Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Pritzker’s graduated income tax campaign concedes defeat after huge loss

Posted in:

Illinois
Updated Posts

* Press release…

Vote Yes For Fairness Chairman Quentin Fulks released the following statement:

“We are undoubtedly disappointed with this result but are proud of the millions of Illinoisans who cast their ballots in support of tax fairness in this election.

“Illinois is in a massive budget crisis due to years of a tax system that has protected millionaires and billionaires at the expense of our working families, a crisis that was only made worse by the Coronavirus pandemic. Republican legislators and their billionaire allies who brought us the dysfunction and pain of the Rauner years continue to stand in the way of common sense solutions, choosing instead to play partisan games and deceive the working families of our state. Now lawmakers must address a multi-billion dollar budget gap without the ability to ask the wealthy to pay their fair share. Fair Tax opponents must answer for whatever comes next.”

* Sun-Times…

Incomplete election results showed 55% of Illinoisans voting against the amendment, and 45% voting in favor with 97.6% of precincts reporting. State election officials said Tuesday there could be as many as 400,000 outstanding mail-in ballots.

The amendment needed a “yes” vote from a majority of all people voting in Tuesday’s election or 60% of people who specifically voted on the amendment.

Thoughts?

…Adding… Hannah Meisel from early this morning…

Pritzker this week warned that he and the Democratic supermajorities that control the legislature would be forced to consider raising taxes across the board to deal with Illinois’ significant structural budget deficit, or brace for significant budget cuts.

“The cuts, though, just to be clear: 15% cuts in public safety dollars, education dollars, in the dollars necessary for human services exactly at a moment when people need these things most,” Pritzker said hours before polls closed Tuesday.

Both major budget cuts or an income tax hike, however, are extremely difficult and politically risky. Deep cuts to some areas like social services would be impossible due to long-standing consent decrees and court orders, and much of the state’s $41 billion budget is taken up by legally obligated payments like school and Medicaid funding, pension contributions and debt service — aka the interest on loans Illinois has taken out over the years.

The libertarian-leaning Illinois Policy Institute on Wednesday, which had a hand in organizing thousands of Illinoisans online to mobilize against the graduated tax since early last year, used its election night statement declaring victory to also point in the direction of a constitutional amendment to address Illinois’ ballooning unpaid pension obligations.

After the Illinois Supreme Court in 2015 threw out a bipartisan 2013 attempt to change Illinois’ public employee pension systems to save the state billions over time, conservatives have turned their attention toward moving public support for getting rid of the pension protection clause in Illinois’ 1970 constitution — the same constitution graduated income tax proponents said was standing in the way of fiscal stability for Illinois.

posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:27 am

Comments

Great. My taxes get to go up instead of millionaires. Yay…

Comment by Perrid Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:30 am
The Pro-Tax amendment committee seriously misallocated its resources. It created slick ads and put them on streaming services, but they obviously didn’t reach their intended audience.

Comment by DarkDante Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:30 am
It’s embarrassing to admit this, but I completely missed seeing the question on my mail-in ballot. I heard later that it was at the bottom of the first column, and I guess that I expected the first question to be the presidential contest so I looked right pas it. So I’d be interested to know how many others may have made the same mistake and left the question blank.

Comment by jabes Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:31 am
Byeeeeeeeeeeee

Comment by ;) Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:32 am
Come on enough with the millionaires and billionaires- they pay the majority of ILlinois taxes. The reason we’re in a mess is that the State spent on programs for 49 years as if the tax rate was 5 while it was for many years 3. The revenue deficit was made up by failing to adequately fund pensions. It’s not for the lack of a progressive tax scheme.

Comment by Sue Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:33 am
Nah nah nah nah HEY HEY HEY GOOOODBYEEEEE

Comment by Woody Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:33 am
@OswegoWilly, you okay there big guy?

Comment by Raunerites Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:34 am
I believe this wasn’t a vote against progressive taxes, it was a vote against giving authority to the legislature.

