JG-TC.com > Opinion > LETTER: Last week's sad display on budget simply unacceptable

TODAY'S HEADLINES

SPECIAL SECTION

ONLINE POLL

ONLINE EXTRAS

SITE TOOLS

OTHER LINKS

St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Lee Enterprises

Thursday, July 24, 2008 8:10 PM CDT
LETTER: Last week's sad display on budget simply unacceptable

By CHAPIN ROSE, 110th District represenative

In the week since the House acted on budget vetoes sent to us by the governor there has been some confusion about what has actually taken place. I am writing today in hope of clarifying the situation. First a recap of the new budget to date:

The Fiscal Year 2009 state budget that passed in May was at least $2 billion out of whack. And some would put that number closer to $2.5 billion. Our state’s Constitution mandates that the legislature not pass an unbalanced budget — one of the primary reasons that I voted against it then. Another clear reason to vote “no” was that it represented a cruel hoax: promising funding to all sorts of state programs — many of which we hold dear. However, by shorting the revenue side of the question by billions of dollars, there is no way it comes close to paying for the promises it extended.

Then Governor Blagojevich issued $1.5 billion in budget cuts. One can easily argue against what he decided to cut versus what he decided to leave intact (like his massive cuts to DNR or drug treatment programs, for example). But the basic point is that with a budget that is this out of sync, cuts were inevitable.

Then came last week’s special session. The House had been called back to vote on potential revenue sources to shore up the budget and provide some of the needed funding and thereby being able to restore some of the cuts. However, the revenue bill never materialized for consideration and indeed at the start of last Wednesday’s session, it was announced that no revenue sources would be considered, and that the House would just go ahead and vote to “override” the governor’s original vetoes — without the revenues needed to pay for them.

It seems lost on those who voted to override, but you can’t put back what you don’t have. You either have to cut elsewhere or raise revenue. Many (indeed in some cases a majority) of my colleagues went ahead and voted to override in “symbolic support” on many of the override motions. The reality, however, is that last week’s House votes to override the governor’s budget reductions will not send a single penny more in state funding to any agency or organization, nor will they protect a single job that depends on those lines in the budget.

As for me, I’m not going to give any constituent the “yeah, I’m with you so I’m going to vote ’yes’ on the override” line when I knew well and good that the revenue was not there, and that the sad reality is that their program’s line was going to be cut anyway. Therefore, I voted “no” on all overrides — to do otherwise is not only intellectually suspect, but to extend false hope to someone who is about to lose their job is morally dishonest as well.

Looking forward, what I know is that last week’s sad display cannot be the final chapter on this new fiscal year’s budget. To allow it to be so is simply unacceptable. Further, I refuse to believe that if the parties will sit down in the same room that this can’t be figured out. I’m ready to do that, and work toward a solution to these issues.

Add your comments

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login? (requires cookies)
	Forgot Your Password?

Not already registered?
Then click Here.

Comment policy:

JG-TC.com encourages readers to engage in civil conversation with their neighbors. Comments that are submitted are not posted to the site immediately. They go into a queue to be moderated and may take several hours to be reviewed. Comments posted on Saturday may not be reviewed until Sunday afternoon.

In order to keep the page a set width, long lines (mostly long links) will be chopped. Try putting spaces in your links or consider using tinyurl.com to make a smaller link that you can include.

We will never edit or alter your comments, but we do reserve the right to remove comments that violate our code of conduct.

No comment may contain:

* Potentially libelous statements; such as accusing somebody of a crime, defamation of character, or statements that can harm somebody's reputation.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults, threats, harassment or inciting violence.
* Commercial product promotions.

If you have any questions, please contact our moderator.

dwiggins wrote on Jul 25, 2008 8:28 AM:

" Thanks for the legislative insight and your dedicated work, Chapin. We encourage you to continue to work to stabilize the budget, but not with new gambling revenues that the Governor seems to be driving towards. "

The Question wrote on Jul 25, 2008 8:42 AM:

" I'd pay more attention to what you had to say, Chapin, if you weren't in a political party that had inflicted the most stupid, corrupt, incompetent, vicious creep ever to occupy the Oval Office on the American people. If that's the best your party can do, get lost. "

Tom Andres wrote on Jul 25, 2008 1:42 PM:

" Good letter, Chapin! Politics is a rough and tumble business, perhaps the toughest there is. I often think of you and Dale and the battles you face in Springfield every day as you represent your downstate constituents best interests. Keep up the good fight. I know you're pulling for us - and I support your efforts 100%.

