Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Some budgetary red herrings
Next Post: Unemployment rate falls to 9.4 percent
Posted in:
* One of the most active state legislators so far this spring is Rep. Kelly Cassidy, who is involved in a high-dollar Democratic primary race against Paula Basta. Rep. Cassidy has mastered the art of getting publicity for liberal legislation this year, which will definitely help her with her campaign. Her district is quite liberal and staunchly Democratic, so this stuff is red meat for her constituents…
All purchases of firearms ammunition in the state would be subject to a new 2 percent sales tax to help fund trauma centers under a bill (HB 5167) passed by a House committee Wednesday.
A lobbyist for the Illinois State Rifle Association called the measure “an unconstitutional poll tax.”
The bill passed on a party-line vote in a committee dominated by Chicago Democrats.
The new tax would raise an estimated $800,000 to $1.2 million annually, according to sponsor Rep. Kelly Cassidy, D-Chicago, “for the fight against gun violence.” Money would be deposited in a new High Crime Trauma Center Grant Fund.
The Executive Committee approves bills like these just to get them to the floor. But it’s really not important whether this bill passes, it’s important that it gets noticed by the folks back home. Cassidy has also pushed a gay marriage bill this spring and is behind several other high-profile bills like the one we debated yesterday.
I’ve teased Cassidy about her slew of bill sponsorships in person, and she insists that she fully supports the policies. That’s undoubtedly true. She’s not pushing bills she opposes. But she is focusing on some of the highest profile legislation in the House right now, so there’s really no way to deny that this isn’t also political. She’s simply working the tried and true program for anyone in a tough race, and doing it better than many.
Some of Cassidy’s other gun bills are detailed here.
* And speaking of guns…
Handguns would have to be registered and a new tax would be imposed on ammunition sales under bills approved Wednesday by the Illinois House Executive Committee.
With Democrats voting “yes” and Republicans “no,” the committee approved House Bill 5831, which requires handgun owners to register their weapons with the state. The bill is an initiative of Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanual. […]
Felicia Davis, Emanuel’s first deputy chief of staff, said most guns used in crimes in Chicago come from Illinois, but outside of the city. A handgun registry will help law enforcement trace guns used in those crimes, she said.
“The city of Chicago already has a handgun registry, but with a majority of illegal handguns arriving from elsewhere in the state, Chicago’s gun laws are only as good as those for the rest of the state,” Davis said. “This is not about restricting the rights of law-abiding gun owners.” […]
“Criminals don’t care if they register guns,” said Rep. Mike Tyron, R-Crystal Lake.
* Related…
* Gun-rights groups decry proposed surtax on Illinois ammo sales
* Illinois Politicans Debating New Ammo Tax: National Rifle Association lobbyist Todd Vandermyde likened the proposal to a poll tax, and a Republican on the committee, State Rep. Ed Sullivan (R-Mundelein), said since you cannot purchase ammunition in Chicago anyway, Cassidy is just trying to tax the suburbs and Downstate to help trauma centers in Chicago. Cassidy denied the centers would necessarily be in Chicago, but Sullivan responded, “That’s the reality of the state of Illinois.”
* Texting-on-a-bike bill irrelevant Downstate, says some lawmakers: State Representative Kelly Cassidy of Chicago is a supporter of the bill. She says while parts of the state don’t have the traffic like Chicago does it’s still a good precaution.
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 11:24 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Some budgetary red herrings
Next Post: Unemployment rate falls to 9.4 percent
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
==All purchases of firearms ammunition in the state would be subject to a new 2 percent sales tax to help fund trauma centers under a bill (HB 5167) passed by a House committee Wednesday.==
Taxing the bullets is a good idea, advocated best by Chris Rock in his standup routine awhile back.
But I’m getting tired of all of the earmarking revenue for specific uses when the state has unpaid bills and a budget crisis. 4 examples:
1) AG Madigan’s revenue from the bank foreclosure settlement going to homeowners.
2) LG Simon’s pole tax proposal, with money going to sexual abuse victims.
3) Governor Quinn’s idea to use the extra sales tax money going to education
4) Cassidy’s proposal today
Comment by Robert Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 11:35 am
Did the NRA and ISRA just equate the ability to buy cheaper ammunition with American citizens’ right to vote?
I really wonder about their sense of proportion, sometimes.
Comment by mark walker Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 11:38 am
It’s not a poll tax, it’s a tax on a commercial good. Ridiculous argument.
Comment by siriusly Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 11:50 am
I support the tax idea, but I agree with Robert - what’s with the earmarking? Put the money into the state police pension fund or someplace on the ledger.
Comment by siriusly Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 11:52 am
The gun measures seem punitive.
I don’t really see a connection for taxing every purchase of ammunition to pay for the consequences of illegal use of ammunition.
And if the handgun registry is solely for tracking crime, why require a fee at all?
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 12:00 pm
People who buy their guns LEGALLY already have them regulated and registered through having to have a permit to purchase them and a waiting period. So the idea of having to specifically register handguns AGAIN and pay $65 to do so to benefit a cause that benefits only a few is simply ridiculous! NOTE TO ALL LEGISLATORS: Quit grandstanding for media-grabbing bills and get to work on the stuff that really matters - like a fair and balanced budget!
Comment by Both Sides Now Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 12:05 pm
In the status quo, people who are hurt by gun violence and can’t afford it just suck up taxpayer money (at the county level? state maybe?) This tax would offset that money.
Comment by Anon Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 12:09 pm
All the more reason to buy out of state
Comment by Informer Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 12:09 pm
===already have them regulated and registered===
Illinois doesn’t register guns, hence the proposal.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 12:14 pm
Amazing how flawed this gun registration proposal is, and it won’t deter crime in the least bit. It’s an assault on legal, law-abiding gun owners. People who commit gun violence aren’t allowed to own guns in the first place, thus they won’t/can’t register them under this proposed law. In addition, what about guns that will “flow into Chicago” from Wisconsin, Indiana, etc?
This is very misguided, and it is placing a tax on a constitutionally-protected freedom. There is already a tax on the purchase of these items: a sales tax. Taxing the ownership of such items is an infringement.
Comment by East Sider Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 12:16 pm
I don’t see the tax as punitive, but I believe the money should help cover the costs of law enforcement, rather than funneled into a specific grant.
Comment by Wensicia Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 12:17 pm
–“The city of Chicago already has a handgun registry, but with a majority of illegal handguns arriving from elsewhere in the state, Chicago’s gun laws are only as good as those for the rest of the state,” Davis said. “This is not about restricting the rights of law-abiding gun owners.”–
How is it NOT about restricting the rights of law-abiding gun owners???
Comment by East Sider Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 12:18 pm
Looks like the ISRA has put out a separate proposal to fund these trauma centers. It involves surtaxes on sales/property taxes, and possibly cell phone bills, vehicle registrations and utility bills, all based on zip code. So those in more violent zip codes (poorer areas) will pay higher taxes.
Seems to be based on the idea that Southern Illinois shouldn’t be paying for violence in Cook County. I think a simple look at which areas generate revenue in this state, and where that goes, really puts a damper on this argument.
Comment by Anon Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 12:20 pm
Such proposals are definitely going to hurt Downstate Democratic candidates for the General Assembly. Politically this will play well along the liberal Chicago lakefront, but it is going to be toxic Downstate. It makes you wonder if the Democrats would be happier to have a majority composed solely of reps and senators from Cook County and Northeastern Illinois.
If this legislation passes and is enacted, the lawsuits are going to be filed simultaneously.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 12:22 pm
–People who commit gun violence aren’t allowed to own guns in the first place,–
Not sure what you mean. There certainly are examples of legal gun owners shooting people.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 12:22 pm
–Not sure what you mean. There certainly are examples of legal gun owners shooting people.–
In rare instances…certainly not an epidemic that requires regulations that infringe upon the rights of all law-abiding gun owners.
Comment by East Sider Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 12:38 pm
Thank God. Finally, a proposal that will keep guns and ammo from criminals and will make our streets safer.
