Legislators and interest groups have debated the issue of school funding reform for years, but they have failed to agree on the specifics. Supporters of the new plan believe they will have better luck in 2007.

"I think the political will is there," Sen. James Meeks, D-Chicago, said at a state Capitol news conference.

He and Rep. David Miller, D-Calumet City, are spearheading the effort through identical pieces of legislation, Meeks' Senate Bill 750 and Miller's House Bill 750.

Under the legislation, the individual income tax rate in Illinois would rise from the present level of 3 percent to 5 percent - a hike of 66 percent. The corporate income tax rate would rise from its present level of 4.8 percent to 8 percent - also a hike of 66 percent.

In addition, the state sales tax would be expanded to cover consumer services, such as lawn care and haircuts. The plan also calls for $2.7 billion of property tax relief throughout Illinois.

Supporters say the measure would:

?Generate a net revenue increase of more than $5 billion a year.

?Provide downstate schools with more than $700 million in additional funding every year.

?Set up a more reliable method of paying off the state's pension debt by establishing a flat-dollar amount - at least $3 billion - that would be paid annually over a 50-year period.

Meeks said the plan is "designed to reform the way we fund education here in the state of Illinois, taking the burden off of our property taxpayers.""Education funding is a statewide problem, and it has been for a long time," Miller added. "We've had enough time to talk about it."

Even if the new proposal eventually wins approval in the Senate and House, it would face an uncertain future at the hands of Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

"The governor has been very clear in his opposition to raising the income tax or sales tax," said Blagojevich spokeswoman Rebecca Rausch.

Blagojevich agrees with Meeks, Miller and their coalition about the need to increase funding for public education, she said. The governor also agrees that Illinois' existing tax structure must be fixed, but he believes the problem is that individual taxpayers are unfairly burdened, Rausch added.

Meeks said he thinks the Senate and the House could muster enough votes to override a potential veto from Blagojevich.

Overriding any veto requires a three-fifths majority vote in the Senate and the House. Democrats hold 37 of the 59 seats in the Senate, so in theory they could override a veto without the help of Senate Republicans.

In the House, however, Republicans would have to provide some of the votes needed for an override.

House Republicans from central Illinois expressed skepticism Thursday about the newest school funding plan.

"I think all that stuff's dead on arrival because the governor has made it clear he's not going to raise any sales or income taxes," said Rep. David Leitch, R-Peoria.

"There's probably more questions than answers," said Rep. Bill Mitchell, R-Forsyth. "If it was easy, we would have done it a long time ago."

"We need to do something," said Rep. Raymond Poe, R-Springfield. But he added that he isn't sure if the Meeks-Miller legislation is the solution.

Besides Meeks, Miller and some of their fellow lawmakers, backers of their proposal include the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability, A-Plus Illinois, Voices for Illinois Children, the Illinois Federation of Teachers and Council 31 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.

"All school districts across the state (would) get an increase in funding," said Ralph Martire, executive director of the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability. "No school district loses a penny."

Martire noted that "the bottom 60 percent of income-earners will not pay more in taxes" if the legislation becomes law. He said the remaining 40 percent of income-earners would pay more - about 1.1 percent to 1.3 percent of their income.

Adriana Colindres can be reached at 782-6292 or adriana.colindres@sj-r.com.

---

Reader Comments - 14 comments

Unfair taxation wrote at 2/9/2007 7:58:35 AM

This tax-increase would hit low-income persons A LOT harder than others. Why? Simply because the relief is based on property ownership. Those who rent homes probably aren't the ones who'll benefit from this (unless they actually own some taxable property separate from where they live); but they WILL pay the increased income tax. I really hate to say it, but I would have to support a veto. OUCH! it really hurts me to have to agree with our non-resident Governor.

Curious wrote at 2/9/2007 7:59:24 AM

So obviously my income tax is going to be increased. Is it now just a matter of whether the money goes to the state coffers for universal healthcare or for education? What makes the bottom 60%? Are the people who make a household income of $50K - $100K going to be the ones carrying the load for the rest of the state again?

Dave wrote at 2/9/2007 8:17:21 AM

Is this a joke? Now we are going to tax services? Gotta love those Democrats spend, spend, spend on giveaway programs and then come back and try to justify new taxes to fund education. How about tightening up the purse strings, cutting ineffective programs and re-allocating monies being wasted to cover educational expenses?

Paul H wrote at 2/9/2007 8:25:17 AM

Let's see. Give property tax relief and tax more goods and services while raising income tax. Sounds like tax the poor and give relief to the rich. Are these guys really Democrats? Aren't they supposed to tax the rich? Ha Ha Ha...

anon wrote at 2/9/2007 8:34:47 AM

The problem with education funding is not that there isn't enough money--it is how that money is spread around. Some districts spend $20,000 per pupil every year and some spend $5000. Why do rich districts need more money? They don't! We need to make it so that every child gets a good education, an equitable education, no matter where they live.

Survivor:Illinois wrote at 2/9/2007 8:50:03 AM

So when do the pay increases come along so we can afford to pay all the increases in utilities, taxes and fees? No rest until the middle class is gone.

Ashrak wrote at 2/9/2007 8:50:30 AM

Will renters be hit hardest or will this legislation force rents down as a result of property tax relief on behalf of the owners? Will owners be allowed to keep rents at their current levels to offset their increase in income taxes? Most people rent because they cannot afford to buy right? So then, this angle without legislating in rental property hits the poor hardest right? I am all for backing off property taxes ( I believe it to be a communist endeavor because basically it means you can never own land outright) but let's look at this in a realistic way. All I can say is that this is what happens when we are overtaxed by layers and layers of taxes and over legislated by layers and layers of legislation. Simplify the tax code, reduce the footprint of Government and many problems like this one don't exist.

Paul H wrote at 2/9/2007 8:57:15 AM

One word to improve education. VOUCHERS. Teachers unions won't allow that but it works. That way every student gets the same amount to spend.

Paul H wrote at 2/9/2007 9:08:39 AM

Education funding can be spread out with vouchers. Not that it will happen but, it should be put on the table.

anonymous wrote at 2/9/2007 9:13:08 AM

Maybe we need a constitutional amendment making the personal income tax progressive.

The Whole Story wrote at 2/9/2007 9:17:52 AM

It's understandable why some commenters above think this proposal would hit the middle class and poor harder, because Colindres, usually a very good reporter, missed an important fact in this article. From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch story on the same news conference: "The bill would provide $900 million in tax relief to middle and low-income families to offset the increases in income and sales taxes."

The Dude wrote at 2/9/2007 9:39:04 AM

Eliminate the government monopoly on education and the corrupt political influence between teacher labor unions, construction labor unions (building more scholls that are NOT needed), and our elected officials. Make them compete rather than increase taxes. Make them lower their costs and improve their product.

FSW wrote at 2/9/2007 9:42:59 AM

So many different options to choose from. I know that our leaders will be able to navigate the different plans and choose one that will benefit the people of Illinois.

anonymous wrote at 2/9/2007 9:56:44 AM

Plan and simple for education support - those that have kids, pay; those that chose not to have kids get a break.

---

Post your comment 150 words maximum

Comments may be screened before being posted. More information.

Name:

Comment:

150 words maximum. Current word count