Totaling the unsustainable tax increases and windfall revenue during Pritzker Administration – Wirepoints
May 26, 2026
10 Comments
With $162 billion more from taxpayers, couldn’t you deliver a few bond upgrades, too
-- Connecting the dots between our economy, government and business --
Audio and summary 
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.
This type of activity can be stopped at the voting booths but as we know…Illinois voters love things this was as long as they get a few goodies along the way.
I’ve been told that voters are unable to change their voting habits and it’s just up to our politicians to do the right thing. So I guess we wait for elected leaders to change their ways instead.
Why didn’t the Rs do this 20 years ago? May have given the state a chance for survival.
They tried in the past and lost. You may not like “shell” bills but they aren’t going anywhere in Illinois.
The captain on the titanic was pretty optimistic too
Am I confident that the bill described in the article is constitutional? Not at all. Am I confident that the Illinois courts will continue to follow IL Supreme Court precedent and continue to allow “gut and replace”? Absolutely.
Interestingly ‘shell bills’ always favor the (D)’s…
Shell bills are blatantly unconstitutional…
But when you live in Illinoisistan, it does not matter…
The Illinois Supreme Court disagrees with you.
Thank you for making my point…
I pointed out that the Illinois Supreme Court decides constitutionality and not Joey Z. So your “blatantly unconstitutional” is completely false.
Courts view this as separation of powers—legislative procedure is the legislature’s domain. The Illinois courts defer to Enrolled Bill Doctrine.
Also, nothing about the “three readings” rule requires that the bill not change its contents.
I guess people only like “separation of powers” when their team is in charge.
I’m curious. How does a bill get “read” 3 times, when the entire contents of the bill have changed when it comes to the 3rd reading? It’s like saying I read The Great Gatsby 3 times, but the 3rd time I kept the title and substituted The Cat in the Hat for content. How did the ILSC square this circle?
The entire bill doesn’t get read. The constitution doesn’t require it. Reading the title of the bill is the only thing that needs to be read (3 different days) along with providing the final bill and any amendments to each legislator before final passage.
Is it sleazy? Yes. Is it constitutional? Also Yes.
Another democratic coup. Never ends