Greg Brownfield
For State Representative
Blog
-
My Opponent's Divisive Politics
Posted Aug 15 at 8 PM
As some of you already know, my opponent is offering immigration proposals as a “solution” to our state budget crisis. At yesterday’s Tea Party event in Bartlett he said that he will soon introduce an Arizona-type bill that he claims will provide $4.2 billion savings on the state budget (here is our press release). He also appeared on Fox News Chicago in support of the movement to deny birthright citizenship by repealing the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution.
My last blog post highlighted wise advice from George Washington on this very topic, namely divisive partisan politics. The father of our country says that this type of politics is “truly the worst enemy” of a democratic government and explains why he thinks so:
“It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection.”
I will blog more extensively about this as soon as I have time. But, for now, I will simply say that I completely agree with George Washington and suggest that my opponent (and you) read this article from today’s Tribune.
Greg
-
The Father of our Country on Divisive Politics
Posted Aug 02 at 7 PM
On Saturday night, I spoke to a wonderful group of folks about our state budget and the extent to which partisan politics has prevented us from engaging in an honest search for the best solutions (this was also the subject of my last blog post). In the course of this discussion, I cited one of my favorite political documents of all time, namely George Washington's farewell address. The following excerpt is a clarion call from the Father of our Country about the unholy mess we find ourselves in today:
"I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.
This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.
The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the
minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.
It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit
for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume."George Washington, 1796
Greg
-
The Bi-Partisan Political Crisis
Posted Jul 30 at 11 AM
From the beginning of this blog, I have been writing about our State’s budget crisis and the grave risk this poses for our future. Sadly, we are further burdened with a bi-partisan political crisis where our “leaders” put the partisan blame game and self interest above urgent priorities such as jobs, education, and vital services. Indeed, my frustration over this politics-first/people-last approach from both parties is what led me to run for State Representative.
With this backdrop, I feel compelled to respond to a portion of my opponent’s July newsletter where he puts all of the blame for our State’s budget crisis on Democrats:
Republicans were not consulted or asked to participate in putting this budget together by either the Governor or the Speaker of the House. We had reform proposals to control state spending, restore accountability, create jobs, and ideas for areas to cut that we attempted to have considered time and time again only to be blocked by Speaker Madigan and the Democrats.
While I agree with the basic theory behind this statement (see below), there are many important facts that should be considered before we accept my opponent’s partisan assessment of this year’s unproductive General Assembly. Here are just a few of them:
1. My opponent blames the Speaker for the budget situation without noting that his own Party Leader in the House blocked Republican Representatives who were willing to participate in bi-partisan solutions. In other words, there was plenty of fault, political gamesmanship, and party “discipline” on both sides.
2. The quote above ignores the facts related to this year’s pension reform. For years, many Republicans have been calling for pension reform and Democrats played a big role in the bi-partisan effort to get it passed this year. Some commentators and editorial boards view this as the only significant progress that the 2010 General Assembly made toward dealing with the budget crisis. Indeed, the Senate Republican Leader hailed the bill “as a good first step in setting our state finances on the right track.” But instead of embracing this noteworthy example of Democrats acting on a Republican priority for reform, my opponent refused to support it (he voted “present”.)
3. In recent years, many Republicans, Democrats, good government groups, and editorial boards have called for elimination of the legislative scholarship program. This program costs about $13 million per year and it provides legislators with the temptation to reward political supporters or otherwise use the program to serve their own interests. A majority of House Democrats and Republicans voted for this reform proposal but my opponent voted against it.
4. Tribune columnist John Kass has been writing for years about “The Combine" of Illinois politics, where powerful elements of the Illinois Republican and Democratic parties unite for purposes of political corruption. Is there any doubt that power is the problem, not party affiliation?
But perhaps the most ironic thing about my opponent’s complaint is that he has received over $120,000 in campaign funds from the person most responsible for giving the Speaker so much power. Indeed, it was Republican powerbroker Pate Philip (former Senate President and my opponent’s step-father) who ushered in the rules that put rank-and-file members at the mercy of their chamber’s leader (here is an article that outlines the story behind these rules). Again, is there any doubt that power is the problem, not party affiliation?
