Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Unclear on the concept

Posted in:

Illinois

Incumbent state Rep. Blaine Wilhour, R-Beecher City, said taxpayers can send policymakers a message about budget principles.

“Just by simply voting ‘no’ on the progressive income tax,” Wilhour said. “You wanna force a tough conversation on our fiscal situation in Illinois, a conversation we’ve been needing to have for a long, long time, that’s a perfect place to start.”

If you want to force an increase in the state’s flat income tax, there’s no better way to do that than to vote against the progressive income tax. Democratic super-majorities in both chambers and the Democratic governor and the Democratic-leaning electorate in this state are not going to support deep spending cuts.

posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 10:58 am

Comments

The Off-Center Square and Illinois Republicans….marching together for defeat in November. An absolutely absurd comment, especially when the Repubs cannot claim clean hands in creating the long-term fiscal disaster that is Illinois.

Comment by revvedup Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 11:03 am
A likely smaller GOP minority in the General Assembly next year won’t be forcing conversations on anything, especially not if the Easter bloc becomes a bigger force within the caucuses.

Comment by anon1 Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 11:04 am
Now that Illinois’ biggest victim, who’s been hurt the most by state and local politics, put $20 million in the game to oppose the graduated income tax, will it drive up turnout to 50% voting on the ballot question?

Comment by Grandson of Man Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 11:04 am
=== Democratic super-majorities in both chambers and the Democratic governor and the Democratic-leaning electorate in this state are not going to support deep spending cuts.===

The election of 2018 already decided the issue. Wilhour can’t re-litigate what the electorate made clear in the defeat of Bruce Rauner.

Keep up, Mr. Wilhour

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 11:05 am
=== Democratic super-majorities in both chambers and the Democratic governor and the Democratic-leaning electorate in this state are not going to support deep spending cuts.===

That may be his goal, to force the legislature to raise everyone’s taxes. With no popular issues of his own to campaign on, maybe he’s looking to manufacture some.

Comment by Socially DIstant Watcher Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 11:07 am
Its all about accountability. Who wears the jacket when the top 97% slips to say 80% is there another vote taken or just passing the budget ? The ILGA has not shown much ability to control spending or guide dollars get the best results over the past 20 years.

Comment by theCardinal Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 11:14 am
Be interested to see his suggestions on what exactly to cut. Show your work, Rep.

Comment by Fixer Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 11:16 am
=== Its all about accountability. Who wears the jacket when the top 97% slips to say 80% is there another vote taken or just passing the budget?===

… in FIVE years.

When do *you* see this vote happening, and the 60/71 and 30/36 that will be needed, AND a governor 2 years away from re-elect?

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 11:17 am
=Be interested to see his suggestions on what exactly to cut. Show your work, Rep=

The Rep can simply follow JB’s OMB lead and call for a 6.5% cut to budgets.

https://www.northernpublicradio.org/post/gov-agencies-prepare-budget-cuts

=

Comment by Donnie Elgin Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 11:27 am
I am a Dem but I don’t like this. I’m still not convinced that if it passes that the legislature & gov down the road aren’t going to say we need to lower the income hrudle rom 250 to 150 and then even less to raise more taxes because Springfield can’t manage money, say no to programs or identify poor performing programs and shut them down because that means votes lost.

Comment by BigLou Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 11:28 am
The “party of no” reappears. No ideas, either.

Comment by Jibba Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 11:35 am
==say no to programs==

The only “program” that matters to the budget right now is the pensions. Good luck saying “no” to that one.

Comment by North Park Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 11:39 am
=I’m still not convinced that if it passes that the legislature & gov down the road aren’t going to say we need to lower the income hrudle rom 250 to 150=

So what poor performing programs do you think need to be cut? We gutted IDES and now see the consequences of that. The question isn’t one of spending it’s the need for revenue. Raise taxes on a minority or everyone. Those are the choices.

