IL-Gov. 2018 Megathread

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Does JB have any noteworthy baggage going into this? I mean, I'm sure we'll all find out soon enough, but I was curious if there were any obvious weak spots known right now.

Don't know if it's "baggage" in the traditional sense, but he'll be fighting the "rich guy in politics" archetype that voters may be fed up with?

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

State Rep. Drury announces bid. Of note, Rep Drury is the lone Illinois State House Democrat to vote against Michael Madigan for speaker.

Probably symbolic to burnish his "outsider credentials" and to try to create some lane to run, but still.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

State Rep. Drury announces bid. Of note, Rep Drury is the lone Illinois State House Democrat to vote against Michael Madigan for speaker.

Probably symbolic to burnish his "outsider credentials" and to try to create some lane to run, but still.

Drury's outsider credentials are not symbolic. He's taken many tough stands against his party while in the House, including a "present" vote for Speaker at the start of this year. He will point at everyone else who may claim to be an outsider, but have failed to break from the machine when the pressure was on.

Good to know, thank you.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Not related to candidate recruitment or anything. Sun Times with a pseudo-puff piece on Kennedy's ideas on property tax reform.

 I'm not sure how Kennedy would fare better than Rauner when it comes to working with the legislature (and the entrenched interests therein) in getting these reforms passed, though. With at least a semblance of plausible reforms for Illinois's fiscal state, Kennedy is immediately better than Pritzker. Of course, someone like Drury or Biss would serve as a more credible avatar for reforms aimed Dr breaking the status quo, but Kennedy isn't half bad.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Bobby Rush (IL-1) endorses Kennedy. Luis Gutierrez (IL-4) endorses Pritzker.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/ct-illinois-democrats-governor-endorsements-met-0620-20170619-story.html

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

kennedy apparently told a bunch of old people "if you don't vote for me you'll die alone"

Link to an article/video, please.

friend of a friend was there

Once the goons of Pritzker and Madigan pick up on this, Kennedy might be dead. We better hope at least Drury runs.

Scott Drury is running.

lol....Rauner refuses to implement budget:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hopefully he continues until a property tax freeze and legislative term limits are acceded to.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

lol....Rauner refuses to implement budget:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Good.  If opposing tax increases hurts his reelection then we're in some Bizarro Universe.

Ideally, Rauner pushes the legislature into lowering the property tax burden and instead shifting the burden of taxation into a hybrid progressive income / consumption or GST-type tax system with property taxes as a supplement. A budget that is so dependant on property tax receipts results in extreme sensitivity to economic trends, moreso than other states.

 A higher flat income tax and astronomic property tax makes employment in the state or interstate immigration difficult. Rents are expensive, property taxes pose an impediment to home ownership and high income taxes for businesses and employees make other states more attractive. A progressive structured income tax helps alleviate the regressivity inherent in the consumption tax, while ensuring that employees move to Illinois expecting low taxes on their entry level jobs. A lower corporate rate encourages Illinois' companies to remain in Illinois and to continue to attract top-tier companies to the state (see, e.g., Boeing's move to IL, Amazon's corporate support office expansion).

Long post short, tax increases or decreases shouldn't be the goal; moving to a modernized revenue system while maintaining similar levels of overall revenue should. Of course, this would require addressing (read: scaling back on) pension spending for current recipients, which would require a constitutional amendment.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

I thank governor Rauner for standing up to the people of Illinois, who can't afford a 32% tax increase.

Thanks to that tax hike from 'slightly less than everywhere else' to 'around average,' I can now call 911 if I need to. I appreciate your concern but I'm honestly fine.

It is not a tax hike of 32%. It is an increase from 3.75% to 4.95%. While technically correct to call it a '32% hike,' it does not accurately reflect the situation. At all.

It was possible to call 911 before. This tax increase is paying for services that have already been agreed to (and in some cases) performed but illinois taxpayers have been pushing the bill down the line for decades.

Overly optimistic growth targets resulted in pension payments beyond what the state anticipated (i.e., the state budgeted payments for a 4% growth rate; lower growth rates in reality resulted in the state shouldering higher payouts than budgeted for. combine this with a revenue system deriving an abnormally high percentage from property tax receipts + a crash in real estate prices in 2007-2010 resulting in substantially lower revenues than forecasted and you have a recipe for a budget disaster).