Comment by Amurica Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:34 am
Good. Put together a wholistic plan that actually fixes a lot of the problems facing this state (revenue and expenses) and give the public a plan to vote on. The “soak the rich” campaign while bending over backwards to protect the public sector only isn’t selling. Time to put it all on the table for the benefit of all the people in Illinois.

Comment by DuPage Moderate Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:35 am
It comes down to a lack of trust of Springfield

Comment by Old Illini Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:35 am
“progressive tax scheme”

Yeah, that Ponzi scam rarely works, which is why you rarely see it.

Comment by Flyin' Elvis'-Utah Chapter Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:35 am
I was surprised the opposition didn’t make hay about what the proposal would have allowed with the corporate tax (which is based on a max 8:5 ratio of the highest income tax rate, so higher top income tax rate=higher possible corporate tax). But, I guess it wasn’t a point they needed to bring up since they seem to have won (or the Frerichs gaff was that bad…)

Comment by Leslie K Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:36 am
“give the public a plan to vote on”

Which will go something like-

Cut all services except those I benefit from.

Comment by Flyin' Elvis'-Utah Chapter Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:37 am
Apparently the IL voters find the words Tax Hike to be overwhelmingly anathema no matter who you tell them will pay. Unfortunately one is coming no matter what so it may be an interesting next 2 years as politicians try to chart a course between that reality and the mathematical demands for more funds.

Comment by Mason born Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:37 am
Build back better the trust voters have in Springfield before you try that again.

Comment by Donnie Elgin Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:38 am
This was a lost cause as soon as the Vote Yes crew failed to make the case that this was the fiscally responsible thing to do for the state. Also, it’s real hard to be associated with fee & tax increases in 2019 and then expect to have wide spread belief that you are for lowering taxes in 2020. Maybe I should change my nickname to Highly Irritated Dem today.

Comment by Concerned Dem Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:38 am
Not a good look. Even New Jersey got a millionaire’s tax through their legislature this year (after the legislative Dems previously killed it).

The question now is whether there will be a flat tax increase or any appetite for that? Depending on the district-by-district results, I’d say no.

That leads to the question of whether or not JB and team will muscle up and be nice (not good politically) or be realistic and cut GOP-held districts to the bone while making sure everyone knows that a cut led to a specific harm (i.e. less cops because there’s no money, rape kit backlog increase because of no money, FOID delays because of no money, college tuition hikes because of no money). You’ve got tie this stuff to the specific harm in order to get it reversed through a tax hike.

Comment by Precinct Captain Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:39 am
Now the question is how fast for IL debt to become junk?

Comment by BulfrogVino Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:40 am
When reasonably intelligent people I know we’re confused about how to vote on this, I knew it was going to fail. The many lies the anti amendment folks spewed resonated with voters. Now, we will all pay.

Comment by Because I Said So.... Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:40 am
Um . . . .don’t count on Republicans even attending the meetings for the flat tax hike.

Dems are on their own in the near term with this discussion. Durkin in a good and unexpected spot in terms of being able to demand what he wants for ANY help.

Comment by Go Big Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:40 am
The messaging was much better and reached more people on the No vote. I received at least 5 to 1 at my house and the no people were diverse with heartfelt, convincing messages. The Yes was sparse and basically said nothing more than we need money so screw the rich.

Comment by Lurker Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:40 am
=== you okay there===

Why wouldn’t I be?

I didn’t lose it.

If the first thing is you thought about me… that’s kinda pathetic.

How much rent do I owe living in your head?

To the post,

I’ve made my remarks in September, October, reiterated them today.

You sit on $50 million for months and months and get soundly defeated by messaging when you had…time and cash… to own the field… not much more can be said.

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:42 am
This is frustrating, since so much of the opposition was about giving legislators the power to raise taxes–power they already had, for crying out loud. I feel like I’m shouting into the wind.

I do see a possible solution: raising taxes to the maximum desired for the high-earner brackets, then adding an earned income tax credit for the lower 90% or so. I’m not skilled enough in legislation to say that would definitely pass muster, but it’s worth exploring.

Comment by Benjamin Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:43 am
They didn’t address the trust issue. If they had tackled that head on, and had some credible plan, it might have worked.

