Daley challenges Blagojevich to take on school funding in Illinois. While it matters in the City, rural areas need these changes most of all (along with some significant mergers).
This has long been a hobby horse of mine: see my endorsement of The Blagorgeous in 2002 for one of the earlier (though not the earliest post on this)
Archpundit’s 2002 endorsement of Blagojevich I think underscores one of the main reasons his Administration is running into trouble.
For those who remember, Candidate Blagojevich promised the world to every single special interest group that would conceivably endorse him. He even made some lame joke about making more than 200,000 campaign promises.
Sure, he said he wouldn’t raise taxes. But as Archpundit pointed out in 2002, he was lying about fiscal policy. To put it bluntly: no one who followed politics took his “no new taxes pledge” seriously. He was elected because he would shift spending and expand social programs.
Then, as Governor, the “no new taxes” pledge became the only thing that mattered. A staff member explained to me the thinking: the state was in a fiscal crisis. No matter what the Governor did, some programs would be cut or eliminated. The Governor would be anger some special interests no matter what. The resulting policy was attack every special interest (and break the promises made) with a vengeance and stand up for the “ordinary guy” by making “no new taxes” the Blagojevich mantra.
There are a lot of problems with this stance. First is the general principle of politics that people with the most to lose/win will engage in politics the most. If social service agencies see their budgets threatened, they (and their supporters) will put in a lot of time to save the program. On the other hand, I don’t imagine anyone volunteering substantial time on a campaign because their taxes did not go up.
Equally as important is the perception in 2002 that Candidate Blagojevich was not serious about his “no new taxes” pledge. The campaign message was all about making promises to different constituencies, promises that the Adminsitration has routinely ignored. I just don’t see “no new taxes” as the route to re-election when it wasn’t really the mandate from the voters.
Unless Gov B starts delivering on the “200,000 promises,” no one will stick out his/her/its neck out for B in 2006. And keeping those promises requires some fiscal reforms, including new taxes.
I just wish all the dems would stop fighting each other. If they don’t, I fear they’ll end up having to fight repubs again, and I don’t want that. If it’s not Madigan or Daley making me ill, it’s Mr. B.
Item A: the state has no money. get over it.
Item B: I won’t mention the state leg. pay hike if you won’t.
nice comments about Vallas. i hope-and expect-he’ll be back to the Land of Lincoln at the right time. imagine our party represented by Obama and Vallas-how cool is that?