House 32% Income Tax Hike Veto Override Vote, Madigan Holds Enough Republicans

My wife emailed me at 4:30 to tell me our taxes just went up.

Here’s the House veto override vote, 71-42, the minimum for a successful override:

Here’s Governor Bruce Rauner’s reaction:

Governor’s Statement on Speaker Madigan’s 32% Income Tax Hike

SPRINGFIELD – Governor Bruce Rauner today issued the following statement after the House of Representatives voted to override the Governor’s veto of Speaker Madigan’s 32 percent permanent income tax hike:

“Today was another step in Illinois’ never-ending tragic trail of tax hikes.

“Speaker Madigan’s 32 percent permanent income tax increase will force another tax hike in the near future.

“His tax-and-spend plan is not balanced, does not cut enough spending or pay down enough debt, and does not help grow jobs or restore confidence in government.

“It proves how desperately we need real property tax relief and term limits.

“Now more than ever, the people of Illinois must fight for change that will help us create a brighter future.”


House 32% Income Tax Hike Veto Override Vote, Madigan Holds Enough Republicans — 27 Comments

  1. Rep 65 Steve Andersson stayed with the tax & spend Democrats.

    He’s a lawyer, so he wins on all sides.

    This is akin to taxation without representation.

    No reforms or plans on anything, just pay more for nothing.

    Zero sum.

  2. Thank you to all the reasonable representatives and senators. I’m glad the budget has been passed and don’t mind the tax increase.

    All you anti-taxers should move to Kansas where it’s working out really well…

  3. The people that get out and vote are the people that benefit from the corrupt system that we call Illinois government.

    If the people that constantly get screwed got out and voted we would have a fighting chance, but we are where we are for a reason.

    Pay to play = ensure that enough state workers and people on State aid benefit so your voice and vote doesn’t mean anything.

    King Madigan wins and his daughter sits in his wings…

  4. The three bills which consist of the budget passed today:

    Senate Bill 6 (SB 6) – Spending Bill

    Senate Bill 9 (SB 9) – Revenue Bill

    Senate Bill 42 (SB 42) – Budget Implementation (BIMP) Bill

    Illinois now has a “balanced” budget for the first time in 2 years and 5 days (the State fiscal year is July 1 through June 30th).

    It’s balanced using gimmicks.


    It took two years for Democrat Michael Madigan to pass a budget bill through a House in which he is the leader and the Democrats have the majority.

    The URL in the comment at 6:22pm above lists some of the victories Michael Madigan achieved by waiting this long.


    Not a single person talked about the state’s biggest fiscal problem today during House comments before the votes.

    That being, the $9 billion dollars annually ($25 million dollars per day) being accrued in pension interest on the five state pension funds (TRS, SERS, SURS, GARS, JRS).


    A State Representative during comments prior to the SB 9 vote did mention that Illinois has racked up $800 million interest on the past due bills.

    The State Rep made a big deal out of that.

    Not sure of the time frame to rack up the $800 million, but:

    $800M / $25M = 32 days.

    Surely the time frame was more than 32 days.

    Illinois accrues as much interest on underfunded state pensions in 32 days as it accrues on past due bills in x number of days.

    Time for politicians to start talking about pension interest.

    That is a very unpleasant conversation because to write it off would require an attempt at modifying the state constitution, or Federal passing legislation allowing a state to restructure its debts and obligations, and neither of those is a sure thing.

    Taxes would probably have to higher before the state would take those measures.

    In other words the state and taxpayers are between a rock and a hard place, and everyone is ignoring the elephant in the room.

  5. The major irony is that Republicans are most likely going to lose seats to “teach them a lesson” and the state will go bluer, perhaps getting supermajorities in both chambers and getting a Democratic governor, which is absolutely counterproductive from a conservative point of view.

    Some very dense Republicans are even blaming Rauner.

  6. Yeah, excellent because things were great when Quinn and Blagojevich were in charge. . .

  7. The state has one of the highest tax burdens in the nation and is number one for people leaving, and you want to double down on failed policies.

  8. **My wife emailed me at 4:30 to tell me our taxes just went up.**

    Don’t worry, Cal.

    axed), so you will not be paying higher taxes.

    Not sure what your wife does, so cannot speak to her income.

    But your income is protected!

  9. **excellent because things were great when Quinn and Blagojevich were in charge**

    Blago was crazy.

    But under Quinn, the state reduced discretionary spending and had balanced budgets.

    It made its full pension payments each year.

    The state also passed comprehensive Medicaid reforms, comprehensive workers comp reforms, etc.

    So, yea, I’d take Quinn of Rauner’s $15B in unpaid bills in a second.

  10. Of course the budget was slightly better under Quinn.

    The tax rate was 5 instead of 3 percent like it was before.

    Quinn and Democrats let it sunset even though they had supermajorities.

    They punted on minimum wage too, even though voters approved of raising it via referendum.

    These are typical partisan games and they were done to blame Rauner.

    You don’t think it’s odd that Democrats who were reform minded about Medicaid and entitlements are suddenly not working with a Republican governor?

  11. Joe – Rauner has been asking for entirely different things than happened under Quinn.

    If Rauner had come in with reasonable positions and not an all or nothing approach, he would have likely found allies across the aisle.

  12. Oh – and “slightly better” – that’s funny.

    Under Quinn IL paid down back bills.

    Under Rauner IL has racked over $10b more in back bills.

    But yea – “slightly better.” *eyeroll*

  13. Also – blaming Rauner. Your facts AND analysis are wrong.

    First, the income tax: Rauner (foolishly) demanded that the tax increase expire.

    The Dems did gladly give him what he wanted.

    But Rauner got what he wanted in the hope he could then use it as leverage to get non-budget related “reforms.”

    Second, on min wage.

    I can tell you first hand that we simply didn’t have the votes in the fall of 2014.

    It was incredibly frustrating.

    But they didn’t punt so they could blame Rauner.

    They punted because they didn’t want to do the hard work of getting the votes.

    Interestingly, I don’t hear you saying anything about the Republicans who had districts where voters supported the min wage increase.

    I’ll give you a hint – everyone of them was a no, despite what their voters says.

  14. During that time we were still number 1 or 2 in people leaving the state.

    Clearly things weren’t that great.

  15. The GOP isn’t the party that typically supports minimum wage increases; it’s more unusual for Democrats to oppose it.

    They’re the ones with the majorities, they didn’t even bother having a vote.

    And Republican politicians can answer to their voters about that issue.

    I’m not going to sit here and tell you Republicans are on the popular side of every issue.

  16. So I don’t have to establish residency in another state.

    Perhaps the lack of tax on retirement income is why Steve Andersson, with a fairly large voting population in Sun City, decided he could support the income tax hike on working constituents.

  17. While retirees may not feel it in their own pocketbooks, their medical care professionals certainly will.

    I think that issue should be of more concern to that age demographic voter.

  18. **So I don’t have to establish residency in another state.**

    Wait… are you telling me that you don’t know (or didn’t know before today) that retirement income wan’t taxed in IL?

  19. One of the comments above was the the state made full contributions to the state pension funds under former Governor Pat Quinn.

    The rest of the story is the debt (unfunded liability) grew faster than the contributions, resulting in more debt, not less debt.

    Full contributions, which are determined by the state laws and pension funds, have for years resulted in the unfunded liability growing each year.

    Obviously that is one dud of a payment plan.

    Sort of like making a “full contribution” to the credit card company, yet the balance continues to grow.



    Mr. Quinn was in office from January 1, 2009 to January 12, 2015.

    The state fiscal year is July 1 through June 30.

    So Pat Quinn was in office for only part of FY 2009 and FY 2015, and all of FY 2010 – 2014.

    The following numbers are in billions (B) and reflect the 5 state pension funds.

    Year – State Contribution – Unfunded Liability

    2009 – $2.7B – $077.8B

    2010 – $4.0B – $085.6B

    2011 – $4.2B – $083.1B

    2012 – $4.9B – $096.8B

    2013 – $5.9B – $097.5B

    2014 – $6.8B – $104.6B

    2015 – $6.9B – $111.0B

    2016 – $7.6B – $129.8B


    Leaving the political parties out of the picture, since both parties caused the problem, contemplate those numbers.

    From 2009 to 2016, the state contributed $43 Billion to the 5 state pension funds (TRS, SURS, SERS, GARS, JRS), yet the unfunded liability grew $52 Billion, from $77.8 Billion to $129.8 Billion.


    $43 Billion in state pension contributions over 8 years did not reduce the unfunded liability by one penny.

    Rather, the debt (the unfunded liability) grew by $52 Billion.


    Percentage increase from 2009 – 2016:

    State Contributions: 181%

    Unfunded Liability: 66%




    Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability (COGFA)

    Illinois State Retirement Systems

    Financial Condition as of June 30, 2016

    report dated March 2017

    pdf page 33, document page 23

    Table 2

    Summary of Appropriations Authorized

    State Retirement Systems

    FY 1996 – FY 2017


    Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability (COGFA)

    November 2016

    Special Pension Briefing

    State Retirement Systems Overview

    by Julie Bae and Jerry Lazzara, Pension Analysts

    pdf page 3

    State Retirement Systems Combined

    Unfunded Liability History

    FY 2002 – FY 2016

  20. Here is another way to express the state pension problem described in the previous comment, from the perspective of the taxpayer.

    In 2009, taxpayers owed $77.8 billion to the five state pension funds (TRS, SERS, SURS, JRS, GARS).

    In 2016, after 8 years of paying $43 billion to those funds, taxpayers owed $129.8 billion.

    Over those 8 years, taxpayers paid $43 billion, but the debt grew by $52 billion ($129.8 – $77.8).

    So for every $1 paid by taxpayers, the debt grew $1.23 ($53B / $34B).

    The debt is getting bigger and bigger and bigger.

    Yet people continue to make the point, the state made its full pension payment, without explaining the full pension payment is not enough to prevent the debt from growing.

    And that will continue to be the case after the 32% income tax hike for years to come.

  21. Of course I knew.

    There was a strong push by Chicago business leaders and Leftists to tax retirement income.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *