Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Question of the day

Posted in:

Illinois

Illinois voters rejected a high graduated rate income tax while Arizonans embraced a large income tax rate increase for high earners, among the many attention-grabbing results from Tuesday’s elections—most of which, admittedly, weren’t about taxes. Coloradans, meanwhile, ratified an income tax cut in a year that many expected voters to instead be weighing in on a substantial income tax increase—and that was before the pandemic. […]

Arizona’s Proposition 208 creates an 8 percent top rate on income above $250,000, up from 4.5 percent currently. This bracket will not be adjusted for inflation. This move reverses decades of reform which lowered the state’s top rate from a high of 7 percent and will undermine Arizona’s status as a destination for those fleeing California’s taxes, and for snowbirds looking for a state with mild winters and mild taxes.

Because the new bracket will not be indexed to inflation, this will also result in what is called “bracket creep,” where income tax burdens increase even without an increase in real income. A person whose salary increases track with inflation could have the same amount of purchasing power year over year, while the change in the nominal dollar amount of earnings could push more of their income into the higher bracket. Because of this, the new Arizona bracket will capture progressively lower incomes as the value of the dollar decreases. […]

Colorado was the only state to give the option to lower income taxes, and voters took the state up on that opportunity. Colorado’s Proposition 116 will permanently lower the state income tax rate from 4.63 percent to 4.55 percent, retroactive to January 1, 2020. In fiscal year 2019, actual tax collections exceeded the revenue cap by $428 million, which triggered a Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) refund in the form of a reduced income tax rate of 4.5 percent for tax year 2019. […]

Voters’ views on income taxes do not cleanly map to partisan preferences. In Colorado, the Democratic governor gestured at support for a rate cut brought to the ballot by conservative groups, and in Illinois, voters who overwhelmingly chose Democratic candidates also rejected a tax increase championed by their Democratic governor.

It’s always dangerous to draw firm conclusions, but if you had to summarize the past decade worth of results on income tax-related ballot measures, it might look like this: voters are wary of tax increases, even when they largely fall on other taxpayers (at least initially), but their willingness to consider the proposed increases is much greater if they’re given a clear picture of what the additional revenue is for and can evaluate whether they think the trade-off is worthwhile. Observers may agree or disagree with voters’ evaluations of those trade-offs, but it says something good about the system that voters clearly care about both costs and benefits.

* The Question: Why do you think the “Fair Tax” so badly failed here?

posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:19 pm

Comments

Pure and simple…lack of trust of politicians. It’s the only thing upon which Republicans and Democrats agree.

Comment by Geezus Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:21 pm
The opponents lied about what it would do. The proponents assumed too much and didn’t pound home the math.

In my experience, middle income voters don’t like taxes on the wealthy because middle income voters plan to be wealthy one day. Pre-emptive self-defense.

Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:21 pm
Arrogance. Organization moves voters, especially in Illinois. The camp spent all their money on a terribly designed ad campaign and not feeding the organizations that can turn out the vote, especially in Chicago and suburbs. The margins were not good enough to overcome the downstate referendum on JB. People make people vote, not commercials.

Comment by Dell Gall Dough Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:23 pm
It is just an angry year between covid and national politics. The general public would use the hose on the Easter bunny if they saw him.

Comment by Jibba Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:24 pm
Voters just did not trust what they were being told about changing the tax structure.

Comment by SOIL M Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:25 pm
In this year of COVID, a lot of people are financially and otherwise stressed. Also in parts of the state JB, the main proponent, has been labeled evil incarnate for his attempt to keep people from getting sick. This set of circumstances, combined with a sophisticated and well-funded disinformation campaign (face it, that’s what it was), doomed the Fair Tax pretty much from the start. We’ll see what the GA does and whether federal funding materializes, but all of this COVID expense (unemployment, equipment, etc.) has to be paid for somehow. Now it looks like we will all pay.

