In the event, however, it failed to achieve even 50 percent of the vote.
Indeed, in the run-up to November, most polls suggested that the measure would get the supermajority of votes it needed to succeed. Most theories of voter self-interest would suggest a tax on the top 3 percent would be quite popular. We’ll put the judgments about policy aside for a moment, and focus on political expectations and surprises. We wrote previously about some of the background to the measure here. Opponents, most notably hedge fund mogul Ken Griffin and the state Republican Party, characterized the measure as a slippery-slope power grab by an untrustworthy legislature (Illinois faces deep, chronic debt problems, despite its balanced-budget constitutional requirements), and a sort of gateway to overall higher tax rates, which might lead to an exodus by businesses and wealthy individuals. The measure was tied to a specific proposal in the state assembly that would have slightly increased taxes on household incomes over $250,000 while slightly reducing tax rates on incomes below that level, essentially shifting some tax burden to the rich.Īs described in detail by Ballotpedia here, proponents of the measure, most notably Governor Pritzker and progressive labor movement organizations, saw it as a way to restructure one stream of revenue for the state by shifting some burden to the highest-income Illinoisans (most states have a progressive income tax structure, though some have no income tax at all). More precisely, the measure would have enabled the state legislature to change the state income tax from a flat tax to a “bracket” structure tax different levels of income at different rates, something currently forbidden by the state constitution. Labeled the “Fair Tax” by its proponents, it would have allowed for a progressive income tax in the state. Here in Illinois, there was a major ballot initiative under consideration that had a surprising result. In Illinois, the recent statewide ballot measure to amend the Illinois constitution is a theoretical headscratcher: “Why would an electorate reject a tax that only applies to the richest 3%?” Some of these results can also help us learn about voters’ priorities and ideological decision-making. Down the ballot, however, important choices were made in many states and cities that will both impact Americans’ lives. In November 2020, the Presidential election took most of the headline space in Illinois and elsewhere. By Tom Ogorzalek, Kumar Ramanathan, and Jacob Wu
0 kommentar(er)
