Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

* UPDATED x1 * A justifiable warning

Posted in:

Illinois
Updated Posts

* Dan Proft warns legislators about voting to make the income tax hike permanent…

Liberty Principles PAC intends to monitor very closely the votes of those legislators up for re-election in November, such as the 11 House Democrat sponsors of HB 1064, who made a commitment to sunset the 2011 tax increases as originally promised.

I hasten to add that Liberty Principles PAC’s willingness to engage is bipartisan in nature, as was proven in the March primary election. We will also take an interest in the political future of any Republicans who would aid and abet defrauding Illinois taxpayers.

If we do not hold to account legislators who make promises they know they will not keep, we will beget more of those kinds of legislators. And if we do not have legislators who keep their promises, Illinois will keep losing businesses and families to states that do.

Liberty Principles PAC has a balance of more than $1 million in its campaign account currently. I am confident that figure will grow substantially between now and November.

* Set aside the rhetoric and Proft makes an extremely good point about HB 1064, which was introduced last year…

Reduces the rate of tax to 3% for individuals, trusts, and estates and 4.8% for corporations.

The bill’s sponsorship list…

Martin J. Moylan - Stephanie A. Kifowit - Sam Yingling - Katherine Cloonen - Natalie A. Manley, Deborah Conroy, Sue Scherer, Jerry F. Costello, II, Carol A. Sente, Patrick J. Verschoore and Kathleen Willis

Those legislators, plus historically anti-tax Democratic state Rep. Jack Franks, are more than enough to kill the tax hike extension on their own. If any of them flip, Proft and everyone else will have good reason to go after them.

*** UPDATE *** I also seriously doubt that former Rep. Keith Farnham’s recent replacement can be a “Yes” vote on the tax hike extension. That’s 13 total. The House Dems have 71 members with 60 needed for passage. Do the math. This ain’t gonna be easy or pretty.

posted by Rich Miller
Friday, May 9, 14 @ 9:19 am

Comments

Proft has no fiscal solutions. He has dogmatic tests to apply in any situation.

He plays his own political game pretty well.

Comment by Walker Friday, May 9, 14 @ 9:28 am
Gotta spend that Uihlein money somewhere. But I don’t think that 60 votes in the House was ever a sure thing.

Comment by wordslinger Friday, May 9, 14 @ 9:38 am
===Proft has no fiscal solutions. He has dogmatic tests to apply in any situation.===

Whatever the validity behind that claim, I think he makes a good point. You’ve got 11 legislators who sponsored a bill to completely roll back the tax hike. They shouldn’t be held accountable if they change their minds?

Comment by Rich Miller Friday, May 9, 14 @ 9:44 am
Why does Sue Scherer support putting so many of her constituents out of work?

Comment by Anonymous Friday, May 9, 14 @ 9:45 am
One thing about Proft. He doesn’t make idle threats, and he puts his PAC money where his mouth is, as Sandack found out the hard way even if he did squeak out a win in the primary.

@Walker, Proft has proposed many spending reform opportunities that would greatly mitigate, if not completely remedy, the spending problems that created the fiscal mess we have in Illinois.

The problem with our financial crisis is not technical. If Illinois were a business, and patronage, cronyism and corruption weren’t driving the train, there are solutions as they found in Wisconsin and Indiana and many other states.

The dilemma that Quinn, Madigan and Cullerton have is how to keep their cronies feeding at the state trough (and contributing to their campaigns) and keeping a mercenary welfare entitlement, trial lawyer, and public union political base keeping them in power without losing the rest of the state’s voters through tax increases.

Tough problem for the Dems, but they made this bed.

Comment by Arizona Bob Friday, May 9, 14 @ 9:46 am
There’s most of your target list.

Comment by Cabildero Friday, May 9, 14 @ 9:47 am
Rich: You’re right. They should be held accountable.

They shouldn’t have been so foolish to sponsor something that couldn’t work in the first place.

Comment by Walker Friday, May 9, 14 @ 9:48 am
Here’s hoping their positions have evolved due to a greater understanding of the need for continued revenue stabilization to address Illinois structural deficit. Held accountable for a bill that didn’t pass? How about being held accountable for responsibly addressing Illinois revenue problems?

Comment by PublicServant Friday, May 9, 14 @ 9:50 am
Stick to the facts.

