A Response to Foster & Jackson’s “The Politics of Public Budgeting in Illinois”

New Illinois rejects the findings of a recent study by the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute that

calls into question the legitimacy and feasibility of the state split movement. Authors John L.

Foster and John S. Jackson make flawed judgments that allow them to make claims going far

beyond what the data could support.

The study uses economic data from the Legislative Research Unit of the Illinois General

Assembly. Foster and Jackson mention, but proceed to ignore, issues the LRU warns about in the

The media and others analyzing the split movement will be wise to be aware of those other

issues. The reality is that there is much more to the split movement. People long for

representative government and to be free from Illinois’ legendary corruption. It never enters the

authors’ minds that for some leaders, the pursuit of a state split is not a political gimmick but a

commitment to their constituents.

___________

The Foster and Jackson study focuses on the raising and distribution of revenue in the State of

Illinois. We are responding to this study because, as stated above, the authors scorn the state split

movement, of which New Illinois is a part.

• Large portions of the state’s revenues and disbursements are excluded from the report.

• Only about 80% of the General Funds revenue collections and 71% of disbursements

could be estimated.

• Data by county do not always accurately show where revenue was collected, or

disbursements took place (e.g. numbers based on address of company headquarters).

• Large state facilities, such as universities, mental health institutions, and prisons, provide

for regional and even statewide needs, not just the county where it is located.

• Capital spending is not included because little comes from the General Funds.

The study mentions these warnings, but nevertheless uses the data to determine specific ratios by

We don’t argue that wealthier areas, such as the Chicago suburbs, pay more and get less back.

We argue that the study’s claims exceed what the data can support. We further argue that it

overlooks other significant factors in the downstate economic situation.

One major source of analysis is sorely missing from this study: how much state mandates drive

up costs for downstate Illinois. These costs would be reduced dramatically in a new state under a

new constitution. For example, the pension rules mandated by the state are bankrupting many of

our cities. The statehouse, run by Chicago, sets the rules and cities across the state are forced to

play by them. Other factors include Illinois’ collective bargaining laws, some of the strictest in

Also, the study didn’t include information on who benefits from the big, expensive pensions in

this state. In general, they don’t go downstate but to wealthier districts in the Chicago area.

One study detail has been cited frequently in media coverage about the state split movement and

is used to question the movement’s feasibility. Table 8 of the Foster & Jackson study splits

Illinois into 6 sections and shows that Cook County gets back 90 cents on the dollar, the collar

counties 53 cents, downstate (collectively) $1.69, and the 19 southernmost counties $2.81.

While we question the study’s numbers, there is no question that the contrast between 90 cents

and $2.81 catches people’s attention. However, forming a state from the 19 southernmost

counties is not our goal. Rather, we advocate for the other 101 Illinois counties becoming a new

New Illinois’ Version of Table 8

In fact, much of this analysis is not an economic study but a psychological study of Illinois

voters, using Paul Simon polling data to measure public perceptions about whether each region is

getting their “fair share.” We question, not their polling numbers, but their interpretation.

It is simplistic to attribute the perennial desire for separation to economic perceptions or

misperceptions only. Their own polling shows that, statewide, 70% of respondents believe state

government doesn’t pay attention to what people in their community think. Statewide, a majority

believe the government doesn’t represent their values.

distribution lens, Foster & Jackson don’t see that people outside of Cook County chafe at a lack

of representative government. Nowhere is room made for other factors, such as laws reflecting

the interests of Cook County but not the rest of the state, cultural differences, high taxes,

government debt, or a legitimate, natural response to a corrupt government. These are reasons

people in northern places, like wealthy Lake County, support a state split—not regional

resentment. Nowhere do the authors consider that factors fueling Downstate frustration may be

some of the same things fueling the massive exodus of people from all over the State of Illinois.

G. H. Merritt, Chairman, New Illinois

Paul Durr, New Illinois St. Clair County Committee