The View from Right Field

Will Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx Lose in November? No, Democrats Won’t Allow It.

Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx has been having a rough time.  A special prosecutor, Dan Webb, who is a former U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, found there were “substantial abuses of discretion” in how Ms. Foxx handled the Jussie Smollett matter.  Ms. Foxx pretty much let Mr. Smollett, a famous TV star (I guess), off the hook on charges filed against him because he had made a false report of a racist and homophobic attack on himself.  She has also come under criticism for how her office has dealt with all kinds of other matters.  Some people have even gone so far as to look at the Republican candidate for State’s Attorney, Patrick W. O’Brien, in the fall election.  Except they don’t need to waste their time doing that.  No matter how bad Kim Foxx is, the Democratic Party is not going to let the Republican candidate win.  If things get really bad, they might try to replace Ms. Foxx with another candidate.  But if she is on the ballot in November, the Democrats will make sure she wins.  They can’t afford to have her lose.

The last thing Democrats in Cook County, and Illinois, want is a Republican State’s Attorney in Cook County.  The Democrats are having enough trouble with John Lausch, Jr., the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, investigating public corruption.  They can’t have a Republican State’s Attorney in Cook County working with him.

A “Fair Tax” for a Poorly Run and Corrupt State

Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker has an idea to solve Illinois’s financial problems: a progressive income tax.¹  Illinois currently has a flat-rate income tax, but in November, voters will be able to vote on an amendment to the Illinois constitution allowing a graduated income tax.  In pushing for the change, Governor Pritzker assures us that only 3% of us would pay more under his plan. (I would say that, if you believe this, you probably also believe in the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy, but that would be unfair to the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy.  They’re real compared to the chance that, within five to ten years, only 3% of us would be paying more under the Fair Tax.)

Illinois’s main problem is not its unpaid bills or huge unfunded pension liability.  It is, rather, that it is so poorly run and so corrupt.  So much of the money that Illinois government gets is wasted, and there is no reason to think this would change just because Illinois gets more money.  More money would just mean more money to waste.²

Little Sisters of the Poor and Free Birth Control

There was considerable outcry earlier this week when the Supreme Court upheld Trump administration regulations under Obamacare that provided the Little Sisters of the Poor, and other religious groups, did not have to provide free contraceptive services under their health plan.  Well, actually, it was more complicated than that.  The Obama administration had not required the Little Sisters to provide free contraceptive services; it required the Little Sisters’ health plan to provide free contraceptive services, without charging the Little Sisters for the services.¹  The problem for the Little Sisters was, as I understand it, that they did not feel comfortable with what they had to do in order to opt-out of providing free birth control.² 

Apparently, 70,000 or more women could be left without free birth control under the Trump administration regulation, which bothers (outrages) a lot of people.  But the point is, which a lot of people seem to miss, is there is a simple way to make sure free contraceptive services are provided to all women without forcing groups like the Little Sisters to violate their religious principles: Have the federal government pay for it.  If free birth control is that important, just pass a law and provide for it.  Nobody’s religious principles are violated,³ and women get free birth control. 

What's Better? Something or Nothing? Police Reform In an Age of Polarization.

I’ve been writing a lot about baseball lately, mostly because baseball, even with people like Rob Manfred and Tony Clark unable to negotiate anything, is better than politics today, which says something.  But it’s back to the real world.

A big issue in Washington is police reform.  Your first thought about Washington and police reform might be like mine: Huh?  Police, like schools, seems like the epitome of a state and local issue.   We need police reforms (for one of my ideas, see here), but what’s the federal government got to do with it?  State governments, local governments.  Police reform is their issue.  Congress can’t pass laws telling state and local governments how to run their police forces.  About all the federal government can do (with one exception I will get to below) is cut back on the money it gives to state and local police departments if they do things the federal government doesn’t like.  It’s not much, but it’s something.  So the people in Washington are talking about a police reform bill which would increase or decrease the amount of money Washington gives to state and local police departments.

Figure Out How We Will Vote in November – Now!

How are we going to vote in November?  No, not who are we going to vote for.  Rather, what is the actual process of voting going to be?  Wisconsin had a disaster of an election in April.  The Democratic governor said he didn’t have authority to change the election date, but he waited until the week before the election to call the Republican-led legislature into special session – twice.   But the legislature and governor couldn’t agree on anything, and the legislature adjourned.  At that point, on the day before the election, the governor tried to delay in-person voting until June.  Republicans appealed to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which said the governor didn’t have the power to delay the election,¹ so voting went ahead on Tuesday.  At that point, things were so messed up there were only five polling places in the entire city of Milwaukee.  Stupid, just stupid.  (See here and here.)

While we can’t know for sure, there is a fair chance that in-person voting could be a problem for at least a significant portion of the population in November.  But even if it turns out that it isn’t, we need plan ahead.  Something we haven’t been doing, so far.

Bailouts, Turnabouts, Fair Play – And a Progressive State Income Tax

In today’s Chicago Tribune, Eric Zorn supports Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker’s argument that Illinois should get a bail out from the federal government because, in Governor Pritzker’s words, “we pay more in federal taxes in Illinois than we get back from the federal government.”  Mr. Zorn acknowledges that federal spending is affected by things like higher poverty rates in other states, but eventually he comes back to the view that other states should bail out Illinois “[b]ecause we’ve been bailing them out for years.”

I wonder, though, why we should be looking at this on the basis of state boundaries.  Perhaps we should look at it on a county basis.  Maybe Cook County should get back from the federal government what it pays in. 

Illinois and Stein’s Law

Herbert Stein, economist and Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors under Presidents Nixon and Ford, is probably best known by many people today as the father of Ben Stein (of “Ferris Buehler's Day Off” and “Win Ben Stein’s Money” fame).  But Herb Stein is also known for “Stein’s Law”: “If something cannot go on forever, it will stop.”

Which is actually a lead-in to Illinois’s budget and unfunded pension liability mess.  Unless you believe that Illinois’s unfunded pension debt will never be a problem, because there will always be enough money in the fund to make current pension payments,¹ you would say that the present situation cannot go on forever; i.e., Illinois cannot continue to not properly fund its pension obligations.  But looking at the people we have in Springfield, you would despair of that ever happening.

The Effect of “Exit” and “Voice” on Financial Irresponsibility and Corruption in Illinois

“Exit” and “voice” are the two main ways that people can react to problems they have with business or government – or pretty much anything.  With “exit,” you just leave.  If you don’t like one cell phone company, you go to another.  If a food store doesn’t have the products you want or if the fruits and vegetables aren’t fresh enough, you go someplace else.

When it comes to government, the same theory applies, though it isn’t quite as easy.  Still if things are bad enough, you leave.  As Tim Harford noted in FT Weekend,¹ “[a] citizen of the US can move to a different state; a citizen of the EU can move to a different country.”  Venezuela is the current champion in this category.  Literally millions of people have left Venezuela because conditions are so bad there.

Is There Any Program Illinois Politicians Can’t Find a Way to Corrupt?

Sixteen years ago the City of Chicago began installing red-light cameras.  The idea of red-light cameras is simple and sounds good: make sure cars stop before turning right on a red light.  But Chicago being Chicago, and Illinois being Illinois., once red-lights cameras arrived so did corruption involving red-light cameras. 

In 2016, a Chicago city worker and the CEO of a red-light camera company were convicted of participating in a kickback scheme involving the awarding of Chicago’s red-light camera contract.¹  Now, the Chicago Tribune reports that, according to testimony in a court case, SafeSpeed, a company with a number of red-light camera contracts in the Chicago suburbs, paid the police chief of Justice, Illinois (I know, “Justice, Illinois” is a contradiction in terms) a fee of 1% of the revenues it collected from other cities that the police chief was able to convince to sign a contract with SafeSpeed. 

Illinois Politics: The Gift That Keeps on Giving

As you may know, Chicago’s teachers’ strike ended last week.  (The teachers were only doing it for the children, of course.)  One of their demands was an elected school board.  (The mayor presently appoints the board.)  The union wants a 21-person elected board; all the better, I suppose, to ensure that the union will be able to help elect a majority of the board.  Which would mean that during the next contract negotiation, the teachers’ union would be on both sides of the table, negotiating with itself.  Which should make the negotiation easier – and increase business for one-way U-Haul rentals out of town.

Michael Madigan, Speaker-for-Life¹  of the Illinois House (sort of like Xi Jinping in China), has said he would support legislation creating an elected school board in Chicago.  However, given that the feds and the FBI seem to be investigating Springfield, as well as the Chicago City Council (wow, they must be busy), the possible problem for such legislation is whether Speaker Madigan will have a quorum by the time the legislative session starts in January.  On Friday, State Rep. Luis Arroyo, an assistant majority leader in Speaker Madigan’s House of Representatives, resigned after being charged with bribery last week.