Comment by Jechislo Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 12:42 pm
Rare instances? Back it up with facts, please.
Comment by Emanuel Kant Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 12:43 pm
“Such proposals are definitely going to hurt Downstate Democratic candidates for the General Assembly.”
Not if they play their politics correctly it won’t. See Rich’s spot-on analysis on Rahm’s handgun proposal.
Comment by Bill F. Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 12:46 pm
–Thank God. Finally, a proposal that will keep guns and ammo from criminals and will make our streets safer.–
I hope this is sarcasm?
Comment by East Sider Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 12:47 pm
Make gun owners get training and a license to sue their guns. Do the same with bike owners. Make them all pay something, put that money in the general funds and pay down the debt.
Comment by Cheryl44 Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 12:52 pm
So downstaters (the most active recreational shooters in Illinois) are going to be subject to a 2% tax on ammo purchases (which are already incredibly high) to help prevent gun violence which mostly occurs in Chicago.
Yeah, that makes perfect sense.
Comment by Don't Worry About the Government Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 1:01 pm
Where Cassidy lost me was when she started talking about taxation at Northside DFA. She said that she hoped the CME/Sears deal would stimulate discussion of implementing a graduated income tax in Illinois.
Excuse me, Rep. Cassidy, but amending the Illinois Constitution starts in the General Assembly.
She talked about implementing the graduated income tax like she was some sort of academic far removed from the process.
Cassidy can sponsor bills that appeal to liberals. It sorta reminds me of President Clinton proposing a bunch of narrow-bore policy proposals he had no intention of passing.
The Illinois General Assembly has been negligent for years. The default for voters in this cycle should be to vote against incumbents.
Cassidy might have some good qualities, but she’s hardly irreplaceable. Voting out incumbents helps light a fire under them to do their jobs.
Comment by Carl Nyberg Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 1:10 pm
Yes, East Sider - that was sarcasm; to the nth degree.
I don’t post often. But when something this idiotic is proposed in by our legislature, I just can’t control myself.
Comment by Jechislo Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 1:14 pm
I agree with the view point I dont see how any of this is going to reduce violence in Chicago or anywhere else in Illinois. This I suspect are DOA any way. While it may not hurt individual done state members of the General Assembly depending on how they handle it it does have the potential to hurt the Democrat brand name downstate.
Comment by RMWStanford Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 1:15 pm
–Voting out incumbents helps light a fire under them to do their jobs–
Non sequitor.
Comment by David Ormsby Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 1:29 pm
Let’s resurrect the blackpowder/ammunition ID/chemical tag tracing proposals. That was a great idea that got shot down by the NRA for no rational reason (not that they ever have any rational reasons for their policies).
Comment by D.P. Gumby Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 1:29 pm
an unconstitutional poll tax? Someone should tell ISRA that poll tax does not mean what they think it means. Whoever put that release out for ISRA must be pretty darned stupid.
That said, the tax is to pay for trauma centers. Trauma centers have nothing to do with preventing violence. They have everything to do with keeping people alive who have (amongst other things) been shot.
And there’s a big problem in Illinois with trauma centers. As in many hospitals don’t want the costs and liabilities associated with being trauma centers anymore, so they’re eliminating their trauma center programs, leaving people who have suffered severe injury with fewer options. Longer ambulance trips. Greater risks of death.
A tax to help fund trauma centers seems like a good idea to me. And since trauma centers mostly deal in gunshot victims, seems to me that taxing the proximate cause of gunshot injuries (the bullets) is as good a funding mechansim as you can come up with.
Comment by jerry 101 Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 1:50 pm
-Let’s resurrect the blackpowder/ammunition ID/chemical tag tracing proposals.-
I hope this is sarcasm?
Comment by Jechislo Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 1:50 pm
I guess the state police will be checking cars coming from MO with ammo purchases just like they did for the cigs. This world is changing, and it is not for the betterment of the majority.