Comment by Ron Burgundy Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:29 pm
Downstate protest vote against Pritzker’s handling of coronavirus. People are angry they can’t exercise their god-given right to eat Chili’s baby back ribs and continue to send the grim reaper to our parents and grandparents as readily.

Comment by Mittuns Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:29 pm
Multiple neighbors mentioned retirement tax. Once the vote yes side started spending money to say the word “retirement tax” (i.e. this is not one) I started to question their whole strategy. There may be something about not tying the money to education or health care or something. But I don’t think that would have changed much.

Comment by Tawk Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:30 pm
Lies about retirement income and, somehow, people in IL being too dim to realize that giving the GA the ability to target revenue hikes was the only way to stop them from getting their own taxes hiked. Instead, the rich get to keep the poor hostage to protect their own pocket books.

People can armchair quarterback the campaign decisions for it all they want, in the end “Taxes bad” is a really easy argument for dim people to hear and understand, and “Look, someone has to pay for this, we promise we don’t want it to be you, trust us and we’ll make those guys over there pay for it” is too complex for people. It shouldn’t be, a child should be able to follow that, yet here we are.

I’m sorry for being condescending but there’s no other way of looking at people voting to make their own lives worse in every way instead of asking someone else to chip in a little bit more.

Comment by Perrid Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:30 pm
fuzzy message out of the gate. they let the opposition define the question and they played catch up. the lack of trust the opposition created with their message was not overcome.

Comment by Amalia Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:30 pm
Fear of tax on retirement income. Treasurer Frerichs bumbled his way into inserting that fear into the narrative and it never went away. Pritzker wanted to make it his legacy and bungled terribly by not getting out early and controlling the narrative, as many smarter people have been saying.

Comment by SAP Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:31 pm
The main reason the CA lost is that the opposition turned the vote into a referendum on Governor Tax Loophole and Public Official A.

Comment by Back to the Future Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:31 pm
Political malpractice … the supporters did not clearly define the alternatives. Should have been a contingent flat tax increase already enacted so the choice was clear.

Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:32 pm
I’m gonna crib from others, but these are the reasons I think it went down:

-started late. should’ve flooded the zone when they had the playing field all to themselves

-h/t RNUG - they should’ve tied it to an automatic increase in the flat rate if it failed

-h/t Walk - Dems weren’t able/didn’t canvass in person because of COVID. The more I think about it, the more I think this might’ve been behind Dem’s troubles down ballot, and not just in Illinois

Comment by Joe Bidenopolous Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:34 pm
Oh, whoops, forgot on - Frerichs. Thanks Mike!

Comment by Joe Bidenopolous Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:34 pm
Arizona benefited from Californians moving in , maybe we can attract the next wave to move here ?

Comment by Curious George Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:36 pm
Hard to trust anything out of Springfield let alone give them more power when there are so many Federal indictments of Springfield politicians.

Comment by BulfrogVino Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:37 pm
Hard to trust anything out of Springfield let alone give them more power when there are so many Federal indictments of Springfield politicians.

Comment by BulfrogVino Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:37 pm
The Tax Foundation may be on to something with informing voters what the tax revenue was to be used for. (Of course, this revenue is fungible.) Perhaps they should have said, “The revenue generated will be used to keep Illinois current on its bills,” or the like.

Or they could have gone full snake-oil salesman and called it the “Tax Cut Amendment.” (”It gives us the power to give some of you a tax cut, you see.”) So maybe the backers made a mistake by trying to fight fair instead of dirty.

Comment by Benjamin Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:38 pm
Lack of trust combined with very high real estate taxes, increase in gas taxes, very high sales taxes, increase in license stickers.

Comment by Petey L. Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:42 pm
Next time they should raise taxes on everybody first then ask voters if they want a tax cut by shifting to a graduated rate that soaks the wealthy.

Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:43 pm
I tend to agree with RNUG and this article’s estimated conclusion. People tend to have short attention spans. Since the message of ‘why’ Illinois was doing this, ‘what’ it was for exactly, ‘how’ it affects the majority of the population and then clearly explaining it continuously like a broken record did not happen, I believe it got lost in all the louder noise.

Comment by Hawaiian Heat Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:43 pm
It failed due to political failures.

The pro-fair tax people were too vague in their advocacy of this and specific plans for implementation and their own ads reminded voters of the financial mismanagement of Illinois which raised the question why give the politicians more money.

The ad campaign had no imagination and either due to malpractice or at the request of Pritzker the campaign marketers failed to capitalize on the eat-the-rich populist sentiment that can make tax increases palatable.

They should have made the fair tax a referendum on Ken Griffin and all his controversial statements and ostentatious lifestyle. Versailles wedding is a tailor made direct mail hit and the Dems blew it.

Comment by hisgirlfriday Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:43 pm
As always Illinois put the cart before the horse and just assumed the horse would be able to drive the cart.

Arizona actually reformed pensions first and then asked voters to raise taxes.

“The Arizona referendum enabled the state to change an arcane formula that determined cost-of-living increases for elected officials and corrections officers based on their fund’s investment returns. That formula had siphoned off gains made during robust stock markets so that less money was left for lean times, occasionally leaving workers with no cost-of-living increases. The amendment substituted a formula tied to the cost of living in Arizona, capped at 2 percent.”

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/crains-forum-pensions/how-arizona-rhode-island-broke-mold-pension-dispute

Comment by Lucky Pierre Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:45 pm
The Yes team was overconfident, with a false sense of mandate from two years ago and an assumption that they would have the resources to outspend and outshoot any opposition. Enter kg and the Z team, who took them to school.

Comment by fs Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:45 pm
Pretty much what RNUG and others have said about the “political malpractice” and arrogance.

In the same theme another factor was a lack of educating voters about the wealth inequality in this state and country.

Lastly a lack of trust in Illinois government was a factor as well. The ILGOP demonized Madigan and the Democrats and since people have short memories the voters were ignorant or uniformed by the Dems of the damage Rauner did to Illinois.

That is apparent nationally as well as the Democratic Party for years believes it is the “high minded”/virtuous party and can sit on it’s hands and take voters for granted and the Dems pay the price for their arrogance and never learn.

Comment by Big Jer Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:47 pm
Well the idea that voters need a clear alternative to the Griffin flat tax increase or the defund police local government revenue cuts that are coming next year may get their chance. I hope the GA puts another version on the 22 ballot that can reverse some of the negative consequences that will flow from the next two state budgets.

Comment by Dan Johnson Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:49 pm
I guess it all depends on what your definition of fair is. Does the basket height change depending upon how tall the basketball player is? Do the fences move in depending upon the abilities of the baseball player? Should Harvard accept me because I’m not as smart as the other students? Are my property taxes lower because I don’t have children in the school system? Get real people, there was nothing “fair” about it.

Comment by anonomouse Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:50 pm
1) Raise taxes for what? Dems did not effectively convey the need for it. It is true it would help prevent us from falling off the fiscal cliff, but people of Illinois have heard that for a number of years. Many people don’t feel it is their responsibility to bail the government out of poor management whether true or not.

2) The threat that without the flat tax, eventually politicians would raise taxes on middle and working class anyways. They were just starting with the rich. Not real logical because taxes are likely to go up for all now, but that is what I was hearing in my neck of the woods.

Comment by Mr. Hand Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:51 pm
Illinois was a CA with AZ a ballot measure so lower threshold required. I’m seeing 52.6% approval in AZ. More importantly all politics is local. Arizona the increase is funding teacher salary increases and schools. Further, the Californians and snowbirds would still pay a lower rate (and lower property taxes) than were they were previously. Illinois CA didn’t have a specific funding source. Along with the lack of trust voters have of Springfield. The population increasing vs. decreasing probably helps too.

Comment by 1st Ward Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:51 pm
Lots of reasons. All condensed down to one word. Madigan

Comment by Bruce( no not him) Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:51 pm
Tax increase referendums require a clear explanation of what the money will be used for. That was never adequately articulated, probably because it was just going to the State’s pension debt.

