comment by Grandson of Man Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 9:55 am
The Republican groups will counter with Ads that mention ComEd corruption. Perhaps JB should run a commercial that lists the big salary of ComEd Executives and that with the passage of the fair tax will be required to pay more.

Comment by Frumpy White Guy Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 10:02 am
The message of “protecting your retirement income” by the AARP is an effective one. Knowing that they’re behind this send a message to an important voting block who currently doesn’t pay state income tax.

Comment by Pundent Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 10:02 am
“Billionaires didn’t mismanage the state budget, either.”

This is true in the narrow sense that Bruce Rauner’s net worth is only about $400 million. Also, the rich deform our budget, as they do most of the rest of our society, because our government is primarily organized to serve their needs and desires rather than the 99% (or 97% in the FairTax context).

Comment by Quibbler Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 10:04 am
I think the Pritzker ad is better. It does a better job of making the case for changing the system independent of the need for more money. The AARP ad’s “new tax money has got to come from somewhere” assumes that folks agree with that statement.

Comment by Montrose Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 10:06 am
If you think the graduated tax does not trickle down to the middle class soon after it is passed you have you head in the sand. If you think retirement income does not get taxed soon after this passes then you have your head up your a**. As soon as every public employee union votes on a new wage standard where every member makes the same wage then you can talk about fairness and equality.

Comment by Arock Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 10:20 am
=== If you think retirement income does not get taxed soon after this passes then you have your head up your …===

LOL

There’s no will or want to tax retirement income.

If you can’t speak to the political realities of the governing, yikes. This is Facebook silliness, can you imagine the chambers deciding to even take up taxing retirement income? lol

=== As soon as every public employee union…===

Is that you, Bruce Rauner?

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 10:27 am
Arock- now do what happens to the tax rate when the fair tax does not pass. If it goes up for everyone either way, then why the vitriol? Because you’re protecting the rich and trying to scare the less well off.

Comment by Jibba Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 10:28 am
If you think this vote failing in November won’t result in taxes going up on everyone, Arock, you have your head located where you’re projecting others have theirs.

Comment by Fixer Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 10:33 am
- If you think the graduated tax does not trickle down to the middle class soon after it is passed you have you head in the sand. If you think retirement income does not get taxed soon after this passes then you have your head up your a**. -

How many income tax increases have we seen under the flat tax in the last 30 years, with all the budget shortfalls and debt we’ve had?

And you think shifting more of that burden to the wealthy makes it easier to also shift it to the middle class and retirees?

I’d love to see your math on that one whenever you pull your head out of wherever you’ve placed it.

Comment by Excitable Boy Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 10:35 am
I don’t like the tagline of “Vote Yes for Fairness”. The ask should be explicit. That may be the campaign’s name, but, with all that’s going on in the world these days, I’m not sure voters will know ‘where’ or ‘how’ to ‘vote yes for fairness’. Otherwise, it’s fine. AARP ad is better, but both should mention amending the constitution.

Comment by Hyperbolic Chamber Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 10:36 am
Do they cover the “marriage penalty”? If so I missed it. I kid.

Arock, can you do us all a favor and cover all of the boogeyman arguments today so we can be done with that? Then we can move on to the infinite possibility of “if” arguments.

Pritzker, with a few exceptions, has been pretty good for his word thus far. The Fair tax is a big one so I hope he stays the course.

The ads are solid B+ material. Agree with Joan P in that sticking with $250000 is clearer than 3%.

Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 10:41 am
== =If you think retirement income does not get taxed soon after this passes then you have your head up your a**. ===
Count me as one of those people then. The revenue this would generate would be minuscule and the animosity would be great. There is no reason for the GA and Senate to go there.

Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 10:43 am
===If you think the graduated tax does not trickle down to the middle class soon after it is passed===

If you think there won’t be a tax hike across the board if the graduated income tax isn’t approved, you’re an idiot.

Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 10:46 am
Neither ad moves the needle for me. Still a no vote. Surprising how Democrats are so terrible with math. People that make more money still pay more in taxes and more for the same terrible services than people that make less. That’s a fact and calling it unfair doesn’t make it less true.

Comment by Really Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 10:55 am
The closing argument for the Fair Tax is that everyone’s taxes will be raised if it doesn’t pass.

That’s why I like the top ad versus the AARP ad as it sets the table perfectly to how this needs to be rolled out, framed, and closed.

It’s about the 97%… it’s about the millionaires paying their share… if it fails, then we all pay.

It’s like football; sweep right, sweep left… stick with plays that work.

The messaging is simple. The close is about the warning that could happen.

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 10:55 am
Yow, both of those ads are really mediocre. I like the first one better, but neither of them would make me want to support this if I didn’t already.

Comment by Odysseus Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 11:07 am
==The closing argument for the Fair Tax is that everyone’s taxes will be raised if it doesn’t pass.==

Where was that stated in the ad?

Comment by City Zen Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 11:10 am
=== Where was that stated in the ad?===

It’s the closing argument.

That’s *probably* an indicator it’ll be a last run ad before the election.

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 11:11 am
Government services cost money there’s no getting around it. If taxpayers want primary and secondary schools public pensions and Medicaid and they do :taxes have to go up. It’s just not the upper 3% that’ll have to pay more mostly everyone will. The notion that the upper 3% is supposed to bear an outsized burden for the entire state budget is rather problematic from a budgeting standpoint.

Comment by Cook County Thinker Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 11:16 am
==It’s the closing argument.==

So it’ll be the last ad run in an election cycle in which there is a heavy push for everyone to vote as early as possible? Won’t much of your target audience have voted by then?

Comment by City Zen Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 11:33 am
I find the AARP ad offensive.

Comment by R A T Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 11:37 am
=== So it’ll be the last ad run in an election cycle in which there is a heavy push for everyone to vote as early as possible? Won’t much of your target audience have voted by then?===

Probably why for the last couple weeks I’ve wondered aloud what they’ve been waiting for, sitting on $50+ million, over the summer… and nothing.

Why, I even stated it again, today, on the post yesterday;

=== Right now, it’s got a 3 in 7 chance in passing. They wasted a whole summer sitting on $50+ million when reminding unemployed voters worried about rent or a mortgage might be people they’d like to try to make a pitch to in ads.===

Anything else?

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 11:37 am
The problem with the Iowa and Wisconsin comparison is they don’t have the historical budget issues at every level of government, high property taxes, and continued corruption.

The threat of vote to raise on the top 3% or we will raise on a 100% is effective to swing people on the fence or slightly against.

I am curious how local budget issues in Chicago effect how people vote. In October if Lori says we are raising your property taxes and laying off workers does that change how people vote on this issue and to which side.

Comment by 1st Ward Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 11:43 am
I would be paying more if this passes. I will vote in favor of raising my taxes. We need more revenue. I should pay more than somebody that is living check to check. My kids went to good schools. Other people helped pay for that. I have a responsibility to pay my fair share. We are all in this together.

Comment by Trapped in the ‘burbs Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 11:50 am
===The notion that the rich flee states willy-nilly to avoid taxes is largely a myth:===

Too early to tell in the “new normal” where everyone from loan processors and CEOs are given new opportunities to WFH. Within the next 5 years, we will see if the uber-trends are toward areas with lower taxation, city amenities, “living off the grid”, whatever, for those jobs that are tele-transportable. Disclaimer - I am a Fair Tax supporter.

Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 12:04 pm
Rich - Curious if the tif between Larry Ivory and Pritzker has any effect with the CBC and their constituents. It seems inopportune for that to occur.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-opinion-black-small-business-pritzker-tax-20200813-qe5zp35rtzc5ncplr2ozhe2qnm-story.html

Comment by 1st Ward Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 12:40 pm
==We are all in this together.==

cc: AARP

Comment by City Zen Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 12:42 pm
1st Ward - Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 11:43 am:

-The problem with the Iowa and Wisconsin comparison is they don’t have the historical budget issues at every level of government, high property taxes, and continued corruption.-

The reason they haven’t had the budget issues is because they collect enough tax revenue with their graduated income tax systems. High property taxes are a direct result of our flat income tax. Corruption happens in all states, voters can vote them out of office and throw the guilty in jail.
To the ads, both are a B. People want the services a higher level of taxes provides. Hopefully, enough of them will make the connection and vote yes. You get what you pay for, unless your talking health care in the USA. In Merica, we pay twice as much to get the worst outcomes thanks to the same folks who oppose the FAir TAx.

Comment by Froganon Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 2:13 pm
The original estimated incremental annual income tax revenue driven by the Fair Tax proposal was approximately $3.7 billion. The vast majority of that was coming from roughly 20,000 tax filers with income greater than $1 million/year.

It would be helpful to know how many of the 20,000 millionaires still have income levels that qualify for the excessive tax rates under the Fair Tax proposal given the economic events we have seen this year.

Assuming the number of millionaires has dropped and the projected deficit for next year is substantially greater than the estimate, just how high do the new Fair Tax rates have to be to cover the deficit?

Comment by Occam Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 2:14 pm
“The reason they haven’t had the budget issues is because they collect enough tax revenue with their graduated income tax systems”

So Indiana and Michigan do not collect enough tax revenue with their flat tax system? They also have high property taxes? How many Governors and politicians have gone to jail over the past couple decades there?

Comment by 1st Ward Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 2:27 pm
==The reason they haven’t had the budget issues is because they collect enough tax revenue with their graduated income tax systems.==

Hardly. Iowa residents spend $4,000 less per pupil on K-12 education than we do. Apply to Illinois’ 2 million students and we’d have $8 billion extra we could’ve spent on other things.

==High property taxes are a direct result of our flat income tax==

Then explain how no income tax states have lower property taxes than us.

Comment by City Zen Thursday, Aug 20, 20 @ 3:15 pm