Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
>>> YOU ARE LOOKING AT THE CHAMBERS OF THE ILLINOIS STATE
CHAMBERS OF THE ILLINOIS STATE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IN
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IN SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS.
SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS. , YES, THIS IS "AT ISSUE."
, YES, THIS IS "AT ISSUE." THANK YOU FOR JOINING US ON THE
THANK YOU FOR JOINING US ON THE PROGRAM.
PROGRAM. I AM H. WAYNE WILSON.
I AM H. WAYNE WILSON. WE ARE HERE AT THE STATE CAPITOL
WE ARE HERE AT THE STATE CAPITOL TO TALK ABOUT THE RESPONSE TO
TO TALK ABOUT THE RESPONSE TO THE GOVERNOR'S SPEECH THAT HE
THE GOVERNOR'S SPEECH THAT HE GAVE AT THIS POINT AND TIME
GAVE AT THIS POINT AND TIME YESTERDAY, WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON.
REPRESENTATIVE, A SENATOR, ANDñ THE PRESIDENT AND C.E.O. OF
THE PRESIDENT AND C.E.O. OF ILLINOIS STATE CHAMBER OF
ILLINOIS STATE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.
COMMERCE. LET ME INTRODUCE TO YOU DON
LET ME INTRODUCE TO YOU DON MOFFITT.
MOFFITT. DON IS A REPUBLICAN
DON IS A REPUBLICAN REPRESENTATIVE FROM GILSON, SOME
y GALESBURG AREA.
GALESBURG AREA. DON, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING
DON, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING WITH US.
WITH US. >>THANKS, H, NICE TO BE WITH
>>THANKS, H, NICE TO BE WITH YOU.
YOU. >>SEATED NEXTG
>>SEATED NEXTG AS PRESIDENT AND C.E.O. OF THE
AS PRESIDENT AND C.E.O. OF THE ILLINOIS STATE CHAMBER OFaly
ILLINOIS STATE CHAMBER OFaly COMMERCE, DOUG WHITLEY.
COMMERCE, DOUG WHITLEY. THANK YOU FOR ASKING ME TO BE ON
THANK YOU FOR ASKING ME TO BE ON THE SHOW.
THE SHOW. >>SENATOR DAVE KOEHLER WILL JOIu
>>SENATOR DAVE KOEHLER WILL JOIu US IN A FEW MINUTES BECAUSE OF
US IN A FEW MINUTES BECAUSE OF THE TIME BECAUSE OF THE SPACE IN
THE TIME BECAUSE OF THE SPACE IN THE CHAMBER OF THE ILLINOIS
THE CHAMBER OF THE ILLINOIS HOUSE.
INITIATIVE, AN INITIAL RESPONSE TO THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET
TO THE GOVERNOR'S BUDGET ADDRESS.
ADDRESS. >> I THINK THE GOVERNOR
>> I THINK THE GOVERNOR INDICATED IT WILL BE A DIFFICULT
INDICATED IT WILL BE A DIFFICULT BUDGET YEAR WITH CONSEQUENCES,
BUDGET YEAR WITH CONSEQUENCES, OBVIOUSLY DEPENDING WHICH
GO. MOST DIFFICULT SINCE I HAVE BEEN
MOST DIFFICULT SINCE I HAVE BEEN IN THE LEGISLATURE.
IN THE LEGISLATURE. GOVERNOR DID CALL FOR FIVE YEAR
GOVERNOR DID CALL FOR FIVE YEAR SPENDING PLAN THIS TIME INSTEAD
SPENDING PLAN THIS TIME INSTEAD OF JUST SHORT ONE YEAR SPENDING
OF JUST SHORT ONE YEAR SPENDING PLAN.
PLAN. I THINK+,aít THAT'S THE RIGHT TG
I THINK+,aít THAT'S THE RIGHT TG TO/ v6 DO.
TO/ v6 DO. WE NEED MORE LONG RANGE PLANNING
WE NEED MORE LONG RANGE PLANNING IN ILLINOIS.
IN ILLINOIS. HEÃCALLED FOR SEVERAL THINGS.vOA
HEÃCALLED FOR SEVERAL THINGS.vOA CAPITAL BILL.
CAPITAL BILL. I THINK WE NEED TO DO A CAPITAL
I THINK WE NEED TO DO A CAPITAL BILL.
BILL. WE HAD A LOT OF GOOD THINGS COME
WE HAD A LOT OF GOOD THINGS COME OUT OF THE LAST ONE.
OUT OF THE LAST ONE. CAPITAL BILL WOULD HAVE ITS OWN
CAPITAL BILL WOULD HAVE ITS OWN REVENUE STREAM.
REVENUE STREAM. IT WOULD NOT BE PART OF THE
IT WOULD NOT BE PART OF THE GENERAL FUND.
GENERAL FUND. IT IS THE GENERAL FUND THAT HAS
IT IS THE GENERAL FUND THAT HAS SUCH DIFFICULTIES.
SUCH DIFFICULTIES. SO EVEN THOUGH WE ARE TALKING
SO EVEN THOUGH WE ARE TALKING ABOUT MAYBE THE CAPITAL BILL,
ABOUT MAYBE THE CAPITAL BILL, THAT DOESN'T IMPACT THE GENERAL
THAT DOESN'T IMPACT THE GENERAL FUND. PLUS, IT A DOCTORS VERY
FUND. PLUS, IT A DOCTORS VERY SERIOUS INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS TO
SERIOUS INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS TO INCREASE JOBS.
INCREASE JOBS. WE NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT.
WE NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT. THE GOVERNOR DID SAY WE NEED TO
THE GOVERNOR DID SAY WE NEED TO LOOK AT A SPENDING CAP IN THE
LOOK AT A SPENDING CAP IN THE HOUSE IN A BIPARTISAN MATTER,
HOUSE IN A BIPARTISAN MATTER, HOW MUCH MONEY WE REALISTICALLY
HOW MUCH MONEY WE REALISTICALLY THINK WE HAVE TO SPEND.
THINK WE HAVE TO SPEND. IF WE CAN STAY WITHIN THAT
IF WE CAN STAY WITHIN THAT LIMIT, WE CAN REALLY ADDRESS
LIMIT, WE CAN REALLY ADDRESS SOME BUDGET IR ISSUES.
SOME BUDGET IR ISSUES. STOP DIGGING THE HOLE DEEPER AND
STOP DIGGING THE HOLE DEEPER AND DO IT WITH A SPEND CAP.
DO IT WITH A SPEND CAP. SECONDLY, MAKE INSTALLMENT
SECONDLY, MAKE INSTALLMENT PAYMENTS ON THE DEFICIT, AND
PAYMENTS ON THE DEFICIT, AND IMPROVE THE BUSINESS CLIMATE TO
IMPROVE THE BUSINESS CLIMATE TO CREATE PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS.
CREATE PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS. WHEN YOU DO THAT, THEN YOU
WHEN YOU DO THAT, THEN YOU INCREASE REVENUE FROM STATE
INCREASE REVENUE FROM STATE INCOME TAX, AND STATE SALES TAX
INCOME TAX, AND STATE SALES TAX BY PEOPLE WORKING AND HAVING
BY PEOPLE WORKING AND HAVING JOBS AND BUYING THINGS.
JOBS AND BUYING THINGS. ALSO, THE GOVERNOR ALSO CALLED
ALSO, THE GOVERNOR ALSO CALLED FOR DOUBLING THE EARNED INCOME
FOR DOUBLING THE EARNED INCOME TAX CREDIT.
TAX CREDIT. I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE A LOOK
I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT.
AT THAT. HE ALSO CALLED FOR SOME PROPERTY
HE ALSO CALLED FOR SOME PROPERTY TAX RELIEF WHICH WE NEED TO DO.
TAX RELIEF WHICH WE NEED TO DO. IN ILLINOIS, WE ARE SO HEAVILY
IN ILLINOIS, WE ARE SO HEAVILY RELIANT ON THE PROPERTY TAX TO
RELIANT ON THE PROPERTY TAX TO FUND EDUCATION MUCH SO THAN ANY
FUND EDUCATION MUCH SO THAN ANY OTHER STATE.
OTHER STATE. GOVERNOR EDGAR TRIED TO ADDRESS
GOVERNOR EDGAR TRIED TO ADDRESS THAT WITH PROPOSAL HE HAD TO
THAT WITH PROPOSAL HE HAD TO GIVE PROPERTY TAX RELIEF IN
GIVE PROPERTY TAX RELIEF IN EXCHANGE FOR RAISING INCOME TAX.
EXCHANGE FOR RAISING INCOME TAX. >>15 YEARS AGO.
>>15 YEARS AGO. >>RIGHT.
>>RIGHT. AND HE -- IT PASSED THE HOUSE
AND HE -- IT PASSED THE HOUSE AND NEVER CALLED FOR A VOTE IN
AND NEVER CALLED FOR A VOTE IN THE SENATE.
THE SENATE. I DID VOTE FOR THAT BILL BY THE
I DID VOTE FOR THAT BILL BY THE WAY.
WAY. THOUGHT IT WAS THE RIGHT PLAN AT
THOUGHT IT WAS THE RIGHT PLAN AT THAT TIME.
THAT TIME. ANOTHER ISSUE THE GOVERNOR
ANOTHER ISSUE THE GOVERNOR MENTIONED, AND THIS WILL BE A
MENTIONED, AND THIS WILL BE A VERY DIFFICULT, TEMPORARY STATE
VERY DIFFICULT, TEMPORARY STATE INCOME TAX INCREASE, HE IS
INCOME TAX INCREASE, HE IS CALLING TO MAKE THAT PERMANENT.
CALLING TO MAKE THAT PERMANENT. WE HAVE GOT TO LOOK HOW WILL
WE HAVE GOT TO LOOK HOW WILL THAT IMPACT BUSINESS, HOW WILL
THAT IMPACT BUSINESS, HOW WILL THAT IMPACT JOBS, PRIVATE SECTOR
THAT IMPACT JOBS, PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS IN ILLINOIS.
JOBS IN ILLINOIS. >>WITH THAT IN MIND, LET ME TURN
>>WITH THAT IN MIND, LET ME TURN TO THE PRESIDENT AND C.E.O. OF
TO THE PRESIDENT AND C.E.O. OF ILLINOIS STATE CHAMBER BECAUSE
ILLINOIS STATE CHAMBER BECAUSE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THAT ISSUE,
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THAT ISSUE, WHAT IS YOUR TAKE ON THAT.
WHAT IS YOUR TAKE ON THAT. >>MY TAKE IS QUITE A BIT
>>MY TAKE IS QUITE A BIT DIFFERENT.
DIFFERENT. I THOUGHT IT WAS A POLITICAL
I THOUGHT IT WAS A POLITICAL SPEECH, NOT A BUDGET SPEECH.
SPEECH, NOT A BUDGET SPEECH. HE HIT ON THEMES VOTERS WOULD
HE HIT ON THEMES VOTERS WOULD CARE ABOUT.
CARE ABOUT. HE TALKED ABOUT EDUCATION WHICH
HE TALKED ABOUT EDUCATION WHICH I THINK IS THE FIRST EMPHASIS ON
I THINK IS THE FIRST EMPHASIS ON EDUCATION SPENDING IN QUITE
EDUCATION SPENDING IN QUITE AWHILE BECAUSE THE GENERAL
AWHILE BECAUSE THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY HAS BEEN CUTTING
ASSEMBLY HAS BEEN CUTTING EDUCATION SPENDING.
EDUCATION SPENDING. TALKED ABOUT PROPERTY TAX
TALKED ABOUT PROPERTY TAX RELIEF, ANOTHER GOOD THEME FOR
RELIEF, ANOTHER GOOD THEME FOR VOTING PUBLIC.
VOTING PUBLIC. SO I DIDN'T THINK HE WAS TALKING
SO I DIDN'T THINK HE WAS TALKING TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY IN HIS
TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY IN HIS BUDGET MESSAGE.
BUDGET MESSAGE. I THOUGHT HE WAS TALKING TO THE
I THOUGHT HE WAS TALKING TO THE PUBLIC AT HOME ABOUT AN ELECTION
PUBLIC AT HOME ABOUT AN ELECTION CAMPAIGN THAT HE WAS ABOUT TO
CAMPAIGN THAT HE WAS ABOUT TO LAUNCH.
LAUNCH. BUT THE THIRD POINTE MADE IT
BUT THE THIRD POINTE MADE IT VERY EMPHATIC THAT HE WOULD NOT
VERY EMPHATIC THAT HE WOULD NOT SIGN ANY LEGISLATION THAT WOULD
SIGN ANY LEGISLATION THAT WOULD EXPAND TAXATION TO INCLUDE
EXPAND TAXATION TO INCLUDE PENSION FACILITIES.
PENSION FACILITIES. ALL OF THOSE WERE THINGS THAT
ALL OF THOSE WERE THINGS THAT APPEALED MORE TO THE PUBLIC THAN
APPEALED MORE TO THE PUBLIC THAN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY LOOKING FOR
THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY LOOKING FOR A BUDGET MESSAGE.
A BUDGET MESSAGE. I AM SORRY.
I AM SORRY. LET ME TALK ABOUT SPECIFICS WITH
LET ME TALK ABOUT SPECIFICS WITH REGARD TO THE TAXES.
REGARD TO THE TAXES. NOW WE KNOW THAT I BELIEVE IT IS
NOW WE KNOW THAT I BELIEVE IT IS THE CONSTITUTION, CORRECT ME IF
THE CONSTITUTION, CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG HERE, REPRESENTATIVE.
I AM WRONG HERE, REPRESENTATIVE. BUT THE CONSTITUTION SAYS YOU
BUT THE CONSTITUTION SAYS YOU HAVE TO PROPOSE A BUDGET THAT
HAVE TO PROPOSE A BUDGET THAT LIVED WITHIN THE INCOME
LIVED WITHIN THE INCOME GUIDELINES THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN
GUIDELINES THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN PLACE.
PLACE. WE KNOW THAT AS CURRENTLY SET
WE KNOW THAT AS CURRENTLY SET UP, PERSONAL INCOME TAX WILL
UP, PERSONAL INCOME TAX WILL DROP BACK TO 3.75%, HALFWAY
DROP BACK TO 3.75%, HALFWAY THROUGH THE FISCAL YEAR, FISCAL
THROUGH THE FISCAL YEAR, FISCAL YEAR STARTING JULY ONE.
YEAR STARTING JULY ONE. HE NEVER SAID ANYTHING -- HE
HE NEVER SAID ANYTHING -- HE NEVER USED THE WORD 5%, NEVER
NEVER USED THE WORD 5%, NEVER SAID THAT.
SAID THAT. WHAT -- HOW IS HE GOING TO
WHAT -- HOW IS HE GOING TO PROPOSE A BUDGET WHEN HE IS
PROPOSE A BUDGET WHEN HE IS VIOLATING THE CONSTITUTION LIKE
VIOLATING THE CONSTITUTION LIKE THAT. THE LEGISLATURE, WE
THAT. THE LEGISLATURE, WE CANNOT COUNT ON THAT INCOME.
CANNOT COUNT ON THAT INCOME. WE NEED TO ASSUME IT WILL GO
WE NEED TO ASSUME IT WILL GO BACK TO WHAT THE 3.75 AND BACK
BACK TO WHAT THE 3.75 AND BACK TO WHAT THE LEGISLATION CALLED
TO WHAT THE LEGISLATION CALLED FOR WHEN IT WAS CALLED A
FOR WHEN IT WAS CALLED A TEMPORARY TAX.
TEMPORARY TAX. WE CANNOT BUDGET THAT IN.
WE CANNOT BUDGET THAT IN. AS I MENTIONED, THE PENSION
AS I MENTIONED, THE PENSION PROPOSED UNTIL THE COURTS RULED
PROPOSED UNTIL THE COURTS RULED SAY THAT'S CONSTITUTIONAL, WE
SAY THAT'S CONSTITUTIONAL, WE CANNOT PROJECT ANY SAVINGS IN
CANNOT PROJECT ANY SAVINGS IN TERMS OF PENSION REFORM.
TERMS OF PENSION REFORM. SO, NO, WE CAN'T.
SO, NO, WE CAN'T. I SEE IT AS VIOLATING
I SEE IT AS VIOLATING CONSTITUTION IF WE PUT THOSE
CONSTITUTION IF WE PUT THOSE THINGS IN THERE WHEN THEY ARE
THINGS IN THERE WHEN THEY ARE NOT -- THEY ARE JUST
NOT -- THEY ARE JUST POSSIBILITIES.
POSSIBILITIES. >>A COUPLE OBSERVATIONS.
>>A COUPLE OBSERVATIONS. NUMBER ONE, ALTHOUGH THE
NUMBER ONE, ALTHOUGH THE ILLINOIS CONSTITUTION CALLS FOR
ILLINOIS CONSTITUTION CALLS FOR BALANCED BUDGET, I AM HARD
BALANCED BUDGET, I AM HARD PRESSED TO SAY THAT WE HAVE HAD
PRESSED TO SAY THAT WE HAVE HAD A BALANCED BUDGET IN ILLINOIS
A BALANCED BUDGET IN ILLINOIS FOR WELL OVER A DECADE FOR A
FOR WELL OVER A DECADE FOR A WHOLE VARIETY OF REASONS.
WHOLE VARIETY OF REASONS. THIS BUDGET IS NOT LIKELY TO BE
THIS BUDGET IS NOT LIKELY TO BE ANY MORE BALANCED THAN THE ONES
ANY MORE BALANCED THAN THE ONES IN THE PAST.
IN THE PAST. I THINK MOST WOULD SAY, A
I THINK MOST WOULD SAY, A BALANCED BUDGET IS DOLLARS IN,
BALANCED BUDGET IS DOLLARS IN, DOLLARS SPENT.
DOLLARS SPENT. OH, BY THE WAY, LITTLE BIT OF
OH, BY THE WAY, LITTLE BIT OF SURPLUS LEFT IN THE CHECKING
SURPLUS LEFT IN THE CHECKING ACCOUNT WHEN IT IS DONE.
ACCOUNT WHEN IT IS DONE. WE HAVEN'T BEEN THERE FOR A LONG
WE HAVEN'T BEEN THERE FOR A LONG TIME.
TIME. THE INCOME TAX IS SCHEDULED TO
THE INCOME TAX IS SCHEDULED TO ROLL OFF.
ROLL OFF. THE LEGISLATURE WILL -- MAKE THE
THE LEGISLATURE WILL -- MAKE THE DETERMINATION, MAYBE IT DOESN'T
DETERMINATION, MAYBE IT DOESN'T GO ALL THE WAY.
GO ALL THE WAY. THE GOVERNOR, WHAT THE GOVERNOR
THE GOVERNOR, WHAT THE GOVERNOR DID TODAY WAS HE STAKED OUT HIS
DID TODAY WAS HE STAKED OUT HIS POSITION THAT IT SHOULD STAY IN
POSITION THAT IT SHOULD STAY IN PLACE.
PLACE. BUT IT IS NOT HIS CHOICE.
BUT IT IS NOT HIS CHOICE. IT IS THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY'S
IT IS THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY'S CHOICE.
CHOICE. WE WILL SEE HOW THAT PLAYS OUT
WE WILL SEE HOW THAT PLAYS OUT OVER THE NEXT FEW WEEKS.
OVER THE NEXT FEW WEEKS. >>KNOWING THE GOVERNOR DOESN'T
>>KNOWING THE GOVERNOR DOESN'T ALWAYS SEE EYE TO EYE WITH THE
ALWAYS SEE EYE TO EYE WITH THE DEMOCRATS, HAVE YOU TALKED TO
DEMOCRATS, HAVE YOU TALKED TO ENOUGH OF YOUR FELLOW
ENOUGH OF YOUR FELLOW REPRESENTATIVES AND SENATORS
REPRESENTATIVES AND SENATORS WHETHER OR NOT THE INCOME TAX
WHETHER OR NOT THE INCOME TAX WILL STAY AT 5%.
WILL STAY AT 5%. >>I DON'T THINK THERE IS VOTES
>>I DON'T THINK THERE IS VOTES TO DO THAT.
TO DO THAT. I DON'T ANTICIPATE ANY
I DON'T ANTICIPATE ANY REPUBLICAN VOTES IN THE HOUSE TO
REPUBLICAN VOTES IN THE HOUSE TO MAKE IT PERMANENT.
MAKE IT PERMANENT. I THINK QUITE A FEW DEMOCRATS
I THINK QUITE A FEW DEMOCRATS THAT WOULD NOT VOTE TO MAKE IT
THAT WOULD NOT VOTE TO MAKE IT PERMANENT.
PERMANENT. I DON'T THINK THERE ARE THE
I DON'T THINK THERE ARE THE VOTES TO DO IT.
VOTES TO DO IT. >>WHICH THEN LEADS BACK TO THE
>>WHICH THEN LEADS BACK TO THE ORIGINAL POINT WHICH IT WILL BE
ORIGINAL POINT WHICH IT WILL BE VERY DIFFICULT BUDGET YEAR IF
VERY DIFFICULT BUDGET YEAR IF YOU CAN'T COUNT ON THAT REVENUE.
YOU CAN'T COUNT ON THAT REVENUE. I ALSO THINK IT IS GOING TO BE
I ALSO THINK IT IS GOING TO BE HARD PRESSED TO KEEP THAT TAX AT
HARD PRESSED TO KEEP THAT TAX AT 5%.
5%. >>CORPORATELY, WE ARE TALKING
>>CORPORATELY, WE ARE TALKING HIGHER TAX RATE.
HIGHER TAX RATE. WHERE DOES THE CHAMBER STAND ON
WHERE DOES THE CHAMBER STAND ON THAT?
THAT? >> ILLINOIS CORPORATE INCOME TAX
>> ILLINOIS CORPORATE INCOME TAX RATE IS SECOND OR THIRD HIGHEST
RATE IS SECOND OR THIRD HIGHEST IN THE COUNTRY NOW AT 9.5%.
IN THE COUNTRY NOW AT 9.5%. THAT'S EXCESSIVE.
THAT'S EXCESSIVE. I THINK POLITICALLY, LEGISLATORS
I THINK POLITICALLY, LEGISLATORS OUGHT TO BE THINKING ABOUT THE
OUGHT TO BE THINKING ABOUT THE ECONOMICS AND THE
ECONOMICS AND THE COMPETITIVENESS BETWEEN THE
COMPETITIVENESS BETWEEN THE STATES.
STATES. SO MY BIGGEST MEASURE WOULD BE
SO MY BIGGEST MEASURE WOULD BE INDIANA.
INDIANA. I DON'T THINK ILLINOIS'
I DON'T THINK ILLINOIS' CORPORATE INCOME TAX RATE SHOULD
CORPORATE INCOME TAX RATE SHOULD BE HIGHER THAN INDIANA'S.
BE HIGHER THAN INDIANA'S. RIGHT NOW INDIANA IS 6.5.
RIGHT NOW INDIANA IS 6.5. I WOULD ARGUE THAT THE CORPORATE
I WOULD ARGUE THAT THE CORPORATE INCOME TAX RATE SHOULD BE CUT
INCOME TAX RATE SHOULD BE CUT BACK AT LEAST TO THAT LEVEL AND
BACK AT LEAST TO THAT LEVEL AND RECOGNIZE THE COMPETITIVE NATURE
RECOGNIZE THE COMPETITIVE NATURE OF STATE TAX STRUCTURES.
OF STATE TAX STRUCTURES. >>REPRESENTATIVE, ANY CHANCE OF
>>REPRESENTATIVE, ANY CHANCE OF THAT HAPPENING?
THAT HAPPENING? >> WELL, SPEAKER HAS MENTIONED
>> WELL, SPEAKER HAS MENTIONED THE POSSIBILITY OF DOING
THE POSSIBILITY OF DOING SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
SOMETHING LIKE THAT. WE MIGHT GET A CHANCE TO VOTE ON
WE MIGHT GET A CHANCE TO VOTE ON THAT.
THAT. I THINK WE DO.
I THINK WE DO. WE ARE NOT AN ISLAND HERE BY
WE ARE NOT AN ISLAND HERE BY OURSELF. WE HAVE TO LOOK AT
OURSELF. WE HAVE TO LOOK AT WHAT OUR STATES IN THE REGION
WHAT OUR STATES IN THE REGION ARE DOING.
ARE DOING. ONE OF THE THINGS WE CAN DO TO
ONE OF THE THINGS WE CAN DO TO MAKE US MORE ATTRACTIVE WOULD BE
MAKE US MORE ATTRACTIVE WOULD BE LOWER THAT CORPORATE INCOME TAX.
LOWER THAT CORPORATE INCOME TAX. WE SHOULD LOOK AT IT, I HOPE WE
WE SHOULD LOOK AT IT, I HOPE WE CAN, THE SPEAKER MENTIONED THE
CAN, THE SPEAKER MENTIONED THE POSSIBILITY.
POSSIBILITY. >>TWO PROPOSALS OUT THERE, ONE
>>TWO PROPOSALS OUT THERE, ONE FROM THE SPEAKER TALKING ABOUT
FROM THE SPEAKER TALKING ABOUT 3% TAX ON EARNINGS MORE THAN A
3% TAX ON EARNINGS MORE THAN A MILLION DOLLARS.
MILLION DOLLARS. YOUR TAKE ON THAT?
YOUR TAKE ON THAT? >> I DON'T THINK THAT HAS MUCH
>> I DON'T THINK THAT HAS MUCH OF A CHANCE.
OF A CHANCE. I DON'T THINK WE -- RIGHT NOW, I
I DON'T THINK WE -- RIGHT NOW, I DON'T BELIEVE THERE WOULD BE ANY
DON'T BELIEVE THERE WOULD BE ANY REPUBLICAN VOTES IN FAVOR OF
REPUBLICAN VOTES IN FAVOR OF THAT.
THAT. AGAIN, YOU KNOW, THAT'S -- THOSE
AGAIN, YOU KNOW, THAT'S -- THOSE PEOPLE -- THAT GROUP OF CITIZENS
PEOPLE -- THAT GROUP OF CITIZENS ARE VERY VOCAL.
ARE VERY VOCAL. YOU RAISE THE TAXES, AND THEY
YOU RAISE THE TAXES, AND THEY MAY SUDDENLY HAVE A RESIDENCE
MAY SUDDENLY HAVE A RESIDENCE SOMEWHERE ELSE.
SOMEWHERE ELSE. SOME HAVE MORE THAN ONE
SOME HAVE MORE THAN ONE RESIDENCE.
RESIDENCE. I THINK IT IS A LITTLE BIT -- IT
I THINK IT IS A LITTLE BIT -- IT IS NOT AS ACCURATE PROJECTION
IS NOT AS ACCURATE PROJECTION HOW MUCH MONEY THAT WOULD AGAIN
HOW MUCH MONEY THAT WOULD AGAIN RATE BECAUSE I THINK SOME OF IT
RATE BECAUSE I THINK SOME OF IT WOULD BE LEAVING.
WOULD BE LEAVING. >>DON HARMON'S PROPOSAL, AND
>>DON HARMON'S PROPOSAL, AND THAT'S THE PROGRESSIVE TAX,
THAT'S THE PROGRESSIVE TAX, THREE TIERS IN THAT PARTICULAR
THREE TIERS IN THAT PARTICULAR INCOME TAX, A CHANCE OF THAT?
INCOME TAX, A CHANCE OF THAT? >> THINK IT IS VERY SLIM.
>> THINK IT IS VERY SLIM. AGAIN, I DON'T THINK THERE IS
AGAIN, I DON'T THINK THERE IS ANY REPUBLICAN SUPPORT FOR
ANY REPUBLICAN SUPPORT FOR PROGRESSIVE TAX.
PROGRESSIVE TAX. >>WITH REGARDS TO THE CHAMBER
>>WITH REGARDS TO THE CHAMBER THIS.
THIS. >>WELL, I THINK THE FACT THAT
>>WELL, I THINK THE FACT THAT THE SPEAKER PROPOSE A NEW
THE SPEAKER PROPOSE A NEW VARIATION OF PROGRESSIVE TAX,
VARIATION OF PROGRESSIVE TAX, IMPOSING HIGHER RATE ON
IMPOSING HIGHER RATE ON MILLIONAIRES, I INTERPRETED THAT
MILLIONAIRES, I INTERPRETED THAT PLAN "A" PROGRESSIVE TAX
PLAN "A" PROGRESSIVE TAX PROPOSAL WAS DEAD, AND PLAN "B"
PROPOSAL WAS DEAD, AND PLAN "B" WOULD BE PROPOSED TAX ONLY ON
WOULD BE PROPOSED TAX ONLY ON HIGH INCOME.
HIGH INCOME. I TAKE A LITTLE EXCEPTION WITH
I TAKE A LITTLE EXCEPTION WITH REPRESENTATIVE MOFFITT, THE
REPRESENTATIVE MOFFITT, THE REPUBLICANS ARE NOT IN CHARGE.
REPUBLICANS ARE NOT IN CHARGE. THE DEMOCRATS HAVE ENOUGH VOTES
THE DEMOCRATS HAVE ENOUGH VOTES IN BOTH CHAMBERS TO PASS THAT
IN BOTH CHAMBERS TO PASS THAT MEASURE IF THEY WISH.
MEASURE IF THEY WISH. IT IS A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
IT IS A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT PROPOSAL.
PROPOSAL. THAT MEANS THAT THEY ACTUALLY
THAT MEANS THAT THEY ACTUALLY DON'T RAISE THE TAX.
DON'T RAISE THE TAX. THEY ONLY PUT IT TO THE VOTERS
THEY ONLY PUT IT TO THE VOTERS TO MAKE A DECISION ABOUT WHETHER
TO MAKE A DECISION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT TO RAISE THE TAX.
OR NOT TO RAISE THE TAX. POLITICALLY, IT IS A GOOD WAY TO
POLITICALLY, IT IS A GOOD WAY TO GET OUT OF THE FUNDAMENTAL
GET OUT OF THE FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION OF IMPOSING EXTRA HIGH
QUESTION OF IMPOSING EXTRA HIGH TAX.
TAX. THERE IS ONLY ONE STATE IN THE
THERE IS ONLY ONE STATE IN THE COUNTRY THAT HAS A TAX BRACKET
COUNTRY THAT HAS A TAX BRACKET THAT IS A MILLIONAIRE OR MORE,
THAT IS A MILLIONAIRE OR MORE, AND THAT'S NEW YORK.
AND THAT'S NEW YORK. ONE OF THE OTHER ISSUES THAT
ONE OF THE OTHER ISSUES THAT COMES INTO PLAY WHICH YOU
COMES INTO PLAY WHICH YOU HAVEN'T HEARD PEOPLE TALK ABOUT
HAVEN'T HEARD PEOPLE TALK ABOUT YET, IT WOULD BE A
YET, IT WOULD BE A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, 3%
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, 3% RATE.
RATE. IT IS NOT CLEAR WHAT TAX BASE
IT IS NOT CLEAR WHAT TAX BASE WILL BE, WHETHER IT IS NET OR
WILL BE, WHETHER IT IS NET OR GROSS OR WITH OR WITHOUT
GROSS OR WITH OR WITHOUT EXEMPTIONS, THAT'S A QUESTION.
EXEMPTIONS, THAT'S A QUESTION. 3% ON 5 WHICH WOULD MAKE IT 8,
3% ON 5 WHICH WOULD MAKE IT 8, WHICH WOULD MAKE US ONE OF THE
WHICH WOULD MAKE US ONE OF THE HIGHER TAX STATES IN THE COUNTRY
HIGHER TAX STATES IN THE COUNTRY OR IS IT #% ON 3% WITH 3.75
OR IS IT #% ON 3% WITH 3.75 ROLLBACK?
ROLLBACK? THOSE THINGS REMAIN TO BE
THOSE THINGS REMAIN TO BE DETERMINED.
DETERMINED. CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT MUST BE
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT MUST BE ADOPTED BY MAY 4 OR 6.
ADOPTED BY MAY 4 OR 6. LEGISLATURE DOESN'T GO HOME
LEGISLATURE DOESN'T GO HOME UNTIL HAD THE END OF MAY.
UNTIL HAD THE END OF MAY. AND IF THEY DON'T MAKE THAT
AND IF THEY DON'T MAKE THAT DETERMINATION, THEY ACTUALLY
DETERMINATION, THEY ACTUALLY HAVE AFTER THE NOVEMBER ELECTION
HAVE AFTER THE NOVEMBER ELECTION TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION.
TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION. SO WE ARE DOING THIS WITH A
SO WE ARE DOING THIS WITH A LITTLE VACUUM WHERE THINGS WILL
LITTLE VACUUM WHERE THINGS WILL SHAKE OUT.
SHAKE OUT. >>60% BOTH THE HOUSE AND SENATE
>>60% BOTH THE HOUSE AND SENATE MUST APPROVE IT BEFORE IT GOES
MUST APPROVE IT BEFORE IT GOES TO THE VOTERS?
TO THE VOTERS? THREE-FIFTHS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL
THREE-FIFTHS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO GO TO THE VOTERS.
AMENDMENT TO GO TO THE VOTERS. >>RIGHT.
>>RIGHT. BEAR MINIMUM IN TERMS OF WHAT
BEAR MINIMUM IN TERMS OF WHAT THE DEMOCRAT MAKE UP OF THE
THE DEMOCRAT MAKE UP OF THE HOUSE.
HOUSE. EVERY DEMOCRAT WOULD HAVE TO
EVERY DEMOCRAT WOULD HAVE TO VOTE FOR IT, AND I THIS THINK IT
VOTE FOR IT, AND I THIS THINK IT IS UNLIKELY.
IS UNLIKELY. >>IN THE FINAL 30 SECONDS WITH
>>IN THE FINAL 30 SECONDS WITH YOU REPRESENTATIVE, ANYTHING
YOU REPRESENTATIVE, ANYTHING ELSE THAT STRUCK YOU ABOUT THIS
ELSE THAT STRUCK YOU ABOUT THIS SPEECH?
SPEECH? I THINK MOST PEOPLE HERE HE SAID
I THINK MOST PEOPLE HERE HE SAID AT THE START I WILL TALK
AT THE START I WILL TALK SPECIFIC.
SPECIFIC. HE DIDN'T TALK SPECIFIC.
HE DIDN'T TALK SPECIFIC. >>WELL, I THINK IN TERMS OF --
>>WELL, I THINK IN TERMS OF -- ONE AREA IN EDUCATION THAT WAS
ONE AREA IN EDUCATION THAT WAS NOT MENTIONED.
NOT MENTIONED. SOMETIMES WHEN WE TALK FUNDING
SOMETIMES WHEN WE TALK FUNDING EDUCATION AND IF THERE ARE
EDUCATION AND IF THERE ARE CUTBACKS, ONE AREA HIT
CUTBACKS, ONE AREA HIT EXCEPTIONALLY HARD IS
EXCEPTIONALLY HARD IS TRANSPORTATION FUNDING.
TRANSPORTATION FUNDING. THAT'S PART OF EDUCATION.
THAT'S PART OF EDUCATION. IT IS EVERY WHERE, BUT
IT IS EVERY WHERE, BUT ESPECIALLY IN THE RURAL AREAS.
ESPECIALLY IN THE RURAL AREAS. EDUCATION HAS TAKEN SOME HITS,
EDUCATION HAS TAKEN SOME HITS, MIGHT TAKE SOME MORE.
MIGHT TAKE SOME MORE. WE ALSO NEED TO GET THAT OUT
WE ALSO NEED TO GET THAT OUT HERE TO THIS PART OF THE
HERE TO THIS PART OF THE DISCUSSION THAT PROBABLY
DISCUSSION THAT PROBABLY DOWNSTATE SCHOOLS HIT HARDEST.
DOWNSTATE SCHOOLS HIT HARDEST. >>HIGHWAY ACCOUNT IN THE HIGHWAY
>>HIGHWAY ACCOUNT IN THE HIGHWAY TRUST FUND, IF NOTHING IS
TRUST FUND, IF NOTHING IS CHANGED AND YOU DON'T TRANSFER
CHANGED AND YOU DON'T TRANSFER MINE LIKE THE PAST YEAR, WILL GO
MINE LIKE THE PAST YEAR, WILL GO INTO A DEFICIT SENDING ARENA BY
INTO A DEFICIT SENDING ARENA BY JULY FIRST, I BELIEVE.
JULY FIRST, I BELIEVE. REPRESENTATIVE DON MOFFITT,
REPRESENTATIVE DON MOFFITT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR JOINING
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR JOINING US ON "AT ISSUE."
US ON "AT ISSUE." WE WILL TAKE A SHORT BREAK AND
WE WILL TAKE A SHORT BREAK AND BE BACK WITH DOUG WHITLEY AND
BE BACK WITH DOUG WHITLEY AND ALSO SENATOR DAVE KOEHLER IN
ALSO SENATOR DAVE KOEHLER IN JUST A MOMENT.
JUST A MOMENT. >> WE ARE JOINED NOW BY SENATOR
>> WE ARE JOINED NOW BY SENATOR DAVE KOEHLER OF PEORIA.
DAVE KOEHLER OF PEORIA. DAVE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
DAVE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING WITH US.
BEING WITH US. >>THANK YOU.
JOINED9J.@Ñ BY DOUG WHIY PRESIDENT AND C.E.O. OF STATE
PRESIDENT AND C.E.O. OF STATE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. FIRST, UNDER WHAT IS YOUR TAKE,
FIRST, UNDER WHAT IS YOUR TAKE, OVER ALL TAKE ON GOVERNOR'S
OVER ALL TAKE ON GOVERNOR'S BUDGET ADDRESS?
BUDGET ADDRESS? >> LIKE WHAT HE SAID ABOUT
>> LIKE WHAT HE SAID ABOUT EDUCATION OF THAT'S WHAT I WAS
EDUCATION OF THAT'S WHAT I WAS SPECIFICALLY LOOKING FOR.
