Hang Onto Your Wallets, Here they Come Again!

Progressive? Liberal? It doesn't matter. These guys have never met a tax increase they don't like. So, hang onto your wallets! Here they come again!

In case you missed it, in January 2011, Democrats in the Illinois Legislature raised the state income tax on individuals 66 percent -- from 3-5 percent -- and Illinois' corporate income tax to 9.5 percent. Not one Republican voted for the increases.

Democrat Gov. Pat Quinn ecstatically signed the tax increases into law. The increases have generated between $7 billion and $8 billion each year since, all of which has been ripped from the pockets of taxpayers. And of course, if Speaker Michael Madigan was to be believed, those tax increases were "temporary!"

What good did it do? These days, the only way Illinois can keep big businesses from leaving the state, and bring new ones in, is to bribe them with incentives. Big corporations, who provide jobs, don't like paying 9.5 percent corporate income taxes.

Have all these tax increases helped the state's credit rating? Hardly.
Here is what the Chicago Tribune reported on June 6, 2013:

"Moody's Investors' Service on Thursday downgraded Illinois' general obligation credit rating by one notch -- to the lowest rating in the state's history -- following a move earlier this week by Fitch Ratings.

"Moody's downgraded Illinois' $27 billion of general obligation debt to A3 from A2, with a negative outlook after state lawmakers last week failed to pass a plan to deal with a $100 billion unfunded public pension liability."

And on March 14, 2013, Huff Post Chicago headlines, "Illinois budget deficit worst in the nation: State is reportedly $43.8 billion in the red," based on a report issued by Illinois Auditor General William Holland. Mr. Holland states that "the state's overall budget deficit has more than doubled in the past five years."

The audit analyzed the Illinois Comptroller's comprehensive annual financial report which lists all state government assets and liabilities for fiscal year 2011.

When Democrats rammed through the 2011 tax increases, then-House Minority Leader Tom Cross, R-Oswego, said, "It's a cruel hoax to play on citizens to say this is temporary."

Two years later, as if to prove Tom Cross a prophet, Rep. Lou Lang, D-Skokie, a top House Democrat, said, "The state's temporary income tax increase from 2011 should become permanent. ... I think most legislators in this building, even those who will never vote to extend that income tax increase, would tell you we need the dollars."

Now Democrats are not even satisfied with that; they want a graduated income tax for Illinois. A coalition delusionally calling itself "A Better Illinois" is leading the charge.

"If Illinois were to adopt the same graduated income tax rate structure as Iowa, Illinois would raise $6.3 billion more in revenue than it does from its current five percent flat rate, while 54 percent -- over half -- of all taxpayers would pay less in state income taxes," from The Case for Creating a Graduated Income Tax in Illinois.

But if 54 percent of taxpayers would pay less, the 46 percent who pay more will have to pay the additional $6.3 billion PLUS billions more to make up for what the 54 percent who will be paying less won't be paying!

And look who is supporting this newest effort to plunder productive citizens -- the usual suspects! Indeed, at their March 19, meeting 17 of out 25 esteemed Rock Island County board members -- ALL DEMOCRATS --at the urging of state Rep. Mike Smiddy, D-Hillsdale, voted to support the campaign to put the proposal for a graduated state income tax on the November ballot. The five Republican members had the good sense to vote no!

And look who else is supporting putting on the ballot the extra $6.3 billion tax increase (on top of the billions approved in 2011. DEMOCRATS)! They include state Sen. Mike Jacobs, D-East Moline, with his bland, "the voters will ultimately decide."

When does it end?

Moline aldermen in December 2013 approved sewer rate increases for each of the next five years. The public schools just unsuccessfully sought a 1 percent increase in the sales tax. The county wanted and didn't get a .25 percent increase in the sales tax for the sheriff. The county is expected to vote in November for a tax increase to support Hope Creek Care Center.
And in Washington, the president never tires of demanding that the "rich" pay their fair share ("fair share" equals "more").

If this keeps up, Illinois will go the way of the bankrupt city of Detroit. If this keeps up, the productive and vilified "rich" will head south. Corporations will continue to choose not to locate here without being incentivized (bribed) to do so (and yes, you and I are taxed to provide those incentives!).

The tax-and-spend Democrats and their beloved taxes are wrecking the country, the state and the county. And if you doubt me, here is what President Obama said in his 2014 State of the Union Address:

"Average wages have barely budged. Inequality has deepened. Upward mobility has stalled. The cold, hard fact is that ... too many Americans are working more than ever just to get by; let alone to get ahead. And too many still aren't working at all."

Posted Online:  March 26, 2014, 11:00 pm - Quad-Cities Online
by John Donald O'Shea

Copyright 2014
John Donald O'Shea

Why Majority Can't Do Anything it Wants

In a democracy, what are the rights of the majority? Does the minority have any rights? In November of 2013, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and his Democrat cronies in the U.S. Senate answered that question in a way that should send chills up the spine of every American.

Sen. Reid, D.-Nev., and the Democratic majority changed the rules of the Senate by a majority vote. Fifty-two Democrats and independents voted to partially abolish the filibuster. The change reduces the threshold from 60 votes to 51 for Senate approval of executive and judicial nominees to lower federal courts.

The Republican minority was unanimous in its opposition to the change. Republicans were joined by three Democrats -- Mark Pryor D-Ark., Joe Manchin, D-W.V., and Carl Levin, D-Mich. The rule change does not apply to Supreme Court nominees, who are still subject to a 60-vote filibuster threshold, or to legislation.

Reid's justification was simple: "The American people believe Congress is broken." Translated: "We are the majority; the majority rules." Further translated: "Power makes right."

Were Reid and the Democrats right? In America, should the majority party be able to run the country by majority vote? Are you for "pure Democracy?" After all, the voters, gave the Democrats a majority in the U.S. Senate.

But go back in time to the first two years of the Obama administration, when the Democrats, besides controlling the presidency and the Senate, also controlled the House. If you believe that 51 (of 100) senators and 218 (of (435) representatives should be able to pass whatever law they deem necessary or convenient, how would you feel if 51 senators and 218 House members passed any of the following laws?

-- Re-instituting slavery?

-- Making it illegal to be a Catholic or a Baptist?

-- Stripping Jews of citizenship?

-- Prohibiting American families from having more than one child?

-- Providing for the sterilization of all illegal immigrants found inside the United States?

-- Making it criminal to be a member of the Republican Party?

-- Directing extermination of all mentally disabled persons?

-- Denying tax exemption to "tea-party affiliated" groups? Or "progressive" groups?

-- Suppressing Fox News and CNN? Or putting monitors in their newsrooms to ensure their news reports are "favorable to the president, his party and his friends"?

If the rule is majority rules, what protects the minority? Where does the minority hide?

Lord Acton has written, "The one pervading evil of democracy is the tyranny of the majority..."

Our Founding Fathers tried to give America a maximum of democracy short of mob-ocracy. They feared the "mob." They feared the excesses of "pure democracy." That is why, rather than creating a pure democracy, they created a representative republic of limited powers, and further hamstrung it with a Bill of Rights, calculated to put certain powers beyond the reach of the majority.

Harry Reid, to the contrary, our Constitution is not "broken." It is a document replete with checks and balances -- intentionally built in -- to limit the power of the transient majority and the chief executive so as to safeguard personal liberty and property.

James Madison summed it up in Federalist Paper No. 10: "Democracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."

And if there is danger in unfettered mob rule, there is equal danger in government by executive orders and decrees. Our Constitution was adopted to bar both.

It is for that reason that no law can be passed by the president. It is for that reason that no law can be passed by the House or Senate alone. Indeed, it is for that reason that Article I, Sec. 1 of the Constitution provides "All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives," and why Congress is granted power "To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof."

And it is why the president takes an oath that he "will faithfully execute the office of the President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

And it is why the Constitution and the Bill of Rights bar the president, the Congress and even the courts from engaging in certain actions destructive of the liberty of the individual citizen.

Posted Online:  March 19, 2014, 11:00 pm - Quad-Cities Online
by John Donald O'Shea

Copyright 2014
John Donald O'Shea

New Tax Won't Add up to Better Schools

Exactly how much money does it take to educate a student in the public school system?

We are repeatedly told "our kids deserve the best!" But what does the "best" cost? Will another $11.5 million do it? Guarantee it? Moline School District 40 tells us that its 2012 cost per student was $9,488.46.

At the same time, the county can't afford to replace a century-old physically and functionally obsolete courthouse, and is expected to ask for a tax increase to save its nursing home. The American economy stinks, and here comes one more special interest group telling us that our kids will be better off if only we pay an additional 1 percent sales tax. I doubt it!

Moline School District 40's financial statements show:

"Total governmental fund revenues for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2012, of $86,634,518."

"Total governmental funds expenditures for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2012, of $85,333,855."

Not content with that $86.6 million in revenue, a special interest group calling itself, "YES Makes Cents for Students," wants Rock Island County voters to impose a 1 percent sales tax "to provide a better and safer learning environment and to reduce reliance on property taxes." The 1 percent will raise $11.5 million, about $3.8 million of which would go to the Moline schools. In consideration for that increase, the district promises to reduce the real estate tax levy by $400,000. As such, the net tax increase for the people of Moline would be $3.4 million.

In short, the "Yes" people want $90,034,518 to run the Moline schools. The group also blithely claims taking $11.5 million out of the private sector will somehow "boost the local economy." But this isn't $11.5 million for just one year. It's $11.5 million every year!

The Moline School District's financial report also states, "Moline School District No. 40 serves 7,438 students with a 2011-12 total governmental fund budget of $102,556,230." In 2012, there were 47,457 men, women and children in Rock Island County. An $11.5 million tax increase means every man, woman and child's share of the tax will be $78 per year -- year after year.

Therefore, as during the fiscal year ending June 30, 2012, there were 7,438 students, including high school students, in the Moline School system. By simple division, the cost of educating each student was $11,472 ($85,333,855/7438 = $11,472). A $3.4 million tax increase means the Moline schools can spend $90,034,518 or $12,105 per child ($90,035,518/7438 = $12,105). And yes, I question the district's $9,488.46 per student figure.

So, why isn't $86.6 million enough? Why isn't $11,472 per student enough?
According to the district's figures, the 2011-12 student/teacher ratio was 16.15 students per teacher. Taxpayers, therefore, are already spending $184,699 per year to educate the 16.15 kids in each class.

Do the "Yes" people really expect us to believe that if we spend an additional $457 on each Moline child, it will boost the local economy? Provide a better and safer learning environment? At a time when the district barges ahead with the Hamilton School expansion over public objection, how can there be any trust on their promise to permanently reduce real estate taxes? And in the $86.6 million they already have, is there no $3.4 million that could be put to better use?

In the 2012-13 school year, the Moline School District was very "average." It ranked 222 out of 480 (top 46 percent). Only 50 percent of Moline High School graduates meet or exceed the ACT College Readiness Benchmark (defined by an ACT composite of 21 or higher).

Maybe it is time for the public school systems to take an open-minded look at private/Catholic school achievement.

Alleman's 2012-13 enrollment was 457 students. Its student-to-teacher ratio was 17:1. Ninety-eight percent of Alleman's graduating seniors went on to college or joined the military. Over 70 percent of Alleman's 2013 graduates met or exceeded the ACT College Readiness Benchmark. The average composite ACT score for 2012-13 was 23.1.

Alleman's Total Operating Fund Revenues for the 2012-13 year was $2,931,209. Its Total Operating Fund Expenses were $2,959,045. Alleman spent an average of $6,565 per each of its 457 students. And as far as I know, Alleman has football, baseball, softball, soccer, golf, volleyball, tennis, drama, orchestra, etc., just like the "public schools."

Why does it cost $11,472 to educate a student in the public schools, and only $6,565 to do so in a Catholic school? It is rather difficult to argue that Alleman isn't giving more bang for the buck.


Posted Online:  March 09, 2014, 11:00 pm - Quad-Cities Online
Last Updated: March 10, 2014, 7:40 am
by John Donald O'Shea

Copyright 2014
John Donald O'Shea