It stinks that we have to hold our legislator’s feet to the fire and threaten them in order for them to comply with their own promises.

This entire Quinncome Tax scam is another political embarrassment for a state filled with political embarrassments. What will these people do for an encore? Rescind Blagojevich’s impeachment during the final hours of a lame duck session?

Do the right thing. Follow through with your promise, then be honest with us as to why we need the tax increase and ask us.

Comment by VanillaMan Friday, May 9, 14 @ 9:51 am
===Here’s hoping their positions have evolved===

When somebody flip-flops in your direction, that person is a statesman who has evolved. When s/he flip-flops away from your position, the person is a dastardly liar.

Comment by Rich Miller Friday, May 9, 14 @ 9:52 am
Well, putting it that way boarders on the dastardly, and flip-flop is such a loaded word.

Comment by PublicServant Friday, May 9, 14 @ 9:56 am
err borders, and yes, mt position on the word boarders has evolved.

Comment by PublicServant Friday, May 9, 14 @ 9:58 am
@publicservant
=How about being held accountable for responsibly addressing Illinois revenue problems?=

How about being held accountable for addressing Illinois SPENDING problems, like reducing the growth of education cost per student at double the rate of inflation while showing NO improvement in outcomes, excessive construction labor costs, an institutionally crooked grant system for doling out hundreds of millions every year, and serious control of medicaid fraud at both the recipient and provider levels?

I wouldn’t object to temporarily increasing my tax burden in Illinois (I still own income producing ventures there, but I’m trying to change that) if I believed that the increase was needed and was not just to sustain a corrupt and dysfunctional system.

I’ve seen little in Illinois to have ANY faith that there’s sufficient prudency and integrity in the GA and guvs mansion to believe this is a revenue and not a spending problem.

Comment by Arizona Bob Friday, May 9, 14 @ 9:59 am
Back to reality:

Vershoore? Laughable target.

For the suburbanites, it will not matter what Proft says or how much he spends if their mayors are on-board 100%.

At the end of the day, Proft’s group will be pigeonholed as Tea Partiers, and every dollar he spends of Dick’s money is cash that would have gone to a Republican anyways.

Besides, with Dick supporting Rauner, who also favors extending the tax hike, how much credibility does Proft really have?

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Friday, May 9, 14 @ 10:21 am
Let’s see…

Which of them voted for budgets over the last couple decades that got us into this mess in the first place?

Comment by Aldyth Friday, May 9, 14 @ 10:23 am
The real problem the Dems have is that the stated rationale for the expiration of the tax increase in 2011 was the need to get over the hump of the recession. Well, the recession has been technically over for four years with a slow but steady recovery at 2% to 2.5% a year. They have not made their case why in 2015 does the tax need to be increased. What have they been doing for the last 3 years to bring spending into line with the to be sunset revenues?

Comment by Bogart Friday, May 9, 14 @ 10:34 am
If I am reading Proft’s release correctly, he is not just targeting the 11 sponsors of the bill which included the rollback language. He will also be targeting those who voted in favor of it who also will be standing for reelection.

Comment by Louis G. Atsaves Friday, May 9, 14 @ 10:34 am
Proft is making this a “single issue” stance for his monetary PAC support or opposition.

Proft is not singling out Dems or the GOP, but any Mushroom who decides to make the Tax permanent, and is vulnerable.

Is that what “single issue” PACs…do?

Proft picked a “side”, I guess. The warning is, what it is.

Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 9, 14 @ 10:42 am
@ArizonaBob, you crack me up, especially with your WI and IN talk. As any reader here knows, WI personal income tax rates are graduated and top brackets over 5%. And IN, the average income is 21% below national average, IL is 5% above, and IL GDP is 50% higher than IN (source is Crains from about month ago in story about Rauner wanting to be like Mitch). There is a reason lots of Marquette,Madison, Purdue, IU, and ND grads come to Illinois after graduation. Google is opening an office in Chicago and not Hammond or Kenosha for a reason. But like I said, you do crack me up when I read your posts!

Comment by IllinoisO'Malley Friday, May 9, 14 @ 10:43 am
–Besides, with Dick supporting Rauner, who also favors extending the tax hike, how much credibility does Proft really have?–

Alright, YDD, I’ll bite: how do you get there?