I agree that my own party deserves criticism for not addressing the budget crisis and my decision to run for State Representative is grounded in a recognition that my party needs to refocus on its core values, especially putting the needs of real people above all else. Accordingly, I agree that we need to change the House rules so that potential solutions to our State’s urgent problems can rise or fall based on merit rather than political considerations. Finally, I suspect that I would agree with some of the reform proposals my opponent hints at in his newsletter.
But casting blame for political gain is a big part of what got us into this mess and I hope my opponent will join me in the always-useful process of first thinking about the sins of our own respective parties. If so, perhaps we can do a better job of putting aside the political blame game so that we can have an honest debate about the best solutions for our urgent problems.
Greg
If you haven't read Adam Doster's article - please do so here:
-
Hope
Posted Jul 14 at 7 AM
This past Sunday, I heard an interesting story on the radio as I was getting ready for church. Strange as it may sound, my pre-church routine includes listening to Rick Edelman's investment show on WLS. This week he commented about how sad it was that only 20% of this year's Harvard MBA class signed a pledge to serve the greater good, rather than solely focusing on the profit motive.
Then, when I went to church, my pastor preached on the Good Samaritan story, including an anecdote about how her medically trained daughter had rushed into a dangerous situation to save a drunk driver who had just crashed. My pastor noted that all doctors take the Hippocratic Oath and used this as an example of how we are all called to serve others, regardless of our profession and regardless of whether or not the other person is one of our peers.
This got me to thinking about the Harvard MBA story so I googled it when I got home and found this. In recognition of the ethical risks and societal dangers of solely relying on the profit motive, a group of Harvard MBA students started a movement that seeks to make it a standard practice for MBAs to take an oath similar to one that doctors take. These students recognize that business can be a tool for serving the greater good but that it can also be used in ways that cause societal detriment, a detriment that stems from excessive focus on narrow and selfish interests.
The more I think about this story, the more it gives me hope.
In Illinois, our political system has long been a tool for serving narrow and selfish interests. And if a group of young Harvard MBAs can see the importance of using business to serve the greater good, isn't time for our political leaders to follow suit? Clearly so, and I'm hoping that a new wave of business and political leaders can work hand-in-hand in service to the greater good.
Interestingly, the scripture that my pastor focused on is followed two chapters later with the admonition that "when a man has a great deal given to him, a great deal will be demanded of him" (Luke 12:48). It seems to me that this wise teaching puts a great deal of responsibility on business and political leaders. Accordingly, we need more folks in business and in politics who are willing to work together in service of the greater good. I
am very pleased to learn that a group of young Harvard MBAs will be joining us in this effort.Greg
Here again, is the link to the Harvard MBA story.
-
Tough but Necessary Choices
Posted Jun 29 at 3 PM
Here's another update to my blog from a few weeks ago on borrowing to pay our pension liability, this time from Eric Zorn of the Chicago Tribune. Again, it's easy to sit back and do nothing while criticizing the tough but necessary choices that a true leader would make.
Read Eric's blog post here. If you have thoughts that you want to share with me, please click here and do so!Greg
-
Blog Updates - Leadership and Borrowing
Posted Jun 15 at 12 PM
Update: Last week I blogged on the issue of borrowing to fund the state pensions and the leadership it takes to make tough choices. Yesterday, the Sun Times Editorial Board reiterated the basic point from my blog; borrowing is a bad option but when the alternatives are worse, a true leader will step up and take the heat for supporting something that is unpopular. Here is the link to the complete SunTimes editorial.
Update: Last month I blogged about members of the general assembly ignoring the most important part of their job (dealing with tough choices, particularly the budget crisis) as a
deliberate strategy to enhance their own electoral prospects. The State Journal Register from Springfield, reiterated this point today. Here is the link to their editorial.Greg
-
Wanted: Leaders (Not Politicians)
Posted Jun 08 at 7 AM
Yesterday I read an article that neatly summarizes a concern we often hear about from you, the voter and community member. The author wrote about the problems in DC but everything he says applies equally to what we have been seeing from the Illinois General Assembly.
In particular, the following excerpt is apropos to our own leadership crisis:
For years we have heard politicians from both parties talk about the need for Social Security reform. But it's called the third rail of politics: "You don't touch it."
So Congress passes the buck each year, because no one in either party wants to be a true leader and take on the issue. We need to get it done. It is clear that we are in store for a heap of trouble down the road, but with folks today protecting their political jobs, nothing gets done.
