EXTRA: Could Pence make Middle East trip? Trump's holiday "surprise?"

PENCE: Middle East, or Indy, for holiday?

Vice President Mike Pence made a point of rescheduling his journey to the Middle East for mid-January, since he wants to be on hand for when the Senate takes its vote on the tax plan desired by President Donald Trump to benefit the more wealthy amongst us who feel ever-so-overtaxed.

Yet with the House of Representatives giving its approval Tuesday afternoon, making it possible for a Senate vote Tuesday night, it may seem that Pence could still make his overseas travel.

OR WILL HE prefer the thought of a Hoosier Christmas? Returning to his home state of Indiana for the holidays.

Trump's holiday surprise? His alter ego?

For the record, Republican leadership says they pushed to take the final vote on the Trump tax plan so that it could be sent to the president for final consideration prior to Christmas.

Which literally could make it possible that Trump acts to sign the measure into law on Christmas. His "gift" to Americans? Or his "screw you" to the majority of people who didn't vote for him!

Which would truly make Donald J. the 21st Century equivalent of the "Grinch who stole Christmas." It's just too bad we can't find a "Cindy Lou Who" who can shame him into a sense of decency.

  -30-

Ego brought down to Earth – Stroger to seek water district, not county president

Todd Stroger, the one-time state legislator and alderman who will forevermore be remembered for his stint as Cook County Board president and his effort to raise the county portion of the sales tax, will go about thinking to himself that he could have been re-elected to that post – IF ONLY.

STROGER: Water dist., sted of president

Stroger on Facebook this weekend was boasting of the Sunday night campaign event where his nominating petition circulators would gather together the results of their work.

THAT WOULD ALLOW Stroger himself (or more likely some flunk on his behalf) to file the petitions Monday to get him a place on the ballot for county board president come the March 20 Democratic primary.

But instead, Stroger on Monday decided to instead file the nominating petitions he had originally collected to get himself on the ballot for a seat on the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District.

Which under typical circumstances could be considered a government post of some significance – one that would allow Stroger to go around thinking of himself as a government official. Rather than a political has-been – which is what he’s been in recent years.

Stroger aides were honest in admitting he was unable to get enough signatures of support to get himself a place on the ballot with just over 8,200 valid signatures of support. There wasn’t enough time, since he only began his county board president talk just over a week ago.

WHEREAS HE HAD been using the past several months to gather signatures for the ballot slot for the water district.

If Stroger had gone ahead and sought the county board president post, there’s a very good chance that his petitions would have had the appearance of a rush job; as in sloppy and flawed.

It happens, particularly since the rules governing the process are so vague that who’s to say what will ultimately be determined to be a flawed signature.

PRECKWINKLE: One less primary challenger

Meaning it would have been likely that some supporter of incumbent Toni Preckwinkle would have filed a challenge to Stroger – and he likely would have suffered the ignominious embarrassment of being kicked off the ballot!

IT’S MORE LIKELY that his water district petitions are more legally sound and less likely to be challenged.

Although it’s always possible that someone motivated by spite will go ahead and challenge Stroger’s water district candidacy on the grounds that he had a hell of a lot of nerve to think he could run against Preckwinkle.

If that line of logic sounds incredibly petty and absurd, keep in mind we’re talking about electoral politics. It’s all about the egos for these people.

Including for Stroger, who probably has some resentment that voters dumped on him for his sales tax initiative that was meant to stabilize the county government finances – but instead caused resentment because the increase in the county portion of the sales tax caused the overall tax in Chicago to exceed 10 percent.

THEN AGAIN, THERE are others for whom Stroger’s real offense was being picked by his father, the late John Stroger, to succeed him as county board president.

Todd may have been a one-time state legislator and alderman, but the people who were somehow willing to accept all the generations of Daleys, Madigans, Cullertons, Lipinskis, etc., who have been a part of the local government scene were somehow unable to accept it when the Stroger family tried to follow suit.

John Stroger must settle for county hospital named in his honor, rather than being a political family like the Daleys

I don’t doubt that a Stroger candidacy for Cook County Board president would have drawn a certain amount of negative energy. He would have been a long-shot to win, regardless of what he thinks about Preckwinkle and her ‘pop tax’ effort to balance the county budget.

Although I wonder if his couple of weeks as a Preckwinkle challenger will merely elevate Todd’s profile to the point where the people who eight years ago chanted “Don’t Vote for the Son” as their mantra will suddenly take an interest in the water district race to ensure he doesn’t win that seat either.

  -30-

Do knee-jerk pols put any thought into votes they cast on govt. business?

One of the things that dismays me as a reporter-type person observing various levels of government is that our elected officials are the equivalent of sheep.

Daley's 'rubber stamp' council not odd, even today

The rank-and-file aldermen, commissioners and legislators (Congressmen, too, if you want to be honest) are supposed to be the bodies that give their approval to the proposals put forth by the chief executives (mayors, governors, etc.) they’re supposed to monitor.

YET LET’S BE honest. They usually do whatever they’re told to do. They “get with the program,” so to speak. The occasional public official who actually makes a point of trying to study the details and think for themselves on each and every issue winds up being regarded as a troublemaker – if not a downright huge pain in the derriere.