Don't get me wrong, it was a necessity. Losing investment grade bond status would have been catastrophic for the state. It would have been unable to finance any major projects or really any level of significant borrowing. Doing so would have state services atrophy, which in the long run would have driven out business in search of talent that would no longer be attracted to the state.

There were two paths forward: 1) raising taxes to make up a portion of the shortfall; or 2) amend the constitution and pare back pension benefits. Ultimately, the legislature chose the former, but without the fixes that were critical to the state's long term fiscal health. But it's a path forward, which is better than the status quo.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

^ This directly costs an Illinois employee on minimum wage $200 annually. As Green Line points out above, a family of 4 grossing $50k directly loses $600 yearly. That's $600 that they're unable save for their retirement, or spend on food or clothing.

And I wouldn't consider retiring at 55 on a lifetime pension worth nearly 100% of the worker's final annual salary with 3% compounding COLA increases being stabbed in the back. If anything, the current state workers who have worked hard only to have their benefits reduced in favor of current retirees have been stabbed in the back.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Nice analysis. To add a little history to it I can say that there have been attempts to modernize the syste for decades. In the mid-1990's Pub Gov Edgar proposed restructuring the tax code to reduce the reliance on property taxes for education.

I'm relatively new to the state. What's the reason why the plan failed? Seems to me from reading archived information that it's similar to Rauner's plan: an increase in income tax in exchange for a reduction in property taxes. Does it stem from Madigan's intransigence?

In 2007 there was another attempt spurred by the unions to do the same including a broad expansion of the sales tax, since IL has the narrowest sales tax base of any state that imposes one. Both those efforts ran into interests on both the right and left that liked their tax advantages under the antiquated system, and a public mistrust of Springfield to get it right with new taxes.

Yeah, if I understand correctly, the state imposes a tax on far fewer services than other states that impose a sales tax and those service business didn't want to collect a sales tax. This is particularly unhelpful given that the US economy has largely transitioned into a service based economy and losing revenue on those services is detrimental to the state

Even at the beginning of this year there was discussion of restructuring revenue as part of an effort to bring revenue back to 2014-levels, but by the time all the interests had weighed in, the only surviving proposal was to return the income tax to the 2014 rate.

I'm aware that it failed in Michigan for reasons unrelated to the efficiency of it, but has there ever been a serious attempt to move the sales tax into the direction of a VAT? VATs don't care about the type of good or service being offered, making for a generally efficient form of revenue raising

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Politico on the state of the race and the money that is expected to be spent.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Bill Daley is the new finance director for Kennedy's campaign. Biss raised more money than Kennedy did in Q2.  

Strange decision for a candidate running an explicitly anti-establishment campaign to hire seemingly one of the most insider, establishment people in Illinois.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

^ Dan Biss still has a chance. He raised a good deal of money and if he can convince Sanders' organization to back him, he can hope Pritzker splits enough with other candidates.

Personally pulling for Scott Drury, but I'd be surprised.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

^ Dan Biss still has a chance. He raised a good deal of money and if he can convince Sanders' organization to back him, he can hope Pritzker splits enough with other candidates.

Personally pulling for Scott Drury, but I'd be surprised.

I seriously doubt anyone can stop Pritzker with Kennedy imploding like this, but I've always been thinking Bliss has a shot. 
80% Chance Pritzker wins imo.

Yeah that seems about right. I would go with something like 70/15/10/5 (Pritzker/Kennedy/Biss/The Rest) but my personal distaste for Pritzker's candidacy is probably leading me to assign him a lower probability.

Hard to compete against that much money and establishment support.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Solid (if lengthy) article on the Dem primary, specifically Drury's focus on Madigan.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

If he wants to win he has to come off as less rich, snooty, and elitist than JB Pritzker.

FTFY. I don't think anything Kennedy's done even snifs the level of rich, snooty and elitist of trying to buy a political office from Rod Blagojevich.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Cook County Democrats endorse J.B., try desperately to lose eminently winnable race.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

and the Tilt R rating with Pritzker solidifies.  Thank you Cook County Democrats.

Yeah. What an awful decision.

Goddamnit. The first Kennedy to show some ambition in decades and he has to blow a winnable race. God f****** damnit.

The Kennedys are a terrible family, lmao. I'm much more disappointed that the state party is about to anoint a billionaire as the nominee for Governor, but hey, Illinois Dems gonna Illinois Dem.

No joke, they want to save the money for other downballot races and let Pritzker self fund. They honestly believe that Rauner is so doomed that a trust fund baby who is on tape trying to buy political office in the past is destined to win.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Question for Illinois Dems/Indies- If Kennedy & Pritzer both suck, who's the best candidate in your eyes? Biss?