We are seeing exactly the same thing in Illinois with our budget crisis. Instead of doing the problem-solving work we pay them for, the General Assembly “punted” on real solutions and narrowed the debate to an unholy choice between additional borrowing and skipping the payments to our state pension systems. Then, after backing Gov. Quinn into this nonsensical choice, his opponents have constructed an ad campaign around his willingness to accept the bad option (borrowing) over the horrible one (not funding the pensions).
In my opinion, this situation demonstrates an extremely admirable quality on one side and a complete lack of it on the other. Gov. Quinn made a tough choice that would make things better for real people. And he did so knowing that his opponents would spin his principled choices into bumper-sticker “logic” for their negative campaign.
Don’t get me wrong—borrowing is a bad option. But when bad meets horrible, there’s only one thing that a responsible person can do (and it has nothing to do with punting).
I applaud Gov Quinn for having the guts to make the right choice even though it provided his unscrupulous opponents with material for their bumper stickers. More importantly, I believe that it exemplifies the author's conclusion:This nation is crying out for men and women of conscience and principle to stand up, make a clarion call to lead and then do it. But as long as we're willing to accept impotent politicians, the next generation will still be howling about fixing the messes we see right now.
Greg
Here is the link to the entire Roland Martin article, Voters Want Leaders, Not Politicians.
-
Earning Their Pay and Your Vote
Posted May 14 at 1 PM
As most of you know, I have been talking about our State's budget crisis from the beginning of my campaign. Yesterday I read an insightful article about this mess and the following excerpt perfectly illustrates one aspect of my angst:
This being an election year, lawmakers haven't had the stomach to address the problem with a tax hike, massive cuts from other parts of the budget, or a combination of both. What they appear intent on doing instead, when they return to Springfield later this month, is to stall the issue until after the November elections, giving Gov. Pat Quinn the authority to spend whatever the state has, wherever he sees fit.
The suspicion among many (verbalized privately by some lawmakers) is that they'll pass a tax hike once they're safely re-elected.
Tragically, the excerpt above illustrates that many of our incumbent politicians are trying to protect themselves by hiding from tough choices until after the election. We tend to accept this as "normal" but when you stop and think about it, this is outrageous. Most of us know that we would get fired for not doing our jobs and many of our incumbent politicians are operating on the opposite assumption, namely that the best way for them to stay in office is to avoid their most important responsibilities. Indeed, the State budget crisis is probably the most important issue that any of our incumbent legislators will ever face, which makes this year's run-and-hide stampede particularly revolting.
This situation reminds me of something I learned in law school; when applicable, the doctrine of caveat emptor ("let the buyer beware") dictates that a buyer is responsible for fully examining the product before the sale and, in turn, finalizing the sale passes responsibility for any defects to the buyer.
As voters, we have much to complain about. But if we don't fully examine the product before the election, won't we bear much of the responsibility for any resultant defects?
So far, none of the cut-only politicians have shown their math homework on the $13 billion deficit. They have various creative ways to avoid basic math, including (1) offering "examples" of what they would do that don't even come close to $13 billion, (2) complaining that Speaker Madigan won't listen to their ideas but not offering specifics that actually add up to anything close to $13 billion, and (3) bald-faced dishonesty about the painful cuts that would be required without new revenue.
In order to help such politicians with their math homework, the Illinois Policy Institute (IPI) drafted a comprehensive and detailed plan that tackles the budget crisis without an income tax increase. But for all their bravado about taxes, the cut-only politicians "cut and run" when it comes to the specifics of the IPI plan. This is not too surprising because the IPI plan offers extremely painful cuts such as additional cuts to education and social services (beyond those in Gov. Quinn's 2011 budget proposal), along with highly questionable choices such as selling the Illinois Tollway, massive job cuts, and higher property taxes (because the plan eliminates distributions of state income tax to local government).
Particularly in this time of crisis, we need more leaders who are willing to face our problems-not more politicians who scurry like cockroaches when someone turns the light on. Please join me in demanding that our incumbents honestly address the budget problem before they ask for our vote.
Greg
-
Give Us A Real Budget - Not a Credit Card Bill
Posted Apr 25 at 4 PM
In response to the recent budget rally in Springfield, the Sun Times ran an article with the title "Give us a real budget, not a credit card bill." The article, which reiterates the paper's call for a 2% increase in the state's income tax rate, is part of a growing chorus that includes the right-leaning Civic Federation and even former Republican Governor Jim Edgar.
