There are apparently some legal shenanigans going on in Lisle, Illinois. On June 6th of last year, Lisle trustees held a closed meeting to discuss refinancing the debt from the Lisle-Benedictine University Sports Complex. Critics charged that the “Village of Lisle needed to re-issue the bonds because there was not enough revenue to make the remaining payments.”
But the meeting was closed door which violated the Illinois Open Meetings Act. Lisle residents objected and demanded a recording of the illegal meeting. The village refused and thus began an expensive 9-month (and counting) legal battle.
On September 26, 2016, the Illinois attorney general’s office ruled in favor of Lisle residents leading the village to appeal. Meanwhile, some even called for prosecution of village officials.
On March 13th, 2017, the village dropped the appeal and released a 9-minute recording of the meeting. The problem with recording is that the meeting was over 20 minutes long.
The attorney general’s office is, for the second time, ordering the village to release the “verbatim recording” of the closed session. The village has not decided whether it will comply.
WalletHub recently released a brand new report ranking the tax burden of all 50 states. Guess which state has the highest taxes in the nation? Illinois. Yes, Illinois has the highest taxes in the entire country!
Yet, politicians meeting in Springfield are trying to figure out how to make taxes even worse, all because they don’t know how to balance a budget. Unbelievably, Illinois is over $108 billion in debt.
We need real change in Illinois. The Democrats are tax-and-spend. The Republicans are borrow-and-spend. Only the Libertarian Party advocates fiscal responsibility.
Come next election, tell the politicians in Springfield that you want real change. Come next election, vote Libertarian.
Two very important bills have been introduced in the Illinois Senate and House:
1) SB0063 – This Senate bill changes signature requirements for all political parties to place candidates on ballot. Sponsored by Sen. Kyle McCarter.
2) HB0762 – This House bill changes the vote threshold to become a political party, from 5% to 2%. Sponsored by Rep. Allen Skillicorn and Rep. David Welter.
If you have not already done so, please contact your State Senator and State Representative and let them know that you want them to support these bills.
You can find your representative’s contact information from here:
By Claire Ball
I have, yet, another reason to dislike my government.
Attention tax filers! Were you unfortunate enough to have to get health insurance through the Marketplace in 2016? While doing my friend’s taxes, I came across a new splinter starting with the 2016 tax year, courtesy of Obamacare. If you receive a 1095-A statement for your insurance and there are amounts in column C ‘Monthly advance payment of premium tax credit’, depending on your income, you might have to PAY those amounts back. Here’s how it works:
In column A is the monthly premium for the plan you received, in column B is the value of the second lowest cost ‘silver’ plan. Column C is what the government paid to the insurance provider towards your premiums on your behalf (a mini-subsidy if you will). Depending on your income and where you fall along the federal poverty line, this column C amount will result in either a credit that you can take on your return, or a charge that you have to pay back on your return. You really won’t know where you stand on this until you file your taxes for the year. Case in point – one of my loved ones, who works at a restaurant and goes to college, normally breaks even on her return, but this year had to pay more than $600 because of this. $600 that she did not have nor did she (or I) have any inkling she might have to pay. She lives paycheck to paycheck and is trying to get a college degree and pay the rent, but she earned too much, apparently.
By Ken Prazak
I see an increasing and disturbing trend, in my opinion, for those who align themselves with the libertarian name to choose an expedient path always involving more government. They seek what is “popular” and “practical”. Why push for legalization of drugs when to legalize crystal meth is not a popular position? Why then, should we even advocate our position against the initiation of force? After all, force is everywhere, it appears popular among politicians. If libertarians don’t advocate force, too, we will not be taken seriously.
I would remind those of you who grew up in the Fifties as I did, and suggest to those who are younger, that there were many things that Americans would have been absolutely, 100% against, and would have called it tyranny and un-American that is routine today. Public policy does change over time and what was thought unthinkable 60 years ago in some cases is considered mainstream today.
For example, routine roadblocks would have been thought of as only happening in Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia. Never happen in America.
Confiscation without due process of law–forfeiture laws would have been regarded the same. It is now routine in America.