It is something I have seen at so many levels of government that I don’t doubt its truth. Reading a recent analysis prepared by the Moody’s Investors Service only helped to reinforce it in my mind.

The analysis was meant to study the long-range impact of the recent debacle Cook County government went through in enacting, then repealing, that penny-per-ounce tax on pop and other sweetened beverages.

Those pennies do add up – to the point where people were outraged at the increased cost of a case of pop. Even the county admits it expected to raise some $200 million per year from all those pennies. It wasn’t cheap change!

THE ANALYSIS SAID that public outrage, stirred up by the lobbying efforts of the American Beverage Association with its “Can the Tax” campaign, is now intense enough that the public will be skeptical of any government proposing any kind of tax increase – regardless of the reason.

“The political backlash against the pop tax highlights the practical limitations on raising taxes, even if a government is legally permitted to do so,” Moody’s officials wrote.

“Any future tax hikes in the wake of the pop tax repeal will likely be met with some political opposition, exacerbating budget pressures for Cook County and other area local governments,” the service wrote.

Let’s be honest. When most of the officials who voted to implement the tax did so last November, they really didn’t think much about it. They just voted “aye” because they felt they ought to do so. Likewise, most of them were just as quick to want to jump on board the repeal effort made earlier this month.

I COULDN’T HELP but see some truth in the view of commissioner Deborah Sims, D-Chicago, who complained about being forced to vote to repeal. I think I would have respected her view if she had held her ground, instead of going along with the repeal.

It is the reason why the two county commissioners I gained some respect for out of the pop tax debacle were Jerry “the Iceman” Butler, D-Chicago, and Larry Suffredin, D-Evanston. They were the two who held their ground and voted for the pop tax – then against its repeal.

The others went with the whims of following the way the wind blows – and when it blew in ways telling them to suddenly change their stance, they did so; regardless of whatever it is they really think about the issue.

Although for all I know, they may be more than willing to go with the program – either putting their faith in the elected leadership so that they want to be part of the overall organization. Or maybe they’re really just that indecisive.

NOT THAT COOK County government’s behavior is unique. Aldermen and legislators are just as inclined to follow the whims of the mayor or the Democratic leadership of the General Assembly – who admittedly have staffs of analysts who can discuss the intricacies of any measure that goes before their respective governing bodies.

So are we now going to have knee-jerk “no” votes on anything that involves the revenue by which our government’s operations are funded? That would scare me, because we already have some people willing to act in such a manner on measures they have ideological opposition to.

Thinking they can get government out of its obligations to the people merely by cutting off the funding. Will similar people stir up trash talk against the Uber and Lyft transit fees being considered to help balance out the Chicago city government budget now under review?

It’s not high-minded or responsible government by any means. It’s more about being more interested in holding on to one’s elected office at all costs – even though the individuals probably don’t have anything in mind to do with the post once they have it.

  -30-

EXTRA: ‘Pop tax’ shifts – you can buy cheaper pop in Cook Co. come Dec. 1

Cook County Board members voted overwhelmingly on Tuesday to support an ordinance that repeals the penny-per-ounce tax on sweetened beverages – the tax that was enacted with a tie vote that had to be broken by board President Toni Preckwinkle herself.

SUFFREDIN: Lone remaining tax backer

Which means that the American Beverage Association’s “Can the Tax” lobbying effort was heard loud-and-clear.

IT DOESN’T MEAN that there was really a consensus of thought about this issue – which was supposed to raise some $200 million per year to balance out the budget and ensure that county-run healthcare programs and facilities would be fully funded.

All but one of the county board members who previously supported the tax (Larry Suffredin of Evanston was the lone 'no' vote) voted “aye” in favor of the ordinance to repeal the measure that came up Tuesday during a finance committee session.

But some of the people who previously supported the pop tax made it clear they weren’t happy about feeling pressure to vote to repeal it come Dec. 1 – which is the date that a new budget for the upcoming fiscal year takes effect.

Jesus Garcia, D-Chicago, said government officials will have to deal with potential budget shortfalls when they give approval to that new budget sometime next month.

“RESIDENTS OF COOK County sent a strong message how they felt about this revenue measure we tried to utilize to balance out the budget,” the former mayoral candidate said. “This budget is a statement about our morality, values and compassion, or lack thereof. We still face a revenue challenge to provide services to the needy.”

While Stanley Moore, D-Chicago, said he thinks he should get credit for initially supporting the pop tax. “I have shown I will take the hard vote, if need be,” adding he fears there will be “cut, cut, cut, cut at the expense of the disenfranchised.”

Suffredin, the lone opponent of pop tax repeal, said he believes the county suffers financially because Illinois government is not providing the full amount of reimbursement it is supposed to provide for healthcare programs.

While Deborah Sims, D-Chicago, said she was bothered by being pressured to change her vote. “It’s not fair that nine of us (who supported the pop tax) take the heat, and everybody else walks away free.”

NOT THAT EVERYBODY was concerned about reductions in healthcare services by Cook County government. Jeffrey Tobolski, R-McCook, said he anticipates such cuts in spending.