Tax increases should never be on the table unless there are no other reasonable options. But as the recent cuts in U-46 so painfully demonstrate, the absence of new revenue will have catastrophic consequences, including shocking cuts to education.
The folks who are reflexively anti-tax need to be honest with voters about the full extent of deep cuts and fiscal irresponsibility (e.g. continuing the practice of not paying the state's bills) that would be required if there is no new revenue. They need to show that they have an actual plan (with details that add up) for keeping the state out of bankruptcy. And they need to explain how we can expect to have economic growth in the absence of educational opportunities that would enable the next generation to compete in a global marketplace.
Business-savvy organizations like Crain's and the major bond rating agencies have repeatedly warned about the extreme danger of our $13 billion budget deficit. In fact, Crain's warned, "without quick corrective action or a sharp economic upturn, Illinois is headed toward a governmental collapse."
When I consider these dire warnings and weigh all of the potential for bankruptcy, fiscal irresponsibility, economic stagnation, and other disastrous consequences, I can only agree with what the Sun Times said: we need deep budget cuts and other reforms but "basic math tells us that a tax increase must be part of the solution."
Speaking of basic math, here's an overview of how it goes: you generally get to choose from five options and your numbers must add up to $13 billion. The options are (1) borrowing, (2) under-funding the state pension system, (3) delaying payment on the state's bills, (4) budget cuts, and (5) tax increases. Options 1-3 are "credit card" schemes that will make the long-term problem even worse. Moreover, each of them invokes serious consequences such as the rising cost of interest (based on our poor bond rating), passing our debts to the next generation, and pushing small businesses and non-profits out of business by forcing them to wait many months for state payments. If you conclude that these options are therefore unpalatable and that tax increases are also not an option, you will need to cut $13 billion from an overall budget that is only a bit more than twice
that amount. To put such cuts in perspective, the entire state budget for K-12 education is about $7.5 billion, which means that even if you cut every penny of K-12 spending you'll still have $5.5 billion more to cut.As the Sun Times indicated, the math is pretty simple. Please join me in demanding that our "leaders" give us what we deserve-a "real budget" that actually solves the problem and an honest explanation of the details.
-
Beginning to Put Out the Fire
Posted Mar 30 at 4 PM
In case you missed it, our General Assembly recently voted for a major overhaul of our State pensions. There are lots of important details but the thing that really struck me was the provision that pushes teachers' retirement age from 55 all the way to 67. My first inclination was to think that I would have voted against the bill on this basis. Teaching is a high-burnout profession and there aren't many teachers who are at the top of their game at age 66. Also, I wondered how many top new graduates would want to teach in Illinois when surrounding states have much lower retirement ages.
But then I started to think about where we are and when the pain of various choices will hit. The provisions of the pension bill will only apply to new-hires, which means that the major impact of retirement at 67 won't hit for over 30 years. Even the less compelling argument about attracting new teachers isn't an immediate problem because recently RIFed teachers will fill many of the vacancies that arise over the next few years.
We do, however, face a "house on fire" budget emergency that requires immediate action. From everything I have read in the past few days, it appears that the pension reform will be a big help with the critical issue of our state's bond rating.
Also, while it's easy to sit back and say that our legislative leaders should not have pushed the bill through in one (very long) day, they were concerned that more time would have allowed various interests to defeat the bill via lobbying efforts. In other words, the risk of demanding further debate was that the bill would not pass or that it would have been too watered-down to make a difference.
For all of these reasons, I believe that the responsible choice was to vote in favor of the pension reform bill-despite its many imperfections.
I also believe that when the dust settles on our budget crisis, we will have the time and opportunity to fix any problems this pension reform creates. The first item on my list will be to make sure that our State's classrooms are staffed with energetic and enthusiastic teachers. This is a goal that almost everyone will share and I am hopeful that we can find creative solutions toward reaching it.
But first we need to put the fire out.
-
$13.5 Million Saved
Posted Mar 24 at 4 PM
The Chicago Tribune published an excellent editorial this week that outlines one of the most basic reasons our state is in fiscal crisis. I’ve said this before and I will say it again – I reject the concept of legislative service where legislators cast themselves in the role of gift-givers who reap the benefit of their largess and then use budget tricks to avoid telling voters that they have to pay for it. Tellingly, this concept even to self-styled spending hawks that do everything they can to bring “bacon” back to their home districts.