But IL voters have been well trained to not trust the legislature.

And so, they don’t trust it.

Comment by Fav Human Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:44 am
It’s not just the President who has frequently succeeded with constant lies. The anti-amendment crowd did, too.

Comment by Keyrock Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:44 am
=== don’t count on Republicans even attending the meetings for the flat tax hike.===

They’ll show up. Why?

Close 2-3 IDOT facilities, SOS closes facilities, a prison closes, you’d be surprised who will show up.

Y’all want cuts, and no votes on taxes… “ok”

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:44 am
I suspect the Treasurer will not be popular on Democrat Day next year at the State Fair.

Also raising the gas tax and vehicle registration fees didn’t help, especially when driving to the polls on the same horrible roads that we had before the fee increases.

And possibly the general mistrust of Chicago politicians.

Comment by A Jack Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:45 am
Seems that voters perception that belt tightening was as good for Illinois as it has been for themselves is operative here. It will be interesting to see how Democrats fight against this idea.

Comment by Wesleyan Guy Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:45 am
@Go Big - Durkin would be making a big mistake if he offered help passing this one. The only benefit of being in the super minority is not having to make difficult votes.

Comment by Chicagonk Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:47 am
The question was on the ballot was poorly placed and gray. Usually CA questions are at the end, not the beginning. And what is up with people being offered a Federal only ballot? I don’t remember that ever happening in an election. And if a voter pulled a federal only ballot, wouldn’t that be an automatic “no” on the CA?

Comment by A Jack Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:53 am
=== Durkin would be making a big mistake if he offered help passing this one.===

With most of the caucus downstate or central Illinois, and losing population, closing facilities, laying off or reducing headcount at IDOT facilities, for one, closing a prison, as another, deciding to be petulant, “have at it”

Ya want cuts… “ok”

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:55 am
==It’s embarrassing to admit this, but I completely missed seeing the question on my mail-in ballot.==

I almost missed it too on my ballot, until I was almost done with the front side.

Comment by Chatham Resident Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:58 am
trouble is, we can’t balance the budget on the backs of millionaires. people think government can run on air. it cannot.

Comment by Amalia Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:59 am
If tied to even a watered down pension reform it would have passed . Illinois citizens who don’t have public pensions joined with others to defeat the Madigan boondoggle

Comment by Curious George Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 11:00 am
Did Quentin Fulks actually run a campaign?

Or was it really just a Rube Goldberg performance art experiment in how to take a simple concept (YES for a Tax Cut) and make it as convoluted, complex and ripe for redefinition as possible.

Comment by The Other Rich Hill Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 11:00 am
Not shocking it didn’t pass. Shocking by the huge margin of defeat, though. Just a completely horribly run campaign on the pro side.

Comment by Ducky LaMoore Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 11:02 am
Most of the people effected by this will be south of I80. They are losing population and don’t need all the services there. But you get what you pay for.

Comment by Publius Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 11:03 am
I mean… that’s one way to defund the police…

Comment by Guy Probably Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 11:03 am
Fair Tax Flop was an unforced error by the best funded team in America.

Comment by The Most Anonymous Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 11:09 am
==how to take a simple concept (YES for a Tax Cut) and make it as convoluted, complex==

How did they make it more complex? They never deviated from the 97%. It was up to the No side to provide all the context.

Comment by City Zen Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 11:10 am
There wasn’t one thing that created this defeat, there were several. It’s a slap in the face to the Governor though, and he would do well to take a step back and think about it. The fair tax was part of the grand plan, and how to move forward is pretty important.

Comment by SSL Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 11:10 am
@OW - The decision is with the Dems. There are enough Dems to pass a tax hike. I’m not saying it’s not being petty, but this is politics 101.

Comment by Chicagonk Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 11:10 am
When you run ads stating vote Yes for the Fair Tax and that phrase is not in big headlines on the ballot then many people may not comprehend when they read the actual Amendment on the ballot what it actually consist of. Reading with comprehension is not a big strong suit as I have found when reading comments to a newspaper article. Working as an elections judge yesterday when I was in the position of handing out ballots I made sure to point out the different categories on the ballot. The front of the ballot being the Federal Elections, the gray section being for the Amendment to the State Constitution, the back of the ballot being for State and Local Elections and the gray area being for Judge retention. Flyers tend to go straight in the recycle bin.