My suggestion: reopen every state contract in existence (labor, vendor, medical, pensions, all of them) and negotiate an immediate 5% reduction in the terms of payment! If the courts overrule, file for bankruptcy. Eventually maybe everyone gets a pink slip or a dime on the dollar instead of a quite reasonable offer of 95-cents. Thats what a private entity would do, and thats exactly what the State of Illinois should do. "

tammer65 wrote on Jul 25, 2008 10:20 PM:

" Tom Andres, Illinois is already losing some of the best and brightest of its younger college professors to states that pay better salaries, and the new professors we're attracting are often ones that can't find a job anywhere else. And you opt for our contracts to be reopened and cut 5% more, this after 6 years of a governor who has already crippled Illinois' higher education system? Your suggestion would not only further erode the quality of higher education in Illinois, but would cause harm for decades to come. Parents would have to either pay out-of-state tuition (extremely expensive) or move to a state with better-funded universities to pay in-state tuition in order to ensure their children's college degrees were worth the paper they're printed on. Not all professors are rich -- many at EIU make in the $30-40,000 range. I know of several new hires whose children qualify for reduced-price school lunches. Surely there is a better way to improve the state's budget then looking at higher ed, which has already been plundered. Even Chapin and Dale, Republicans to the core, have acknowledged that higher ed needs more funding, not 5% cuts. "

Tom Andres wrote on Jul 26, 2008 11:01 AM:

" tammer65, as your friend Early Bird has observed many times on here about the issue of government spending cuts, *Folks tend to say theyre all for it, but not in their own backyard*.

The State of Illinois collects revenue of over $12,500 PER HOUSEHOLD every year. Think about it, this is an outrageous number! And the worst part is Springfield spends every dime of it, and more! Surely you would agree that were sending entirely too much money (and power) to Springfield.

You say * and the new professors we're attracting are often ones that can't find a job anywhere else*. Wow, thats quite a condemnation of your employer, isnt it? No wonder you use a pseudonym for job security. Look, tammer65, if someone is willing to work as a so-called full-time professor for $30,000 a year, wouldnt you say thats probably about what theyre worth? "

really wrote on Jul 26, 2008 5:25 PM:

" to The Question you stated "if you weren't in a political party that had inflicted the most stupid, corrupt, incompetent, vicious creep ever to occupy the Oval Office on the American people"

Wow look what the Democrats have done to Illinois and guess who is probably heading to the White House. WooHoo how bout some more of this Chicago politics nationwide!!! Be careful what you wish for it's comin...

Everyone is so quick to judge in hindsight. Question I think you should change your name to Answer since you always seem to have them all. "

The Question wrote on Jul 27, 2008 11:38 AM:

" Really, Blago is terrible, and on his worst day he won't do one percent of the damage that the fascist idiot George W. Bush has done For example, thanks largely to Bush's lunatic drunken-sailor military spending and unregulated crony capitalist crook pals, we have a $10.6 trillion national debt and are right on the precipice of a national economic collapse.
But thanks for the suggestion about changing my name to "Answer.: I appreciate the vote of confidence in my wisdom. "

Harry Potter wrote on Jul 27, 2008 1:29 PM:

" I'm sure that you have noticed that the same people railing against Blago are the same ones praising Bush, TQ. Figure that one out!

It would seem to me that if your objective was to criticise incompetence, you would criticise people form both parties for the same offense when appropriate.

The Blago critics who fail to do that only show that their criticism is merely based on party lines, and in fact makes them looks like hypocrites and fools. "

The Question wrote on Jul 27, 2008 4:41 PM:

" I have noticed that, Harry. And I have also noticed that our opponents never seem to notice that you and I aren't here to defend Democrats, but to call them as we seem them. The Democrats are weak and cowardly, but the Republicans are scheming fascists who, in less than a decade, have managed to take this nation from prosperity to near-destruction and incipient tyranny. "

291953 wrote on Jul 27, 2008 9:45 PM:

" Good evening all; The comments here riling againt Bush first them Blago are interesting. You know, if I came to the States from Australia a month ago and I didn't know any differently, I'd swear that Bush and Blago are of the same political party instead of opposites.

It's not just the complaining here where I'd get that idea; it's the similiar actions by the two. Bush and his posse have shown that he cares little about the common people like us, and if we turn our attention to Blago; well,surprise surprise.

We're getting rid of Bush(gracias a dios!!). It's time to do the same with Blago and his posse before he does any more damage. "

coonbug wrote on Jul 28, 2008 8:55 AM:

" I think it's funny how consumers feel it's ok to see a rise in the price of food, gas, clothing, cars, homes, shoes, etc... but they REFUSE to SEE that, yes, even the government needs to increase their income to pay their bills.

The cost to repair roads has gone up. The cost to maintain the public works, city hall, police, state police, office buildings, liability ins, medical ins, etc... has gone up.

This means INCOME must increase also.

What some call luxury items or pork -- others call necessities for the betterment of the community....such as after school programs for kids or medicaid for the poor and disabled.

What I call pork is a new sign on the highway or just inside a city limits 'honoring someone or something'. That one sign probably cost about $500 or more (labor, transportation, sign materials).

While this is a small dollar amount, just imagine if each city got just 2 such signs. I'm guessing but lets say there are 400 cities across Illinois. That's a total of $200,000. just for Illinois HONOR signs.

We haven't had an increase in State income tax since 1989. Imagine paying your bills with not income raise for 18 years.

