-- Connecting the dots between our economy, government and business --
This is from 2017 but still fits.
SIGN UP HERE FOR FREE WIREPOINTS DAILY NEWSLETTER
FOLLOW US
WIREPOINTS ORIGINAL STORIES
Totaling the unsustainable tax increases and windfall revenue during Pritzker Administration – Wirepoints
May 26, 2026
26 Comments
With $162 billion more from taxpayers, couldn’t you deliver a few bond upgrades, too
Audio and summary Why the Holdup Using Artificial Intelligence to Cut Illinois Government Costs? – Wirepoints
May 19, 2026
10 Comments
A largely unasked question is becoming glaring: Is Illinois doing all it should to use artificial intelligence to make government cost less and work better? So far, the evidence says no.
Note to readers from Mark Glennon re: Ukraine
May 6, 2026
4 Comments
Everybody needs a side hustle these days, and mine is Ukraine, where I am now.
Even in the event of bankruptcy or implied bankruptcy bondholders are protected by being able to get 90% of future sales tax revenue for up to 40 years. Jeanne Ives speech at the City Club (youtube) starts at approx minute 34 explains this some more. I believe this applies to only home rule communities and if you are aware there was a push for home rule in towns of 5,000 or more down from 25,000 now. This would protect more bondholders across the state. Will bankruptcy help or harm taxpayers more is the question? Saving money for municipalities by reorganizing… Read more »
You are dead right. We were the only ones writing about that horribly bill authorizing securitization as it’s called — selling off public body parts. One of our many articles is here: https://wirepoints.org/unbelievable-illinois-house-votes-with-senate-to-hand-over-public-assets-to-bondholders-wirepoints-original/ Ives was the first one to challenge it in the legislature. Rauner vetoed it but the Dems buried it into the 1,000 page budget bill to make it law. Whether bankruptcy would help any municipality is a case by case matter, but this bill raises the risk of “assetless bankruptcies,” which are catastrophic.
Federal bailout only if people go to jail.
I wonder where the idea of needing a “grand compromise” with Republicans keeps coming from. The mega-super-majority the Dems have makes the thought meaningless, even if the usual suspects don’t roll over and give in. What am I missing?
I think you’re correct Daniel. The Dems don’t need Republicans.
Ah, I see this is from 2017 – before the great slaughter of Illinois Republicans
Yes, my error for overlooking the date.