Monday, August 24, 2009

Proft for Governor

This guy talks like I think. And sometimes can put in words. He is the most outstanding candidate who doesn't sound like a career politician.


August 24, 2009

Dan Wins Murphy/Dillard/Brady Pillowfight

Who Do You Want Taking the Fight to the Chicago 9?

The Illinois Republican Party has a historic opportunity to take back control of Illinois on behalf of the people who play by the rules and have borne the cost of a state government wired to benefit the politicians and the politically-connected at their expense.

However, House Speaker Mike Madigan and the other members of the Chicago 9 who have run Illinois into the ground will not relinquish power without a fight. This is serious business to them. They derive their incomes and their power from their control of public resources.

We need a conservative reform candidate for Governor who takes this as seriously as they do.

We need a conservative reform candidate for Governor who is willing to go toe-to-toe with the Chicago 9.

Who will lead this fight against Madigan’s minions for the GOP? I was asked this question after a campaign appearance yesterday afternoon.


We have three state senators who have had ample opportunity to distinguish themselves in Springfield.

They all claim to have “put in the good fight in Springfield.” So let’s look at the results:

In the last 10 years state spending has increased at 8 times population growth (in real terms). Unemployment is at a 25-year high and businesses are fleeing this state like it’s on fire because they cannot shoulder the tax and regulatory burdens imposed on them by state government.

If my opponents—Sens. Kirk Dillard, Bill Brady, and Matt Murphy—have been fighting the good fight, then they clearly aren’t punching their weight. They are not innocent bystanders.

Sens. Dillard and Brady have been in Springfield for the last 15 years. During that time, every major system in state government has deteriorated even as our taxes have gone up. Our K-12 school system is saddled with stagnant test scores and sagging graduation rates. Our economic climate has become increasingly hostile to business. We have disinvested in our transportation infrastructure, our comparative advantage. And we have the largest unfunded pension liability in the nation.

Against this backdrop, what bona fides do my opponents present as to why they should be Governor?

Sen. Dillard brags that he is “camera-ready and has enough charisma to make people want to listen to him”.

Sen. Brady offers that from his previous run for Governor in 2006 the only thing he learned was that Illinois is “a big state”.

Sen. Murphy believes he should be elected Governor because he “never met George Ryan”.

Is there anything in these routines that represent the kind of conservative reform leadership the GOP needs to be successful in 2010?

Do you think these empty bromides are how we take the fight to the Chicago 9, hold them accountable, and build non-traditional coalitions around issues of common interest to advance conservative reform and system-change ideas from rhetoric into reality?

By contrast, our campaign is putting forward system change ideas:

• The Chicago 9 want to raise taxes by 50%. I aim to cut the state income tax and the state corporate tax by 50% to spur entrepreneurship and economy growth.

• The Springfield political class—both parties—believe one-time spending cuts, video gambling, and regressive taxes are the way to balance the state budget. I believe we need to impose statutory spending caps on state government to permanently restrain the growth of government and get us off the hamster wheel of annual budget “crises”.

• The Springfield political class—both parties—are content to tinker on the margins of K-12 education, open up a few more charter schools and call that reform. I have offered a plan that will extend opportunity to low- to moderate-income families in Illinois whose children are relegated to schools we know will fail them. We invest in families not bureaucracies. We change how the money flow and who gets to make spending decisions and unleash the creativity that competition engenders.

Every GOP primary voter has a choice to make. Do they want more of the same or are they ready for something qualitatively different?


No comments: