When Pritzker finally releases tax returns, will many comprehend them?

It has become the issue that won’t die, even though I wonder how many people truly care.

PRITZKER: Will we comprehend his wealth?

That is, the public disclosure of one’s income tax returns – as in candidates for government office releasing for public disclosure copies of the tax returns filed with the Internal Revenue Service and Illinois Department of Revenue.

MANY POLITICAL OFFICIALS make a point of letting their returns become public right around Tax Day. It’s usually an attempt by government officials to show some sense of normality about their lives – something they have in common with those of us who comprise the electorate and decide who we want in office.

But in this era of excessively (or is that obscenely?) wealthy people running for office, the very issue of making details of one’s finances public has become the equivalent of classified information.

Donald Trump is most famous for this – what with the way he went through the 2016 election cycle without ever letting the public know just how wealthy he is (he says his returns are “too confusing” for us mere mortals to comprehend).

But I can’t help but be amused by the way the Illinois Republican Party has repeatedly pointed out the degree to which Democratic gubernatorial hopeful J.B. Pritzker has yet to release his tax returns.

TRUMP: He started non-disclosure issue

THE PEOPLE WHO likely would be the first to defend Trump’s “right” to privacy are claiming that Pritzker is hiding something from us. Heck, even Democrat Daniel Biss’ long-shot gubernatorial campaign is starting to try to use the issue against Pritzker.

Personally, what I take from that behavior is that Biss isn’t a loyal team player, insofar as the Democratic Party is concerned.

But the way some people are determined to keep this issue alive truly makes me wonder if they just don’t have anything else they can complain about.

RAUNER: Will he trash J.B. after saying little on Trump?

Seriously, it amuses me the way Illinois Republican operatives seem capable of working this tax return issue against Pritzker on just about every issue. Somehow, they always seem to find a way to bring the talk back around to that.

EVEN IN CASES where it is completely irrelevant and the fact they bring it up reflects more poorly upon them than it ever could on Pritzker.

For what it’s worth, Pritzker campaign aides tell the Chicago Tribune they plan to make the disclosure later this year when they file his financial disclosure forms along with nominating petitions to formally get him on the ballot for the March 20 primary elections.

That means some time about Dec. 4, we could finally get to see just how wealthy Pritzker is – and how much of the Pritzker family fortune he has a piece of. The sad thing is that a part of me wonders if Trump is correct when he talks about “too confusing.”

I wonder how many those of us whose own finances don’t come anywhere near the complexity of trying to legally hide income in obscure places so as to reduce one’s tax burden so significantly will be truly capable of appreciating the Pritzker info?

PERSONALLY, I THINK that what we’d learn about Trump if we ever get public disclosure is just how little in taxes he pays, relative to his overall income. While complaining that the wealthy are being overtaxed, and in need of even more relief.

BISS: Dem willing to use issue against J.B.

Who knows what we’d learn about J.B. Or even care much. Most of us would probably need a "Cliff's Notes"-type version in order to comprehend exactly what Pritzker is worth.

If anything, this is an issue where prompt disclosure probably is best. Dump the raw info that many won’t comprehend, and you erase the issue of non-disclosure. Most won’t care enough to study the details.

And as for those who get obsessive over studying the details, it’s more than likely that the masses will dismiss them as being geeky. It’s like political people draw more attention to the issue with non-disclosure than the masses would give it otherwise.

  -30-

Politicos try to score points off tax returns; even the president in his refusal

We’re coming up on Tax Day and I expect we’re going to hear our share of political rhetoric lambasting and praising President Donald Trump for continuing to tell the American people to “stuff it” if they want to see his tax returns.
 

TRUMP: Still thinks taxes are 'nunaya' business

Personally, I’m not going to get so worked up – I realize we have a president who’s not interested in making the usual gestures of openness to the public and probably doesn’t want us knowing exactly how much more wealthy he is than the bulk of us.

BECAUSE THAT MIGHT be the final straw that would make many of the so-called working people who voted for him realize how ridiculous their presumptions about him were.

Besides, I also have to admit that even when government officials do release their returns, it’s usually because there are circumstances that they wish to exploit.

They’re doing so for their own political gain. Not because of any sense that they’re exposing themselves to the sunshine of truth and honesty and all that other good-government rhetoric.

If anything, Trump’s telling of the American people to “drop dead” on this issue might well be the most honest thing a government official can say. It shows us his arrogance, rather than us having to make us all dizzy with his political “spin.”