Do I WANT an increase - not really, but I can understand it if we get one.

http://coonsey.wordpress.com/ "

sapient wrote on Jul 28, 2008 10:24 AM:

" TQ: I was wondering why university professors in Illinois had some ridiculous ideas. Thanks for the enlightenment. "

sapient wrote on Jul 28, 2008 10:26 AM:

" TQ: Your intense hatred for President Bush is clouding your judgment. You lost the election in 2000 and 2004. Get over it. "

The Question wrote on Jul 28, 2008 11:00 AM:

" Sappy, 57 people have just been killed and hundreds of people wounded in suicide bombings in Iraq. You'd better hop the pond and tell them they can't do that because "The Surge Is Working." Just stamp your little foot and insist it's true because you Republican propagandists say so.
That's at least $3 trillion in borrowed money, 4,000 dead troops and maybe a million dead Iraqis, all to invade and occupy a nation that posed no threat to the U.S. You Republicans are insane, Sappy. "

The Question wrote on Jul 28, 2008 11:04 AM:

" And let's not forget Vice President Dick Cheney, who's busy kicking around wounded veterans.
----------------
Vice President Cheney's invitation to address wounded combat veterans next month has been yanked because the group felt his security demands were Draconian and unreasonable.
The veep had planned to speak to the Disabled American Veterans at 8:30 a.m. at its August convention in Las Vegas.
His staff insisted the sick vets be sequestered for two hours before Cheney's arrival and couldn't leave until he'd finished talking, officials confirmed. "

The Question wrote on Jul 28, 2008 11:07 AM:

" They shoot liberals, don't they?
---------------
Knoxville's police chief says the man accused of a shooting that killed two people at a Tennessee church targeted the congregation because of its liberal social stance.
Chief Sterling Owen IV said Monday that police found a letter in Jim D. Adkisson's car. Owen said Adkisson was apparently frustrated over being out of work and had a "stated hatred of the liberal movement."
Adkisson is charged with first-degree murder. Police say a gunman entered the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church during a children's performance Sunday. No children were hurt.
The church is known for advocating women's and gay rights and founding an American Civil Liberties Union chapter. "

tammer65 wrote on Jul 28, 2008 2:09 PM:

" Tom Andres, you get what you pay for. I think education is one place where it's very dangerous to shop for bargains. "

tammer65 wrote on Jul 28, 2008 2:11 PM:

" Even your own party has sought more spending for higher education than we're getting, Chapin Rose and Dale Righter among them. Doesn't that mean anything to you?

When the state bleeds higher education dry, as it has been doing, it has an effect on the local economies that are home to colleges and universities. Even you folks in the private sector -- like insurance salesmen -- feel the effects. "

Tom Andres wrote on Jul 28, 2008 2:12 PM:

" Coonbug, I know you're not an economist, but anyone can poke holes in your argument that since we haven't had an increase in state income tax since 1989, the state needs more money to pay its bills. For starters, (state income tax) in the context of your statement is far too vague. Perhaps you meant to say state income tax RATE. And by the way, do you recall that the old rate was 2.5%, before the so-called *temporary* 20% increase which raised the rate to the current 3%? Raising the tax rate only allowed more money to be funneled into Springfield, and more money to be spent by Springfield.

Think of it this way. If we, like the State of Illinois, had the opportunity to be paid 3% of our employers income, wed probably all be set for life. With that financial arrangement, wed do everything in our power to assure that our income base (the employers income) would grow year after year after year. Since 1989, the Illinois budget has grown at nearly twice the rate of inflation. The 3% tax rate would work just fine IF spending were under control!

In addition, consider this, the State Income Tax doesnt even come close to representing the total revenue raised from Illinois taxpayers as Ive said before, that number is over $12,500 per household! Coonbug, the only way out of this is to cut spending. Period! I suggest we begin by cutting ALL state payments by 5%; no exceptions.

Take a look at the Real Estate Tax bill you just received in the mail. Youll find that, as a percent of your total tax bill compared to just five years ago, taxes collected for pension funding has increased by over 50% - in just five years! Ours soared from 12% to 18%! Did you increase your OWN retirement funding by 50% since 2003? Probably not. State spending is out of control. Throwing more money at the problem will NOT fix the problem. "

tammer65 wrote on Jul 28, 2008 2:14 PM:

" Tom Andres, how would you respond if the state government passed a law saying that, due to tough economic times, every private sector entity must reduce its prices by 5%? Would you be able to keep going on if every one of your insurance customers suddenly paid you 5% less for the same policy? If you think your proposal of a 5% cut across the board is good for state employees, it should be just as good for you in the private sector, too. "

The Question wrote on Jul 28, 2008 2:25 PM:

" Right wingers generally hate and fear education, Tammer. Just listen to the way they talk about it on Fox News.
Liberal efforts such as public education created the American middle class, and the ruling plutocrats can't stand that uppity bunch. Employees are so much easier to control when they are kept ignorant at subsistence-level poverty wages without education. Therefore, public education is a constant threat to Republicans. It's not the quality of public schools that really bothers them. It's the fact that they exist at all. "

Tom Andres wrote on Jul 28, 2008 3:05 PM:

" Look, tammer65, I know you and I dont agree on much, but surely you do agree that a state budget that collects (and spends) $12,500 per household is a little on the excessive side. My math on this is simple: approximately $60-billion in spending divided by approximately 4,700,000 households in Illinois. Who do you think is paying for this, corporations and wealthy people, or do you think the burden falls onto the folks who are least able to pay? These tax rates (and the spending that goes along with them) are almost inhumane to a family earning less than $40,000 and spending every dime of it in basic consumer goods such as food and clothing and medical care, housing and transportation.