Comment by Arock Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 11:12 am
Pritzker campaigned heavily on a fair tax two years ago. The big swing makes his runaway look even more like a referendum on Rauner than I thought at the time.

The other variable from 2018 is his huge field operation. It seems like a policy centric campaign would benefit from person to person interaction especially when parsing misinformation and nuance is crucial.Understanding it took a backseat to field workers in presidential & senate races I think they missed an opportunity. Correct me if I’m wrong but I got no calls or any outreach besides ads.

Comment by Chi Cat Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 11:15 am
=== The decision is with the Dems. There are enough Dems to pass a tax hike. I’m not saying it’s not being petty, but this is politics 101.===

“The decision is with the Governor. There are Dems to pass a tax hike. Deciding to make the hardest and most drastic cuts in Republican held districts that have no help legislators and use those cuts to help Dems who might face backlash is part of the cuts. I’m not saying it’s not being petty, but this is politics 101.”

They all want cuts… the Dems have a super-majority… and remembering how Raunerites hurt higher ed and social services… they want to sit it out, not help, that’s their call.

Facilities close and jobs lost, it’s politics 101.

With respect.

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 11:15 am
They can’t cut deep enough to get the savings needed. So they will need to cut deep and also increase taxes. Not a win for anyone. They may take a bite at the Madigan pension reform that lost in the ILSC as the crisis was state created, and now argue that the crisis was from COVID.

Comment by illinifan Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 11:18 am
=== It created slick ads and put them on streaming services===

Some folks just undervalue direct mail.

Comment by Candy Dogood Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 11:18 am
@Curious George: So, you are in favor of defaulting on the debt owed to a particular group of debtors — the ones who weren’t allowed to say “No, we don’t want to lend you these funds”?

Comment by Hieronymus Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 11:21 am
Had a bunch of older people tell me that passing the Fair Tax *allowed the legislature to raise taxes, which they are not otherwise allowed to do.* I explained until I was blue in the face that the legislature can ALREADY raise taxes whenever it wants to. They flatly refused to believe it; IPI’s commercials, mailers, and misinformation got to them.

Wonder what their reaction is going to be when the legislature raises their taxes.

Comment by Suburban Mom Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 11:33 am
I saw so many “vote against the progressive tax amendment” signs in front of modest, and even ramshackle homes in downstate and rural areas. These folks will be surprised when their taxes still go up.

Comment by Scamp640 Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 11:43 am
Try again in two years. This time, include a specific ban on taxing retirement income and mandate no marriage penalty and indexing rates to inflation. Take away as many of the talking points possible that the “No” group used. Get it done before losing the supermajorities.

In the meantime, cut facilities and expenses downstate, consolidate school districts and counties, emphasizing the need to live within one’s means and to balance the budget. Sadly, make sure that it is understood what austerity looks like.

And, assuming the existing flat tax rate also needs to go up, then disconnect from the federal AGI and implement a whole slew of targeted deductions, exemptions and credits to mitigate the effects on the 97%. Examples include medical expenses and insurance, mortgage interest, rent expense, sales and property taxes. Do something similar for truly small businesses, with breaks targeted as well as can be toward them.

Comment by Hieronymus Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 11:44 am
The actual amendment did not match the message and some voters can read. It may have done better if the amendment included the $250K and up, and it had a auto-CPI, as well as excluding pensions.

Comment by LocalGovGuy Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 11:47 am
So much money spent with such little to show for it. Too much paid media but so little on the ground support and outreach. Money doesn’t buy you a win. Sorry to see the results, because the state needs a progressive tax.

Comment by west wing Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 11:53 am
City Zen - How did Fulks and team make it complex??

There were multiple message lines on TV, in social media, from allies, etc.

Instead of simple, repeatable quips there were 60-90 minute zoom meetings to ‘explain’ it.