I CAME TO that realization on Friday when I learned how state Sen. Daniel Biss, D-Evanston, who also is one of the people seeking the Democratic Party’s nomination for governor.

BISS: Poor little legislator

He released the return he filed for 2016 to show just how far his income as a state senator had declined – an adjusted gross income of just over $32,500 even though in past years he had income in the range of $55,000.

But let’s not forget this past year was one in which state legislators had their own paychecks delayed because of the lack of a state government budget to authorize such payments.

Now, we can see for ourselves just what a financial blow the politicking over our state budget has had on the poor individual lawmakers. How sad!

I DO HAVE to admit that if I had to take a $20,000 shortfall in my income, it would be a financial blow. It would hurt. My guess is that Biss wants us all to feel similar sentiment.

Picasso to be surrounded by Trump tax rally

I’m also guessing that gubernatorial candidates J.B. Pritzker, Chris Kennedy and Ameya Pawar (all of whom have told the Capitol Fax newsletter they will be releasing their tax returns in coming days) will find similar ways to make political statements placing themselves in the most favorable light.

Even Gov. Bruce Rauner is most likely to find a way to make himself look good and somehow bear a resemblance to the masses of Illinois on whose behalf he wishes to govern for four more years.

It’s just the kind of cheap rhetoric that can make this time of year most annoying for a political reporter-type person. All the self-serving talk being spewed about!

WHICH KIND OF makes me wonder if we should be thankful that Trump, in his eternal sense of arrogance, isn’t giving us a load of political B.S. to contemplate. There really are limits to how much we, the people, should have to put up with. Which is why some of us will gather Saturday at rallies across the country, including in Chicago's Daley Plaza, along with suburban Naperville and in Chesterton, Ind.

Even though we can wonder how Trump is clueless enough to realize he’s missing a significant chance to humanize himself – and possibly detract from the reports coming out trashing himself and first lady Melania for the lack of activity to prepare for the White House Lawn Easter Egg hunt that has been a D.C. tradition for generations.

Image remains relevant all these yrs later

Although humanizing Trump could just be an impossible task, because the man gives us so many other examples of his unfitness for the office to which 46 percent of the electorate was able to anoint him to last year.

And now, I must turn my attention to my own tax returns – which I must admit that I haven’t even started as of the point in time I’m writing this commentary. It’s a good thing the Easter holiday weekend gives us a few extra days until Tuesday’s Tax Day deadline!

  -30-

EXTRA: Rauner differs self from Trump on tax-return tactic

I almost feel sorry these days for Gov. Bruce Rauner.
 

RAUNER: Wants Trump voters, but not political baggage

He has gone to extremes to try to put distance between himself and his supposed partisan political ally – President-elect Donald Trump. To the point where his refusal to say anything about Donald has become laughable.

YET IF YOU look at the election results from Tuesday night in Illinois, we leaned largely Democrat. The only gains that can be attributed to Republicans were the pickups of some legislative seats in rural parts of the state where Trump’s presidential aspirations were predominate.

It can be argued that despite the millions of dollars that Rauner spent of his money and that of his business-oriented friends to influence the elections in his favor, the real swaying factor was Trump.

I suspect that the reason those Republicans succeeded in beating off rural Democrats was because of the Trump coat-tails. I suspect those voters wanted to pick people they thought would be allied with Trump, and probably would be more than willing to sacrifice Rauner in an instant if put to the choice.

But does this mean that Rauner is now going to have to sway himself to the ideological idiosyncrasies of the Trump types of people? I suspect Rauner himself desperately wants to stay away from that stuff. Aside from wanting to dump on organized labor, our governor has tried to stay away from other social issues.

SO HOW CAN he differentiate himself from Trump without going too far so as to irritate the many rural voters he’s desperately going to need come his own 2018 re-election bid?

Personally, I’m inclined to think that Rauner making public on Friday his income tax return for 2015 is one such step – largely because it is one that Trump himself has yet to make; and probably will go out of his way to avoid doing for as long as he lives.

It’s just enough of a gesture to appease the progressive mentality – most of which will never be able to comprehend making so much money in their lives. While not touching on the social issues that would thoroughly offend the ideologues amongst us.

MUNGER: Should she have expected larger donation?

For the record, Rauner, a former venture capitalist with personal wealth, reported having income during 2015 of $188.2 million, of which he paid $43.3 million in taxes to the Internal Revenue Service and another $6.9 million to the Illinois Department of Revenue.