Of course, we are going to disagree on spending priorities thats the basis of the *not in my backyard* theme. And, by the way, yes I can (and have) seen much more than 5% cuts in my sales commission rates over the last several years. All that means to me is that I just have to work that much harder to increase my income. I thank God every day that Im still healthy enough to keep working harder and that I have the opportunity as a self-employed individual to do so.

If I could have your agreement today that a $12,500 per household tax burden (no matter who you think is paying it) is excessive in the State of Illinois, Id be satisfied; but you seem unwilling to even address that FACT or acknowledge that I made the statement. So, whats going on with you? Do you simply not believe my statement, or do you simply not want to address the real problem here? "

The Question wrote on Jul 28, 2008 4:36 PM:

" Tell me, have you followed the stock market lately? If so, you've seen Bush's corporate kleptocracy policies in action. We have put this nation in hock to the Chinese to the tune of $10.6 trillion. We have invaded and destroyed a country that presented no threat to us, at a cost of $3 billion a week and a million or so lives. We have kidnapped, secretly imprisoned and tortured people. We have buzz-sawed the protections enshrined in the Constitution of the United States, which had been one of the crowning achievements of civilization. And we have done all these things because a monkey and his organ grinder VP thought they would be a good idea. "

tammer65 wrote on Jul 28, 2008 4:54 PM:

" Tom, you make it sound like that person making $40,000 a year is having to cough up $12,500 of it to fund state spending. Of course, at only 3%, someone earning $40,000 per year (adjusted gross income, at that), is paying $1,200 per year in state taxes. No one likes to pay taxes, but we like the things we get for it -- roads and bridges and their maintenance, basic assistance and healthcare for the poor, public education, and state prisons to help protect the public, to name just a few. $1,200 on $40,000 actually seems rather cheap for what we get in return -- heck, if you have a single school-age child, you'd spend well over that in private school tuition alone. So no, Tom, we don't agree. Rich people have enough money to pay for services privately, so many of them are against paying taxes. For the middle class and below, we get more than we pay for. "

usafsf wrote on Jul 28, 2008 6:49 PM:

" Is it just me or did Mr. Rose not once mention the President in his letter. Ill never understand how some can get so off topic when discussing things on this site. But to get back on point, budget problems will always occur in a state where the majority of its inhabitants live in a single metropolitan area (Cook County and the surrounding area) and that area is not near being self sufficient monetarily. That area then becomes a drain on the state as a whole. If people want the States budget to be balanced then they need to start looking to the Northeast. If that area could somehow get its act together and stop depending on the rest of the state for large sums of money we all would be much better off in the future. But with Chicago politics in play I doubt that we will see that any time soon. "

usafsf wrote on Jul 28, 2008 7:02 PM:

" To Tammer65: I believe Mr. Andres is referring to the total an average household pays to the state in various taxes and not just one. Unless I am mistaken you are not factoring in the taxes a household pays for gasoline, sales tax on items they purchase, utilities, property and the like. While Mr. Andres says himself that he is using simple math, the average resident in Illinois pays a lot more than 3% of their yearly earnings to the state. "

Tom Andres wrote on Jul 28, 2008 7:37 PM:

" Thank you, usafsf. Youre absolutely right, if you could add up all the taxes and fees we pay to the state, you'd come up with a whole lot more than 3% - a whole lot more!

There is only one classification of taxpayer that matters: the END CONSUMER. To illustrate, lets assume an extreme situation. Lets assume that Wal-Mart is the only business in Illinois, and lets assume that they just wrote a check to the Illinois Department of Revenue for 100% of the $60-billion total tax bite to Springfield.

Do you suppose that Wal-Mart would add their $60-billion cost of taxes to the retail prices they charge the END CONSUMER? Who pays the taxes ALL of them? "

Tom Andres wrote on Jul 28, 2008 8:01 PM:

" Tammer65, are you beginning to see what Im talking about here? Id agree with you wholeheartedly IF $1,200 was the total tax bite for a family with an AGI of $40,000. $1,200 would be a bargain compared to all we get in return. But heres another (oversimplified) illustration of how this works: lets say you buy a new $150,000 home and lets say a local contractor builds it for you. You probably think that youre not paying any income tax on the $150,000 purchase price, right? But, if the contractor pays income taxes, the cost of those taxes gets passed onto you, the end consumer. Same thing with anything you buy. Lets say you buy a new car to put in your new garage. If the auto maker pays taxes, their tax bill is automatically passed on to you. Are you beginning to see how the average household sends $12,500 a year in taxes to Springfield??? "

Hahvahd wrote on Jul 28, 2008 8:02 PM:

" usafsf, if you were to actually use facts, you'd note that the Chicago metropolitan area actually carries the load for muc of the state, esp. when a state's budget largely comes from income taxes and those north of I-80 earn considerably more than down-staters.