Comment by Just Me 2 Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:51 pm
The Fair Tax Flop;

The Governor sat on $50 million+ for weeks and weeks and weeks. Early voting and absentee ballots out, the governor made a colossal error by not saturating a message on the 97%…

The Frerichs Tax, Mike Frerichs standing tall for taxing retirement income, used in ad after ad…

Allowing the anti-tax folks the time to spend their $50+ million with a goal to merely make the message muddy.

It was malpractice, it’s colossal, it’s arguably a top five “lesson to learn in Illinois” kinda defeat.

The months… months of silence instead of framing their own message… heck, they had, at the time of the money drop, a $2 million a week kinda cash influx… and it was silent.

We all discussed this in… June.

Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:54 pm
Lack of trust in past policy that is perceived to be failed - taking the tolls off when the bonds are paid off, the lottery will fund the schools, education is the primary responsibility of the state, the Edgar ramp, and the latest tax increase-decrease-increase. Most successful tax raise initiatives (no matter how they are structured) are tied to some tangible benefit. There was much “millionaires and billionaires will pay more” and “it won’t really affect you, the little guy” but scant little on why the money was needed or what would happen in its absence.

Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:54 pm
Bad political planning by the Pritzker team..

Comment by Wow Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:54 pm
You pass a gas tax that goes to new spending
you pass recreational cannabis and generate hundreds of millions in taxes and it all goes to new spending
You double car and trailer fees, and all that goes to new spending.

So it’s hard to see how that doesn’t happen here

Comment by Merica Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:55 pm
People, fundamentally did not think their taxes would actually go down.

Comment by OneMan Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:55 pm
For suburban voters, being labeled as a “millionaire” or “billionaire” was offensive. Face it, there are a limited number of millionaires and billionaires in Illinois. The lion’s share of the new payers were bound to be dual-income suburban voters. Those taxpayers are already net exporters of income tax, coupled with very high property tax bills. The lack of marginal rates or indexing was also a difficult pill to swallow for many.

The Governor only loosely alluded to doing something with property tax at the beginning of the CA proposal, but never followed through. Again, the suburban voter who is above (or close to) the $250K threshold says “what’s in it for me? I get a tax increase either way.”

I tend to agree with other commenters that the lack of foundation on what was going to be done with the money led to wild speculation that it would be spent frivolously. I think the Guv could have laid out a financial plan and committed portions of the funds to things like paying down the backlog of bills and decreasing unfunded pension liabilities, along with timelines to achieve those benchmarks, and given voters more assurance that their tax dollars were going to be used responsibly.

The retirement income angle was a red herring from the start. The opponents used it very effectively and the proponents got caught in the trap.

Perhaps the Guv owned the issue too much? It was positioned as his initiative. Maybe he should have had a panel of business and community leaders head it up and work on the some of the accountability issues mentioned above and it would have had a better chance.

Comment by Look County Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 1:57 pm
I do not believe that it was lack of trust of Springfield nor was it that Illinois voters are sick of paying more taxes. I believe that it was because it was painted as a partisan issue. I believe that Illinois voters want to see Democrats and Republicans working together in a bipartisan manner to address the financial issues. Obviously, that was not the case here. Without political cooperation, the CA was doomed.

Comment by Carbondale Chronicle Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:01 pm
It’s funny that I, a pretty leftist guy, am one of the few people who is blaming the electorate for not being able to understand the consequences of their own actions instead of blaming the campaign for not educating them enough. The state needs money, everyone knows that. Now, since the electorate has decided that the richest among us are not going to be the ones paying for it, we all will. By rejecting a tax hike on the rich people have guaranteed a tax hike on themselves, and it should not take millions of dollars to make people see that.

Comment by Perrid Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:02 pm
There are some insightful comments here, and recurring themes. The failed campaign and any future effort could learn a lot by keeping these in mind.

