Some folks out there don’t like it when I call Public Education in Illinois a “Legalized Money-Laundering Scheme.” Sadly, it is a 100% accurate description of the legalized reaming of the Illinois taxpayer, all for the bloated payroll, perks, pensions and pork lathered on this fundamentally corrupt and powerful network of greedy unions, administrators, and the private interests that they have co-opted.

As more proof of the concept, I submit an article from today’s Tribune.

Schools districts may get state OK to issue bonds for buildings without voter approval
Appellate Court has barred practice, though many districts waltz around the ban anyway

Strapped for cash and taking their lumps on tax-increase measures, school districts in Chicagoland are increasingly skirting requirements for voter approval of building projects by issuing bonds that don’t require a referendum and then shifting that money from fund to fund.

Even after a state Appellate Court ruled last year that such maneuvers were improper, the Hinsdale Township High School District 86 board reached into a rainy-day fund for $4 million to install artificial turf at its two high school football fields.

Because the court held that another district inappropriately used working cash bonds on a building project, the Hinsdale board didn’t transfer the money directly. Instead it parked the cash in the district’s main education fund before moving it to building funds.

“Money-laundering,” one outraged school board member called it.

According to court filings, 95 school districts in Cook, DuPage and Will counties sold nearly $800 million in working cash bonds between 2000 and 2008 for building projects through these “back-door” means of avoiding referendums. Nearly 75 percent have been in Cook County.

…

State legislators are now considering a bill that would permit school districts to transfer working cash bond money to any school fund, allowing the controversial practice to become the norm. The legislation, which would be retroactive, was crafted by firms that specialize in school law and a nationally recognized bond counsel, Chapman and Cutler, which has advised schools on the practice.

State Rep. Paul Froehlich, D-Schaumburg, who served on a school board in Schaumburg District 54 from 1989 to 1993, voted against the bill, which was approved by the House and could come to a final Senate vote as early as Tuesday.

“I see it as an amnesty bill,” he said. “It’s giving amnesty to those school districts that didn’t follow the law.”

Critics of the legislation say a fund created to help districts pay bills when the state is late on its payments — as it is now — could be gutted by school districts with a proclivity to overspend. State Board of Education officials estimate 44 percent of districts will spend more than they take in this school year. As for taxpayers, the legislation would take away their right to vote down building projects through a referendum.

John Izzo, an attorney with Sraga Hauser, which represents about 100 of the state’s 869 school districts, helped draft the legislation and testified in favor of it in Springfield. He says the Appellate Court decision simply interpreted “an ambiguous provision” of the school code differently from how Chapman and Cutler and school attorneys had done in the past.

School districts could potentially be ordered to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions, in tax refunds if the law is not changed.

…

School district attorneys say if the legislation doesn’t pass, schools will continue the financing method whether it be as a two-step process, three steps or even four steps.

“If (the bill) doesn’t get passed, in the future, school districts will just do it a different way,” Izzo said. “It won’t change how they do it.”

That last line should tell you just how vile, greedy, and corrupt these districts, law firms, and bond churning scum truly are. They care nothing for the law, the taxpayer, or the economy that funds their money-laundering scheme.

They only care about funding their greed and gluttony. They day is coming when they will be defeated. Pigs get fat, Hogs get slaughtered, and it is time to slaughter this hog.

This just in from New Zealand…

Poll shows solid backing for GST rise if income tax cut

Herald readers have given the thumbs-up to Prime Minister John Key’s plan to raise the goods and services tax and cut income taxes.

They were asked, “What would you prefer? GST to be increased to 15 per cent but the rise to be compensated with a personal tax cut, or GST to remain the same but no tax cuts.”

Of the 1407 Aucklanders on the Herald’s online reader panel who replied, 56 per cent opted for higher GST with tax cuts.

Only 40 per cent chose the status quo, and 4 per cent were unsure.

____

As a nation, we need to cut Income Taxes and Payroll Taxes down to near zero, and increase and broaden consumption taxes. The fact is that we have to bring down the level of yearly deficits, and the nation needs the revenue growth that would come with the jump in economic growth from such a tax shift.

As for the increase in costs for the poor and middle class, we simply give every American a yearly stipend to cover that increase and use the stipend to start abolishing the collectivized welfare state. Once a yearly stipend is in place, you merely use that money for mandated health and retirement payments.

It’s so obvious and elegant that only a 3rd party could propose it. The Democrats and Republicans are too stupid.

It’s disgusting that this nation is so devoid of leadership that there is only one person in Congress willing to stand up and say what needs to be said. I suppose Tom Coburn is the only other person I can think of with the decency to be this honest.

Paul Ryan’s Lonely Challenge

WASHINGTON — Paul Ryan, a six-term Republican congressman from Wisconsin who is the ranking minority member of the House Budget Committee, has yanked himself from obscurity by doing something no one else in Congress or apparently the White House has done: design a specific plan to control long-term government spending and budget deficits. That he stands virtually alone is a damning commentary on our politics.

Many public policy problems are genuinely hard. How to guarantee job creation? Provide financial stability? Improve inner-city schools? There are no panaceas. By contrast, solutions to the long-term budget imbalance are obvious: cut spending or raise taxes. Given the predictable retirement of baby boomers, it was no secret that promised government benefits would overwhelm the existing tax base. This problem could have been fixed.

It hasn’t because our political culture is so wedded to public opinion that it can’t (or won’t) govern. To govern is to choose, and our leaders recoil from unpopular choices. Americans want generous benefits and low taxes, so that’s what the system — led by either Democrats or Republicans — provides.

…

Ryan rejects this consensus [of waiting for someone else to tackle the problems later]. He would make choices now. Here are some features of his plan:

– Social Security: For those 55 or older today, the program would remain unchanged. For those younger, benefits would be reduced — with no cuts for the poorest workers. Workers 55 or younger in 2011 could establish individual investment accounts that would be funded with part of their payroll taxes. Government would guarantee a return equal to inflation.

– Medicare: Current recipients and those enrolling in the next decade would continue under today’s program, though wealthier recipients would pay somewhat higher premiums. In 2021, Medicare would become a voucher program for new recipients (those today 54 or younger). With vouchers, recipients would buy Medicare-certified private insurance. In today’s dollars, the vouchers would ultimately grow to $11,000. Eligibility ages for Medicare and Social Security would slowly increase toward 69 and 70, respectively.

– Spending Freeze: From 2010 to 2019, “non-defense discretionary spending” — about a sixth of the federal budget, including everything from housing to parks to education — would be frozen at 2009 levels.

– Simpler Taxes: Taxpayers could choose between today’s system or a streamlined replacement with no deductions and virtually no special tax breaks. Above a tax-free amount ($39,000 for a family of four), taxpayers would pay only two rates: 10 percent up to $100,000 for joint filers and 25 percent on income more than that.

It’s time to attack the benefits. Attack because they are unsustainable. Attack because this mania about retiring at 55 is insane, and always has been. Attack because the retirement age, at 62 OR 65 is unsustainable.

It’s time to “man-up” America. It’s time to elect and support the Paul Ryan’s in Congress and in our state houses. It’s time to individualize the welfare state.