“What we have (in revenue) is what we have to work with, there are some tough decisions that will have to be made,” he said.

As for the politicking, Richard Boykin, D-Oak Park, said he was “overjoyed and elated this tax is going to go away.” Although Tobolski was most blunt, saying, “I’m glad this damned thing is over.”

Of course, we’ll get to re-do the issue again Wednesday, as the county board will meet as a full board, rather than as a committee, which means that Jerry “Iceman” Butler, D-Chicago, will get his chance to add his thoughts for the record – assuming he shows up for the county board meeting rather than being absent, as he was on Tuesday for the finance committee session.

  -30-

EDITOR’S NOTE: The official info that Cook County government put forth to try to justify the pop tax they enacted Nov. 10, 2016 that took effect at the beginning of August of this year.

Will ideologues ruin Preckwinkle reputation the way they did Ogilvie?

Presuming that Cook County Commissioner John Daley and three others who indicated last week they changed their minds about the pop tax keep to their word, it would seem the tax meant to ensure the county can cover its financial obligations for health care services and other expenses will wither away.

If signs like this really stirred up anti-pop tax attitudes, will their hostility carry over to hurt Toni Preckwinkle come 2018 Election Day? Photograph by Gregory Tejeda

It creates the potential vote by the Cook County Board later this week of 12-5 (or maybe 13-4) in favor of an ordinance to rescind the penny-per-ounce on pop and other sweetened beverages. Which county board President Toni Preckwinkle will veto – but is a strong-enough vote to over-ride her – if it holds fast.

NOW SOME PEOPLE are not considering this sufficient suffering for Preckwinkle. They’re determined to stir up resentment at the polling place – getting enough people to vote against her re-election bid next year because she had the nerve to realize that the county has financial obligations that must be met.

PRECKWINKLE: Remains firm on pop tax

People in the real world don’t get to tell bill collectors we don’t have the money so we’re not paying. In reality, we have to come up with the finances to meet our obligations. We need to pay up!

Which is why I have consistently thought (and still believe) that this pop tax that adds about 20 cents to the bottle of Coca-Cola I occasionally buy is something we all have to pay – if we really need to have those carbonated beverages in supply.

It also is why I’m not terribly sympathetic to the lobbying efforts of the American Beverage Association – which represents the pop manufacturers who probably don’t want anyone else managing to get a larger cut of the money paid by people when they feel the need to buy pop.

THEY WANT IT for themselves. Understandably, but not a high-minded cause by any means.

OGILVIE: Insisted Ill. needed income tax

The trick is to see how, in coming months, this issue plays out. Will people really hold a grudge against Preckwinkle – and carry out their revenge on Nov. 6, 2018 by voting ABP?

The one thing that Toni has going in her favor is that as of now, the Anybody But Preckwinkle vote literally has nobody else to pick. People who were contemplating seeking the Democratic nomination for Cook County Board president have decided not to do so. As for the Republicans, their political party may get bogged down in the mass of anti-Trump and anti-Rauner rhetoric to put up a serious challenger.

But there are those people who can manage to get worked up at the “T” word just as much as many ideologue-minded Republicans will get worked up at the “A” word tying the governor to abortion.

Is there a 'Dan Walker' type for county?

I’M SURE THERE are those looking back to the 1972 election cycle – the one in which incumbent Gov. Dick Ogilvie lost to Democrat Dan Walker; in large part because one of the major accomplishments of Ogilvie’s one term in office was that Illinois implemented its original state tax on residents’ incomes.

Ogilvie (himself a former Cook County Board president who used that post as a springboard to the Statehouse Scene) argued that the state’s finances had become so unstable that the tax was necessary. Financial experts will argue that the tax turned out to be essential.

Yet there were enough people who voted against Ogilvie because of that tax that he wound up losing re-election.

Could governmental history repeat itself by stirring up enough people p-o’ed by the thought of paying a few more pennies each time they buy pop (which is expected to add up to a few million dollars to balance out the county budget)?

Daley name still influences our government

OGILVIE WASN’T HELPED by the fact that Dan Walker and his walk across Illinois caught the imagination of many as a viable alternative (although I know many of the same ideologues who still denounce Ogilvie’s income tax view Walker as an even worse choice).

As I already stated, as of yet, there is not really a credible challenger to Preckwinkle – although it’s always possible that there’s somebody currently out there passing about nominating petitions to try to get on the ballot for the March 20 primary.

But could she wind up going into our local political history as the woman who pushed for a tax to ensure that Cook County met its expenses – only to be penalized at the polling place?

In a world that could seriously elect Donald J. Trump as president with only 46 percent voter support, anything is possible.

  -30-

Abortion vs. pop tax – which makes for a more unpopular political figure?

The 2018 election cycle will be intriguing to see which one of two high-ranking officials winds up becoming the most unpopular, and if they can manage to win re-election despite the levels of contempt felt towards them by the populace.

PRECKWINKLE: Pop tax provide gas for her demise?

I’m referring to Gov. Bruce Rauner and Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle – both of whom I’m sure feel in their hearts they did the “right” thing, but are likely to face their share of crackpots determined to see to it that both of them lose their dreams of re-election.