Comment by Pundent Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 11:39 am
I am no fan of Wilhour. But he’s right from the sense that the tax amendment will serve as a sort of referendum on tax/fiscal policy in our state. Yet, hes wrong from the sense that, even if the amendment fails, the Dems will still have a super-majority, despite those potential sentiments on said tax/fiscal policies.

Comment by CubsFan16 Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 11:41 am
” The ILGA has not shown much ability to control spending or guide dollars get the best results over the past 20 years.”

Exactly. Do Chicago voters feel like the bushels of additional money they’ve paid in increased property taxes really made a difference in improved services or the pension deficits?

The Chicago Police Pension fund balance would suggest otherwise.

Comment by Illinois Pride Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 11:45 am
=== The Rep can simply follow JB’s OMB lead and call for a 6.5% cut to budgets.===

Then the Raunerites will face constituents too… “why did you let that program end”?

Funny thing about owning all this… you never hear the Raunerites embrace massine cuts, they just *talk* massine cuts.

Campaigns are hard. Governing is difficult, doncha know.

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 11:46 am
=== paid in increased property taxes===

The state doesn’t collect property taxes.

Save that for your Facebook rants, thanks.

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 11:47 am
I don’t hear about the masses in Iowa, Wisconsin and Missouri all living in fear of the random tax hikes that apparently happen all the time when you have a graduated income tax … like all those states have.

Comment by Leigh John-Ella Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 12:06 pm
==
If you want to force an increase in the state’s flat income tax, there’s no better way to do that than to vote against the progressive income tax. Democratic super-majorities in both chambers and the Democratic governor and the Democratic-leaning electorate in this state are not going to support deep spending cuts.==

Our citizens seem to have to learn the hard way that the legislature can already raise the flat taxes. Even after the last raise, they don’t seem to get the message. They are too focused on the conspiracy theories that nothing can happen to the flat tax percentage without a voter referendum.
The pamphlet that Secretary White distributed Included so called arguments against the graduated taxes. People are assuming that those arguments are 100% valid.

Comment by thoughts matter Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 12:13 pm
I like that idea of 6.5% of cuts.

Comment by Blue Dog Dem Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 12:27 pm
If Illinois voters want government services they have to pay for them. If Illinois voters want to have government workers who have a certain pay scale and pensions they have to pay for him.

Comment by Cook County Thinker Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 12:44 pm
4 years Raunerites had to suggest cuts to these agencies and now they call for the same cuts without making any suggestions. You all had a chance to make these suggestions four years ago and failed to do even this much.

Comment by Fixer Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 12:46 pm
I wouldn’t underestimate this sentiment among the electorate. Illinois needs to work on re-establishing trust before expecting voters to put their faith in the State.

Comment by Shemp Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 12:51 pm
Cut muscle or bone. That’s all that’s left. The hollowing out has already occurred. What could be outsourced was - including much that should not have been. 6.5% will start getting through the tendons.

It is not hard to see this if one actually wants to solve the problem not just continue pushing the Ayn Rand nonsense.

Comment by Proud Sucker Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 12:56 pm
Arguably, would it not be politically harder for the ILGA to raise income taxes across all incomes versus smaller slivers a little at a time?

Comment by Just Observing Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 12:57 pm
“I like that idea of 6.5% of cuts.”

Identify the specific programs and jobs that you want cut or take it back to the dorm.

– MrJM

Comment by @misterjayem Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 1:28 pm
NO is the best vote on this. Voting for tax increases to pay for spending should be the duty of those increasing the spending- if the vote is favorable, dems will spend and spend and spend and tell everyone the people voted for it…the solution is to GROW the economy and revenue will come- if this passes the rates will go up and jobs will be lost- Wilhour is correct about the need to vote this down, he just left out some details

Comment by Elliott Ness Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 1:30 pm
=== if the vote is favorable, dems will spend and spend===

Like Rauner did… when the tax increase was passed?

Good times, amirite?

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 1:31 pm
Have listed cuts so many times you mustn’t pay attention. I’d start at ISP and eliminate the FOID dept.