Comment by Don't Bloc Me In Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:02 pm
The Boomers have never been willing to pay sufficient taxes for the amount of government services they consume, both at the federal and state level. If a demographic breakdown of the vote on the amendment is possible, I’d be very interested to see it.

Comment by Michael Feltes Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:02 pm
What Six Degrees of Separation said. Also, some people who voted against felt they should address pension clause in Constitution at the same time/as a package deal.

Comment by 32nd Ward Roscoe Village Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:02 pm
It was almost a Referendum on Madigan more than the tax itself. Also, I kept hearing the state should live within it’s means. I don’t think it mattered that the rich would be taxed only. It mattered that the state would spend more. The general population wants the state to spend less. That will happen but that doesn’t mean overall taxes will go down.

Comment by Publius Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:02 pm
They had a lot of ’splainin’ to do………..and they didn’t do it.

Turned into a battle of the billionaires - should have been more of a grass-roots thing.

Comment by TinyDancer(FKASue) Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:03 pm
Not properly countered FUD.

Comment by PublicServant Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:03 pm
Four Words:

Reputation
of
fiscal
irresponsibility

Comment by Chi Cat Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:05 pm
Opponents out hustled proponents around the large state. If they did this again, they need regional campaigns. They need to get out of the Chicago bubble.

Comment by west wing Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:05 pm
It never had a chance. All the tv spots labeling it in so many negative ways worked brilliantly. Sad but true reflection of how most people don’t trust politicians.

Comment by BluegrassBoy Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:06 pm
Gas tax can only be used for transportation, due to the lockbox amendment.

Comment by Ares Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:07 pm
They got too cute with the brackets. Telling me, who is no where near the $250k threshold even if I filed jointly, I’d be getting a tax cut which amounted to $20 per year felt like I was being lied to right out of the gate. The lack of a single/filed jointly breakout hurt a lot too. Sprinkle in a natural distrust of IL politicians, and that “97% get a tax cut” message, which some on this blog touted as being bulletproof, falls flat.

The arrogance of telling people they were too stupid to know better was also a bad message. Insulting people into voting for you generally doesn’t work.

Comment by ChrisB Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:08 pm
The woman who does my hair was railing against it on Facebook, calling it a tax on small business. Ditto to the florist in Washington who appeared in a commercial touting the same thing. It is weird to me in one breath they say the state is killing small businesses, they aren’t going to survive, etc and then they are out publicly opposing a tax that only hits people above 250k. If you are making over 250k in Peoria, you’ll manage.

Comment by Shaun in East Peoria Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:09 pm
State history of not being honest. Lottery to schools, gas tax raided, tollways etc.
Also our real estate taxes are really unsustainable. I would vote for graduated income tax if it funded schools and took that out from real estate. And I suppose what ever happened to property tax commission? Lack of trust and that lack of trust was well earned.

Comment by DuPage Saint Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:18 pm
Terrible ads, terrible plan. Tie the graduated rate to a decrease in property taxes, tie the failure to xxx new flat tax rate, but overall, democrats need to quit punting on downstate. They don’t even both to try in so many areas and then wonder why the urban can’t carry things like this home. They also didn’t tie the passage to any planned cuts, Illinois needs both but by only focusing on the tax allowed the opposite side to discuss that it was just more spending they were after.

Comment by OurMagician Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:19 pm
People are notorious low information voters, gullible as well as easily frightened.
Look at the ads to show how politicians think about what it takes to reach people.
Either outright lies as they know people are too lazy to verify or scare tactics as people are want to “clutch their pearls” at the drop of a hat.

Comment by Fair tax failure Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:19 pm
Reading the comments about how the voters are too stupid to know what is best for them tells you everything you need to know about Illinois Democrats

Comment by Lucky Pierre Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:23 pm
Attempting to buy trust for $44.

Comment by City Zen Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:25 pm
1) It included a marriage penalty.

2) The proposed brackets were not indexed to inflation which enables “bracket creep”.