You rural folks need to get over your urban phobia. "

Tom Andres wrote on Jul 28, 2008 8:06 PM:

" Hahvahd, and speaking of facts, please provide the numbers which support your position that Chicago somehow pays it's own way. Please include income AND EXPENSES. "

Tom Andres wrote on Jul 28, 2008 8:46 PM:

" tammer65? Hello? Are you going to address who really pays taxes in Illinois, and how much they pay? Or would you rather avoid this discussion? "

tammer65 wrote on Jul 28, 2008 9:00 PM:

" Tom Andres, I still say the money to pay for the services we use must come from SOMEWHERE! Are you just expecting money to fall from the sky to pay for roads and bridges and law enforcement and education and, and, and? Try living more modestly instead of proposing $150,000 new home constructions and you won't be paying so much in taxes. I still say that what we get as a society as a benefit from what we pay in education alone more than justifies what we pay in taxes. "

tammer65 wrote on Jul 28, 2008 9:02 PM:

" And as for discussions that are being avoided, you've continued to avoid the fact that our state Sen. and Rep., both Republicans (and both of whom I support, by the way), have BOTH argued for MORE funding for higher ed., not the 5% cut that you're proposing. Your solution of just slashing everything 5% across the board would do more harm than good for Illinois. "

Tom Andres wrote on Jul 28, 2008 9:48 PM:

" Man oh man, this is frustrating! LOL. My God, you are completely missing the whole point. I'll try again. Let's say there are just TWO taxpayers in Illinois - you and Wal-Mart. Let's say you owe zero taxes, and don't even have to file a tax return. Wal-Mart is the only business entity in Illinois, and they pay $60-billion a year in taxes to Springfield because, like I said, they are the only taxpayer. With me so far?

So, you probably think *Cool, I don't have to pay any taxes! Yea, Wal-Mart pays all the taxes! What a great state to live in! I love Blago! Hooray! No taxes!*

Now, you obviously do ALL your shopping at Wal-Mart because they are the only game in town (or the whole state). Let's say, just for the heck of it, your purchases at Wal-Mart are $200-billion. Do you suppose there is a chance that $60-billion of your total purchases of $200-billion might just be a reimbursement for Wally's tax bill??? You, as the ONLY end consumer in the whole state, now pay 100% of the cost of running this state.

Does Wal-Mart really pay any taxes? NO. Do you pay all of Wal-Mart's taxes? YES! Yes indeed, tammer65, you paid them all!. Get it? Now will you admit that the average household pays a grand total of $12,500 in taxes a year? If not, who pays them, the tax fairy? "

tammer65 wrote on Jul 28, 2008 11:16 PM:

" Tom Andres, keep your condescending tone to yourself. I realize we can't all be the intellectual giants that you insurance salesmen are known to be, but anyone who's paying 12,500 per year in sales taxes and fees is making a heck of a lot more than $40-k per year. I know I'm not a consumer on that great a level. But MY point, which seems to be over YOUR head, is that the average citizen (or "consumer" if that's what you're bent upon calling us) in Illinois gets a lot of services for what they pay for. I disagree with your numbers, but just to end this pointless discussion with you, even IF I'm paying $12,500 a year to the state of Illinois, and I know very well that I'm not (even if you add my LOCAL taxes in here, too, along with all the sales tax and utility taxes and gas taxes, etc.), but even if I were, the benefits that I receive as a citizen just for having an educated citizenry alone, would be worth that 12.5 K to me. Get it yet, Tom???? And that doesn't even factor in the benefits of roads and law enforcement and everything else that those taxes pay for. "

ReynoldsBlowhard wrote on Jul 29, 2008 2:35 PM:

" Off-topic, but when will someone hold Rep. Rose's feet to the fire and ask why the I-57 interchange, which was lobbied for by Charleston, heads only west, to Mattoon, so far. CHARLESTON initiated the development, and no one seems to mind that Mattoon has reaped the rewards thus far; what gives? I'm all for sharing the wealth, but it would be nice to start developing that corridor north of Charleston, as originally intended. Wonder when that might happen? Rep. Rose, care to comment? "

tammer65 wrote on Jul 29, 2008 5:31 PM:

" Reynoldsblowhard, you probably won't get an answer, not even from other posters, since this thread has been dumped to the archives because it became too politically specific. Anytime Rose and Righter's positions on issues get mentioned, the thread mysteriously vanishes to the archives, even though more people were posting to this thread than to several others that have stayed on the page for days. Ah, freedom of speech -- too bad our local newspaper doesn't believe in it! "

