(upbeat music) (camera beeps) (dramatic music) - Thanks for joining us on "Capitol View."

I'm Fred Martino.

Illinois Republicans react to the verdict against former President Donald Trump.

State lawmakers pass a bill that would allow unlimited campaign contributions from political parties for state and federal primary campaigns, and a lawsuit seeks to end the use of police cameras for motor vehicle violations.

Those stories and more this week with Amanda Vinicky of WTTW and Kent Redfield, Emeritus Political Science Professor with the University of Illinois, Springfield.

Amanda, we begin with reaction from Illinois Republicans over the felony conviction of former President Donald Trump.

It includes some explosive language like, quote, "Stalin would be proud," and the flying of the US flag upside down, get this, outside the Homer Township office building.

What do you make of this, Amanda?

- Well, so this comes actually after the Illinois Republican Party recently had its convention.

And really this is, I think, what we had seen as the transitioning of the Illinois GOP going full throttle behind President Trump and turning more conservative.

Sort of the mainstream Republicans who had been in charge are really no longer when it comes to most party politics.

I think some would say that more of the true Republicans are still at the helm at the General Assembly when you're talking about leaders McCombie and Curran.

But that's a different case at the state party level.

And this is, I think, in part just evidence of how really strong Trump is for factions of the party.

And this is a sign of what I think, in an interview, for example, this was Rick Pearson's reporting in the Chicago Tribune talking about the Republican leader of the Will County Board had flown this flag outside the Homer Township building.

And of course, there are questions and concerns that if you do that on taxpayer property, is that taking your own political and personal views and ascribing them to all the taxpayers?

The defense that the Republican leader there had made was that it's true belief that the party is in distress as is evidenced by the conviction now of felon and former, possibly future president Donald Trump.

So we have seen a very polarized nation.

There is no indication that that is going to subside, particularly with an election on the horizon and presumably thereafter, given threats that former President Trump has made.

- Truly something.

I mean, Amanda, I've been in journalism for more than 30 years and it is the first time I can remember such a political display at a government building.

I mean, that was what really stood out to me as a journalist.

I couldn't remember another time hearing such a thing.

- I mean, we're just in a new era, I think, in general.

The ushering in of Trump Republicanism is all historic.

I mean, we've never of course had a president that is a felon, that is under multiple court cases, both at the federal and, in this case, state level.

I mean, all of this is unprecedented completely.

- It certainly is.

- Impeachment, twice impeachment.

That was what I was trying to go for earlier.

- Tough to, yes, tough to predict anything anymore.

Kent, one of the many issues that came out of the 2020 election involved efforts by states to ensure the presidential vote is accurately replicated by the electors, the people who represent the state's vote before the electoral college.

The Illinois General Assembly passed a bill this year dealing with this issue.

And the bill has other important provisions, including a major change, allowing unlimited campaign contributions by parties in some elections.

Tell us more about this.

- Okay, well, to the first, you know, we did have, obviously had a dispute in the 2020 election about alternative slates of electors presenting credentials and results when we were certifying the presidency.

And some of this is rooted in the fact that, you know, the original Constitution had a lot of anti-majoritarian elements to it.

And so while this bill doesn't speak specifically to slates of electors, it speaks to the idea of the faithful or the faithless elector, that when you vote for a candidate for president, you are registering the popular vote, but you're also electing electors from the congressional districts that are pledged to support the candidate, a particular candidate.

And if that candidate wins statewide election, then you're an elector and you're supposed to record your vote in favor of whoever won the popular vote and you supposedly are pledged to that candidate.

We have had instances where we have had people that have not kept those pledges.

This is then a uniform law that's been passed in about 34 states to try to make sure that it's very clear about the pledge and has provisions for substituting someone if someone-- - Yeah, I was surprised, Kent, when I read the story that it was only a little more than 30 states because it's such an important, such an important idea.

Let's move to that second part.

Unlimited, unlimited campaign contributions in certain elections.

This didn't, some would argue, didn't get as much attention as one would expect.

- Yes.

When the limits were passed in 2009, the people that were working on it, and I was one of them, you know, were interested in restricting the flow of money, private money into the process and then restricting the flow of money within the process, particularly what political parties could do.

And this provision that is now being removed was frankly the only limitation that the legislature would agree to on restricting their ability to move money around once they had gotten the contributions from private sources and it applied just to the primary with the idea that the party leaders and local party organizations should not be putting their thumb so heavily on the scale in terms of, you know, and keeping the process open to-- - What do you make of this, changing this, allowing unlimited political contributions from the parties for these primary elections for state and federal offices?

What do you make of this idea?

- Well, it just shows that, you know, while there were really good intentions with the law, the limits that were passed, because of exemptions for self-funders, exemptions for independent expenditures, pretty much unlimited money comes into the process.

And this is, you know, with this kind of restriction, then when Senator Harmon or Speaker Welch wanted to go after an incumbent, they had to work around it.

They couldn't use their caucus committee, which is a political party, to make contributions.

They had to deal with individual contributions, individual candidates, but they did work around-- - I see.

So it sounds like your answer is, to me, it sounds like you're saying by removing the limit, making it unlimited from political parties, it's an opportunity for them to compete with other contributions that might get around the idea of kind of campaign finance reform.

Is that what you're saying?

- Yeah.

In some cases, yes.

But in terms of the larger picture, right now, the speaker, the Senate president, Republican leaders, though they really don't have any money, they can waive the limits on their personal committee, bring money in, and then they can transfer it to their caucus committee, which is a political party under the state law, a political party committee.

So we pretty much have unlimited party contributions now.

Some of the people reacting to the criticism from the reformers said, you know, the world has changed with Citizens United, dark money, and this is just us saying, you know, we might as well acknowledge reality, but-- - Oh, my.

Okay.

Well, that's-- - It does show how things have changed in the last 20 years.

- Yeah.

Very interesting stuff.

And we do need to move on.

Amanda, the Chicago Sun Times had an important story this week.

A lawsuit filed in federal court wants to end the state's use of cameras that record license plates, geolocations, and photos, saying that those efforts violate the 4th and 14th Amendments.

- Well, so this is a lawsuit that was filed by the Liberty Justice Center, which probably sounds familiar to folks who follow Illinois politics.

They're very active across the country, but particularly in Illinois, given that they're affiliated with the Illinois Policy Institute based here in Chicago.

It says that there's basically a dragnet of surveillance that is going on because of these automated license plate readers.

And this is less about the red light cameras or cameras that may be dotting, for example, the city of Chicago if I go over the speed limit where there are signs, there are warnings.

They're limited in use.

These are really all over highways and police say that they've been particularly instrumental in combating crime and carjackings, shootings, unfortunately, that occur on highways.

And so the lawsuit, however, alleges that because there's really no limit on how long this information can be held, that essentially the government has an eye and can watch and keep accounts of drivers' whereabouts.

And so that is what this lawsuit alleges.

There has been no activity, but yeah, lots of reporting over this because it is something that, and speaking about what Kent Redfield was just saying in terms of how much times have changed, I mean, the use of these cameras has really proliferated in recent years.

- Yeah.

It's gonna be so interesting to see how the courts rule and how far that goes and the preference-- - Yeah.

Privacy versus protection.

And what do we want?

- Yeah.

- Some of that, of course, is legal, but I think that it is also questions that our society is going to be continuing to contend with as technology advances.

- Yeah.

Kent, another story from the session here.

Illinois residents can claim bigger state tax credits next year under the new budget, but it is not much.

Tell us about that.

- Well, this is the standard exemption and back when Governor Quinn was governor, he got legislation that would tie the standard exemption that you take for being a homeowner, a head of a household, your dependents, that that would be tied to inflation.

During the pandemic, there was a lot of changes within the tax laws.

And one of the things that happened was that we essentially suspended the automatic increase.

You know, this happened last year.

The governor had a proposal to put money into it, about $100 million as I think was around the figure.

The legislature chose not to do that.