SPECIFICALLY LOOKING FOR. I HAVE BEEN MEETING WITH SCHOOL
I HAVE BEEN MEETING WITH SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENTS, NOT ONLY IN MY
SUPERINTENDENTS, NOT ONLY IN MY DISTRICT, BUT THROUGHOUT CENTRAL
DISTRICT, BUT THROUGHOUT CENTRAL ILLINOIS.
ILLINOIS. THEY ARE SCARED ABOUT WHAT THEY
THEY ARE SCARED ABOUT WHAT THEY HAVE TO DO IN TERMS OF TRYING TO
HAVE TO DO IN TERMS OF TRYING TO PROJECT A BUDGET FOR NEXT YEAR.
PROJECT A BUDGET FOR NEXT YEAR. WE ARE FUNDING THEM RIGHT NOW
WE ARE FUNDING THEM RIGHT NOW 89% WHAT WE SHOULD BE PAYING
89% WHAT WE SHOULD BE PAYING THEM.
THEM. THEY WERE FEARFUL 69%.
THEY WERE FEARFUL 69%. IF IT HAPPENS, MORE TEACHER
IF IT HAPPENS, MORE TEACHER LAYOFFS, MORE PROGRAMS
LAYOFFS, MORE PROGRAMS ELIMINATE, A LOT OF LIP SERVICE
ELIMINATE, A LOT OF LIP SERVICE GIVEN IN SPRINGFIELD TO
GIVEN IN SPRINGFIELD TO EDUCATION.
EDUCATION. WE NEED TO PUT OUR MONEY WHERE
WE NEED TO PUT OUR MONEY WHERE THE MOUTH IS, AND I THINK THE
THE MOUTH IS, AND I THINK THE GOVERNOR IS SERIOUS ABOUT THAT.
GOVERNOR IS SERIOUS ABOUT THAT. >>HE SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON
>>HE SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON EDUCATION, ADDING $1.5 MILLION
EDUCATION, ADDING $1.5 MILLION ON BIRTH TO FIVE.
ON BIRTH TO FIVE. HE TALKED ABOUT PERIOD OF FIVE
HE TALKED ABOUT PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS, ADDING $6 MILLION TO
YEARS, ADDING $6 MILLION TO ELEMENTARY AND HIGH SCHOOL
ELEMENTARY AND HIGH SCHOOL EDUCATION.
EDUCATION. >>RIGHT.
>>RIGHT. >>HE TALKED ABOUT MAP
>>HE TALKED ABOUT MAP SCHOLARSHIPS.
SCHOLARSHIPS. MONEY FOR THIS?
MONEY FOR THIS? >> HE ALSO TALKED ABOUT WE NEED
>> HE ALSO TALKED ABOUT WE NEED TO CONTINUE WHERE WE ARE RIGHT
TO CONTINUE WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW WHICH IS AT 5% ON INCOME TAX
NOW WHICH IS AT 5% ON INCOME TAX RATE.
RATE. WE MADE A BIG MISTAKE FOUR FOUR
WE MADE A BIG MISTAKE FOUR FOUR YEARS AGO.
YEARS AGO. WE DIDN'T MAKE IT PERMANENT
WE DIDN'T MAKE IT PERMANENT RIGHT OFF THE BAT.
RIGHT OFF THE BAT. IF I HAD TO TAKE A HARD VOTE, DO
IF I HAD TO TAKE A HARD VOTE, DO IT ONCE.
IT ONCE. WE CREATED A CRISIS.
WE CREATED A CRISIS. SCHOOLS ARE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT
SCHOOLS ARE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO BUDGET FOR THIS YEAR, AND
HOW TO BUDGET FOR THIS YEAR, AND WE HAVE HALF A YEAR WE HAVE
WE HAVE HALF A YEAR WE HAVE STABILITY.
STABILITY. THAT'S NOT FAIR TO THEM.
THAT'S NOT FAIR TO THEM. SO I THINK THAT HIM FULLY
SO I THINK THAT HIM FULLY PREPARED TO MAKE THIS PERMANENT.
PREPARED TO MAKE THIS PERMANENT. YOU THINK IF WE WANT TO TALK
YOU THINK IF WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT MAKING ILLINOIS AN
ABOUT MAKING ILLINOIS AN ATTRACTIVE PLACE TO DO BUSINESS,
ATTRACTIVE PLACE TO DO BUSINESS, WE HAVE TO HAVE A WELL EDUCATED,
WE HAVE TO HAVE A WELL EDUCATED, WELL QUALIFIED WORK FORCE THAT
WELL QUALIFIED WORK FORCE THAT IS READY TO GO TO WORK WHEN THEY
IS READY TO GO TO WORK WHEN THEY GRADUATE FROM COMMUNITY COLLEGE
GRADUATE FROM COMMUNITY COLLEGE OR COLLEGE.
OR COLLEGE. YOUR RESPONSE TO THAT.
YOUR RESPONSE TO THAT. >>I WOULD AGREE WITH THE
>>I WOULD AGREE WITH THE SENATOR.
SENATOR. I WAS VERY PLEASED THE GOVERNOR
I WAS VERY PLEASED THE GOVERNOR SPENT AS MUCH TIME AS HE DID ON
SPENT AS MUCH TIME AS HE DID ON EDUCATION TODAY.
EDUCATION TODAY. I PERSONALLY CHANGED MY RHETORIC
I PERSONALLY CHANGED MY RHETORIC ABOUT SIX MONTHS AGO.
ABOUT SIX MONTHS AGO. I ALSO STARTED TALKING ABOUT THE
I ALSO STARTED TALKING ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE HAVE BEEN
FACT THAT WE HAVE BEEN SHORTCHANGING EDUCATION.
SHORTCHANGING EDUCATION. THERE ARE A COUPLE OF
THERE ARE A COUPLE OF FUNDAMENTAL ROLES THAT
FUNDAMENTAL ROLES THAT GOVERNMENT MUST PERFORMING AND
GOVERNMENT MUST PERFORMING AND ONE OF OF THEM IS EDUCATION AND
ONE OF OF THEM IS EDUCATION AND MAKE SURE THERE IS QUALITY
MAKE SURE THERE IS QUALITY EDUCATED WORK FORCE, AND ANOTHER
EDUCATED WORK FORCE, AND ANOTHER ONE IS FUNDAMENTAL IS
ONE IS FUNDAMENTAL IS INFRASTRUCTURE INVEST, AND THEN
INFRASTRUCTURE INVEST, AND THEN PUBLIC SAFETY.
PUBLIC SAFETY. WHEN HE SPENT AS MUCH TIME AS HE
WHEN HE SPENT AS MUCH TIME AS HE DID, I THOUGHT THAT WAS AN
DID, I THOUGHT THAT WAS AN INTERESTING DEPARTURE INTEREST
INTERESTING DEPARTURE INTEREST WHAT WE HAVE BEEN HEARING FROM
WHAT WE HAVE BEEN HEARING FROM THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OVER THE
THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS.
LAST FEW YEARS. >>YOU MENTIONED INFRASTRUCTURE.
>>YOU MENTIONED INFRASTRUCTURE. LET ME TURN TO THE SENATOR,
LET ME TURN TO THE SENATOR, ILLINOIS JOBS NOW FIVE YEARS
ILLINOIS JOBS NOW FIVE YEARS AGO, $31 BILLION, SOMEWHERE IN
AGO, $31 BILLION, SOMEWHERE IN THAT RANGE.
THAT RANGE. CHANCES OF A NEW JOBS BILL
CHANCES OF A NEW JOBS BILL CAPITAL PROGRAM?
CAPITAL PROGRAM? >> AS SOON AS HE MENTIONED THERE
>> AS SOON AS HE MENTIONED THERE WAS A COMMITTEE, BIPARTISAN
WAS A COMMITTEE, BIPARTISAN COMMITTEE THAT WAS GOING TO BE
COMMITTEE THAT WAS GOING TO BE LOOKING ATuj
LOOKING ATuj CAPITAL BILL, I TEXTED THE
CAPITAL BILL, I TEXTED THE GOVERNOR'S CHIEF OF STAFF, AND
GOVERNOR'S CHIEF OF STAFF, AND SAID WANT TO BE ON THERE.
SAID WANT TO BE ON THERE. THIS IS ONE THING DOUG HAS HAS N
THIS IS ONE THING DOUG HAS HAS N A LEADER IN ILLINOIS, WE NEED
A LEADER IN ILLINOIS, WE NEED MORE MONEY IN INFRASTRUCTURE.
MORE MONEY IN INFRASTRUCTURE. WHAT WE DID FIVE YEARS AGO, FOUR
WHAT WE DID FIVE YEARS AGO, FOUR YEARS AGO, IS ALMOST AT THE END
YEARS AGO, IS ALMOST AT THE END OF ITS COURSE.
OF ITS COURSE. WE KNOW NUMBER ONE, IT PRODUCES
WE KNOW NUMBER ONE, IT PRODUCES JOBS.
JOBS. NUMBER TWO, WE GOT TO GET GOOD
NUMBER TWO, WE GOT TO GET GOOD RESERVES TO MARKET.
RESERVES TO MARKET. WE DON'T WANT BAD ROADS AND
WE DON'T WANT BAD ROADS AND BRIDGES.
BRIDGES. >>INFRASTRUCTURE IS KEY TO ANY
>>INFRASTRUCTURE IS KEY TO ANY ECONOMY, WHETHER RAIL, RIVER,
ECONOMY, WHETHER RAIL, RIVER, BARGE TRAFFIC, HIGHWAYS, THOSE
BARGE TRAFFIC, HIGHWAYS, THOSE ARE ALL IMPORTANT.