Penny Weaver wrote on Jul 29, 2008 5:44 PM:

" To tammer65: Just to explain -- I'm not sure why you indicate that this column is in the archives, because when I open the JG/T-C home page, it is in the list of Opinions items right on the front page. So perhaps I am misunderstanding. But since I've seen others comment on this before, I'd like to clarify: Items that are posted on our Web site are scheduled to move to archives when they are initially posted. For example, if we post a Letter to the Editor on a Tuesday, we might date it to remain on the site for one week. After that, it's still on the site, just not among top selections. The time at which these are set to archive has nothing to do with anything other than keeping fresh material on the home page of the site. Thanks. Penny Weaver, News Editor. "

tammer65 wrote on Jul 29, 2008 6:37 PM:

" Thanks for the explanation, Penny. I guess here's where my confusion lies. Currently in the "most commented section" is a letter about the 2008 airshow dated July 22. It has received 4 comments. It still is listed under "most commented." This letter is dated July 24, 2 days later, and has 38 comments, including 25 from yesterday when the argument really started to heat up, and yet this letter had been removed from "most commented" between last night and this morning, yet the older letter that is drawing far, far less commentary remains in "most commented." That doesn't make sense to me. (But thanks for directing me to the letter -- I've been going to the archives since I no longer found it on "most commented.") "

Harry Potter wrote on Jul 29, 2008 6:59 PM:

" Hey tammer, guess which profession falls below politicians and used car salesmen on most peoples list of least respected careers? I just hope Tom's not logged on tonight. LOL! "

Penny Weaver wrote on Jul 29, 2008 7:47 PM:

" Hi Tammer. Yes, I see what you mean. I don't believe our "Most Commented" section works properly all of the time. It's something we're aware of and will continue to try to work out such glitches. Nothing like modern technology, right?! Thanks. Penny Weaver, News Editor "

tammer65 wrote on Jul 29, 2008 8:43 PM:

" Thanks, Penny, for clearing all this up. I'm sorry for jumping to conclusions -- I need to live by that old adage regarding one who assumes. "

Tom Andres wrote on Jul 29, 2008 11:07 PM:

" tammer65: oh, there you are. I too thought this was archived. In fact, I just made a comment to that effect on another thread. Back to the issue. The $12,500 is an average, and you will not be able to add up all your direct payments to Springfield and come up with that number. MOST of the taxes we pay are indirect. When we buy a shirt at WallyWorld, part of the cost of that shirt is the retailer's tax bill. Don't you see? Commerce does NOT pay taxes; only the end consumers (citizens) do. When you buy a gallon of gas, any taxes built into the price of that gallon of gas gets passed on to you. If the gas costs $100.00, and the retailer's own tax bill is $25.00, you are paying that tax, just like you are paying for the cost of the person at the cash register, or the light bill, or the rent. You, the end consumer, pays ALL taxes - and that's how you are paying $12,500 a year whether or not you write a check directly to Springfield. I'm sorry for the condescenion earlier. I was pretty bad, wasn't I? Maybe I thought I was being clever and witty. "

Just a Soldier wrote on Jul 29, 2008 11:11 PM:

" Concerning the budget. I agree with both Tammers and Tom. Regarding Tom's argument, I agree that spending needs to be cut. However, I think a 5% cut across the board is a simpleton's response to a complex issue. That course of action assumes that all programs are being funded at the perfectly optimal level under the current budget and that a 5% cut would leave all programs to operate with 95% of their optimal funding. That doesn't seem that bad considering my household seems to operate with about 50% of our optimal funding every month, and we get by. I don't think any of us are dim enough to believe that is the case. This is where I agree with Tammers. We cannot cut funding from places like education; it is far too important to the betterment of our communities to cut corners there. Roads and bridges? We certainly need those, but I have seen a lot of road construction projects being done on perfectly good roads (That new interchange is big joke by the way. Talk about a road to nowhere.) while some roads seem like they haven't been looked at by IDOT since about 1950 so I guess I would like to see a little better project management there. Having said all of that, I know there are places in this budget that are probably getting about 110% of what they truly need because they are this politician or that politician's pet project. Cut the deficit there. If all of the BS is cut out and the state still needs more money, then raise taxes, but not a second sooner. "

jrhendren wrote on Jul 30, 2008 12:14 AM:

" ReynoldsBlowhard wrote on Jul 29, 2008 2:35 PM:
" Off-topic, but when will someone hold Rep. Rose's feet to the fire and ask why the I-57 interchange, which was lobbied for by Charleston, heads only west, to Mattoon, so far. CHARLESTON initiated the development, and no one seems to mind that Mattoon has reaped the rewards thus far; what gives? I'm all for sharing the wealth, but it would be nice to start developing that corridor north of Charleston, as originally intended. Wonder when that might happen? Rep. Rose, care to comment?
Here's a thought, maybe because the government in Illinois is holding every project for ransom right now, and the Interstate is right here, so you make the first exit where it is. I do think that the extension to Charleston should be worked on not stop at a road ends sign. If our government, those ransom holders from Chicago mainly, would do there job then the project would be done. Just a thought, could be some other reason. "

tammer65 wrote on Jul 30, 2008 11:55 AM:

" Tom Andres, thank you for the apology; the tone was making me more fired up than anything eles. I'm no idiot -- I DO understand the point that you're making, but the next obvious thought is "Well, and what of it?" Yes, the end consumer gets the supplier's taxes passed along to them, too, but what's the solution? We've tried cutting taxes on businesses before, but the savings never seems to "trickle down" to the end consumer even then. How do you propose we pay for things like education or roads or law enforcement if not through taxes? Cut the fat, yes, but you're proposing cuts where there is no fat -- you're trimming muscle and bone. I appreciated Just a Soldier's two-cents worth near the end of this thread. "

ReynoldsBlowhard wrote on Jul 30, 2008 1:44 PM:

" jrhendren wrote: "Here's a thought, maybe because the government in Illinois is holding every project for ransom right now, and the Interstate is right here, so you make the first exit where it is. I do think that the extension to Charleston should be worked on not stop at a road ends sign. If our government, those ransom holders from Chicago mainly, would do there job then the project would be done. Just a thought, could be some other reason. "

I'd agree that the project is on hold for budgetary reasons NOW, but from the get-go, Mattoon got the perks that Charleston lobbied for and was supposed to get first. This appears shady, at least on the surface. I would love to be proven wrong, but the issue never seems to be addressed. "

Tom Andres wrote on Jul 30, 2008 2:09 PM:

" To Just a Soldier. The only reason I suggest a 5% across the board reduction in spending is because the legislature and the governor have already had plenty of time to produce an optimal level of spending on each segment of the budget. They have utterly failed to do that. There are the not in my backyard folks who absolutely refuse to give up a dime of pork for their pet project. And I agree with you that there are critical areas of spending that should not be cut, but this silliness has gone on long enough and its time to call Springfield to task.

If you try to cut one pork project completely, then that affected group of folks are gonna say OK, I wont vote for your education funding. And on and on it goes. If we had strong, honest leadership in the House and the Senate and the Executive Branch, wed already have a workable and balanced budget. But of course, thats not the case, is it? 5%, by the way, would allow for a $3-billion savings which is about what we need to get healthy again.

This state already has an outrageous tax bite of over $12,500 per household and, because of leaderships waste and corruption in Springfield (Chicago), it still isnt enough. Missouris tax bite is about $9,800 per household; Indianas tax bite per household is about $5,400! Are you beginning to see the problem here? "

Tom Andres wrote on Jul 30, 2008 5:36 PM:

" tammer65, you know, honestly, I dont know the answers. All I know is that there are a small number of folks who are given the distinct honor of being in Springfield to serve their constituents. There are roughly 13-million citizens in Illinois, and only about 160 individuals are elected to serve their best interests. Some of those 160-some elected officials (One is too many.) spend more time serving the best interests of a few dozen very powerful lobbyists (such as power companies) than they do serving the best interests of the 13-million people theyre supposed to represent. Thats the problem.

About the only thing the leaders can gain consensus on are meaningless resolutions on honorary street names and pay raises for themselves. Other than that, when it comes time to behave responsibly and conduct OUR business, too many of them fall short of the mark.

As far as answers are concerned, perhaps we need *recall provisions* for EVERY elected official in the State of Illinois. I dont think term limits is the answer. Why force someone to quit, especially if theyre doing their job well? Impeachment isnt the answer either because the bad apples are seldom foolish enough to actually break laws; they just bend them to the limit and therefore are not subject to the impeachment process. "

tammer65 wrote on Jul 30, 2008 6:22 PM:

" Tom Andres wrote, "you know, honestly, I dont know the answers. All I know is that there are a small number of folks who are given the distinct honor of being in Springfield to serve their constituents. There are roughly 13-million citizens in Illinois, and only about 160 individuals are elected to serve their best interests. Some of those 160-some elected officials (One is too many.) spend more time serving the best interests of a few dozen very powerful lobbyists (such as power companies) than they do serving the best interests of the 13-million people theyre supposed to represent. Thats the problem.

About the only thing the leaders can gain consensus on are meaningless resolutions on honorary street names and pay raises for themselves. Other than that, when it comes time to behave responsibly and conduct OUR business, too many of them fall short of the mark."

Tom, my friend, at last something we agree on! You mention a recall provision as perhaps something that would provide a little relief, but I don't think even that would work; all we'd get done is re-calling those we elected! Even though I'm a Democrat, I'm fairly content with Rep. Rose and Sen. Righter, but so many others, from the Governor on down -- yikes! But getting someone decent to run for office is part of the problem. Last time our choices were Blago and Topinka -- not much to choose from. Glenn Poshard was the last decent candidate we had, and too many Republicans in the state were afraid of his party, and too many Democrats were afraid of his position on guns. And even he has let me down, with the whole plagiaried doctoral thesis issue that has emerged since he's been at EIU.