Comment by BlueDogDem Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 1:47 pm
“I’m still not convinced that if it passes that the legislature & gov down the road aren’t going to say we need to lower the income hurdle from 250 to 150″

This would be inevitable and with the graduated rates structure proposed expect an ~3% increase. Given the marriage penalty on all income

Comment by 1st Ward Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 2:19 pm
Post was cut-off for some reason:
“I’m still not convinced that if it passes that the legislature & gov down the road aren’t going to say we need to lower the income hurdle from 250 to 150″

This would be inevitable and with the graduated rates structure proposed expect an ~3% increase. Given the marriage penalty on all income

Comment by 1st Ward Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 2:21 pm
===Given the marriage penalty on all income===

Narrator: it’s still 3% of all income tax filed.

=== This would be inevitable and with the graduated rates structure proposed expect an ~3% increase.===

… in 5 years.

Where are your 60/71 and 30/36… and a governor not running in 2 years willing to sign this.

(Sigh)

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 2:22 pm
===eliminate the FOID dept.===

I don’t think any GRF is spent on that, so try again.

Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 2:32 pm
The only way we avoided several income tax increases in the past was due to using owed pension contributions to fund government instead of annual tax revenues. Those days of pension payment thefts are over. It’s time to pay up. The only question is who pays and how much?

I’m voting to let the wealthier Illinoisans pay more for a while. It’s a better choice than all of us paying more for a while.

Comment by don the legend Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 2:48 pm
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again now. Along with passing the proposed Constitutional Amendment and a separate bill with the progressive rates, they should have passed a raise in the flat tax rate that only took effect if the amendment fails. That way the public would more clearly know the choices.

Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 3:38 pm
“… in 5 years.”

In five years would a joint couple making $100 - $150 ($50 - $75 individually) be taxed at a higher rate under a flat or graduated tax? Given the ~3% bracket change I venture a joint filer will pay less under a flat tax. Take the 1% increase now instead of a 3% increase later or file separately to lower state taxes and pay higher federal taxes.

Comment by 1st Ward Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 3:53 pm
=== joint couple making===

… in the 3%.

How many folks you “worried” about there, friend?

It’s still the top 3%, yet you ignore that. Why?

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 3:59 pm
=== Given the ~3% bracket change I venture a joint filer will pay less under a flat tax. Take the 1% increase now instead of a 3% increase later or file separately to lower state taxes and pay higher federal taxes.===

Do the math, get back to us.

Don’t forget to take off your shoes and socks when counting.

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 4:01 pm
Adding … I’ve heard a ridiculous amount of misinformation about the Fair Tax Amendment. Had people telling me the flat tax rates are in the constitution and can’t be changed without voter approval; and with the Fair Tax the State can raise tax rates at any time. And that the same thing is true on taxing retirement. Plus other stuff I don’t remember at the moment.

Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 4:03 pm
Pass the Fair Tax - Grow our economy - just like they did in Minnesota.

https://www.epi.org/publication/as-wisconsins-and-minnesotas-lawmakers-took-divergent-paths-so-did-their-economies-since-2010-minnesotas-economy-has-performed-far-better-for-working-families-than-wisconsin/

Comment by Froganon Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 4:07 pm
=I’ve heard a ridiculous amount of misinformation about the Fair Tax Amendment.=

It seems that there are a lot of folks downstate that want to see to it that a lot of Chicago democrats don’t end up paying more. They’re even willing to go as far as having their own taxes raised to stop it.

Comment by Pundent Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 5:04 pm
1.4 mil FOID holders. $5/ card. 10 years. $$700,000 annual revenue. About 5 employees minus legacy costs.

Comment by Blue Dog Dem Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 7:39 pm
What if we just pass an amendment to raise @OW’s taxes? That’s ok, right? Most people won’t be affected.
/snark

Comment by Expletivedeleted Wednesday, Sep 9, 20 @ 9:06 pm