NOW I’M SURE that in terms of raw numbers, Rauner has more enemies because he’s running for office across Illinois. For Preckwinkle, she doesn’t have to care about what people outside of Cook County think.

But she may have the more intense level of disgust being sent in her direction.

That’s how unpopular the pop tax has become amongst some people. The Capitol Fax newsletter reported Thursday how many people are refusing to sign the nominating petitions for the slate of preferred Democratic candidates running in Cook County because it contains Preckwinkle’s name.

Toni has the advantage of not (as of yet) having an opponent challenging her for the county board presidency. But people peeved because of the pop tax (that one cent per ounce on sweetened beverages) want to make it clear they aren’t fond of the tax that can boost the cost of a 2-liter bottle of pop by about 65 cents.

SOME PEOPLE ARE going so far as to write little messages on nominating petitions so as to express their desire that Preckwinkle go down to defeat.

Now the trick is to whether Preckwinkle can overcome the level of disgust against her between now and the March 20 primary or the Nov. 6 general elections. There is time. And like I stated before, she really doesn’t have a serious opponent yet. Until we know what the alternative is, any talk of a challenge is purely theoretical.

But we’ll have to see what happens Tuesday when the county board’s Finance committee reviews a measure to abolish the pop tax just months after it took place. And if the full county board follows through Wednesday to approve that measure.

RAUNER: Abortion critics and budget blasts?

There is pressure being put by the lobbyists for the soft drink industry on county board members to vote to erase the tax. But there aren’t really many politicos coming out and saying they’d be willing to dump the tax (only commissioner John Daley, D-Chicago, thus far). You’d think people would want to publicly state as soon as possible that they’re changing their vote!

COULD IT BE that the efforts to erase the tax ultimately will wither away, and that the pop tax will remain in place? And would-be voters will have to express themselves by either voting against Preckwinkle or (if she doesn’t ever develop a serious opponent) by merely not voting at all?

I’m sure Republican political operatives want to believe that Preckwinkle is going to be the ultimate drag on the ticket that will lead the GOP to electoral success come 2018. But the reality is that the real drag on the tickets in Illinois will be the Donald Trump persona.

Which is likely to motivate much of metro Chicago into turning out to vote for people they will perceive as being willing to stand up to the crackpot persona of our nation’s current president.

Not only that, but Rauner has his share of hostile would-be voters in Chicago because of the many actions he has taken during his two-plus years as governor that have created the perception of an Illinois government incapable of doing anything.

TRUMP: The ultimate in political unpopularity?

I’M SURE THE rural part of Illinois would be willing to come to Rauner’s defense (“Blame Madigan!!!,” they’ll retort) on the long delays in putting together a state budget or in approving education funding

But many of those people seem determined to turn on Rauner because of the abortion issue. The fact that he signed off on a measure undermining their long desire to restrict Medicaid funds from being used to help lower-income women terminate a pregnancy means he can’t be trusted – in their mindset.

And unlike Preckwinkle, Rauner has serious challengers on the Democratic Party side of the equation – although Republicans seem determined to believe that the Dems in the running are too ineffectual to mount a serious challenge.

Either way, it would seem that ’18 is going to be a campaign cycle filled with hostile rhetoric – with the only question being whether it will be the “Preckwinkle” or “Rauner” name that gets tarred and feathered the most.

  -30-

EXTRA: Cook County may resume its spot back on top (of the sales tax heap)

A part of me is wondering right about now who’s laughing the loudest – Todd Stroger or William Beavers.

PRECKWINKLE: Now, she wants the tax hike

Both of them surely are saying “told you so” at the thought that Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle let it be known Monday that she’s now pushing for an increase in the county’s share of the sales tax.

CURRENTLY, THE COUNTY charges 0.75 percent of the purchase price as a sales tax. Which when combined with all the other government entities in Cook County and Illinois makes the total sales tax some 9.25 percent.

Preckwinkle says she wants to add another 1 percent to the county’s share, which would bring the total sales tax to 10.25 percent – which would be one of the highest rates anywhere in the nation.

It’s ironic that the county board president is now pushing this issue, because she was the one who during her last term in office went out of her way to repeal a 1 percent sales tax hike that former county board President Stroger imposed.

And which was the primary reason why so many people ganged up on his campaign for re-election in 2010 that he came in fourth in a four-candidate field during the Democratic primary that year.

OF COURSE, SOME people were really upset that Stroger was the son of John Stroger, and they didn’t like the way the elder Stroger orchestrated his succession for his son to the top county board post when his health became so inclement that he had to step down.

Talk of the tax hike was really just their cover.

BEAVERS: How snarky would he be?

Preckwinkle made a priority of gradually knocking down the sales tax hike that Stroger enacted because the tax revenue was needed by county government to fulfill its financial obligations.

Now, she wants that money back. The real question is, Will the bulk of the Cook County Board be just as hard-headed in their opposition to the issue as they were back in the days of Stroger?

OR WILL THE fact that Preckwinkle has much more professional respect in her post than Stroger ever had when he served result in them being willing to accept the need for a revenue increase?