Along these lines, here’s what the Tribune had to say about the “scholarships” that legislators dole out each year:
Yes, there are lawmakers who award the scholarships based on merit or financial need. But the abuses are shameless and widespread. Anyone who takes the time to scrub the public documents can find dozens of examples in any given year, and the bad apples are brazenly unapologetic. The law allows them each to award two four-year tuition waivers a year, no questions asked, and they’ve come to regard the scholarships as theirs. Why would they want to change that?
The scholarship program embodies the worse of what’s wrong with Illinois government: It’s poisoned by clout and fiscally irresponsible. The General Assembly doesn’t fund the scholarships; the universities absorb the cost, despite the state’s ever-dwindling contribution to higher education. Last year, the scholarships cost the schools $13.5 million.
The editorial went on to note that “the House bill to abolish the program passed by a solid 80-36.” The incumbent Representative for the 55th District, was one of the 36 who voted to preserve the status quo.
In general, I support the idea of scholarships based on merit and need. But in this time of budgetary crisis, I believe that we need to focus on what’s good for the state as a whole, not the non-essential benefits that each of us might hope to receive. Indeed, I believe that the intellectually honest path towards fiscal responsibility requires a legislator to say “no” to all but the most critical spending, even when the non-critical spending is for his own constituents.
In short, I completely agree with the Tribune’s Editorial Board; the legislative scholarship program “embodies the worst of what is wrong with Illinois government; It’s poisoned by clout and fiscally irresponsible.” As such, I believe that the program should be completely abolished.
Greg
-
Can We Accept Massive Cuts to Education?
Posted Mar 17 at 12 AM
The devastation at Monday night's U-46 School Board meeting was massive and wide-spread. The anguished pleas of so many students, parents, and staff permeated the packed auditorium with anxiety. Then, after much of the crowd had left, the Board made it official by voting for one budget-slashing resolution after another.
The painful result is significantly less educational opportunity for our children and "pink slips" for over 1,000 community members.
Many of the speakers offered opinions about how we got here but, in my opinion, one of them got it exactly right; she said that we need to focus on what we can do about it now and look for ways to solve this problem together.
I couldn't agree more and that's why my campaign team and I are working very hard on this issue, including our participation with a Facebook group ("House on Fire") that serves as an organizing tool for members of the U-46 community.
Unfortunately, we face an uphill battle that starts with duplicity and disrespect. With an election in November, many of our State Representatives would prefer not to tell voters about the painful choices we must make in order to solve the problem. In some cases, this leads them to point fingers without offering any solutions of their own or to offer fairy-tale "solutions" that have zero chance of balancing the budget. In other cases,
they simply want to avoid telling us about the hard choices until after we vote. These scenarios remind me of an unscrupulous used car salesman who will do or say anything to "make the sale."Worse still, their willingness to delay solutions reveals a horribly misplaced sense of priority. At a time when thousands of people are losing their jobs, when our children are facing diminished educational opportunities and when lots of needy folks are losing vital services, too many of our elected leaders are focused on electoral warfare instead of the
service they are supposed to provide.In my opinion, this is the exact opposite of how things should be and we need to take responsibility for the change we desperately need. Indeed, if ignoring a crisis allows someone to win an election, what does that say about us as voters?
The only way to deal with this situation is to send our State Representatives a clear message; we elect them to serve and if they refuse to do so in this time of crisis, we will gladly send them to the end of the long unemployment line that they helped to create.
Greg
P.S. Please visit the House on Fire Facebook page and join in the take action measures in the coming weeks. We are greater together.
-
U-46 Budget Cuts and The State Funding Crisis
Posted Feb 18 at 11 AM
This past Friday, I attended the U-46 budget meeting and legislative forum but did so as a concerned parent of two U-46 students, not as a candidate for State Representative.As a parent, my biggest concern is the SWAS (gifted) program. My oldest daughter Olivia has absolutely thrived in SWAS and we can’t imagine life without it. My family would be devastated if SWAS ever gives way to budget cuts.
Sadly, many parents, children and staff have already felt such devastation. Indeed, I have seen this at many of the recent U-46 board meetings where various groups of parents have pleaded with the Board to save the things that are most important to their children.