Ideologically for me, it's Drury. To win, probably Pawar. Biss is probably the next best choice after those two.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Both Pritzker and Kennedy are awful candidates. Pawar is unelectable in a general and Drury is unelectable in a primary.

As I've said before, Biss is the man I'd want if I were a Democrat.

I'm not sure how Biss is in any way more electable than Drury. Biss is explicitly running on a Sanders-esque bold progressive platform, while Drury has been harder to pin down ideologically but is running against the unpopular Madigan and Rauner. FWIW, Drury was one of only two house Democrats to vote against a surtax on millionaires and voted present on Madigan's speakership.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Dunno what's more delusional, Democrats who thought Lincoln coukd survive in 2010 or Republicans who think Rauner will survive an election in Illinois with Trump at 35% approvals.

Blanche Lincoln voted for a piece of legislation that was an albatross around the necks of each and every member of the party of the sitting President, especially in her state and its political tilt.

Bruce Rauner is a moderate Republican who is a decent fit for the political tilt of his state.

This is accurate. Outside of the City of Chicago.

Democrats' only path to a loss is by nominating a candidate who won't turn out the base in Chicago and who will turn off the moderate Chicagoland suburbanites. Rauner's victory in '14 was propelled in part by the latter (moderate suburbanites in DuPage, Lake and Kane)'s distaste for Quinn's connection to Blagojevich.

There's absolutely the potential for the same to happen in this year's race. Rauner will hammer Pritzker on trying to buy office from Blagojevich.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Dunno what's more delusional, Democrats who thought Lincoln coukd survive in 2010 or Republicans who think Rauner will survive an election in Illinois with Trump at 35% approvals.

Blanche Lincoln voted for a piece of legislation that was an albatross around the necks of each and every member of the party of the sitting President, especially in her state and its political tilt.

Bruce Rauner is a moderate Republican who is a decent fit for the political tilt of his state.

This is accurate. Outside of the City of Chicago.

Democrats' only path to a loss is by nominating a candidate who won't turn out the base in Chicago and who will turn off the moderate Chicagoland suburbanites. Rauner's victory in '14 was propelled in part by the latter (moderate suburbanites in DuPage, Lake and Kane)'s distaste for Quinn's connection to Blagojevich.

There's absolutely the potential for the same to happen in this year's race. Rauner will hammer Pritzker on trying to buy office from Blagojevich.

Well yeah, I said Drury is unelectable in the primary, not the general. Everything you just listed means he isn't getting anywhere near the Dem nomination.

Biss is a decent public speaker, a solid fundraiser, and imo most suited to turn out Chicago liberals as well as win enough Suburbanites.

Edit: wrong quote, meant the one about Drury.

My mistake. I was under the impression that you had meant the general.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

I still think there's an outside chance that if Rauner ties the D nominee to Madigan and makes the race about being a check on him, he could pull off a squeaker. Madigan really has the potential to be that toxic. Of course, that depends on who the voters hate more.

Madigan. The voters hate Madigan more. His approval rating, last I can find, is 26%. Even Rauner has higher numbers than that.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Rahm's mayoral challenger Chuy Garcia endorses Kennedy.

http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/chuy-garcia-endorse-chris-kennedy-illinois-governor-448477373.html

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Rahm's mayoral challenger Chuy Garcia endorses Kennedy.

http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/chuy-garcia-endorse-chris-kennedy-illinois-governor-448477373.html

Kennedy's campaign has always been based around trying to run against the 'machine' (Irony never dies) ever since they ditched him; but if he can combine that with the running and picking up support from the Progressive left it at least gives him a chance.

Question: Does anyone more clued up with IL politics know what positions they wanted him to run for before? I always see it mentioned they've been trying to get him to run for years.

Yeah it's the height of irony for a Kennedy to try to run against the establishment, however it's defined. Strategically, it's seeming like Kennedy and his staff recognizes that his best path to victory is to try to run an outsider campaign, aiming for more progressive voters, assuming that Pawar and Biss collapse. That base plus nostalgia for the Kennedy name and his palatability to the establishment may put him over the top.

Or it could work as well as the Scott Walker 2016 presidential campaign.

As for your question, I'd wager (I'm not plugged in at all, so this is a complete guess) that he was asked to run against Kirk instead of Giannoulis after Burris's colorful time as United States Senator.