Comment by wordslinger Friday, May 9, 14 @ 10:45 am
YDD, you’re over-thinking this. Voters won’t.

Comment by Rich Miller Friday, May 9, 14 @ 10:47 am
@Arizona Bob:

It is BOTH a revenue and a spending problem. Letting the current tax rate expire would be one of the most irresponsible things the General Assembly could do unless you have some brilliant plan to cut billions out of the budget. And what happens when the pension reform is held unconstitutional? Those costs aren’t going away.

Also, did I read one of your solutions right? Cut education spending? You really have a thing against education based on all of your comments about it.

Comment by Demoralized Friday, May 9, 14 @ 10:47 am
@YDD

= Vershoore? Laughable target. =

Especially when he is running unopposed.

Comment by Bill White Friday, May 9, 14 @ 10:52 am
===Especially when he is running unopposed. ===

So is Costello, and he’s a “No.” Just because you’re unopposed today doesn’t mean you will be unopposed when the other party slates somebody onto the ballot.

Comment by Rich Miller Friday, May 9, 14 @ 10:57 am
@Yellow Dog Democrat Proft has the “credibility” that his donors have PAID for him to have.

Comment by justsayin' Friday, May 9, 14 @ 11:01 am
Being short-sided to what it looks like today (unopposed, for example) misses what Proft is driving.

If he plans on spending the cash anyway, get some patsy to be appointed helps the narrative even more!

It’s a warning, there are steps to follow through to make a threat, a promise. Proft has the “resources” to go about it, so looking at this as a snapshot and not a process is a very big misread and a mistake.

Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 9, 14 @ 11:02 am
@IllinoisO’Malley,

Gov Walker inherited the tax scheme in Wisc - he didn’t create it. BTW, did you hear Wisc just rolled back taxes to the tune of half a billion dollars? I wonder how that happened?

Comment by dupage dan Friday, May 9, 14 @ 11:03 am
==== Rich Miller - Friday, May 9, 14 @ 10:47 am:

YDD, you’re over-thinking this. Voters won’t.===

This is the mildest understatement of the day. Mayors are using the term “blackmail” out in the open on this strategy.

Comment by A guy... Friday, May 9, 14 @ 11:03 am
Santa’s wish list might have just gone up by three names in 3 districts.

Comment by A guy... Friday, May 9, 14 @ 11:05 am
People, he’s got a million dollars in the bank. He’s made a legit threat using a very legit argument that is incredibly easy to understand by voters.

He may not be able to defeat everyone on his list, but he can sure scare the heck outta all of them.

It doesn’t matter what you think about Proft. Take your blinders off.

Comment by Rich Miller Friday, May 9, 14 @ 11:07 am
Are some of you really back on this Wisconsin and Indiana crap?

Comment by Demoralized Friday, May 9, 14 @ 11:13 am
Actually, to make this threat even more credible; if Proft gets patsies to run against the unopposed, and just drive this one issue at a 6-figure clip, man, that is a huge headache.

It’s real. It’s possible. It can be funded. Both parties should see this.

Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 9, 14 @ 11:14 am
–Gov Walker inherited the tax scheme in Wisc - he didn’t create it.–

Year Four of Walker administration and GOP assembly and that graduated income tax, with a top rate of 7.65% rate is still there.

Walker proposed rolling back $400 million of the Wisconsin state property tax. What’s the State of Illinois property tax?

Comment by wordslinger Friday, May 9, 14 @ 11:15 am
I am reminded of the words of Ben Franklin:

“We must hang together for we will surely hang separately”

If the targeted Democrats give in on this, Proft will be back for more and more and more.

Yes, this is a real and dangerous threat but caving in won’t make the threat go away.

Comment by Bill White Friday, May 9, 14 @ 11:18 am
Well, I would hope that all those lawmakers who voted to slash pensions in order to please the bond houses would want to please the bond houses by voting to extend the income tax.
Talk about flip-flopping. If you voted to cut pensions to protect the bond rating, and then voted against the tax increase extension, you would be a flip-flopper in my book, or else just a liar who wanted an excuse to cut pensions of teachers and others .

Let’s use the SB1 roll call to pass the income tax extension, otherwise we will see a steep drop in the bond rating

Comment by Truthteller Friday, May 9, 14 @ 11:20 am
It ain’t very credible to argue you are going to spend whatever it takes to defeat someone running unopposed.