All of this came to a head on Friday, when we learned (1) that U-46 is planning to cut up to $40 million from its budget and (2) that the political stalemate in Springfield will probably result in an additional $19 million in U-46 budget cuts. With this news, it appears that nothing will be safe from the deep cuts that will affect every single child in U-46 schools.
Although it’s clear that there have been some serious problems within in U-46 itself, the current U-46 crisis is largely a product of the dysfunction in Springfield. Several experts have described Illinois as being on the verge of bankruptcy and some have suggested that our State is nearing a tipping point from which we might not recover. If these dire predictions come true, the current budget crisis in U-46 will just be the beginning of a long and painful struggle for our children and their education.
At the State level, the basic problem is a have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too philosophy by lawmakers from both parties; it’s easy to curry favor with voters by passing laws that cost money (something that every single lawmaker has done) but it’s not so easy to follow up by telling voters that they have to pay for everything. The long-term result of this philosophy is our State’s current $13 billion budget deficit and our $80 billion debt to the State pension funds.
The incumbent Representative in the 55th District showed up for the third hour on Friday and I sincerely complimented him for being one of the few legislators who were brave enough to do so. But when it came time to address the State funding crisis, his non-specific response was that we can balance our State budget without cutting education, without cutting social services, and without raising taxes. This is an example of the “have your cake” philosophy that has ruled in Springfield for many years and simple math demonstrates that it is not true.
By necessity, the incumbent’s firm anti-tax stance would require painful and/or irresponsible choices such as: (1) deep cuts to K-12 education, (2) deep cuts to higher education, (3) deep cuts to social services, (4) deep cuts to other aspects of state government, including the prison system, (5) continuing our State’s fiscally irresponsible practice of not paying its bills, (6) continuing our State’s fiscally irresponsible practice of passing the buck to our children by borrowing vast sums of money and by vastly underfunding the state pensions, and (7) shedding over 100,000 jobs, which would put many more Illinois families at risk of poverty.
I care more about these things that I do about a modest tax increase. And I care more about telling voters the truth than I do about traveling the path of least resistance toward winning an election. Finally, I care about making the smartest policy choices and am completely disgusted by the partisan battles that prevent this.
Sadly, the budget stalemate in Springfield is all about partisan warfare. Privately, many Republicans acknowledge that there is no way to we can solve our State’s budget crisis without some sort of a tax increase (GOP candidate Jim Ryan openly acknowledged this fact before he became a candidate for Governor). But the two parties can’t reach a budget “deal” because each side is thinking about how the “tax” issue would play out in the next election.
You’d think that a crisis would bring our lawmakers together in a search for solutions but politics is obviously the first thing on their minds. For the reasons given above, I don’t believe that there is any reasonable way to balance the budget without a modest tax increase but there are lots of ways that traditional conservative ideas could be part of the process. Things like spending caps, pay-as-you-go requirements on new legislation, restrictions on unfunded mandates, and targeted tax cuts for small businesses that create new jobs should certainly be part of the discussion (and are all things that I would be willing to consider). But instead of reaching for the best ideas on both sides, our “leaders” remain stuck in their political gamesmanship.
This is why I was in Springfield yesterday and my meeting with education expert Jim Broadway left me feeling slightly more optimistic that we can avoid the disaster that would surely follow if we go one more year without addressing our fiscal crisis. More importantly, Jim’s most recent column provides an excellent suggestion for how we can send a clear message to folks in Springfield.
Please let us know what you think by e-mailing me at greg@gregbrownfield.org.
