Illinois’s Gubernatorial Race

Despite the 2018 Illinois gubernatorial race’s being eight months away we’re being inundated with television spots, mostly by some of the contenders in the Democratic Primary. Incumbent Gov. Bruce Rauner has declared his intention to run for re-election for reasons I can’t fathom. I would very much like him to explain why he might accomplish in a second term what he was effectively blocked from doing by the Illinois legislature or, more precisely, by Illinois House Speaker Mike Madigan and President of the Illinois Senate John Cullerton?

The three most prominent Democratic candidates are J. B. Pritzker, Chris Kennedy, and Daniel Biss. A progressive income tax, something that would require amending the state’s constitution, seems to be a valence issue among Democrats, i.e. they all support it; the only questions are structural and how much they support it.

J. B. Pritzker’s platform rests on a daunting array of new state spending plans including a state single-payer system, increased spending for education, and a massive infrastructure spending program. Illinois increased its income tax last year, it has still not balanced its budget as required by law, Illinois borrows at 6.5%, the highest rate paid by any state, and people, mostly people who earn more than the median income, are leaving Illinois in substantial numbers. I genuinely wish that Mr. Pritzker would put out a position paper on exactly how much money balancing the state’s budget and paying for all of his new programs would require and how he plans to get the money. So far his web site has not been very explicit on much of anything other than that he wants to be governor.

Chris Kennedy, son of Robert, has predicated his campaign on not being J. B. Pritzker.

Daniel Biss’s campaign is based on his not being a billionaire (Rauner, Pritzker, and Kennedy all are) and being the only candidate to have sent his kids to public schools or have any actual experience in elective office.

I don’t know how anyone could see such a group of tyros and lightweights and not recognize that were any of them elected he would inevitably be a ventriloquist’s dummy for the state’s legislative leadership.

Illinois presently has one of the least funded public pension systems in the country. IIRC only New Jersey and Kentucky are in worse shape. Public pensions are thwarting any attempt at balancing the state’s budget or, indeed, moving forward on anything. Without amending Illinois’s constitution, the alternatives for addressing the problem include increased taxes—primarily the income tax, a regressive move since the constitution mandates a flat tax, reduced payrolls (wages and number of workers) of present and future state employees, and cutting other state spending, notably Medicaid.

A progressive income tax, cutting benefits for present state public employee retirees, or reforming the pension system for present state employees would all require amending the state’s constitution not to mention taking on the state’s public employees’ unions.