WHICH IS SOME $50.2 million more paid in taxes than indicated in any tax return ever provided by Trump himself. At least we’ll have an idea now of what kind of finances our governor deals with – or how he can afford to provide so much money to try to buy political posts for people who would be allied with him in Illinois state government.

Although Rauner indicated he and his family foundation have made charitable donations totaling $11.6 million – which is something we’d all like to think we’d do ourselves if we had the kind of money to afford it.

  -30-

Trump one-upped by New Yawk Times

I have no doubt that Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is p-o’ed these days at the New York Times.
 

Even the Daily News felt compelled to play the story

Because the New York real estate developer who has made a big production out of refusing to play by the political rule that he willingly disclose his income through public release of his tax returns now has that very information publicly known.

THE TIMES MANAGED to get a copy of the joint return filed by Trump and then-spouse Marla for 1995. The return showed that Trump’s business losses were so extensive that they enabled him to take advantage of tax write-offs so large that he wound up owing the federal government nothing in the way of taxes.

Literally, the Trumps lost some $912 million that one year – which was far more than most of us have managed to earn during the course of our whole lives.

The newspaper also speculates – without knowing for sure if this is true – that Trump may have used similar tax tactics to cancel an equal amount of money off his tax bill in future years.

Donald Trump, the newspaper tells us, may not have paid federal taxes for nearly the past two decades! Wow!!!!!!

ACTUALLY, THIS SHOULD not be at all surprising to anybody in the know. For the very wealthy often get that way by taking advantage of tax laws and exemptions meant to benefit them.

Trump-loving Post thought Mets were more important

Trump himself told ABC News earlier this year, “I fight very hard to pay as little tax as possible.” Then elaborated to a question about his actual tax rate, “It’s none of your business.”

Besides, I’m sure that someone who is as much of a control freak as is Trump views this as a matter of having a right to determine who ought to get information about himself.

Even though most people seeking government office go out of their way to make the information public because they think it somehow enhances the image that they’re (sort of) regular people.

AS IN SOMEONE who actually needs the money from their bi-weekly paycheck in order to cover their daily expenses of life.

Sun-Times relegated Trump tax return to lower right corner

But that is not a role that Trump could even pretend to play. Which is why he so adamantly refused to let anything become publicly known, and in fact now is issuing statements implying that the New York Times is trafficking in stolen goods.

Which is how Trump would like to think of his tax return being. I’m sure he’s anxious to have people think in terms of someone prosecuting New York Times editors with criminal charges for actions that made it worth someone’s while to steal the Trump return.

In fact, by the time you read this, the conservative ideologues who back Trump so vehemently because they think Trump is just like themselves will be spewing that rhetoric so intensely you’ll already have a headache.

THE PROBLEM IS that Trump really is nothing like anyone else – and thank goodness for that. It would be excruciatingly nauseating if there were more than one person with the overbearing gaucheness of Donald Trump!

Not that I expect the people backing Trump will see the tax return to suddenly see these figures and experience an epiphany. Those people have made up their minds long ago, plus the fact that they are so hard-core opposed to the notion of Hillary Clinton. Nothing will change their minds!

But for the real masses who might feel a touch of apathy and believe that there’s no real difference between the two, we should keep this in mind. Trump is someone whose significant wealth has come from being able to use the business establishment rules in his favor.

Regardless of what you think of Hillary, anybody who thinks Donald is any different is being foolish. Then again, Trump has been counting on the masses being foolish all these years to make up with our tax payments what he has been able to avoid paying out of his income.

  -30-

Playing politics with the tax man; is the voting public just like Rhett Butler?

Yes, it’s just a politically partisan stunt, bordering on trivial, for a group calling itself the Democratic Coalition Against Trump to try to use the Freedom of Information Act to get the Internal Revenue Service to release information concerning the income tax returns of Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.

 

TRUMP: He's rich, but how much?

I write that because I don’t expect the IRS to take seriously a request by a group that specifically has created itself in recent months to oppose Trump’s fantasies of running roughshod over the Republic by becoming its president.

BUT THAT DOESN’T mean the issue of Trump and his income tax returns isn’t something of significance – although I don’t regard it as the be-all-and-end-all issue that some would have us believe it means.

It is a practice going back to the days of Richard M. Nixon, who wanted to respond to the allegations of illegal activity and the fact that only the most hard-core of political partisans believed him when he said “I am not a crook” by letting us know the personal information about his finances.

It is a practice that presidential candidates have carried on since then, along with many other government officials at varying levels. It is supposed to let us see for ourselves that these government officials are really just regular folks like you and me.

Of course, they’re not in so many ways. But they’d like us to think so.

BUT THIS PRACTICE is being altered in this election cycle. For Democrat Hillary Clinton came forth with her tax return, which shows that she and husband Bill Clinton are doing well financially.

An income of just over $10 million – largely because the former president is involved with his foundation that raises funds for supposedly good causes, and Hillary has been active on the speaker circuit and can command ridiculously high rates for her appearances.

So yes, we can see for ourselves where Hillary is coming from – although I found it interesting to read the recent New York Times story about the two-year time period after Bill Clinton lost an Arkansas governor election and she had to work her butt off to support him financially while his ego recovered from political rejection.

 

CLINTON: Her wealth mere pennies by comparison

This may actually be of importance to some people who don’t have a knee-jerk hatred of a candidate and don’t know who they’re voting for yet.

BUT WHAT DO we have of comparable value about Trump? Nothing!!!!!!!!!

He has refused to make anything known of his finances. What do we really know of the Trump Organization and its CEO? Not a thing!

There has been some speculation that what Trump doesn’t want known is his actual financial worth – which may not be as high as he likes to give the impression of in public. His ego would take a blow, and yes Trump is nothing else if not an egomaniac!

Although his attitude also reminds me of the never-quite-came-to-fruition New York gubernatorial campaign of radio talk show host Howard Stern. He talked a lot of trash about public policy, but wound up dropping out when he learned there were legal requirements concerning personal financial disclosure.

HE DENOUNCED THE system that would make him reveal his wealth, which with all the different mediums in which he has his finger dipped into is quite sufficient.

Trump, who at one time was a regular guest on Stern’s radio program because he was entertaining with the garishness of his lifestyle, is giving us that same “It’s nobody’s business” approach. Which is why this election cycle will likely come and go without anything resembling a financial disclosure.

Besides, I suspect that the whole purpose of a tax return disclosure is to create the appearance of ordinariness. And the last thing Trump would ever want to appear to be is ordinary.

We’re supposed to think he’s better than us, which is why we’re supposed to place blind faith in him that all his goofy rhetoric won’t lead us (with apologies to that 2002 Tom Hanks film) down a road to perdition. Because some of us are likely just like the Rhett Butler character of "Gone With The Wind" and just "don't give a damn."

  -30-

Guns or your money -- which action will offend the ideologues the most?

A pair of actions were announced this week that I’m sure will set off the irrational mode of the conservative ideologues of our society. I’m just not sure which one will bother them the most.

Will people blame president on guns, ...

Will it be the fact that President Barack Obama announced his desire to use executive order powers to implement a series of measures meant to better control who can purchase a firearm?

OR WILL IT be the fact that the Illinois Department of Revenue has said that in the interest of reducing tax fraud, it is going to slow up the process by which the state pays out tax returns owed to people!

On the one hand, we’re talking guns. We’re talking about people who really are irrational enough to think that their ability to own a pistol is the key to our national defense (they probably do fantasize about the day when they can shoot to kill some jihadist whom they think will come trampling through their tulips on his way to taking over the nation).

But then again, it’s our money. The money that the state contends was overcharged when taxes were withheld and that they are nearly returning.

While some people (including myself) are tax procrastinators, I do know some people who insist on filing their tax returns electronically the moment they get their W-2 forms so they can get the return payments immediately.

IT IS POSSIBLE to get a return wired into one’s bank account by the end of January, depending on how quickly one reacts.

Or at least it WAS possible. But not anymore.

For the Illinois Department of Revenue said this week they’re not making any return payments until at least March 1. And for people who wait, they can probably count on an additional couple of weeks added to the amount of time it takes to process a tax return.

... or state for outrage over our tax returns?

State officials admit they want to “slow down” the process and make sure certain information matches. They say it is meant to reduce the number of erroneous payments that are caused by trying to process so many returns at once.

CONCERN FOR OUR safety and to reduce fraud. It sounds nice? But let’s be honest, There will be those who want to rant.

I’ve already read some Internet diatribes about how this is a plot by the government to deprive the people of their money. Many have said this is a conspiracy by Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago.

Or Gov. Bruce Rauner, depending on one’s political partisanship and who exactly it is you are inclined to want to criticize. Regardless, it’s someone’s fault, and they want that person to pay.

Even though I have never understood the big deal for those who want to file early. The payment gets made eventually, and you don’t get a financial bonus for filing early. Then again, as a freelance writer who has no one withholding tax payments on his behalf, for me Tax Day is when I have to publicly acknowledge what I owe – then figure out how to pay up.

A PROCESS THAT always takes up every bit of time I can get.

But there also will be those raging about the president’s announcement related to firearms. As though more background checks on people wishing to buy a firearm is really that outlandish an idea.

Who's kidding whom? They'll blame Obama for all!

Or provisions for spending more federal funds on treating mental illness and insuring that those of us who are not quite stable have a tougher time getting their hands on a pistol or rifle. That ought to be a common-sense idea, except that Obama proposed it so they’re ready to demonize it.

Then again, it probably will be the same people complaining about both measures – largely because they feel the need to complain about something. In this case, the fact that they’ll have to wait a little longer to get that tax return they wanted to use to buy themselves another weapon for protection against the Communist/Islamist horde they’re convinced is headed this way.

  -30-

How ‘nothing’ would this be now, if only Mitt’d given info up previously?

Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney had an income of $13.69 million for last year -- of which assorted governments snatched up $1.9 million of it as his share of income taxes.

ROMNEY: Not like you or me, financially



No big deal, when you think about it. Many government officials try to make themselves seem “human” around Tax Day by making their tax returns public. They want us to know that they, too, had to make good with the Tax Man on April 15 – just like the rest of us.

IF ROMNEY HAD been like these other officials and made all this information publicly known some five months ago like everybody else, it wouldn’t have been an issue.

If anything, we might have said “Wow!” to the “$13.69 million” figure for a couple of seconds, would have laughed at the concept that Romney makes far less than a top-notch pro athlete, and would have moved on.

It certainly wouldn’t be any kind of issue now. We probably would have long forgotten the figure. We certainly wouldn’t care some six weeks prior to Election Day (even less time, if your plans are to use an early voting center to cast your ballot).

But it is an issue – because Romney made it one.

FOLLOWING MONTHS OF trying to claim that his personal privacy was being invaded by this now-standard political maneuver, Romney gave in on Friday. He made his financial information publicly known for 2011 – while also providing a summary of his effective tax rates (the percentage of his income that went toward taxes) for every year back to 1990.

Which means all this information has the potential to be fresh as we move into the intense portion of the campaign cycle.

When combined with the “47 percent” comments that make Romney sound like a pompous rich guy, this information makes him look like the ultimate pompous rich guy.

Does Mitt Romney think his tax returns now will get him a chance to work in this office for the next four year? Photograph provided by the White House.

Even the fact that (according to the Washington Post) Romney and potential first lady Ann donated just over $4 million to assorted charitable causes comes across as suspect.

FOR THE NEWSPAPER reported that the Romneys only claimed tax deductions for $2.25 million of their contributions. It seems that the Romneys wanted to ensure they paid a tax rate of at least 13 percent of their income during each year of the past decade.

Which makes us wonder if the Romneys have concocted a financial image for themselves – rather than handled Tax Day like the rest of us and given an honest accounting of how much money we took in for the previous year.

In all, this information and the way in which it was made public creates potential for so many questions that will linger in the minds of potential voters.

None of which would have cropped up if only Romney hadn’t taken the pompous route and tried to keep it all private. It really would have been a non-issue by now.

IN FACT, THIS disclosure may be even more ridiculous than when President Barack Obama tried to put a rest to all the “birther” nonsense by coughing up documentation to indicate he really was born in Honolulu, Hawaii.



After all the years of not providing information, what made him think that his disclosure was going to silence anyone? Obama just drew more attention to a stupid, non-issue. He may have given it credibility it didn't deserve.

OBAMA: Believe what we beleive

If anything, it would merely convince the conspiracy-theorists of our society that this was somehow the ultimate conspiracy. They don’t want to see anything that would disprove what they want to believe. That disclosure didn’t change the perspective of anybody.

Just like Mitt Romney didn’t do a thing on Friday that would convince anybody that he’s anything other than a rich guy who doesn’t have a clue about what kind of daily lives the rest of us live.

  -30-

The significance of tax returns, or lack thereof, in the campaign cycle

I recall the first government official who ever showed me his income tax return – it was then-Gov. Jim Edgar.