ARE ALL IMPORTANT. >>WHEN I TALK TO THE MAYOR HE IS
>>WHEN I TALK TO THE MAYOR HE IS CHRIS KOOS, JIM ARDIS, THEY ALL
CHRIS KOOS, JIM ARDIS, THEY ALL HAVE THE SAME TEAM, ALMOST TO
HAVE THE SAME TEAM, ALMOST TO THE WORD, YOU KEEP TAKING MONEY
THE WORD, YOU KEEP TAKING MONEY AWAY FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
AWAY FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT. >>RIGHT.
>>RIGHT. >>LET ME ASK BOTH OF YOU
>>LET ME ASK BOTH OF YOU STARTING WITH THE SENATOR.
STARTING WITH THE SENATOR. WHAT WAS YOUR RESPONSE TO THE
WHAT WAS YOUR RESPONSE TO THE GOVERNOR SAYING, AND IT WAS A
GOVERNOR SAYING, AND IT WAS A QUOTE "PROTECT STATE FUNDING TO
QUOTE "PROTECT STATE FUNDING TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS."
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS." >>I APPLAUDED PROBABLY AT THAT
>>I APPLAUDED PROBABLY AT THAT LEVEL.
LEVEL. I ABSOLUTELY AGREE WITH THAT.
I ABSOLUTELY AGREE WITH THAT. BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN UNFAIR TO
BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN UNFAIR TO OUR LOCAL COMMUNITIES.
OUR LOCAL COMMUNITIES. WHEN WE PASSED THE TEMPORARY
WHEN WE PASSED THE TEMPORARY INCREASE, FOUR YEARS AGO, WE
INCREASE, FOUR YEARS AGO, WE DIDN'T ALLOW THAT INCREASE TO
DIDN'T ALLOW THAT INCREASE TO ALSO BE RECOGNIZED BY OUR LOCAL
ALSO BE RECOGNIZED BY OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
GOVERNMENT. WE SHOULD DO THAT.
WE SHOULD DO THAT. WE SHOULD DO THAT.
WE SHOULD DO THAT. THAT'S ISSUE OF FAIRNESS.
THAT'S ISSUE OF FAIRNESS. >>IT WILL COME UP IN THE
>>IT WILL COME UP IN THE QUESTION OF EXTENDED --
QUESTION OF EXTENDED -- >>YES, IT WILL.
>>YES, IT WILL. >>AT THAT TIME, THE STATE
>>AT THAT TIME, THE STATE GOVERNMENT WANTED THE DOLLARS,
GOVERNMENT WANTED THE DOLLARS, AND SO THEY CLAIMED THE DOLLARS.
AND SO THEY CLAIMED THE DOLLARS. BUT HISTORICALLY, 10% OF ALL THE
BUT HISTORICALLY, 10% OF ALL THE INCOME TAX RECEIPTS IN THE STATE
INCOME TAX RECEIPTS IN THE STATE HAVE FLOWN BACK TO
HAVE FLOWN BACK TO MUNICIPALITIES.
MUNICIPALITIES. SO MUNICIPALITIES FELT LIKE THEY
SO MUNICIPALITIES FELT LIKE THEY WERE SHORTCHANGED INTEREST LAST
WERE SHORTCHANGED INTEREST LAST TIME AROUND.
TIME AROUND. I WOULD REMIND YOU THAT
I WOULD REMIND YOU THAT TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS ALSO
TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS ALSO FLOW BACK TO MUNICIPALITIES.
FLOW BACK TO MUNICIPALITIES. IN FACT, WE HAVE 147,000 MILES
IN FACT, WE HAVE 147,000 MILES OF ROADS IN ILLINOIS WE HAVE
OF ROADS IN ILLINOIS WE HAVE 9,000 BRIDGES THAT ARE
9,000 BRIDGES THAT ARE MAINTAINED BY THE STATE ALONE.
MAINTAINED BY THE STATE ALONE. I CAN'T TELL YOU -- BUT
I CAN'T TELL YOU -- BUT MUNICIPALITIES, TOWNSHIPS,
MUNICIPALITIES, TOWNSHIPS, COUNTIES, AND ROAD DISTRICTS ARE
COUNTIES, AND ROAD DISTRICTS ARE ALL DEPENDENT UPON PASS THROUGH
ALL DEPENDENT UPON PASS THROUGH MONEY FLOWING BACK TO THEM FROM
MONEY FLOWING BACK TO THEM FROM THE STATE.
THE STATE. WHEN THE STATE ROAD FUND, IN
WHEN THE STATE ROAD FUND, IN THIS CASE, WILL EXPIRE JULY
THIS CASE, WILL EXPIRE JULY FIRST, JUST A FEW WEEKS FROM
FIRST, JUST A FEW WEEKS FROM NOW, WE WILL START ON A DOWNHILL
NOW, WE WILL START ON A DOWNHILL TREND ON FUNDING FOR
TREND ON FUNDING FOR INFRASTRUCTURE, AND THAT'S WHY
INFRASTRUCTURE, AND THAT'S WHY WE HAVE TO COME BACK.
WE HAVE TO COME BACK. I, ON OTHER HAND WAS LITTLE
I, ON OTHER HAND WAS LITTLE CONCERNED FOR THE GOVERNOR
CONCERNED FOR THE GOVERNOR CALLING FOR A COMMISSION.
CALLING FOR A COMMISSION. GOVERNOR QUINN LIKES
GOVERNOR QUINN LIKES COMMISSIONS, BUT IN REALITY,
COMMISSIONS, BUT IN REALITY, COMMISSIONS ARE A GOOD WAY TO
COMMISSIONS ARE A GOOD WAY TO KICK ISSUE DOWN THE ROAD,
KICK ISSUE DOWN THE ROAD, PROVERBIAL CAN DOWN THE ROAD
PROVERBIAL CAN DOWN THE ROAD UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION.
UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION. SO I IN INTERPRETED THAT TO
SO I IN INTERPRETED THAT TO SUGGEST -- WE ARE NOT GOING IT
SUGGEST -- WE ARE NOT GOING IT DEAL WITH TRANSPORTATION AND
DEAL WITH TRANSPORTATION AND OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS UNTIL
OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS UNTIL I AM REELECTED, AND --
I AM REELECTED, AND -- >>I DIDN'T THINK ABOUT IT THAT
>>I DIDN'T THINK ABOUT IT THAT WAY WE NEED INFRASTRUCTURE BILL
WAY WE NEED INFRASTRUCTURE BILL NOW.
NOW. I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.
I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. BUT IF THERE IS GOING TO BE A
BUT IF THERE IS GOING TO BE A COMMISSION, WANT TO BE ON IT.
COMMISSION, WANT TO BE ON IT. >>EARLIER, YOU INDICATED YOU
>>EARLIER, YOU INDICATED YOU THOUGHT THIS WAS A POPULAR
THOUGHT THIS WAS A POPULAR SPEECH, BUT ONE THING THAT
SPEECH, BUT ONE THING THAT STRUCK ME, I THOUGHT THERE WAS A
STRUCK ME, I THOUGHT THERE WAS A BIT OF POLITIC, ESPECIALLY AT
BIT OF POLITIC, ESPECIALLY AT THE END BECAUSE THE GOVERNOR
THE END BECAUSE THE GOVERNOR SAID TAX LESS AND SPEND LESS IS
SAID TAX LESS AND SPEND LESS IS NOT A WAY TO RUN A GOVERNMENT.
NOT A WAY TO RUN A GOVERNMENT. I TAKE THAT AS BEING.
I TAKE THAT AS BEING. >>I DID, TOO.
>>I DID, TOO. >>THOSE AREN'T EXACT WORDS, BUT
>>THOSE AREN'T EXACT WORDS, BUT TAX LESS AND SPEND LESS IS NOT
TAX LESS AND SPEND LESS IS NOT TELLING THE TRUTH.
TELLING THE TRUTH. >>YEAH.
>>YEAH. >> YOUR TAKE?
>> YOUR TAKE? >> WELL, IT IS ELECTION YEAR.
>> WELL, IT IS ELECTION YEAR. I MEAN FIRST OF ALL, LET'S
I MEAN FIRST OF ALL, LET'S RECOGNIZE THAT.
RECOGNIZE THAT. I THINK THE GOVERNOR DID A VERY
I THINK THE GOVERNOR DID A VERY GOOD JOB IN LAYING THE THING OUT
GOOD JOB IN LAYING THE THING OUT JUST EXACTLY WHAT HE WANTED TO
JUST EXACTLY WHAT HE WANTED TO DO.
DO. MAKING NO BONES ABOUT
MAKING NO BONES ABOUT CONTINUATION OF THE TAX BASE IN
CONTINUATION OF THE TAX BASE IN PLACE NOW.
PLACE NOW. THAT WILL BE AN ISSUE THE
THAT WILL BE AN ISSUE THE LEGISLATURE HAS TO DECIDE.
LEGISLATURE HAS TO DECIDE. I AM FULLY PREPARED TO VOTE FOR
I AM FULLY PREPARED TO VOTE FOR THAT.
THAT. I THINK THAT HE LAID HIS OTHER
I THINK THAT HE LAID HIS OTHER PRIORITIES OUT STARTING WITH
PRIORITIES OUT STARTING WITH EDUCATION AND STARTING WITH
EDUCATION AND STARTING WITH PROPERTY TAX RELIEF TO PROPERTY
PROPERTY TAX RELIEF TO PROPERTY TAX HOME OWNERS ESPECIALLY.
TAX HOME OWNERS ESPECIALLY. THOSE ARE TWO THINGS I AGREE
THOSE ARE TWO THINGS I AGREE WITH.