It won’t be just Stroger who thinks “told you so.” Because I can remember so many occasions in which the outspoken Bill Beavers denounced his critics for their tax opposition – always seeing it as a personal slight against Stroger rather than a serious critique about government revenues.

STROGER: Will his tax hike become real?

So many that I honestly lost count, and eventually quit noting them back in the days when I wrote about Cook County government. It got to the point where Stroger NOT criticizing his colleagues was more rare and newsworthy than when he did.

Why would Preckwinkle be willing to move now to repeal something that she previously fought against? Perhaps it is because that with all the different units of government facing financial problems, Preckwinkle wants to stake her claim to an increased share of the sales tax before anybody else can.

OR MAYBE SHE’S just more willing to accept such an increase if she winds up getting the credit for fixing the county’s financial problems.

Although I’m sure the people who are eager to back Gov. Bruce Rauner in his efforts to alter the state’s financial situation will be amongst the most outspoken critics of Preckwinkle for what she is talking about doing now.

I’m also sure it will further bolster the arguments of those people who live near the county’s borders – because they’re going to argue it further makes it cheaper to shop elsewhere. Will County, or perhaps across the state line in Hammond?

Then again, I think anybody who’s willing to go out of their way to waste gasoline so they can save a few cents when they buy gas isn’t going to care about any line of logic that tries to justify the need for additional sales tax revenue.

  -30-

Lucky ’13? Even if we avoid “fiscal cliff,” we really didn’t solve problem

Nobody wants to do anything. But nobody wants to take any blame for doing nothing!

A new year, yet same old cheap rhetoric

That is probably the best way to summarize the activity that our Congress engaged in during the workday hours on Monday – as they were trying to stave off the dreaded “fiscal cliff” that we’re falling off of.

THE TAX INCREASES mandated because of the federal government’s inability to reach real solutions toward fixing federal finances are supposed to be so “draconian” (another catch word that’s being tossed about these days) that we’ll sink into another recession.

Not that I seriously expect this to happen.

For it seems that the reality is going to be that our members of Congress some time in the first day of 2013 will manage to approve some way of resolving the “problem” (which is artificial in that it is a construct of the Congress itself).

The most-laughable concept I have heard in recent days is that the Congress will then take credit for “saving the nation” from economic devastation by lowering the tax hikes that ever-so-briefly went up!

DEVASTATION THAT THEY brought on us by putting this problem off for soooooo long – they did, after all, have the past year to try to resolve it. Yet how much serious discussion occurred until the final weekend?

Nada!

So when I heard President Barack Obama during the noon hour here in Chicago (real time, not that EST nonsense they follow in D.C.) say that an agreement was “within sight” yet “not done,” it made me realize that the cheap talk is in the air.

It didn’t surprise me to read later on the wire services that Obama and Republicans reached a deal to pass a measure that delay the tax hikes temporarily – in hopes that they can be permanently put off with a vote that could be taken Tuesday.

WE DON’T HAVE a solution. We may not have even had a real problem – just a partisan pissing match that won’t really go away until people get serious about government finances as a financial issue.

Instead of as a chance to score point on, and dump all over, their politically partisan critics. Which is what political people on way too many levels place their focus on.

I realize that a government official can’t do anything if they can’t get elected; meaning partisan politics is a reality that must be addressed.

Yet there are times when I wish we had officials who could actually comprehend public policy – and not just spout out a few “talking points” without really understanding what it is they’re saying.

THERE ARE TIMES I think the bikini-clad or evening gown-wearing models at auto shows know more about cars than politicians do about government finances!

OBAMA: Wishing this were someone else's problem?

It results in way too many events where the final solution that gets approved is just a stop-gap measure meant to postpone the problem from getting worse until some unspecified date in the future.

Take the other issue that many of the TV-types have tried to pair up with the “fiscal cliff” – the farm bill and provisions of it that were on the verge of expiring.

Had they expired, an obsolete formula (more than 60 years old) for determining farmer subsidies would have kicked into effect. That is what would have provoked the fears that the price of a gallon of milk could have shot as high as $8.

WHICH IS WHAT it really should cost – except for that dreaded “government welfare” that we give to the farmers in the form of agricultural subsidies.

Not that I’m bashing such use of federal funds. Helping to keep the price of food staples at a reasonable cost that people can afford to buy and consume it strikes me as a legitimate use.

As are many of the other things that some political people are looking to hack to pieces when they talk about the need for spending cuts in the name of “deficit reduction.”

They just want to cut the things that benefit people who might not be just like themselves! Which is why I have a hard time taking them seriously now. And find it reckless and irresponsible that they’d be willing to let a mechanism like the “fiscal cliff” be triggered to score a partisan advantage.

THE POINT OF the “cliff” is that it is supposed to be so horrible that we’d never want it to happen and would do anything to avert it.

Let’s hope that our political people in Washington keep that concept in the back of their heads during the next couple of days.

Because IF it turned out that we have this problem get dumped into the lap of the Congress that was elected in November (they take their oaths of office on Thursday), I really believe that we’d get to see the absurdly-low approval ratings for Congress drop to the single digits.

If not an outright zero percent backing.