Don't get the opinion that I'm in love with high taxes, either -- more money in my bank account sounds great to me. But again, then how do we pay for all the things we've come to expect as a society -- law enforcement, free public education K-12 and affordable public higher ed, decent roads, bridges that won't collapse when we venture across them?

One thing's for sure, the voice of the common, middle class person isn't being heard, or if it's heard, it isn't being acted upon. "

tammer65 wrote on Jul 30, 2008 6:51 PM:

" I posted, "And even he has let me down, with the whole plagiaried doctoral thesis issue that has emerged since he's been at EIU." Oops, meant SIU, obviously! Time to call it an evening -- my head is spinning, anyway, with all the name-game posting on so many of the threads. "

Tom Andres wrote on Jul 30, 2008 8:01 PM:

" I vote for Chapin Rose and Dale Righter and speak well of them at every opportunity. My opinion, theyre honest folks. Ive never seen either one of them abuse their position of power. As to Glenn Poshard, I campaigned for him when he ran because of his independent pro-life position and his stance on the 2nd Amendment, plus the fact that he was running against George Ryan! I knew Ryan was a *stinker* way back then.

Hate to sound gloom & doom, but if Springfield doesnt get its act together (by kicking *corporate* and *special interest* lobbyists out of the legislative chambers), this state is on track for a financial meltdown. If that happens, many innocent people will be hurting; and worse, many of our strongest and brightest will simply pick up stakes and leave. "

tammer65 wrote on Jul 30, 2008 8:28 PM:

" Tom Andres wrote, "Hate to sound gloom & doom, but if Springfield doesnt get its act together (by kicking *corporate* and *special interest* lobbyists out of the legislative chambers), this state is on track for a financial meltdown. If that happens, many innocent people will be hurting; and worse, many of our strongest and brightest will simply pick up stakes and leave."

Again, I'm in agreement with you, Tom. (In fact, your last sentence is similar to something I said about the higher ed funding crisis.) Wow, all this agreement in 1 day? My head is spinning! Is it a full moon or something? LOL! "

Billie Brant wrote on Jul 30, 2008 10:54 PM:

" tammer, I think that problem with Poshard was cleared up some time ago.

I also think he was the one we needed. He didn't strictly follow party lines either. He did what he thought was right and let the cookie crumble.

If I remember correctly, he did win in Coles County which was a surprise. Too bad the whole state didn't follow suit.

Good man. "

longtimegone wrote on Jul 31, 2008 7:59 AM:

" Go to springfield vote for raise,pick up bribes,party then go home.Then they expect You to trust them? "

The Question wrote on Jul 31, 2008 11:05 AM:

" Billie is right. Illinois was offered a choice between an honest man for governor, Glenn Poshard, and a rotten, free-spending old crook, George Ryan. The people of this state licked their lips and picked the crook with their eyes wide open, so they can blame themselves for what has happened since. "

Billie Brant wrote on Jul 31, 2008 2:45 PM:

" You bet'cha Question!! "

HerChild wrote on Jul 31, 2008 9:50 PM:

" -- Monday, July 28, 2008 10:20 PM CDT --

Job cuts begin at historic sites
Lincoln Log Cabin affected, but officials refuse to discuss details

By KURT ERICKSON, JG/T-C Springfield Bureau

WHY WAS THIS ALREADY PUT AWAY IN THE ARCHIVES? "

miltmart wrote on Jul 31, 2008 11:22 PM:

" And then we followed up one crook with another, probably bigger crook in Blago. Can't wait to see that man get his and I hope he takes Evil Jones with him. Because of the Dem majority and Chicago, it's not that one party has too much power in this state but about 3 men do, all Democrats. I too think Chapin Rose, Dale Righter and Bob Flider who represents a nearby district all have the best interests of the state at heart but they have to be extremely frustrated with the situation in Springfield, or should I say Chicago? "

291953 wrote on Aug 1, 2008 5:45 AM:

" I knew Glenn Poshard when I lived in southern Illinois. As for the plagarism charge, it was made by a professor from another state university (not EIU) as an attempt at "payback" for one of Glenn's decisions at SIU. As for the specific charge on what he did or did not do, it was something trivial that made the news as "plagarism" and that was the word that everyone saw.

Also, it was said that Poshard wanted an investigation into the election he lost and Ryan threatened to cut off all money to Poshard's area which included SIU, John A Logan College, and other southern Illinois businesses.
Poshard backed off. I would vote for Poshard again if he ran, but it ain't gonna happen. "

tammer65 wrote on Aug 1, 2008 5:41 PM:

" 291953, I'm with you -- I'd vote for Poshard again in a heartbeat (just as I voted for him for Congress). I wish he'd run again. At least he's serving the state at SIU. Maybe he's too honest for politics. "

Rotty wrote on Aug 1, 2008 10:01 PM:

" I'm with ya there, Tammer.
The Mrs. & myself really liked Poshard, & really wanted him in, & like ya also said, if he ran again, we'd vote for him in a heartbeat. "