They just restored the amount of the exemption to be increased by the amount of inflation.

It turned out to be I think $69 for a family of four.

It is in fact not much, you know, but that's two things.

It's indicative of how tight the budget is and is going to be as we go into future years.

You know, we're talking, we just said, well, we'll take the 1% off of the sales tax, sales tax off of groceries.

That doesn't affect the state budget, but it got put off until 2026 and it will now be up to city councils to raise it.

But again, this is not a lot of money.

$300, family of four, you know, this is not major tax relief.

And again, the other thing it points out is how restricted the sources of revenue that the state has, that the income tax, flat tax, very narrow sales tax, not without any kind of services being included in the sales tax.

And you know, with federal money leaving, we're gonna have a real problem just matching what the governor is touting as a modest, balanced budget.

But we really, all of us have a problem in Illinois.

The cost of government goes up more quickly than the revenue because government is very people-intensive and our revenue streams are not responsive to economic growth.

So there's a lot more here than just, you know, we appreciate the extra amount of tax relief, but it's not much and it doesn't get at what are the serious problems that we may have to attack at least some of them next year.

- I wanted to just jump in and say I agree with Professor Redfield, particularly in terms of what this portends for the future and type budgets, but also when 300 bucks isn't a lot, it is to some people, especially compared with another tax change that has gotten so much attention, and that is the removal of the state grocery sales tax, which is really piddly, a dollar if you spend a hundred bucks at the grocery store.

So in terms of impacts to folks, this is one that $300, you can do something with versus perhaps a buck.

Let's say that you're a really heavy grocery spender, even that, maybe you'll pocket a hundred bucks at the end of the year, maybe.

- Amanda, you're talking, when you mention the $300, are you talking about the child tax credit?

- No, I was speaking about, there's that as well, but speaking about changes to the standard deduction and what-- - Yeah.

The standard deduction-- - Yeah.

- I believe it was, as Kent said, something about-- - Oh, yeah.

Sorry.

- Something around $69.

- Yes.

Sorry about that.

- For a family of four.

- Yeah.

- So just to clarify-- - Yeah.

Thank you.

Thank you for saving me.

- Yeah.

There is a child tax credit as well.

We've covered that previously, so we're not covering it today, but good context there for sure, Amanda.

I want to ask you, Amanda, as we move on here about another issue as we talk about all of the costs of government.

At the governor's request to help pay for a lot of things rather than just tax increases on individuals for necessities like food, which was we had a tax cut, they're looking at things that are very popular tax increases with a lot of people, so-called "sin taxes" and one of the biggest new sources of revenue in the budget involves a higher tax on sports betting.

And this week we learned that the companies affected are pushing back.

No surprise there.

Tell us more.

- Yeah.

They've been pushing back.

They fought really hard to prevent this from happening.

- Yeah.

- They lost.

There was a really robust lobbying effort seeking changes.

Some of those changes were made in that there's now sort of graduated tax on the sports books.

So the biggest names are going to have to pay a higher tax because they do the most business, frankly.

I think that the threats, at least according to experts, and this sort of makes sense to me, according to experts, threats that they're going to leave Illinois on account of the tax are probably just that, threats.

They do hundreds of millions of dollars in business from all accounts.

And so even if you have to pay a higher tax on that, you're not going to leave entirely.

- Yeah.

- But it still is a fairly big change.

That's sort of, I guess, the theme of this show, big changes, that we have really seen, again, proliferations not only of those automatic license plate readers, but also of video gaming terminals across the state of Illinois and the popularity of gambling on sports legally.

So Illinois is really-- - Yeah.

- Really counting on it to make up a budget gap.

- Yeah.

You know this, Amanda.

People who've lived here a while and haven't traveled much don't realize just how much of a big state this is for gambling.

I mean, you know, the notion they would pull out does seem to be highly unlikely, right?

Because I moved here about three years ago and couldn't believe to see slot machines in every gas station and a casino built since I've been here in my town and Illinois even has the ability to buy lottery tickets online, which I had never heard of before.