WITH. AND IF IT IS GOING TO BE AN
AND IF IT IS GOING TO BE AN ELECTION YEAR, LET'S LAY IT ALL
ELECTION YEAR, LET'S LAY IT ALL OUT AND PUT YOUR BEST FOOT
OUT AND PUT YOUR BEST FOOT FORWARD.
FORWARD. >>ANOTHER OB OBSERVATION, HE
>>ANOTHER OB OBSERVATION, HE REFERENCED GOVERNOR JIM EDGAR,
REFERENCED GOVERNOR JIM EDGAR, STATE FUNDING VERDICTS LOCAL
STATE FUNDING VERDICTS LOCAL FUNDING FOR EDUCATION.
FUNDING FOR EDUCATION. I TOOK IT A STEP FURTHER.
I TOOK IT A STEP FURTHER. JIM EDGAR RAN TO BE ELECTED
JIM EDGAR RAN TO BE ELECTED GOVERNOR BY SAYING I WANT TO
GOVERNOR BY SAYING I WANT TO MAINTAIN THE TEMPORARY INCOME
MAINTAIN THE TEMPORARY INCOME TAX, AND IT WORKED FOR JIM
TAX, AND IT WORKED FOR JIM EDGAR, AND I AM WONDERING PAT
EDGAR, AND I AM WONDERING PAT QUINN ISN'T THINKING I WANT THAT
QUINN ISN'T THINKING I WANT THAT TO WORK FOR ME AS WELL.
TO WORK FOR ME AS WELL. HE STAKED OUT HIS POSITION.
HE STAKED OUT HIS POSITION. ULTIMATELY, HE CAN'T MAKE THAT
ULTIMATELY, HE CAN'T MAKE THAT DECISION.
DECISION. GENERAL ASSEMBLY MAKES THAT
GENERAL ASSEMBLY MAKES THAT DECISION, BUT HE STAKED OUT HIS
DECISION, BUT HE STAKED OUT HIS POSITION SAYING I WANT MORE
POSITION SAYING I WANT MORE REVENUE TO SPEND FOR GOVERNOR.
REVENUE TO SPEND FOR GOVERNOR. OVER THE LAST FEW WEEKS, HE
OVER THE LAST FEW WEEKS, HE REALLY HAS BEEN CAUGHT IN THE
REALLY HAS BEEN CAUGHT IN THE HORNS OF DILEMMA.
HORNS OF DILEMMA. POP LIST THING TO DO IS SAY LESS
POP LIST THING TO DO IS SAY LESS TAXATION.
TAXATION. WHEN YOU ARE IN THE GOVERNOR'S
WHEN YOU ARE IN THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE, AND KNOW ALL THE
OFFICE, AND KNOW ALL THE PRESSURES THROWN YOUR WAY, AND
PRESSURES THROWN YOUR WAY, AND YOU KNOW WHAT YOU HAVE ALREADY
YOU KNOW WHAT YOU HAVE ALREADY DONE TO TRY TO RESTRAIN
DONE TO TRY TO RESTRAIN SPENDING, THE QUESTION IS DO I
SPENDING, THE QUESTION IS DO I WANT TO CONTINUE DOWN THAT PATH.
WANT TO CONTINUE DOWN THAT PATH. HE CLEARLY SAID HE DOESN'T WANT
HE CLEARLY SAID HE DOESN'T WANT TO CONTINUE DOWN THAT PATH.
TO CONTINUE DOWN THAT PATH. MEANWHILE THE REPUBLICANS WILL
MEANWHILE THE REPUBLICANS WILL SAY, YOU HAD $30 BILLION WORTH
SAY, YOU HAD $30 BILLION WORTH OF NEW REVENUE OVER THE LAST
OF NEW REVENUE OVER THE LAST THREE YEARS, WHERE DID IT GO?
THREE YEARS, WHERE DID IT GO? WE WILL HAVE A TOUGH BUDGET
WE WILL HAVE A TOUGH BUDGET CYCLE BACK AND FORTH ABOUT WHAT
CYCLE BACK AND FORTH ABOUT WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF
IS THE APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF SPENDING GOING FORWARD.
SPENDING GOING FORWARD. >>REMEMBER R ONE THING VERY
>>REMEMBER R ONE THING VERY IMPORTANT, THOUGH, IF YOU DON'T
IMPORTANT, THOUGH, IF YOU DON'T PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR
PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR PRIORITY IS IN EDUCATION, THEN
PRIORITY IS IN EDUCATION, THEN THE PUBLIC SHOULDN'T THINK THAT
THE PUBLIC SHOULDN'T THINK THAT JUST GOES AWAY.
JUST GOES AWAY. IT SHOWS UP WHEN YOU LOOK AT
IT SHOWS UP WHEN YOU LOOK AT YOUR ARRESTS AND POLICE REPORTS
YOUR ARRESTS AND POLICE REPORTS AND HOW MANY PEOPLE YOU HAVE TO
AND HOW MANY PEOPLE YOU HAVE TO INCARCERATE.
INCARCERATE. LIKE OIL FILTER, IF WE DON'T PAY
LIKE OIL FILTER, IF WE DON'T PAY FOR IT NOW, WE PAY FOR IT LATER
FOR IT NOW, WE PAY FOR IT LATER JUST IN DIFFERENT WAYS.
JUST IN DIFFERENT WAYS. WE HAVE TO, AGAIN, ADDRESS THE
WE HAVE TO, AGAIN, ADDRESS THE QUALITY OF OUR EDUCATION.
QUALITY OF OUR EDUCATION. I REALLY APPLAUD HIM IN SAYING
I REALLY APPLAUD HIM IN SAYING PUBLIC SCHOOLS, REALLY IS OUR
PUBLIC SCHOOLS, REALLY IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY.
RESPONSIBILITY. WE HAVE TO MAKE THEM EXCELLENT.
WE HAVE TO MAKE THEM EXCELLENT. >>IF I COULD, I THINK THERE IS
>>IF I COULD, I THINK THERE IS ANOTHER PIECE TO THIS, AND THAT
ANOTHER PIECE TO THIS, AND THAT IS HOW YOU CURRENTLY SPEND THE
IS HOW YOU CURRENTLY SPEND THE DOLLARS.
DOLLARS. STATE SENATOR MANAR HAS BEEN
STATE SENATOR MANAR HAS BEEN RUNNING A COMMISSION.
RUNNING A COMMISSION. YOU ARE ON THAT COMMISSION.
YOU ARE ON THAT COMMISSION. I AM NOT.
I AM NOT. >>IN THE SENATE TO TALK ABOUT
>>IN THE SENATE TO TALK ABOUT HOW ALL THE EDUCATION DOLLARS
HOW ALL THE EDUCATION DOLLARS THAT WE ALREADY HAVE, HOW ARE
THAT WE ALREADY HAVE, HOW ARE THEY ALLOCATED.
THEY ALLOCATED. THAT OUGHT TO BE PART OF THE
THAT OUGHT TO BE PART OF THE DISCUSSION HERE. WE HAVE NOT
DISCUSSION HERE. WE HAVE NOT FUNDAMENTALLY REVISITED
FUNDAMENTALLY REVISITED EDUCATION FUNDING OVER 20 YEARS.
EDUCATION FUNDING OVER 20 YEARS. IT IS STILL PATCHWORK BAND-AID
IT IS STILL PATCHWORK BAND-AID KIND OF APPROACH WITH SPECIAL
KIND OF APPROACH WITH SPECIAL INTERESTS CARVE OUTS.
INTERESTS CARVE OUTS. IF YOU WANT TO GO BACK TO THE
IF YOU WANT TO GO BACK TO THE BOTTOM LINE TO MAKE SURE YOU ARE
BOTTOM LINE TO MAKE SURE YOU ARE GETTING THE BEST *** FOR THE
GETTING THE BEST *** FOR THE BUCK AND SPENDING THE DOLLAR
BUCK AND SPENDING THE DOLLAR PROPERLY, YOU THINK YOU SHOULD
PROPERLY, YOU THINK YOU SHOULD GO BACK TO ZERO BASED BUDGETING
GO BACK TO ZERO BASED BUDGETING ON THAT EDUCATION BUDGET AND
ON THAT EDUCATION BUDGET AND SAY, YES, PLUS THE NEW MONEY THE
SAY, YES, PLUS THE NEW MONEY THE GOVERNOR WANTS.
GOVERNOR WANTS. ARE -- WE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO
ARE -- WE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO WHAT WE WANT.
WHAT WE WANT. HERE IS THE ISSUE, LEGISLATORS
HERE IS THE ISSUE, LEGISLATORS AND CANDIDATES FOR PUBLIC OFFICE
AND CANDIDATES FOR PUBLIC OFFICE AND GOVERNORS SAY I AM AN
AND GOVERNORS SAY I AM AN EDUCATION CANDIDATE.
EDUCATION CANDIDATE. BUT IN REALITY, WE HAVE NOT BEEN
BUT IN REALITY, WE HAVE NOT BEEN EDUCATION STATE NOW FOR MANY
EDUCATION STATE NOW FOR MANY YEARS.
YEARS. WE HAVE BEEN A HEALTH CARE
WE HAVE BEEN A HEALTH CARE STATE.
STATE. HEALTH CARE GETS MORE SPENDING
HEALTH CARE GETS MORE SPENDING THAN EDUCATION DOES.
THAN EDUCATION DOES. THIS BEGINS, AS YOU SAY, WHERE
THIS BEGINS, AS YOU SAY, WHERE ARE YOUR REAL PRIORITIES?
ARE YOUR REAL PRIORITIES? ARE YOUR PRIORITIES FOR
ARE YOUR PRIORITIES FOR EDUCATION AND PUT THE DOLLARS
EDUCATION AND PUT THE DOLLARS THERE.