Comment by Ain't No Justice Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 2:08 pm
jerry 101 then charge a tax on the areas that have a trauma center. I read that Northern Illinois has approximately 50. The closest to me is in Missouri - a state many downstaters will consider moving to if these punitive taxes and fees are enacted.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 2:24 pm
===then charge a tax on the areas that have a trauma center===
I seriously doubt that would be constitutional.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 2:35 pm
===This world is changing, and it is not for the betterment of the majority. ===
Yes, the majority is always under seige here. C’mon, Eeyore.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 2:37 pm
Why would it be unconstitutional to charge a tax to fund a trauma center in a tax district? Is it different than taxing us for a library? Why couldn’t they charge a $100 fee to be treated at the trauma center? Why not charge criminals who use a gun illegally a $5,000 fee/penalty similar to the fee we pay on our speeding tickets that is used for trauma centers?
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 3:09 pm
Well we all see how well Chicago’s registration scam works on preventing shootings in Chicago, so why not make the rest of the State just as safe as Chicago is? In reality, probably half of the households in the city have at least one unregistered firearm under a mattress, just in case. All a statewide registration would do is turn even more good citizens into felons for not registering their guns.
Here’s a better idea, and easier to verify. As long as we are taxing our rights away, why don’t we impose a tax on library books? You can easily keep tabs on who has one and you can also charge $10 for the library card. You can call it a LBOID card. Books on tape? Tax them too. The First Amendment only gives you freedom to speak, not to read books.
Sheesh, time to go buy some supplies (out of State of course) and learn how to reload my own ammo. I always wanted to learn how to do it anyway. Sorry Rahm, NO TAX FOR YOU!
Comment by Benny Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 3:10 pm
- Well we all see how well Chicago’s registration scam works on preventing shootings in Chicago, so why not make the rest of the State just as safe as Chicago is? In reality, probably half of the households in the city have at least one unregistered firearm under a mattress, just in case. -
I don’t, I leave mine back home down in Central IL where it actually gets used once in a while hunting doves. If the state wants me to register it, I have no problem with that. I also don’t mind paying a little extra for shells if the money goes to a good cause. I really don’t understand why folks get so riled up about these ideas.
Comment by Small Town Liberal Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 3:24 pm
I already pay tax on ammo, and since I’m all registered with the city anyway, that will exempt me. I would only pay an ammo tax when I can buy ammo and shoot inside the city limits.
Comment by Benny Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 3:31 pm
—> I really don’t understand why folks get so riled up about these ideas.
Would you mind paying a tax whenever you speak, or post a response in a blog?
Comment by Benny Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 3:39 pm
@Carl Nyberg:
To be clear, Cassidy was not elected. She was appointed to fill a vacancy (created when former Representative Harry Osterman left Springfield after being elected to represent the 48th Ward in the Chicago City Council). Arguably, she is an “incumbent,” but no one other than the party committeemen have voted for her yet.
Comment by Esquire Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 3:44 pm
-> Would you mind paying a tax whenever you speak, or post a response in a blog?
You are being ridiculous.
Comment by Ratman Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 4:07 pm
I am —thiiiiiiiiiis— close to just skipping the comments on any article that pertains to guns. I always have to look up while reading to see if the sky is falling yet.
Comment by Colossus Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 4:25 pm
—> You are being ridiculous.
Really? I think people’s words have landed them in the trauma center enough times to warrant a tax. I think you are being closed-minded.
Comment by Benny Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 4:29 pm
Why don’t we put a 2% tax on alcohol sales, in the city of Chicago. Alcohol kills more people than gun’s. We could sent it to help the downstate hospital who haven’t been paid by the state. Since there is no ammo sales in Chicago this would even out the taxes!
Comment by Bob Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 4:30 pm
Since I don’t drink, that’s a Capitol idea!
Comment by Benny Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 4:32 pm
Touche’ Benny!
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 4:41 pm
Never posted this way before, but this will make criminals out of more people than crack, including me.
Comment by anonymously Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 4:43 pm
If you review the SCOTUS decision Haynes vs United States, it says felons (who are prohibited form owning firearms) do not have to obtain licenses or register their weapons because that would be an act of self-incrimination.