Thanks,
Greg
-
The Primary Election
Posted Feb 07 at 11 AM
Now that we've gotten past the primary and had a chance to catch our breath, I want to thank you for all of your hard work and support. I am very
fortunate to have so many enthusiastic people who are willing to work hard
toward bringing change to the Democratic Party and to Springfield.Speaking of hard work and change, I am very happy to report that my friend
Trudy Zaja's upstart campaign won the race for Hanover Township
Committeeman. (Cook County) Trudy is a grassroots-oriented Democrat who, like me, rejects insider politics and believes in doing what's right, not what's easy.I am encouraged by Trudy's race because it shows that hard work and
independence can prevail over incumbency. This will be very important in my race because my opponent is a connected insider who will continue to have access to the vast sum of money in Pate Phillip's war chest.As an independent Democrat and someone who does not benefit from having rich and powerful friends, I know that hard work is the only way I will have any chance in the fall. Accordingly, my team and I didn't take any time off after the primary and we're going to be walking the district with a
good-government message over the next three months. (more info here)
Thanks again for all of your assistance and support. If you would be
willing to help us in any way, please contact the campaign here.Greg
-
A Different Perspective
Posted Jan 14 at 9 PM
1/13/2010
Greg visits Bricklayers’ Training Facility
Two of the best things about running for State Rep are that I get to hear lots of different perspectives and learn lots of new things. Yesterday I visited the Bricklayer’s training facility in Addison, which gave me the chance to learn about the important behind-the-scenes role that trade unions play in serving the public good.
The Addison facility is entirely supported by union dues and the training is free to anyone who registers in the program (no student loans!). The 12 week program starts with classroom study and progresses to hands-on work where trainees actually build walls, set tile, etc. As I observed the class and toured the facility it was easy to see the pride of craftsmanship, the respect for hard work, and the concern for safety. And it doesn’t stop with trainees; the facility also serves as a professional development center where union members periodically refresh their training on safety and other aspects of the profession.
My reaction to this experience is to wonder how many people don’t have any idea how hard trade unions work behind the scenes to promote craftsmanship, hard work, and safety (other building trades have similar training programs). Yes, the up-front cost of hiring a union Bricklayer is greater than the cost of hiring a non-union counterpart. But, after today, I have a much better appreciation of the extra value that trade unions contribute to the common good. Indeed, the long list of contributions includes free training for young workers who will be productive taxpayers, safer workplaces, and quality construction.
One of the perspectives I occasionally hear from voters is a belief that unions no longer serve a useful purpose. As a former union member (14 years as a Teamster) and labor/employment lawyer (my first seven years as an attorney), I have personal experience with the important role that unions play and with the types of situations where they sometimes pursue short-sighted objectives. The trade unions’ behind-the-scenes efforts and their commitment to craftsmanship, hard work, and professionalism are a shining example of how much unions can contribute to the common good.
I applaud these efforts and welcome the opportunity to tell this story as part of my campaign.Greg
Greg Brownfield Candidate for State Representative, 55th District -
David Hoffman and the Primary
Posted Dec 16 at 4 PM
Last night (Monday, December 14), I hosted an event for David Hoffman, one of the leading candidates to fill Barak Obama’s former Senate seat. We had a lively crowd that packed our festive room at St. Andrews Country Club in West Chicago.
I enjoyed having the chance to speak to so many good folks and to get positive feedback about my campaign’s message of getting beyond politics-as-usual so that we can solve difficult problems and focus like a laser beam on the bread-and-butter issues that are at the top of most voters’ lists.
I also enjoyed having the opportunity to meet David Hoffman and hear his perspective. His command of policy and ability to answer tough questions was as impressive as his outstanding record of public service. In my mind, there is no question that he has the intelligence and experience to do the job. I realize that there are several good candidates in this race but I believe that it would be a mistake to pass over David without taking a serious look at what he has to offer (please follow this link to the Hoffman website).
Finally, please vote in the Democratic primary on February 2, 2010. The primary includes critical decisions about which candidates the Party will field in key races such as the race for Barack Obama’s former Senate seat and the race for Governor. And although I don’t have a primary opponent, your vote for “Gregory C. Brownfield” will be a big help to my campaign by generating momentum for the general election in November 2010.Greg
Follow this link to slideshow of the evening.
-
Greg goes to Springfield, files petitions
Posted Oct 26 at 8 AM
Greg drove down to Springfield yesterday in order to be in line when doors open for candidates to file their nominating petitions this morning. Over 2,000 district residents signed to ensure Greg gets on the ballot. Here, Greg binds the petitions in accordance with state filing requirements.
-
Greg meets voters at 10/16 house party
Posted Oct 26 at 8 AM
Following on the success of the September coffee, friend of the campaign Nazneen Hashmi hosted a Meet the Candidates house party on the 16th. Greg talked about how his experiences counseling unemployed middle-class families facing foreclosure moved him to run for the 55th District State Representative seat. Following remarks from all the candidates Greg had the chance to talk with the more than a dozen voters who attended.