So we have a lot of gambling in this state.

- A lot, a lot of gambling, as they've termed it.

Illinois lawmakers are betting on the betters.

- That's right.

Kent, so we move to another election south of the border.

Mexico elected its first woman president this week.

And some may be surprised to hear that thousands of people voted in this election in Chicago, according to reports by the Chicago Tribune, some of these people waiting over 10 hours to vote.

- Yeah.

Pretty remarkable.

And you know, there are a number of points here.

It is an indication of the fact that particularly in urban areas, the United States is a multicultural, multiracial, both native-born, immigrant, and lots of these people are there, are working here on different kinds of visas and some of them have dual citizenship.

So, I mean, the complexity of American society just continues to grow and grow.

And it is also when people talk about, well, is it worth my time to vote?

The fact that you have people who are literally standing in line for eight, 10 hours in order to exercise their right to participate in the political process, I think should, people that just toss off how the politics isn't important, that it doesn't mean much and what's the big deal?

People that have not historically enjoyed those rights have a much better perspective on what it means to exercise them.

And so-- - Thank you for those comments.

- I just thought it was an interesting story.

- I like that spin on it.

I really do, because of course my first reaction was no one should have to wait 10 hours to vote.

And that's definitely true, but it reminds us of how much people value that right and we should never, ever forget it.

We just have a few minutes left.

Amanda, final story here in your town where you are, a big story, but nothing came of it.

The Bears are not giving up, though.

The Bears are not giving up on their plans for a new stadium despite the cool reception in Springfield.

Tell us about this.

- Yeah, actually, just this week, you had Kevin Warren, the president of the Bears, making a pitch and trying to get Illinois' top business leaders on board.

But I actually interviewed Illinois House Speaker Emanuel Chris Welch, who had been seen as sort of, hadn't really said all that much.

And he said, no appetite, and followed up and said, what about after the election?

Because that's typically when you might see legislators be more receptive to an idea that's not as popular with their constituents.

You know, it's just after the election.

They're in.

They're safe for at least a couple of years and voters' memories are short.

And he said, no, not even after the election.

I think this circles back to how we had mentioned that tougher budget times are predicted ahead and there's a lot of public frustration with what we're seeing as sort of bailing out and giving handouts to billionaires.

I left unresolved our "What then?"

Because the Bears certainly do want to move.

There's been talk about the Chicago White Sox maybe even leaving Chicago and becoming the White Sox of whatever other city.

So this is not done.

We're gonna continue to hear, talk about it, but there was no action before the General Assembly adjourned for the spring.

And we're hearing from top leaders that they are not likely to change their minds anytime soon.

- Yeah, you know, it does not seem likely, and you gotta remember that in addition to all of the general costs that go up with inflation every year, there are some huge holes in Chicago, I believe, Amanda.

It's like $700 million plus needed for transit alone.

- Yeah.

Yes.

$730 million come 2026, which it will be here sooner than we know it and of course have to deal with that before 2026 hits.

- Yeah.

I mean, enormous sums of money.

And of course, this year, the general assembly pumped another, I believe 350 million into education.

But that's another one that will be continuing to go up as we look at equity as well as just the general increase in costs.

- Yeah.

It's both.

I think you touched on some of the real highlights that are going to be-- - Yeah.

- Seen next year.

There's that.

I also think unresolved is whether the $180 million the state is sending for migrant funding is going to be enough, or whether those will be continued pressures.

- Yeah.

- The $350 million in education funding is not at all what reformers say is enough.

That's on top of it.

So every time you add to it, Illinois is going to be putting that amount in, but then there's pressure to increase that-- - Yeah.

- By hundreds of millions of dollars more.

- You gotta keep your calculator ready, that's for sure.

It gets complicated and tough.

Amanda and Kent, thank you for being with us this week.

- Thank you.

- Thank you for being with us at home.

For everyone at WSIU, I'm Fred Martino.

Have a great week.

(dramatic music) (dramatic music continues) (dramatic music continues) (dramatic music continues)