EDGAR: Not Romney or Plummer



He wasn’t running for anything specifically that year. It was just his habit to let us see the return he filed by mid-April, and it was meant to reinforce the idea that he wasn’t all that different from the rest of us.

SERIOUSLY! I RECALL his returns as showing that while the Edgars had some miniscule financial investments, they weren’t wealthy. For all practical purposes, Edgar supported his family financially on the government salaries he was paid for the various electoral offices he held during his political career.

They weren’t bad salaries. So they lived well. But no more so than many other people.

Edgar always issued the returns so routinely that they ultimately became a non-story. Yet more evidence that Edgar wasn’t the most exciting man on Planet Earth. Or even to walk the halls of the Statehouse in Springfield.

Which is why it always amazes me when would-be government officials make a big deal out of refusing to disclose their incomes. They wind up making an issue out of what should be nothing.

WHEN THE INFORMATION comes out, it gets treated as though it is a major disclosure. If it never comes out, then we wind up thinking that there is some major secret being kept from the public.

It may turn out that the information amounts to a whole lot of nothing. But the candidates treat it as though it is a major something.

Yet every campaign cycle, we get some nitwit who is determined to think that he (or she, I suppose) is special, and that we shouldn’t have some interest in their personal connections.

ROMNEY: Returns becoming an issue



Which is what we gain from getting a look at those returns. Who do they have financial connections to? How do they live? Is this a person who gives a lot to charitable causes?

IF SO, WHICH causes?

It is personal information that we can relate to, because we all ultimately have to fill out those forms.

And while I don’t expect to see anyone running for office who files the 1040EZ, we do learn something from such information.

Mitt Romney’s presidential aspirations are being attacked on this ground. He has only released limited details, and claims he doesn’t want more information about himself out there because he thinks opponent Barack Obama will merely have his staff pick through the information for details that can be used against him.

HE WENT SO far as to tell the National Review, “I’m simply not enthusiastic about giving them hundreds or thousands of more pages to pick through, distort and lie about.”

My guess is that the Romney campaign wants all the distortion and lies to be told by themselves about Obama. Which when thought of that way makes Romney sound like a bully and a wimp!

Locally, we have someone else taking the same attitude. Remember Jason Plummer, the St. Louis-area guy who ran for lieutenant governor paired up with Republican William Brady?

He’s running for a seat in Congress from that part of Illinois that borders St. Louis, and he’s refusing to give up his returns. He claims they’re personal, although he released a statement that says he earns a $55,289 salary as vice president of the family-owned lumber company.

WHICH IF THAT’S all there is would be so much like many other people.

PLUMMER: Really none of our business?



Except that for people like Romney and Plummer, that isn’t all there is. They have business interests that allow them to use various exemptions.

The tales told about Romney are that he has used exemptions and tax breaks so effectively that he literally didn’t owe any federal income tax. Which is something that would make him very unusual, and reduce to rubble any claims he might try to make that he’s just a common guy, compared to “elitist” Obama.

It’s probably the same situation with regard to Plummer. The family business that he has ties to likely make him independently wealthy aside from his actual salary that he reports to the IRS. It’s a shame that he, and Romney for that matter, feels compelled to treat it as a dirty little secret.

  -30-

A WEEK IN REVIEW: Why we could still have Ill. death penalty on Wednesday

Considering the reality of partisan politics, I won’t be the least bit surprised if one week from now, we in Illinois still have a capital crimes statute on our state law books.

I make that statement at a time when Illinois has come closer than ever before to abolishing the penalty of death as legitimate for certain violent crimes.

REGARDLESS, WE’LL ACTUALLY know by Tuesday night what will happen on this issue. For we are in the “lame duck” portion of the General Assembly session. Wednesday at Noon is when the new Legislature elected back on Nov. 2 will take control.

So if it isn’t done by then, the whole process has to start over.

So that’s why I don’t get excited at the sight of headlines in the Friday newspapers that say the Illinois House of Representatives voted to abolish capital punishment. We still have to see what the Illinois Senate does. Then, on to Gov. Pat Quinn – who has been reluctant to say he supports any of this legislative effort on the issue.

For while it seems that state Senate President John Cullerton, D-Chicago, wouldn’t mind seeing the death penalty wither away in Illinois, not all of his legislative chamber’s members feel the same way.