A permanent tax increase was always going to be difficult.

And unless memory serves, it was Quinn who created this mess for himself by insisting it be temporary.

But I am betting that given the choice of a doomsday budget and a tax increase, Democrats will vote for the increase.

Politically, it is a choice between enacted a sustainable budget to the cheers of lots of folks while losing your part time gig as a lawmaker, or remaining in your seat with an ever-shrinking cadre of friends and revenue to spend on programs.

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Friday, May 9, 14 @ 11:42 am
I’m beginning to like Proft. He throws some great verbal bombs, and backs opponents to people who, good or bad, change positions they themselves etched in stone. Sponsoring HB1074 is etching in stone.

Comment by Toure's Latte Friday, May 9, 14 @ 11:45 am
Proft and the HGOP with Durkin at the helm could have some common interests. At the moment, it looks like 11 or 12. I see little in the way of anything preventing a common interest healthy relationship.

Comment by A guy... Friday, May 9, 14 @ 11:54 am
===I see little in the way of anything preventing a common interest healthy relationship.===

You’re not looking hard enough. Does Durkin want more Jeanne Ives or more Ron Sandecks?

Comment by 47th Ward Friday, May 9, 14 @ 12:09 pm
–I see little in the way of anything preventing a common interest healthy relationship.–

Except maybe that spending money against each other in contested primaries.

Comment by wordslinger Friday, May 9, 14 @ 12:11 pm
47th Ward. Ask the other question. Not as much what he wants more of, but what he wants less of.

Comment by A guy... Friday, May 9, 14 @ 12:12 pm
It’s very hard to pass something this unpopular. It was very hard last time to pass it, with Madigan getting just enough votes to do it.

I’m trying to learn how to temper my expectations in Illinois and make them fit into the political reality that is us.

Like some of you are saying, we are trying to recover and are improving our fiscal outlook with the extra revenue, and it makes sense to keep getting it, whether it’s “permanent,” phased out gradually or given another extension.

We always talk about Illinois’ fiscal situation in regards to job creation. If we let the tax increase expire, and our ratings go down, isn’t that what employers don’t want, a state that is less able to meet its obligations? If we don’t pass something permanent or more stable, isn’t that what turns people off, all this political instability, going from crisis to crisis?

I hope that those who are in power take a good look at this and make a right decision soon.

Comment by Grandson of Man Friday, May 9, 14 @ 12:12 pm
===You’re not looking hard enough. Does Durkin want more Jeanne Ives or more Ron Sandecks?===

Ding. Ding. Ding!

It’s one thing to keep MJM’s Crew busy, it’s another thing to “encourage” more Ives or Breen members in the Caucus. Diversity is what I like, but those forcing uniformity, is a mistake to add to a Caucus.

Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 9, 14 @ 12:13 pm
===@IllinoisO’Malley,

Gov Walker inherited the tax scheme in Wisc - he didn’t create it. BTW, did you hear Wisc just rolled back taxes to the tune of half a billion dollars? I wonder how that happened? ===

Scott Walker decided he wanted to be President and chose to sacrifice the fiscal stability of his state for some cheap election fodder. His tax rollback is projected to create a structural deficit in Wisky…after 2016.

Comment by CollegeStudent Friday, May 9, 14 @ 12:17 pm
=== When somebody flip-flops in your direction, that person is a statesman who has evolved. When s/he flip-flops away from your position, the person is a dastardly liar. ===

A great addition to the Dick Lockhart truisms. So true … So true.

Comment by Norseman Friday, May 9, 14 @ 12:19 pm
Good for Proft. Let’s watch carefully now to see what promises and threats are made to try to get their votes! What’s the over/under for resulting indictments?

Comment by Formerpol Friday, May 9, 14 @ 12:20 pm
Rich, I think the blinders are off - but it would be silly not to comment that Proft’s only credibility is derived from one donor’s - Uihlein’s - cash. Being bolstered by one political donor - isn’t credibility now that I think about it. It’s more like someone else paying so you can play.

Comment by justsayin' Friday, May 9, 14 @ 12:22 pm
I have to agree with TL it seems Proft really likes going after the one’s who make promises then don’t keep them. Why you would ever talk in absolutes in Ill politics is foolish.