  -30-

EXTRA: Quinn won’t tax downloads

Broken by the Chicago Sun-Times, and killed off by the Chicago Tribune.

At least that is how it appears on the Internet with regards to Gov. Pat Quinn’s suggestion that downloads of pop music and movies (http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/clout_st/2010/04/quinn-backs-off-itunes-tax.html) could be taxed to raise revenue for government.

IT IS NOT the most ridiculous concept in the world. But it is not about to happen. The Tribune reported Thursday (one day after the Sun-Times played it up big on Page One) that Quinn is now saying the idea was merely a suggestion, and not something he’s committed to backing.

So now, we can focus attention on an increase in the state income tax (the subject of a staged rally outside the Statehouse this week that attracted some 15,000 people), which is an idea that will have even less popularity than getting the financial deadbeats who blow all their spare money on iTunes to fork over a few cents per purchase to the state – which is already done in 19 other states.

-30-

Edgar shows us why he’s no longer the “voice” of the Grand Old Party in Illinois

Illinois’ one-time “Gov. No,” the man who once had a running feud with Mayor Richard M. Daley for refusing to support the city’s desires on so many things, is now in a position where he’s going around touting views that sound like they’re coming from life-long Democrats.

We’re talking, of course, about Jim Edgar, who this week said he supported a business group that wants to push for reforms to the nation’s immigration laws. Edgar also told a gathering at Elmhurst College that he thinks his political party’s gubernatorial nominee is being short-sighted for insisting that tax increases of any type cannot be a part of the solution for resolving Illinois government’s financial problems.

HECK, EDGAR WENT so far as to say that Gov. Pat Quinn is showing “courage” for being willing to talk about income tax increases to help insure that state government has enough money to meet its financial obligations.

The latter comes across with a certain level of incredulity to those of us who remember his 1994 bid for re-election, where his campaign used its fundraising advantages to tar and feather Democratic opponent Dawn Clark Netsch as a “tax and spend liberal” for suggesting that state income tax increases, paired up with local property tax relief, was an idea worth considering.

Of course, Edgar himself proposed something similar three years later as part of a solution to help stabilize state funding for public education – an idea that abhorred his GOP legislative colleagues so much that they went out of their way to let it die politically.

Personally, that is one reason why I now believe that all campaign rhetoric used by candidates should be disregarded. It definitely should not be taken literally

INSOFAR AS EDGAR was concerned, no one was worried about any embarrassment that might be caused to the governor. A part of me has always wondered how much that whole fiasco played a role in Edgar’s decision not to run for any office in 1998, or any election since then.

The fact is that there always was a certain disconnect between Edgar and the ideologically conservative faction of the Republican Party. We’re talking about the same people who are pleased that FINALLY they got a gubernatorial candidate of their own to vote for (in the form of state Sen. William Brady, R-Bloomington), and are the ones who create just enough uncertainty that moderate-to-conservative Senate nominee Mark Kirk shouldn’t take victory on Nov. 2 for granted.

Edgar was always a cause for suspicion among those people because he was the rare Republican who would publicly say he thought abortion was a legitimate medical procedure that should be available to women, if they so chose.

In fact, my recollection of Edgar was of a life-long state government bureaucrat whose reason for wanting to be governor was that it was the top post of his most significant employer. He literally worked his way up from Legislature intern to a legislator to a gubernatorial staffer to a state constitutional officer to governor for eight years.

HE ALSO WAS the guy who took pride in being from Charleston (the college town that hosts Eastern Illinois University). Which meant that his biggest strike in the eyes of Chicagoans is that he was one of those people not fortunate enough to be one of us.

Which also meant he didn’t see the need to cater to the Chicago political organization and was wiling to say “no” to Daley (third airport, Meigs Field, so many issues). Of course, the ideological disconnect between Edgar and the faction that now runs the Illinois Republican Party was also such that they didn’t think much of telling him “no” when he asked for their support – which fed into the idea among Chicagoans that Edgar was useless because he couldn’t get his own allies to go along with him.

My point in recalling all of this trivia (my time covering the daily activity of Illinois state government coincides timewise with the Edgar era, although I also got tastes of Jim Thompson and George Ryan) is to say that it isn’t surprising that Edgar (who remains a “distinguished fellow” of the University of Illinois’ Institute of Gvoernment & Public Affairs) would be in disagreement with the people of his own political party come this election cycle.

I think the news reports emphasizing the idea that “Republican Jim Edgar said his party’s candidate is wrong” (that is pretty close to the lede used by the Arlington Heights-based Daily Herald newspaper) are missing the point.

EDGAR WAS NEVER the hard-core ideologue that is now preferred by Republican Party organizations across the United States. “Milquetoast” and “boring” are the terms I remember being used to describe the one-time goverrnor.

So to read reports indicating that Edgar is now more concerned about the state’s financial situation than he is in scoring political points for people who probably don’t think of him as much of an ally to begin with should be expected.

Hence, he is willing to consider the dreaded “income tax” increase, although in all fairness, Edgar has said he voted in the primary earlier this year for Kirk Dillard, the state senator from Hinsdale who once worked as his chief of staff.

