I’ve been looking at a sample ballot for a week from Tuesday’s election here in Chicago. At the top of the ballot are three non-binding referendum questions:
- Should any candidate appearing on the Illinois ballot for federal, State, or local office be subject to civil penalties if the candidate interferes or attempts to interfere with an election worker’s official duties?
- Should the Illinois Constitution be amended to add an additional 3% tax on income greater than $1,000,000 for the purpose of funds related to property tax relief?
- Should all medically appropriate treatments, including, but not limited to, in vitro fertilization be covered by any health insurance in Illinois that provides coverage for pregnancy benefits, without limitation on the number of treatments?
I plan to vote “No” on all of those. If the first added the word “physically” after “interferes” and “interfere”, respectively, I would support the first. As it stands I think it is too broad.
We’ve already voted once on a graduated income tax and rejected it. I interpret the second question as taking another bite at that apple. Why not just add a referendum on whether we want people earning more than $1 million in Illinois? How about a 100% tax on the income of state employees earning more than $200,000 regardless of source?
If there are a limit on the benefit in the third question, I might support it. As written I think it would be prohibitively expensive and will either drive insurance companies out or end up falling on the state or both.
Three candidates appear in the President section of the ballot: Harris, Trump, and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. I interpret that as the Illinois legislature having succeeded in rendering getting onto the ballot extremely difficult. I find none of those alternatives even marginally acceptable.
I’ve read the Trib’s endorsements on the remaining races. They’re a mixed bag. In some cases they’re endorsing the Democratic Party’s preferred candidate and in some they aren’t.
They agree with my assessment of the second ballot question, by the way.
I’m not a fan of asking whether or not the legislature should draft something, just draft it. If they are having trouble getting it passed into law, take the actual language of the law to the people if one wishes. Other than the proposed Constitutional amendment, which will probably read pretty much as written here, I can easily see the legislature drafting something I don’t agree with.
As to the Constitutional Amendment, I don’t think taxes should be raised on the rich to give to property owners. I support graduated income tax with limits on rates in the Constitution. I do wonder if this is mainly a way for Chicago to afford to raise property taxes.
The Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level score for these referenda are:
Penalties for Candidates: Grade Level 20
Millionaire Tax: Grade Level 15
Vitro Fertilization: Grade Level 23
I’m not completely sold on this type of scoring, but it does suggest it’s written for college (15th grade) to post-grad education.