Comment by DuPage Bard Friday, May 9, 14 @ 12:22 pm
=== wordslinger - Friday, May 9, 14 @ 12:11 pm:

–I see little in the way of anything preventing a common interest healthy relationship.====
Except maybe that spending money against each other in contested primaries.=====

Primary season is over. Much less to disagree on now. Keep watching. I think you’ll see cooperation.

===Oswego Willy - Friday, May 9, 14 @ 12:13 pm:

===You’re not looking hard enough. Does Durkin want more Jeanne Ives or more Ron Sandecks?===

Ding. Ding. Ding!

It’s one thing to keep MJM’s Crew busy, it’s another thing to “encourage” more Ives or Breen members in the Caucus. Diversity is what I like, but those forcing uniformity, is a mistake to add to a Caucus.====

More like, you might be a “Ding Dong”. I think I read that Durkin headlined an event for Breen in Springfield. I don’t think you know too much about him. I think ultimately Durkin wants to be a Speaker or at the very least, lead a relevant minority with added leverage. I can’t believe he hasn’t asked your opinion on who people in other districts should elect. Especially over incumbents. He must be lacking in some way, eh?

Comment by A guy... Friday, May 9, 14 @ 12:23 pm
===I think ultimately Durkin wants to be a Speaker===

So do I, but he won’t win the support of his caucus if people like Dan Proft are the ones choosing the candidates that get elected.

Plus, this all bluster anyway. I’ll believe Proft’s threats are real when I see him spend his money. Until then, it’s all hot air and wishful thinking.

Comment by 47th Ward Friday, May 9, 14 @ 12:37 pm
=== I’ll believe Proft’s threats are real when I see him spend his money===

Didja miss the primary?

Comment by Rich Miller Friday, May 9, 14 @ 12:38 pm
Proft isn’t handicapped this time with a candidate that has been arrested naked, nor is he making gay marriage his cause.

Demanding that the legislators honor their pledge regarding the “temporary” income tax is not a fringe issue supported only by conservative social activists.

He has a million, and on this issue, a whole lotta supporters.

Comment by VanillaMan Friday, May 9, 14 @ 12:43 pm
Mmmm “Ding Dongs”!

Freeze them, then gave them with Coffee. Not every day, but a good start sometimes.

===. I think I read that Durkin headlined an event for Breen in Springfield. I don’t think you know too much about him.===

Breen is the Nominee. It’s a safe district. If Durkin can take a picture with Sandack and Ives on the same Primary Day, Durkin can help his Caucus by backing a Nominee.

You must not read much. I advocate a Caucus if both Sandacks and Ives, like the Maureen Murphy and Mark Beaubien Caucus, that was a majority caucus.

Adding more divisive GOP candidates like Ives is all bad for Durkin, and those “teaching Freshmen” don’t help too much either. Breen and Ives may “work” in winning those districts, but they may not work in others.

Envouraging Proft to keep MJM’s Crew busy is fine, but looking to Proft to add to the Caucus Dopey members lacking the ideal that a diverse Caucus is good, but winning seats on a Litmus Test criteria, that leads to factions, not inclusion.

As to Leader Durkin, if he cares what I think or not, for my purposes, I am a huge fan to the way he, and his Crew, go about their business. The only one who seems to care if Leader Durkin is reading, liking, ignoring, or scoffing at my comments, is you.

Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 9, 14 @ 12:45 pm
It looks as if MJM made his own problem by encouraging his targets to sponsor the tax rollback bill. Though I favor the tax extension, Profts fairly points out the huge discrepancy between favoring a 3% rate and potentially voting to keep a 5% rate they wanted to lower a few months ago. Maybe that will teach the Democrats the risks of pretending to be for something they have no intention of every enacting.

Comment by Anon Friday, May 9, 14 @ 12:52 pm
===Didja miss the primary?===

No, but I could have been clearer. I’ll believe he is seriously going after these Democrats when he spends money against them. Right now, it’s a press release.

Comment by 47th Ward Friday, May 9, 14 @ 1:01 pm
=== No, but I could have been clearer. I’ll believe he is seriously going after these Democrats when he spends money against them. Right now, it’s a press release. ===

47, do you think he wants to save his money for party purity purposes only?