Comment by Simple As Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:26 pm
== Gas tax can only be used for transportation, due to the lockbox amendment. ==

You might want to check on what “transportation” spending includes. The definition is probably broader than you think.

Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:26 pm
Up until now none of the state’s politicians have been willing to actually cut programs to meet expenditures. The public rightfully doesn’t believe that they will suffer any pain because, in truth, they never have. It’s time to actually test their will by refusing to borrow more money in order to simply kick the can down the road. Let them taste the consequences of their actions for once.

Comment by striketoo Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:26 pm
Lack of trust of elected politicians sent to Springfield coupled with the name Fair Tax.

Comment by Louis G Atsaves Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:27 pm
The complete lack of trust for Springfield politicians with additional funds.

Comment by no_antonio Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:34 pm
==should have been more of a grass-roots thing==

The Vote Yes website list 177 Community and Advocacy Organizations, 126 labor organizations, and 17 Faith Organizations. There were numerous op-ed articles in favor of the fair tax in newspapers across the state. One People’s Campaign ran phone banks. They were everywhere. Plus they had the huge advantage of not having to explain the nuance of the tax. Just a couple taglines and they were off.

Despite all this, they still lost.

Comment by City Zen Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:36 pm
The problem is the pension increases.
The problem is Madigan fails to call out of committee any reasonable conversation to reduce future pensions.
It failed because our legislators fail to address the cost, which is pension, whic is the problem,
Throwing more taxes at pension with out addressing pension costs does not resolve the problem.
They need to be tied together, and they never will be under this leader
The ballot was also very misleading, brought to you by those same people

Comment by sharkette Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:50 pm
The article makes it sound like voters in AZ and CO were approving the actual rates rather than trusting legislators with a blank check. Sounds like a good place to start.

Comment by Theshow Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:51 pm
==RNUG==

Lockbox is Article IX, Section 11. It’s pretty clear.

Comment by Anon for Now Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:51 pm
In Illinois voters are easily led astray by big money to vote against their best interest and in the favor of the millionaires and billionaires who do not want to pay more. So when the inevitable happens, and taxes go up, and I expect they will, who will all the small business owners and farmers blame? They have no one to blame but themselves.

Comment by MJ’s Shoes Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:55 pm
“voters in AZ and CO were approving the actual rates”

Interesting to note that both AZ and CO have term limits.

Comment by Squire Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:58 pm
They possibly lost momentum waiting to put the CA on this ballot. I remember at the time the CA passed the GA that many commentators were concerned that by waiting to put it on the ballot, they were giving the opposition time to gear up, which certainly did happen.

Comment by A Jack Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 3:00 pm
The Governor’s team did not make the case for the graduated income tax. I voted for it–but there was so much mis-information out there. It seemed that there was never any explanation on what we were really voting. The administration seemed to assume that people would not understand if they explained it clearly.

Comment by ajjacksson Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 3:02 pm
@- sharkette - Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 2:50 pm:

== The problem is the pension increases.

The problem is Madigan fails to call out of committee any reasonable conversation to reduce future pensions.

It failed because our legislators fail to address the cost, which is pension, whic is the problem,
Throwing more taxes at pension with out addressing pension costs does not resolve the problem.

They need to be tied together, and they never will be under this leader ==

The IL Supreme Court has already said “No”.

Do you also favor bond debt reform?

Do you think it is OK to default upon the debt owed to only a selected group?

Remember, the funds borrowed from the pension funds were used to finance all of the spending in the state. The pension funds just happened to be a convenient place for the politicians to borrow, rather than matching the totality of state spending to available revenue.

But now you want to find some way out of having to actually pay that debt back?

Comment by Hieronymus Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 3:08 pm
Why did it fail? Here are five reasons.

Bad “manufactured” name. Fair Tax moniker felt too clever by half.

One trick pony messaging–millionaires and Billionaires yada yada yada when everybody instinctively knew the effects would snag lower income earners as well.

Unbelievable claim (to most people in all income brackets), “97% will get a tax cut”.

