As for Chris Lauzen’s vote, that was the right vote. What other option is there? Should he have given in to the Senate Democrats demand of “raise taxes or we’ll shut down the government?”

Shutting down the government or raising taxes? Neither of those are wise moves. And the idea that you need to choose between them? Well that’s just a false choice. You can have a functioning state government without raising taxes.

The budget bill prevents a government shutdown and buys time to effect reform and cut spending.

You’re acting under an assumption that simply because Senator Noland is a Democrat that he represents the same fiscal ideology as others. Thus you place too much emphasis on the importance of political parties.

Recently Senator Noland voted ‘No’ one the budget that was just passed. Why? Because, it borrowed money to pay down the debt.

Senator Noland’s stance is one of fiscal conservatism because the bill he voted for DID call for budget cuts. In fact, $2.1 billion dollars worth of cuts including a cut in legislator’s pay.

However, we must also admit that there is a huge revenue problem in Illinois. Let’s look at Washington circa mid 1980s to early 1990s. We were facing massive deficits. Then President George H.W. Bush, in a effort to be bipartisan, sat down with Congressional Democrats and instituted Pay-Go.

It was a fairly simple concept. Simply put,all increases in direct spending or revenue decreases were to be offset by other spending decreases or revenue increases. Now many contribute the budget surplus enjoyed under the Clinton years to be a direct result of those fiscal measures.

The bill Senator Noland has continually supported in his email blasts, which I also receive, demonstrate that he wishes to pursue a similar approach with Springfield.

That’s a fairly responsible stance to take and I think, instead of focusing on the party title that follows his name, we should give credit where credit is due. The way we know that this is an issue over his party affiliation is because Senator Lauzen and others who associate themselves with the Republican Party have received a free pass with this recent bill that incurs more debt to settle this years debt.

Again, kudos to Senator Noland for being one of the few in the Senate that chose to exercise fiscal responsibility over political expediency.

The normal definition of fiscal conservatism is that if you go over budget, you cut spending to bring it back in line with your revenues. You don’t spend more than you have.

Senator Noland presents a false choice: either raise taxes or shut down the government. I hope it has occurred to him that you can also cut spending to bring it in line with revenues. Instead it’s raise taxes or we’ll shut down the government.

Isn’t this what we’ve all been gripping about for years? The state always is borrowing from here or there to make up for its short falls in the budget. I understand a need for oppositional politics, but sometimes it’s better to just fix it!

Kudos to Senator Noland for wanting to provide Illinois with a long term solution, instead of just delaying the budget problem a little longer.

The real question I would be asking is why did Conservatives like Senator Lauzen, Senator Radogno, Senator Rutherford, and Senator Althoff vote WITH Chicago Democrats to borrow more money to “balance” this year’s budget?