CONSIDERING THAT HE is now trying to twist arms to get them to vote for a proposed increase in the state share of the income tax (from 3 percent to 5.25 percent – raising 75 percent more money for the state), it is questionable whether Cullerton will have the desire to do an equally intense arm twisting for capital punishment, particularly since the tax hike is related to resolving the state's severe financial problems. That issue MUST be addressed. Capitol punishment would be a luxury if there is time.

VERSCHOORE: Wise counseling

While the old Legislature (the one that ceases to exist as of Tuesday) is going to be doing business throughout the weekend and all the way up until their final day, somehow I won’t be surprised if this somehow gets lost in the shuffle (although I’d truly enjoy being wrong on this point).

The Illinois House vote did, however, give us a bright moment – learning that state Rep. Pat Verschoore, D-Milan, was the legislator credited with changing his mind to support abolishment, thereby creating the 60^th vote needed for passage. Verschoore says his wife’s opposition to capital punishment was a factor in his decision. So should we wind up doing away with a death penalty in Illinois, perhaps we owe a debt of gratitude to Charlene, the representative’s wife of 46 years.

So what else was notable about the first full week of 2011?



Moseley-Braun: Bigger than it had to be

BIPARTISAN TAX TWITS:  Future political people who experience personal indignation about making their income tax returns public ought to keep the names of “Jason Plummer” and “Carol Moseley-Braun” in mind before getting all snitty.

The whole concept of releasing one’s returns was meant to be a token gesture by political people that gives some superficial information about one’s finances. But Plummer, the GOP lieutenant governor candidate last year, and Moseley-Braun, who is running for mayor this year, both tried to claim they had a right to privacy.

Plummer remained stubborn all the way through his failed campaign, while Moseley-Braun ultimately backed down. But the returns she has released have been so closely scrutinized that we now fully appreciate how unsuccessful she has been in business since leaving the federal government’s employ back in 2000.

The lesson here is that if Moseley-Braun had just turned over the returns without having to be prodded, chances are good they would have received a superficial review and we already would have filed them away – never to be seriously looked at again.

WHO’S KIDDING WHOM:  President Barack Obama went ahead this week and picked mayoral brother (and son) William Daley to be his new chief of staff. Considering that he spent recent years working for JP Morgan, it has certain progressive types convinced that the president is pandering to the right by picking a Wall Street type.

That concept has me laughing hysterically. The idea that the way to pander to conservatives and to business interests is to pick the Son of Hizzoner, Richard J. Daley, who comes from the land that doesn’t succumb to rural conservative ideologues, is so blatantly absurd – just as much as those people who honestly want to believe that Obama is literally a socialist.

What this does is mean that Obama will be bashed by the right for picking a “Chicago Machine hack” to run the federal government just as much as the left for picking a guy whose income in recent years has been around $5 million annually.

Does this mean that by ticking off all the ideologues, Obama may very well have found the proper person to run the White House staff for him for the next two years? Most likely.



RYAN: Free for a day?

WHAT MORE DOES HE WANT?:  Former Gov. George Ryan has applications to both the U.S. District Court and to the warden at the federal correctional center at Terre Haute, Ind., seeking to be released from prison for awhile so he can be with his wife – who is dying at a hospital in the Ryans’ hometown of Kankakee.



Yet federal prosecutors who would rather see nothing that shows anything resembling leniency toward Ryan (fearing that it taints their record of a conviction against him) point out that he WAS released on Wednesday, and got to spend two hours with former first lady Lura Lynn.

During that time, he was escorted by U.S. marshals, and Ryan’s attorney, (also) former Gov. James R. Thompson, said it was federal officials who insisted that no word be given out about the fact that Ryan got a one-day break from his prison time.

Federal prosecutors say the fact that he got the one-day release means that action can be taken without a more wide-ranging court order. Yet if Lura Lynn’s period of illness extends into any length of time, it would only make sense that a court order would be the responsible way to go – rather than having a warden continually approving one-day visits between Terre Haute and Kankakee (roughly a four-hour drive each way).

  -30-

Hard to feel sorry for Alexi or Bill

Political observers watching Illinois are getting all worked up over the fact that Democratic Senate nominee Alexi Giannoulias’ family business officially went under on Friday. Yet a part of me is more offended at the way in which Republican gubernatorial nominee William Brady is trying to make it appear that he’s being open about his own finances.