So law abiding citizens will have to register their guns but criminals won’t. Yeah, that’s really going to help …
Comment by Retired Non-Union Guy Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 5:31 pm
- Since I don’t drink, that’s a Capitol idea! -
Maybe you should start, might help you relax.
But seriously, setting aside the tax issue, what is the big deal about registering guns? To me it seems like it might not be a bad idea, for instance if your gun was stolen and recovered, police would have a way to get it back to you. What’s the real beef with this?
Comment by Small Town Liberal Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 6:05 pm
Small Town Liberal @ 6:05 pm:
Every time such lists were made in the past in various countries, it eventually led to gun seizure, usually within 5 to 10 years or less.
I have a list of the serial numbers in multiple safe locations. If they were to be stolen, I would then supply the numbers to the police and my insurance company. Unless they are stolen, the police don’t need the list.
Comment by Retired Non-Union Guy Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 6:58 pm
Gumby has it right….tracing the bullets is WAY more valuable than a tax on bullets. and less objectionable. the things we really need, like tracing guns, bullets, are things that the ISRA/NRA are opposed to so why hand them a constitutional issue like taxation that will not even help solve the real problem….finding the criminals who use guns! also, get back to an assault weapons ban….those guns do some real damage and the lack of a national ban is problematic. taxing is a waste of time.
Comment by amalia Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 7:29 pm
Require a rider policy providing liability insurance.
We require every auto to be insured, we ought to require every gun to be insured.
Someone gets injured with your gun, your insurance company pays.
No need for a tax.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 7:51 pm
instead of registering guns, which are already registered when u buy them….taxes on ammo, traceable bullets, semi auto bans, liability insurance etc. why dont the demwits in chicago address the minority problem they have there and leave the rest of us alone? the effect of these bills is mass civil disobedience….
Comment by way south of chicago Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 8:39 pm
YDD,
Because I have rental property, I’ve already got a $1M liability rider that covers just about anything on any property. Think I’m covered …
Comment by Retired Non-Union Guy Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 9:19 pm
—> Maybe you should start, might help you relax.
I’m relaxed, however you seem high strung. Maybe you should stop, it would help lift the fog and let you think more clearly.
But seriously, when your gun gets stolen, give your serial number to the cop writing the report. Don’t hold your breath getting it back though, even if it is found later.
Comment by Benny Thursday, Mar 1, 12 @ 11:36 pm
amilia — those evil “assualt weapons” as you call them are no more “powerfull” than any other rifle or handgun. Matter of fact my rifle for Elk hunting has a lot more power in it than my AR15s.
we’ll aslo know more about this issue as it was just argued infront of the Illinois Supreme Court. The tide has shifted, might as well get use to it.
YDD — you never cease to amaze me, however, the insurance gimick has been tried before and it’s just another variation of a way to try and tax a right. To drive the ability to exercise it out of the hands of those who probably need it the most.
If you add up all this, it cost over $300 just to be able to own a single handgun in Chicago now. And YES that’s a Poll tax plain and simple. It is designed to discourage the right.
Comment by Todd Friday, Mar 2, 12 @ 8:26 am
@Todd….disagree with your assessment of AW as do many,including lots of police, but I’m sure you’d agree that the bullet tax is wrong. now if you can just agree to tracing….
Comment by amalia Friday, Mar 2, 12 @ 11:51 am
amalia: I’d like to see your evidence. So far, all that I’ve seen is evidence that you have extremely limited knowledge on guns.
Comment by East Sider Friday, Mar 2, 12 @ 2:05 pm
Small Town Liberal wrote:
“But seriously, setting aside the tax issue, what is the big deal about registering guns? To me it seems like it might not be a bad idea, for instance if your gun was stolen and recovered, police would have a way to get it back to you. What’s the real beef with this?”
If you can point to a single stolen registered gun in Chicago being returned to its lawful owner, we can entertain this idea.
Even so, Canada just dumped its long-gun registry as too expensive and useless in solving crimes.
Comment by David Lawson Friday, Mar 2, 12 @ 2:23 pm