And as for his support for immigration reform, it goes along with the general tone of the Edgar years that were concerned about Illinois business interests. I’m sure some of those businesses could care less about the “foreigners” and just want cheap labor.

BUT MANY OF the “undocumented” are here because they want to work, and would be glad to get the proper visa and go through the paperwork procedure if not for the fact that the current rules governing that process are a mess. Which is why we need immigration “reform!”

There also is a practical political overtone to Edgar on this issue, since he has said in the past that his GOP colleagues’ ideological games are scaring away the growing Latino population from thinking of the Republican Party as a place that might be for them.

I know that many conservatives want to believe that things such as the “Tea Party movement” is a revolution meant to turn back aspects of our society they consider to be threats – including, for some, the presence of all these “foreigners” from “Mexico, or Mexico-like countries.”

The reality, however, is that this conservative “backlash” is a mere blip. There are trends in our society that are occurring and cannot be turned back by some ideological rants. I’m starting to wonder if the presence of Jim Edgar (whom I must admit I didn’t vote for in either 1990 or 1994) is merely evidence that a few people in the one-time Party of Lincoln are trying to accept reality.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTES: Has Jim Edgar really become some sort of liberal who supports higher taxes and letting more foreigners (http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=371853&src=109) into this country? Or is Edgar the equivalent of John Paul Stevens (http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/04/area-businesses-join-push-for-immigration-reform.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ChicagoBreakingNews+%28Chicago+Breaking+News%29), the retiring Supreme Court justice nominated by Republicans who now with the passage of time and changes in the GOP is now lauded/demonized as the ultimate liberal?

Has it really been a dozen years since Edgar gave up government (http://igpa.uillinois.edu/person/jim-edgar) for academia?

How long can Illinois spread around its financial hurt to Indiana and other states?

It is no secret that Illinois government’s financial problems have become so severe that companies doing business with the state often go for months at a time before they actually get paid for their services or products.

But are we now starting to put a financial headlock on surrounding states?

THAT WAS THE initial reaction I had when I learned of the Illinois Department of Corrections having problems purchasing ammunition for use by their guards. More specifically, by the guards-in-training when they go through the exercises that ensure they know how to use the firearms they have been issued for their jobs.

If a cadet is at all competent, he winds up using 600 bullets to complete his training.

Shore Galleries Inc. of suburban Lincolnwood is the company the state has been buying ammunition from. But the state owes Shore some $6,000, cauising the company to say it would not provide any more of its product to the state unless the state paid in advance.

News reports indicate that the state ultimately got the ammunition it needs. But not by paying up what it owed to Shore, or by working out a deal that allows the state to continue to have a line of credit for Shore.

INSTEAD, ILLINOIS MANAGED to find a company in Indiana, which provided some 761,000 rounds of ammunition at a cost of $200,000.

Which means we’re now in debt to an Indiana company.

A part of me would like to think that this is a case of some Hoosiers being suckered. Which it is on a certain level, since I would doubt they got any of the money up front. If the state could afford to pay up front, it would have been kept in Illinois.

But that also makes Illinois the equivalent of a con-artist, pulling off a scam against our “country bumpkin” neighbors. I wish we could have a better image than that.

AT A TIME when Illinois’ national image focuses largely around Rod Blagojevich and half-wit websites run headlines such as “Mob banker endorsed by Obama losing Illinois Senate race,” the last thing I really want to see emanating from the Statehouse Scene is constant reminders of how much of a deadbeat the state has become financially.

Are we eventually going to turn off Indiana companies, so we’re going to have to go two states over to Ohio (or Kansas) to do business with? If we ever get to Idaho, that is when (in my mindset) Illinois will have bottomed out.

The reason Illinois has sunk to such desperate financial straits is that government expenses went up in recent years at the same time that the national economy has taken a hit on income. We’re spending more while taking in less.

Put that way, it seems like such a problem with an elementary solution.

BUT THE SAME kind of partisan politics that want to lambast Giannoulias as a “mob banker” also are preventing political people from seriously addressing the issue.

There are those who figure we need to come up with more money to cover the essential expenses, while others are determined to whittle the state’s financial skeleton down beyond the bone to mere slivers because they’d rather appease the anti-tax types who usually oppose programs that benefit people unlike themselves.

The reality is that while there are some cuts that can be made, there also is going to have to be some sort of tax hike such as what Gov. Pat Quinn has proposed. But then again, there are the people who point out incidents such as Quinn’s meeting with Mayor Richard Daley.

One day after Daley saw an Opening Day White Sox victory with his grandson in tow, Daley got another victory by getting Quinn to back away from suggestions that the state could save money by having the Chicago Police take over patrols of the Interstate highways that cut through the city.

THE PERCEPTION THAT Quinn will back down if pressured is what enables legislators to seriously think they can get away with passing six-month budgets, then return to Springfield in the weeks after Election Day to try to impose another quick-fix to the financial mess.

It is this insistence on quick fixes, rather than seriously addressing the problem, that is going to create more and more situations where we have to find surrounding state suckers who are willing to accept our promise of, “I’ll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.”