Comment by Norseman Friday, May 9, 14 @ 1:03 pm
47th, a whole lot of Republicans said the same thing before he started spending money in the primary.

He proved he wants to spend it, not hoard it. Take heed.

Comment by Rich Miller Friday, May 9, 14 @ 1:05 pm
- Norseman -,

I will say that a side “goal” for Proft seems to be to make it “clear” that his PAC, and his decisions with that PAC, “should” be considered by Durkin and the HGOP in the Micro, and any member in the GA in the Macro.

Reminds me of a Paul Caprio. What is scarier is that Proft will burn more fields and crops to prove a point than Caprio, and in both parties, and that is saying something.

It’s about the leverage and forced influence more that policy, at times, for Proft, and he has the cash to make it so.

Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 9, 14 @ 1:11 pm
On that point I agree with you strongly, Rich.

Thing is, Proft was probably gonna spend that money one way or another. If he wants to spend it trying to beat Democrats in safe seats, bully for him.

The much bigger problem for the tax increase right now are allegations of misspending by Quinn.

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Friday, May 9, 14 @ 1:17 pm
YDD, most of those districts are not “safe” seats.

I mean, why do you think they co-sponsored that bill?

Comment by Rich Miller Friday, May 9, 14 @ 1:23 pm
Agreed, Rich. But the true targets are not gonna vote for the bill anyway, right?

So, this threat only works against lawmakers in safe seats with a history of being afraid of their shadow.

On the upside, for Proft, maybe he can now take credit for targets voting against a bill they were always a No on.

But Moylan? C’mon. Senator Kotowski creamed his opponent last time in a race that was a referendum on the tax hike, and Moylan won by 2500. And he has been working his butt off for two years.

Take away the $5300 each contributed to Moylan’s opponent by Dick Uihlein, Bruce Rauner and his wife — all coincidentally within 48 hours of each other — and Moylan’s opponent raised all of $10K last quarter. His viability is questionable at best.

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Friday, May 9, 14 @ 1:58 pm
The Sandeck race was personal. How long has Proft been holding on to Uhlein’s money? He finally spent some trying to defeat a personal enemy. Good for him.

Proft’s money is all he’s got, and despite his claims, I don’t see him raising a lot more (unless his benefactor continues to write big checks). Whatever Proft spends going after these Democrats, Madigan will match and then some.

Once the PAC money is gone, Dan Proft is a very eloquent nobody.

Comment by 47th Ward Friday, May 9, 14 @ 1:59 pm
=== He finally spent some trying to defeat a personal enemy. ===

Yeah, and on Breen as well.

Comment by Rich Miller Friday, May 9, 14 @ 2:02 pm
Proft won’t waste money if he can’t win.
At least one name on the list still doesn’t have an opponent. So he can threaten all but less than half that list have a credible enough opponent that the Speaker has to jump in on to save if Proft plays there.

Comment by DuPage Bard Friday, May 9, 14 @ 2:16 pm
===Proft won’t waste money if he can’t win.===

Ron.

Sandack.

Proft spends $100K to irritate Madigan, in 10 races, that “buys” a great deal of influence and leverage later, no matter if the races all go against Proft.

This “warning” is very, very real.

The long view is the opportunity for Proft to be an outside influencer, for his own device, to the HGOP. If if gets larger to the House too, even better for Proft.

It’s the raw financial that is the impacter here, to the Temporary Tax, whole real, is an instrument for Proft to use a fulcrum in using that money.

Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 9, 14 @ 2:26 pm
Heavyweight boxing champions do not lose their titles based on points; they lose their titles by being knocked out. Mike Madigan, Illinois’ heavyweight champion, will not lose on points, he’ll need to be knocked out.

Comment by Buzzie Friday, May 9, 14 @ 3:12 pm
So, in other words, he doesn’t want to have a public discussion about why we need to keep the tax hike, or why we can let it go?

Comment by Cheswick Friday, May 9, 14 @ 3:19 pm
===And unless memory serves, it was Quinn who created this mess for himself by insisting it be temporary.===

Luv you, YDD, but the truth happens to be the exact opposite. Quinn always wanted the temporary income tax increase to have been made permanent, not temporary, all along but he lost that fight.

Comment by Mighty M. Mouse Saturday, May 10, 14 @ 10:52 am