Graduated Tax Proposal Beaten

Mike fits the Illinois, non-Chicago elected politician mode quite well---noisy but ineffective. 

"This is sad news as I strongly support a plan such as Frerichs' to reduce property taxes in IL."

Did the constitutional amendment allowing for graduated income taxes actually provide any property tax relief?  Or is that a seperate, tax-swap/tax-increase bill?

What good does it do to have a Democrat, or a Republican, for that matter, represent this area, as long as our elected officials tow the party lines and use our government to reward and punish each other, regardless of the effect on people.  A cynic might say that Senator Frerichs put forward something that his district wants, knowing that unless Jones supports it, it simply won't go anywhere, and thus, he can argue during the next election that he tried.  At the end of the day, does it matter?  Illinois has the worse state government in the nation right now, and as long as Emil Jones is there to block things, and as long as all of the downstate Democrats tow the line, there isn't much that's going to happen, as least as far as downstate is concerned.

"If Jones is the problem, can he be removed?"

Yes, by a majority of the State Senate.

"Did Frerichs vote for him?"

Yes.  And probably will again. 

There's been no indication that Sen. Frerichs or the Senate Democrats are displeased with Emil Jones' leadership of the Senate.

"I'm just happy to see someone trying to do something about our outrageous property tax bills in this state."

When you say "do something about our outrageous property tax bills," are you referring to the graduated tax constitutional amendment or the tax swap/tax increase idea?

Because I don't think the constitutional amendment provided for any property tax relief.  Unless I'm missing something, which is entirely possible.

I have not seen or heard of a clear mandate or even support from Frerichs' district for a graduated income tax.  Depending upon structure, 'curious' could have ended up paying more income tax under the Frerichs' proposed legislation.  Most democrats and some republicans support increasing income to the state of Illinois. 

Mark's comments seemed to some as support of Frerichs by indicating without some changes to the tax structure either increasing or maintaining dollars into the state there could not be a reduction in property taxes.  Mark is correct along with others, changes are needed in Illinois taxing structure in order to impact property tax, hopefully with a reduction.  However, there has been NO EFFORT by Springfield to gather meaningful data which could be used to install an improved tax structure which residents could embrace.  I suggest not holding your breath until that effort is initiated as we are blessed/damed with the people we voted in.

It is clear Jones wants more dollars flowing into the state and a graduated income tax structure would have done just that.  There was a timing issue which defeated this current effort but it will come up again.  Hopefully it should clearer to people in Frerichs district their Senator supports Jones completely except when his lack of support doesn't matter to an action and is necessary to secure his future by the appearance of representing his district.  When graduated tax comes up again, Frerichs will again earn credit with his fellow politicians and it will be played again as an 'effort to reduce property taxes' to the voters.  So goes politics by design in Illinois.

First, let's stop adding new programs.

Second, let's have some cuts, as negotiated in the GA, as opposed to arbitrarily done by the Gov.  Extension, Amtrack subsidies, grants for new parks and bike trails and special school programs and fire trucks, subsidies for ethanol stations, new roads - its all on the table.  It is back-to-basics time. 

Illinois needs to revise its constitution again.