Editorial: Pritzker’s polite demand for more of your money

A look at what other newspapers in Illinois are saying:


Illinois can’t balance its budget and struggles to pay the bills. J.B. Pritzker, the Democratic candidate for governor, has a vast wish list of programs he’d pursue if elected. A question for voters to consider: Where will Pritzker find the money to expand government services in a cash-strapped state?

Pritzker’s not keen to answer before Election Day, but at least he’s polite about it. This, in essence, is his dodge: Thanks for asking, but no, I’m not going to tell the taxpayers of Illinois how much of your money I’d like to spend. You’ll find out … eventually.

What Pritzker will say is that he wants to convert Illinois to a graduated income tax with different tax rates for different income groups. Currently, Illinois charges a flat rate of 4.95 percent. He asserts that rich residents will pay a higher rate while middle-class residents will get tax cuts, but he won’t specify the rates or identify the income levels at which those higher rates kick in. He won’t even define the term “middle class.” Is it household income of $50,000? $100,000? Voters, he won’t say.

This on-camera exchange between Pritzker and a reporter, as relayed on capitolfax.com, has been ringing in our ears since Oct. 9 because of the candidate’s refusal to share details of a proposal that could be costly to many Illinoisans:

Reporter: What does someone make who is middle class?

Pritzker: Thank you very much.

Reporter: What does someone make who is middle class?

Pritzker (walking away): Well, we talked a little bit about that today.

Reporter: You didn’t answer it.

Pritzker: Thank you.

Reporter: Why is that difficult?

This isn’t the first politician who said “Thank you” but meant “La-la-la, I can’t hear you.” All candidates prefer whispering sweet nothings over making specific policy pronouncements. They know governing is harder than campaigning, and any broken promise will be held against them.

Our concern is that Pritzker’s sweet nothings sound expensive, and he’s giving himself maximum room to raise taxes without any assurance of cost savings — or even that he’ll be disciplined in his spending. He wants to expand access to health care, repair roads and bridges, invest in higher education — all fine ideas, as long as he’s clear with voters on the math.

Pritzker says he’d negotiate with the General Assembly on tax rates, which is why he can’t talk now. But the switch to a graduated, or progressive, tax system is a huge move that would give the governor and lawmakers broad new powers in perpetuity. Even if higher rates initially apply only to the highest-income earners, the temptation to raise rates on everyone else will remain. We suspect that over time, as Pritzker feels pressed by Illinois’ crippling financial needs, his definition of “middle-class” taxpayers protected from higher tax rates will shrivel.

There’s history here. The state’s been under duress for years, but the Democratic-controlled General Assembly has overspent, overpromised and overborrowed. Budgeting is a mess, Illinois has a $130 billion unfunded pension liability and the worst credit rating of any state. What’s been Springfield’s solution? Not to cut budgets or reform the tax and regulatory landscape to make Illinois more attractive to employers, as Gov. Bruce Rauner proposes. No, the answer last year was to raise the state income tax by 32 percent, over Rauner’s objection.

Pritzker’s graduated income tax would require a constitutional amendment. He could make an end-around by raising the flat rate and then offering deductions to lower- and middle-class taxpayers. But who’d qualify for those protections? And who’d pay more to a state government that’s profligate with the people’s money?

La-la-la … Pritzker won’t say.

— Chicago Tribune