Nobody (in any tax bracket) trusts Springfield.

Location and graphics of the question on the ballot were messy and confusing.

Comment by Responsa Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 3:13 pm
==Interesting to note that both AZ and CO have term limits.==

Both AZ and CO have property tax rates about one-third of what we pay. I’ll trade that for the Fair Tax. Too late now?

Comment by City Zen Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 3:40 pm
Lies by the opponents, and lack of a strong response by the proponents.

Comment by JoanP Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 3:41 pm
The main reason was poor and inefficient organizing. Fair tax was simply not the word on the streets. And anyone who knew about it did get how critical it was.

Comment by state worker Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 3:44 pm
It is all in the messaging. Should have used Millionaire Tax, not Fair Tax.

Comment by filmmaker prof Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 3:50 pm
It should be noted that, unlike the Fair Tax, Arizona has married tax brackets. So Prop 208 only kicks in above $500K for married couples filing jointly.

All of Prop 208’s revenue, which is expected to generate less than $1 billion per year, is earmarked for education. I’ll also note that AZ spends less than half what Illinois residents spend on lower ed. So they had the advantage of having a singular goal (the kids) while already being on the low end of education spending.

Comment by City Zen Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 3:55 pm
Who really trusts that only the top 3% will be paying more a few years from now?

Comment by Wonk Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 4:15 pm
Multiple failures. Agree with others ^^^ that the messaging was blurry and not urgent.

“A fair tax” is like saying “a fair mortgage payment” or “a fair blow to the head.”

And most people I know, even in progressive circles, did not even know “Fair Tax” was happening. Those who did know about it did NOT know how critical it was, even people who should know. (That’s what I meant to say in the comment above.)

Comment by state worker Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 4:28 pm
I agree with all the above reasons, but in addition, some people just don’t think it is fair to tax people different percentages. I don’t think this makes them less intelligent, or dim as some imply. There was plenty of truth stretching in the ads from both sides. A real interesting process to watch unfold.

Comment by SSL Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 4:43 pm
@sharkette -

If 55 percent voted against a tax hike, how many of the other 45 percent will vote against it because it weakens their retirement savings?

Also, you cannot get that Constitutional amendment out of either chamber. Half the GOP will vote against it. Ask Brad Stephens where he stands. Ask the Fraternal Order of Police, one of the GOP’s biggest backers, and the IEA.

Comment by Thomas Paine Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 5:03 pm
Because people have come to realize the politicians in Illinois don’t solve problems they create them and then profit from them. You add the seen corruption in Chicago politics that is now alive and well in Springfield and you then have to wonder why the electorate refuses to give them a chance at more money through taxes.

Comment by Arock Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 5:55 pm
Terrible marketing. They needed to publicize the brackets, stretch them out, then aggressive show and tell. They needed to write to the third grade level… if it can’t be understood by a third grader it’s over communicated.

Comment by Mr Marketing Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 7:41 pm
Title of the message: Fair Tax. In 2004, in a non-binding referendum, it was titled Millionaires’ Tax, that passed overwhelmingly. Words matter.

Comment by Eddy Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 9:44 pm
They should have called it the Fair Tax Cut and switched the focus to the laughably modest tax savings for the 97% of Illinoisans.

Comment by Two Cent Ante Wednesday, Nov 4, 20 @ 10:30 pm
“…but their willingness to consider the proposed increases is much greater if they’re given a clear picture of what the additional revenue is for…”

Franklin Park passed a 1% non home rule sales tax by high numbers by promising to dedicate 100% of the funds to road improvement.

Comment by Mayor Thursday, Nov 5, 20 @ 10:29 am
Why? Because Pritzker and co were a bunch of amateurs. Rubes matching wits with veteran hustlers.
Well he got knocked off the horse. He needs to get back on the horse and hopefully with better experience on how to ride.
Illinois still needs the money.

Comment by Muddy trail Friday, Nov 6, 20 @ 8:25 am