THERE. THE GOVERNOR HAS SUGGESTED IT IS
THE GOVERNOR HAS SUGGESTED IT IS THERE.
THERE. LET'S SEE IF IT COMES THROUGH.
LET'S SEE IF IT COMES THROUGH. >>I WANT TO SUPPORT WHAT YOU ARE
>>I WANT TO SUPPORT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.
SAYING. ANDY MANAR, AND DAVE
ANDY MANAR, AND DAVE LUECHTEFELD.
LUECHTEFELD. THIS IS A BIPARTISAN COMMITTEE
THIS IS A BIPARTISAN COMMITTEE THE SENATE SET UP TO LOOK AT
THE SENATE SET UP TO LOOK AT REVAMPING THE WHOLE SCHOOL
REVAMPING THE WHOLE SCHOOL FORMULA, CHANGING IT FROM WHAT
FORMULA, CHANGING IT FROM WHAT IT EXISTS RIGHT NOW.
IT EXISTS RIGHT NOW. AND EXCELLENT POINT, HAD THEM TO
AND EXCELLENT POINT, HAD THEM TO COME AND TALK TO
COME AND TALK TO SUPERINTENDENTS.
SUPERINTENDENTS. THERE ARE TWO ISSUES.
THERE ARE TWO ISSUES. ONE IS ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF MONEY
ONE IS ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF MONEY WE HAVE TO SPEND, BUT THE FIRST
WE HAVE TO SPEND, BUT THE FIRST ISSUE THAT WE HAVE TO SOLVE IS
ISSUE THAT WE HAVE TO SOLVE IS HOW DO WE SPEND IT.
HOW DO WE SPEND IT. WE HAVE TO HAVE A FAIR EQUITABLE
WE HAVE TO HAVE A FAIR EQUITABLE SYSTEM THAT MAKES ACCEPTS.
SYSTEM THAT MAKES ACCEPTS. I THINK THEY ARE GETTING THERE,
I THINK THEY ARE GETTING THERE, AND I THINK THIS IS A GOOD
AND I THINK THIS IS A GOOD EXAMPLE -- I MEAN JUST LIKE
EXAMPLE -- I MEAN JUST LIKE TRANSPORTATION, GOOD BIPARTISAN
TRANSPORTATION, GOOD BIPARTISAN EFFORT, THIS WILL BE A
EFFORT, THIS WILL BE A BIPARTISAN EFFORT.
BIPARTISAN EFFORT. >>BY MY COUNT, EDUCATION WAS
>>BY MY COUNT, EDUCATION WAS MENTIONED MUCH MORE OFTEN THAN
MENTIONED MUCH MORE OFTEN THAN ANYTHING ELSE IN THE SPEECH.
ANYTHING ELSE IN THE SPEECH. BUT SECOND PROBABLY WAS PROPERTY
BUT SECOND PROBABLY WAS PROPERTY TAX RELIEF.
TAX RELIEF. >> RIGHT.
>> RIGHT. >>SAYING 500 OR SUGGESTING $500
>>SAYING 500 OR SUGGESTING $500 A YEAR.
A YEAR. >>RIGHT.
>>RIGHT. >>FOR THE FUTURE.
>>FOR THE FUTURE. DO YOU SEE THAT HAPPENING?
DO YOU SEE THAT HAPPENING? IN CONJUNCTION WITH WHAT?
IN CONJUNCTION WITH WHAT? >> RIGHT NOW, WE GET 5% CREDIT
>> RIGHT NOW, WE GET 5% CREDIT ON OUR INCOME TAXES FOR WHAT WE
ON OUR INCOME TAXES FOR WHAT WE PAY ON PROPERTY TAXES.
PAY ON PROPERTY TAXES. SO IF YOU PAID MORE IN PROPERTY
SO IF YOU PAID MORE IN PROPERTY TAXES, YOU GET A BIGGER CREDIT.
TAXES, YOU GET A BIGGER CREDIT. THAT WOULD GO AWAY.
THAT WOULD GO AWAY. THIS WOULD BE A FLAT $500 PER
THIS WOULD BE A FLAT $500 PER PROPERTY.
PROPERTY. WHEN A PERSON PAYS THEIR
WHEN A PERSON PAYS THEIR PROPERTY TAXES, I THINK THE
PROPERTY TAXES, I THINK THE AVERAGE RIGHT NOW I HAVE HEARD
AVERAGE RIGHT NOW I HAVE HEARD IS 250 IS WHAT WE GIVE OUT IN
IS 250 IS WHAT WE GIVE OUT IN TERMS OF THAT CREDIT.
TERMS OF THAT CREDIT. SO SOME WOULD GET MORE AND SOME
SO SOME WOULD GET MORE AND SOME WOULD GET LESS.
WOULD GET LESS. IT IS A WAY OF MAKING IT ALMOST
IT IS A WAY OF MAKING IT ALMOST A PROGRESSIVE WAY OF GIVING
A PROGRESSIVE WAY OF GIVING PROPERTY TAX RELIEF.
PROPERTY TAX RELIEF. >>I CUT MY EYE TEETH ON STATE
>>I CUT MY EYE TEETH ON STATE AND LOCAL FINANCES.
AND LOCAL FINANCES. I WAS REVENUE DIRECTOR FOR THE
I WAS REVENUE DIRECTOR FOR THE STATE OF ILLINOIS AT ONE TIME.
STATE OF ILLINOIS AT ONE TIME. I GIVE THE GOVERNOR CREDIT, WE
I GIVE THE GOVERNOR CREDIT, WE ARE OVER TAXED ON PROPERTY
ARE OVER TAXED ON PROPERTY TAXES.
TAXES. PROPERTY TAXES HURT THE VOTERS
PROPERTY TAXES HURT THE VOTERS MORE SO THAN ANYTHING ELSE.
MORE SO THAN ANYTHING ELSE. >>RIGHT.
>>RIGHT. >>BUT I AM A HUGE SKEPTIC OF THE
>>BUT I AM A HUGE SKEPTIC OF THE IDEA EVERYBODY OUGHT TO GET A
IDEA EVERYBODY OUGHT TO GET A CHECK FROM GOVERNMENT BECAUSE IT
CHECK FROM GOVERNMENT BECAUSE IT IMPRESSES ME OF TRYING TO BUY
IMPRESSES ME OF TRYING TO BUY OFF PUBLIC.
OFF PUBLIC. OH, HERE IS MY CHECK FROM THE
OH, HERE IS MY CHECK FROM THE GOVERNMENT.
GOVERNMENT. I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO GET
I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO GET INTO THAT MODE.
INTO THAT MODE. I'D MUCH RATHER HAVE SOME KIND
I'D MUCH RATHER HAVE SOME KIND OF GUARANTEED RELIEF ON PROPERTY
OF GUARANTEED RELIEF ON PROPERTY TAX BILL THAT YOU ACTUALLY SEE
TAX BILL THAT YOU ACTUALLY SEE ON THE PROPERTY TAX BILL.
ON THE PROPERTY TAX BILL. NOT SOME INCOME REDISTRIBUTION
NOT SOME INCOME REDISTRIBUTION ASPECT.
ASPECT. BUT PROPERTY TAXES GO DOWN.
BUT PROPERTY TAXES GO DOWN. I WOULD SAY THE BEST WAY TO GET
I WOULD SAY THE BEST WAY TO GET THEM TO GO DOWN IS MAKE SURE THE
THEM TO GO DOWN IS MAKE SURE THE STATE IS GIVING ADEQUATE MONEY
STATE IS GIVING ADEQUATE MONEY FOR EDUCATION FUNDING.
FOR EDUCATION FUNDING. I AM VERY SKEPTICAL ABOUT THAT
I AM VERY SKEPTICAL ABOUT THAT COMPONENT.
COMPONENT. >>LET ME -- THE MAIN THING, HE
>>LET ME -- THE MAIN THING, HE HIGHLIGHTED THE ISSUE OF
HIGHLIGHTED THE ISSUE OF PROPERTY TAX RELIEF.
PROPERTY TAX RELIEF. HOW IT COMES OUT IN THE
HOW IT COMES OUT IN THE LEGISLATURE, COULD BE A WHOLE
LEGISLATURE, COULD BE A WHOLE DIFFERENT SUBJECT.
DIFFERENT SUBJECT. >>UP TO YOU.
>>UP TO YOU. >>I LIKE THE IDEA.
>>I LIKE THE IDEA. >>THANK YOU, DOUG WHITLEY,
>>THANK YOU, DOUG WHITLEY, PRESIDENT AND C.E.O. OF ILLINOIS
PRESIDENT AND C.E.O. OF ILLINOIS STATE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.
STATE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. DAVE KOEHLER, REPRESENTATIVE OF
DAVE KOEHLER, REPRESENTATIVE OF PEORIA, AND EARLIER WE HAD JOHN
PEORIA, AND EARLIER WE HAD JOHN MOFFITT REPUBLICAN
MOFFITT REPUBLICAN REPRESENTATIVE FROM GALESBURG
REPRESENTATIVE FROM GALESBURG AREA. WE THANK YOU FOR JOINING
AREA. WE THANK YOU FOR JOINING US ON AT ISSUE.
US ON AT ISSUE. NEXT WEEK, JOIN US ABOUT A
NEXT WEEK, JOIN US ABOUT A DISCUSSION ON AGRICULTURE WITH
DISCUSSION ON AGRICULTURE WITH NEW PRESIDENT OF THE ILLINOIS
NEW PRESIDENT OF THE ILLINOIS FARM BUREAU.
FARM BUREAU. WE WILL SEE YOU IN A WEEK.>>