Wonderful. We have become the political equivalent of Wimpy, the Popeye cartoon character.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTES: Illinois is so far in debt that it had to endure a struggle last month to come up with (http://www.pantagraph.com/news/state-and-regional/illinois/article_74a27a28-41ba-11df-9874-001cc4c002e0.html) sufficient ammunition for its prison guards. For what it’s worth, Department of Corrections officials felt compelled to issuea statement to reporter-types that guards in the prisons themselves were never in danger.

Alexi Giannoulias may have his problems, but the spin on this story goes so far over the top that it makes (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/mob-banker-endorsed-by-obama-losing-illinois-senate-race-90023952.html) their “facts” seem cheap. Meanwhile, Pat Quinn having a better relationship with Rich Daley than Jim Edgar did (http://www.suntimes.com/news/cityhall/2144258,CST-NWS-quinn07web.article) really does not say much for him.

Legislators face a tough decision

Our political people in Springfield are going out of their way to avoid voting on anything that could be perceived as a tax increase. They don’t want to tick off voters come the Nov. 2 elections.

Yet I’m starting to wonder at what point will their refusal to do something about the serious financial problems this state confronts will come back to bite them in the tushy. For the fact is that the state’s shortfalls are causing struggles for many entities that rely on state funding to survive.

THUS FAR, STATE officials have lucked out.

Because many people are seeing cuts in programs they rely on, or are hearing their local school districts talk about making serious cuts in education, in order to balance their budgets with the lesser amounts of money the state is likely to give them during the upcoming school year.

I say state officials are lucky because the people see these cuts and seem to be blaming the local folks.

They’re assuming it is financial incompetence on the part of the local program officials, or school board officials who don’t have a clue what they are doing, that are causing these cuts to be made.

I HAVE LOST count of the number of times I have heard school superintendents make pleas to their local residents to call up their state legislator and complain about the activity in Springfield. All I know is that if that message ever does resonate with the public, there are going to be a whole lot of angry people marching on the Statehouse to complain.

That is a thought our Legislature ought to have kept in mind on Wednesday when Gov. Pat Quinn made (finally!) his budget address for the state fiscal year beginning July 1.

His past attempts to get the Legislature to approve something in the way of a tax hike to raise enough revenue to maintain government services (some of which people depend upon to survive) at adequate levels have failed.

So this year, he’s talking about the massive cuts to programs, which I wonder is just a scare tactic to get people to consider some alternative? I note that legislative officials already are saying Quinn’s budget proposal (which calls for $2.2 billion in spending cuts, mostly to education; taking out $5 billion in loans; and extending by an even more ridiculous time period the schedule by which government pays its bills) is dead.

YET I HAVE not heard of anyone offering a serious alternative – except for some talk of passing six-month budgets that would allow for any potentially negative vote to be taken in the weeks AFTER this year’s general election.

That’s just running away from the problem.

Yet so far, the legislators have been able to take cover in the fact that Illinois residents are quick to blame their local officials for the problems that are being imposed upon them by the state.

I do understand that the economic conditions causing these problems are unlike anything I have seen in recent decades. This is a unique situation – one that is going to require a unique solution if Illinois government is ever to become a worthy entity capable of providing for the many who rely upon it for various services.

I ALSO REALIZE that when I hear parents complain that their local school district is going to decimate itself by making severe cuts in the number of teachers, educational or extra-curricular activities or supplies, I do believe that no self-respecting school official would even consider making these cuts if they could avoid it.

So I do believe that some of the local hostility is irrational. These are conditions that are going to be dumped upon us, and there are going to be some people who will suffer as a result.

So I don’t blame local officials, or even Illinois legislators, for causing the situation, as much as I wonder why they’re so reluctant to take on the hard-nosed actions that will be required to resolve the problems.

I believe that part of the duty of an elected official is to make the tough decisions that aren’t always popular, but are necessary for our government to survive as a worthwhile entity. Because if it can’t provide, then we have to take the Libertarian sentiment into account and question why we even have it?

ONE OTHER POINT that I noticed recently. State Sen. Bill Brady, R-Bloomington, also the Republican nominee for governor, plans to campaign by claiming Quinn has mis-managed the whole situation and is wrong for thinking that additional revenue is a solution.

Yet Brady doesn’t seem to have the support of one-time Gov. Jim Edgar, who recently told WBEZ-FM that Brady’s proposed solutions were “naïve” and that he’s not campaigning for anybody come November.

Edgar is far from a radical and I recall his use of the no-tax hikes rhetoric during his two terms as governor. But if even he’s seeing that our political people are going to have to swallow some of the vile-tasting medicine being offered by Quinn to resolve this situation, we might have to take into account that it will have to happen.

Or else legislators will have to hope that Illinoisans don’t ever some to their senses and turn their disgust on the Statehousse for their inaction.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTES: Pat Quinn is spewing a lot of “crazy talk,” as far as his government colleagues in the (http://www.suntimes.com/news/maxedout/2094100,CST-NWS-quinn10web.article) Legislature are concerned. Could it be that talk includes a little bit of truth?

Jim Edgar is going to maintain (http://www.chicagopublicradio.org/Content.aspx?audioID=40533) his silence this election cycle.