Even the yard signs were overly complex. Who makes a blue on blue sign with text so small you can hardly read it even up close?

All they needed to say from the get-go was “Vote YES for the Tax Cut Amendment”.

Instead they kept saying vote yes for the fair tax which let Griffin define “fair tax” as a tax hike (the phrase fair tax wasn’t even used on the ballot).

There was also zero attempt that I saw to describe the cuts that have already taken place. So all the people saying they would vote yes if there was a plan were left thinking the simpler solution is to “cut spending”.

Anyone who has actually looked at the debt and the annual budget knows that is not a serious proposal.

Comment by The Other Rich Hill Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 12:07 pm
I believe it was doomed to fail from the start. The actual amendment was to broad…no limit on the number of tax brackets and no limit on how high tax rates could be increased on individual taxpayers. “Trust me” won’t work in Illinois.

Comment by Swimdad13 Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 12:08 pm
=== “Trust me” won’t work in Illinois.===

Trust me, your taxes are now going up.

That work for ya?

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 12:09 pm
OW, Yes, I believe they will, but nothing in the amendment says they wouldn’t have if it were passed. We just got “Trust me, they won’t”

Comment by Swimdad13 Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 12:12 pm
=== but nothing in the amendment says they wouldn’t have if it were passed. We just got “Trust me, they won’t”===

Boy, you showed them, LOL

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 12:13 pm
Now on to a solution to get the state’s financial house in order.

I have made mine. A truly Sunset Service tax to pay past bills and then live on on the 4.95% tax we have.

Don’t add to the debt/unpaid bills. Pay them off with this money and do it honestly.

Other ideas?

Comment by Unconventionalwisdom Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 12:22 pm
They should have been running ads all summer. The ads and messaging from the beginning should have focused on how a fairer tax was better for everyone.

They tripped out of the gate when it turned out that the “Tax Cut for 97%” was in fact a “Tax Hike for 3%”, and should have known when they drafted the bill that was going to be a problem, and fixed it. Attention was on “Who will pay more?” from Day One, and the terms of the debate never changed.

Thay said, it was the middle of a pandemic. Even if JB’s team did everything perfectly, defeating a ballot question is always, always much easier than passing one.

As for the IPI plan of weakening pensions, it isn’t happening. I agree with Rich that the GA is likely to turn its attention away from income taxes toward other revenue and cuts that are likely to be painful for somebody. You can bet that lawmakers are going to be looking at just how the Fair Tax fared in their district before hitching their wagon to JB’s next wagon train.

Comment by Thomas Paine Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 12:28 pm
Possible game plan: (1) raise current flat tax during veto session (with some budget cuts, too), (2) reword amendment to shave a few more people that said the previous wording opened the door for municipal/county income taxes, (3) have bottom bracket a little bigger and even lower rate, and most importantly (4) do a much better job of messaging.

I’m not sure how you deal with the trust messaging. But “97% will see no change or a cut” got muddled. Also too many were confused (allowed to be mislead) because the rates were separate from the amendment they were voting on.

Comment by From DaZoo Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 12:30 pm
15% cuts to funding education? Based on how poorly they fund it already (last in the nation, I believe) many districts will adapt. I mean, isn’t 15% of almost nothing, almost nothing?

Comment by Really Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 12:31 pm
=== 15% cuts to funding education?===

Start with athletics, band, theatre, shop/trades…

That’ll fly.

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 12:33 pm
===I believe this wasn’t a vote against progressive taxes, it was a vote against giving authority to the legislature.===

The GA already has the authority too raise taxes, as you are about to painfully find out.

Comment by Nick Name Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 12:45 pm
=== 15% cuts to funding education?===

I imagine downstate University consolidation will be bandied about soon enough.

Comment by Trial Ballon Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 12:56 pm
== Now the question is how fast for IL debt to become junk? ==

Right after the veto session ends without a tax hike.

Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 12:59 pm
== If tied to even a watered down pension reform it would have passed . ==

And exactly what legal pension reform would you have tied it to?

Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:03 pm
== now argue that the crisis was from COVID. ==

I’ll bet it still won’t win, and it will waste another year on achieving a real solution.

Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:06 pm
== Don’t add to the debt/unpaid bills. Pay them off with this money and do it honestly.

Other ideas? ==

Yes. I realize this is unworkable in practice, but what the heck … let’s try it.

Don’t issue any NEW bonds for any reason until the existing debt is all paid off and the State is living on existing revenue.

What that means is losing out on almost all the partially Federal funded programs …

The one exception I might make yo that is new GO bonds at the currently low rates that are used only to retire high interest bonds.

Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:14 pm
I guess that ad with the female investment banker with a nose ring and a million dollar home standing in the aisle of grocery store really worked.

Comment by Mittuns Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:19 pm
== Try again in two years. This time, include a specific ban on taxing retirement income and mandate no marriage penalty and indexing rates to inflation. Take away as many of the talking points possible that the “No” group used. ==

I would add:

1) a limit on the spread between the lowest and highest rate

2) a limit that rates can only be changed every 5 or 10 years … unless the increase is submitted to the voters for approval

3) a ban on using GO bonds to pay general operating expenses.

4) a specific percentage of new revenue dedicated to paying down the pension debt IN ADDITION TO the existing scheduled payments until 70% or 80% funding levels are achieved.

5) mandate zero based budgeting and make everything transparent

6) require a real, balanced budget with a penalty: any excessive spending comes off the top of next year’s budget and that new budget still has to be balanced. Yes - I know they informally play that ‘pay with next year’s revenue’game now, but the point is to try to stop it.

Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:26 pm
Lots of talk about retribution for downstate here…while Cook and the collars have 60-70% of the population. Bright red downstate was never going to go for it, so maybe a better job should have been done convincing well-to-do suburbanites.

Comment by Elad64 Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:34 pm
Maybe part of the problem is that this was a battle of the billionaires. How about a grass-roots effort?
Just finished reading this great book on successful local bi-partisan ballot measures:

https://www.amazon.com/Unrigged-Americans-Battling-Back-Democracy/dp/1631495755

Comment by TinyDancer(FKASue) Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:52 pm
==Take away as many of the talking points possible that the “No” group used==

They had 18 months to do this. They willingly chose not to. They instead drove “97%” into the ditch.

What RNUG suggested, with emphasis on 1 and 2. Lock in the rates for 10 years and limit the spread to 3 percentage points. Live within the framework and earn our trust.

Comment by City Zen Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:56 pm
It didn’t even get 50%. The vote wasn’t close in a time of great wealth inequality, high unemployment, and ‘perceived’ bailouts of corporations. There’s no way this gets back on the ballot in two years. It’s dead for a decade.

The CA not passing is a huge landmine for JB politically and the US Senate elections did not go the way he or Lori needed to get through another year without extremely tough decisions fiscally. This will be an interesting session.

Further, is criminal justice reform now punted to the spring or next fall as the budget will be time consuming. Does the Foxx/O’Brien margin also make it more difficult to pass? Oh and Covid…… Not a fun time to be Gov.

Comment by 1st Ward Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:33 pm
@RNUG

“Don’t issue any NEW bonds for any reason until the existing debt is all paid off and the State is living on existing revenue.”

A good idea. Not enough but a great start.

Comment by Unconventionalwisdom Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 3:12 pm
@RNUG

Your ideas to float another tax referendum based upon the ideas you outlined are solid.

If they had been enunciated in the first place, and done so with real conviction, I believe it would have passed this time.

Comment by Unconventionalwisdom Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 3:14 pm
Illinois, financially, is one of the worst run states in the country. There is more of a spending problem than a revenue problem.

Comment by GusGus Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 4:13 pm
==Illinois, financially, is one of the worst run states in the country. There is more of a spending problem than a revenue problem.==
What needs to be cut? Let all the murderers out of prison? Let bridges fall down?
State government isn’t a pizza parlor where you maybe can change the hours or maybe eliminate the pizzas that people aren’t buying. The state does things that absolutely have to be done.

Comment by Muddy trail Friday, Nov 6, 20 @ 8:33 am