Friday was the day that the FDIC officially shut down the Edgewater neighborhood’s Broadway Bank, which was unable to come up with $85 million to cover its financial obligations. The bank, when it opens Saturday, will be a branch of M.B. Financial Bank.

PEOPLE WITH ACCOUNTS and deposits there will not lose their money, on account of the guarantees the federal government provides in such situations involving failing banks.

But it adds to the image of Giannoulias, whose father founded the bank that is currently run by his older brother, Demitris, as just another greedy business type whose failings wind up getting bailed out by the taxpayer. In short, the political partisans will say, we wind up paying in order to ensure that the Giannoulias family isn’t bankrupted personally by this situation.

Now I’m not about to go on the defense for Giannoulias. He’s a big boy, and he and his campaign staff had better be capable of getting themselves through this situation. After all, being a United States senator would place him in equally pressured situations.

If anything, his handling of this “crisis” may very well show us once and for all whether he has what it takes to be in such a prominent political position.

BUT THERE IS a part of me that can’t help but think that much of the “outrage” expressed about Giannoulias whenever the subject of the family “bank” comes up is so phony. People whose partisan beliefs are such that they were going to express outrage about Alexi no matter what he had done or what the circumstances are.

Even if his bank were doing well financially, they’d likely be equally outraged and claim that somehow being a “banker” made him incapable of identifying with the public. Of course, many of these same people didn’t have any qualms about voting for a “banker” for the U.S. Senate in 1998 when Peter Fitzgerald was the Republican nominee for that post.

But Fitzgerald was willing to give them the partisan rhetoric they wanted to hear on social issues (abortion, gay rights,etc.), while Giannoulias is not.

I can think of one positive from this. Insofar as the campaign is concerned, I hope Giannoulias realizes he has to quit talking about his family bank as though it were just a tiny business.

TO LISTEN TO Giannoulias during this campaign, you’d think Broadway Bank was a family-run Greek restaurant – almost as though we could walk in, see a mural on the wall incorporating the Parthenon and order the “Greek chicken” while watching Alexi himself work the cash register.

Perhaps now we can get a more honest accounting of what occurred at Broadway Bank, rather than the constant string of “organized crime” tales that the Republican partisans are eager to spread.

What is really going on here is a bad economy that is hurting many business interests, including the Giannoulias “family business.” Broadway Bank was not the only Chicago-area bank to be closed on Friday, nor was it the biggest. I’m not saying I feel sorry for bankers or for Giannoulias. But I do realize it is ridiculous to demonize them.

I also wonder if Fitzgerald himself feels fortunate that his family sold their suburban Chicago chain of banks way back in 1994 – providing the family with its wealth and putting Peter in a position where he doesn’t have to worry if something will go wrong and his “bank” will be the next to fail.

BUT LIKE I wrote earlier, I am more offended at the way in which Bill Brady conducted himself on Friday. For after realizing that his refusal to provide the basic financial information about himself by releasing his income tax returns (a standard act for aspiring political types) was making him look like a fool, he decided to act in ways meant to create the illusion that he was being open.

If it seems to you like I’m implying we know where Giannoulias stands while we don’t have a full picture of Brady, you’d be correct.

I think that because of the conditions that got placed on Brady’s announcement. It was by one of those telephone conference calls, and restrictions were placed on the number of people who could call in. That is a condition I have never heard applied before.

In all fairness, the Illinois Republican Party sent an e-mail informing me of the telephone number to call if I wanted to have a chance at being one of the “few” to be able to talk with Brady’s attorney (not Brady himself). Of course, I didn’t get it until after the event began. So it was a moot point.

SO I HAVE to settle for the written summary put together by the Republican partisans, where we learn that Brady paid no taxes to the federal or state governments in 2008, and only paid taxes to the state in 2009.

We also learn his adjusted gross income was only one-quarter of the level it was at in 2004 and 2005, which Brady says is because his own business interests have faced economic troubles. Of course, Brady tries to spin this by saying he had to put employees out of work as his business interests shrank.

Excuse me for not being swayed. That line of “spin” strikes me as being the equivalent of Alexi portraying the bank as being yet another family business going broke. There is something about this handling that strikes me as being too secretive. Most political people write up the press release and include a copy of the return, and leave it at that. Nice and simple.

By going to such extremes to control the release of this information, Brady has made such a bigger deal out of this than it ever should have become. That really does bother me as much as, if not more than, anything that happened on Friday on North Broadway.

-30-