Breaking News Bar
updated: 9/21/2012 4:30 PM

Jackie Burleson: Candidate Profile

60th District Representative (Republican)

hello
Success - Article sent! close
  • Jackie Burleson, running for 60th District Representative

      Jackie Burleson, running for 60th District Representative

 

 

 

Order Reprint Print Article
 
Interested in reusing this article?
Custom reprints are a powerful and strategic way to share your article with customers, employees and prospects.
The YGS Group provides digital and printed reprint services for Daily Herald. Complete the form to the right and a reprint consultant will contact you to discuss how you can reuse this article.
Need more information about reprints? Visit our Reprints Section for more details.

Contact information ( * required )

Success - request sent close

Note: Answers provided have not been edited for grammar, misspellings or typos. In some instances, candidate claims that could not be immediately verified have been omitted.

Jump to:

BioKey IssuesQ&A

 

Bio

City: Waukegan

Website: http://www.jackieburleson.org

Office sought: 60th District Representative

Age: 59

Family: Married for 40 years, three sons, one grand-daughter.

Occupation: Construction

Education: Candidate did not respond.

Civic involvement: Candidate did not respond.

Elected offices held: Candidate did not respond.

Have you ever been arrested for or convicted of a crime? If yes, please explain: No

Candidate's Key Issues

Key Issue 1

Jobs

Key Issue 2

Taxes

Key Issue 3

Our children

Questions & Answers

How would you fix the state's pension gap? Should pension costs be shifted to suburban school districts? Why or why not? Should this issue be voted on in a lame-duck session? Why or why not? How can partisan gridlock be eased to solve the crisis?

I would divide the problem into 5, ten and 15 year periods and solve them in that order, with the last solution being an individual 401K type retirement fund; and interrupting the first categories members retirement as little as possible, as they have earned those benefits. If you worry about $130 billion dollar problem being fixed tomorrow, you will never solve the problem. Let's work on getting through the next 5 years, then the next 10, then the problem completely. No I would not shift the costs to suburban school districts at this time. As a home-owner, the majority of my taxes are already going to our local schools. To think that the home-owners have unlimited deep pockets is just another example of how out of touch our current Springfield occupiers are. I believe that any lame-duck session vote for any legislation should require a 3/5th's majority vote. This would insure that only much needed actions were passed, and on a bi-partisan basis.

How, specifically, would you cut the budget? What does Illinois need to do to fix its status as a "deadbeat state?" How will you vote on future gambling bills? What is your view of slots at racetracks? Casino expansion?

1. Consolidation of bureaucracies and overlapping agencies. 2. The elimination of the Illinois Tollway Authority. (A road is a road, IDOT can handle it.) 3. RTA, CTA, PACE, Metra should be one agency, less subsidies. The obvious answer to fixing our status as a deadbeat state is to only make bills that we can pay. I personally am not a gambler and think in the long run, it actually hurts a community. However, I do feel this is an issue that the communities should deal with as they see fit. Cash operated slots okay, credit card operated - no. Expansion - per community approval.

What can you do specifically to help the economy in your district? How can you help create jobs in your district and statewide? What is your view of the tax breaks granted to companies like Motorola Mobility, Navistar and Sears?

I support incentives to Illinois businesses, large and small. I feel the tax breaks given to businesses will bring in more income from sales taxes, fees, income taxes and home ownership brought in by higher employment.Statewide I would hope voters would send people to Springfield who are not anti-business and would recognize that "they did build that", and not seek to punish success. As for the major subsidies, like the $100 million to Motorola, there should be requirements and accountability to the taxpayers. If these large subsidies are given, the company that receives them should be required to fulfill certain obligations to the state.

Do you favor limiting how much money party leaders can give candidates during an election? If elected, do you plan to vote for the current leader of your caucus? Why or why not? Do you support or oppose campaign contribution limits? Please explain.

I do not favor limiting who gives, but maybe a spending cap might be more appropriate. Yes, I will be voting for the current leader of my caucus. I believe he is doing a good job even with the impossible situation created by the current majority leader. I support the current $1,000 cap for donations. No one should be able to buy an election.

Should gay marriage be legalized in Illinois? Should it be voted on in a lame-duck session as civil unions were? Should Illinois define life as beginning at conception? How would you vote on a concealed carry plan? Should the death penalty return?

No, marriage is between a man and a woman. If legal issues are the reason co-habitants want married status, I think that there are other ways that legal equality could be achieved. Traditional family values are important to maintain, but an individual's rights to legal equality is important, also. I believe that any lame-duck session vote for any legislation should require a 3/5th's majority vote. This would insure that only much needed actions were passed, and on a bi-partisan basis. Life does begin at conception. Why would a vote be necessary to preserve life? In keeping with the preservation of life, I believe that the right to carry for the protection of the people we love and ourselves was granted in the United States Constitution. The current occupiers of Springfield have have advertised to criminals that our citizens are vulnerable and have no right to protect themselves. So yes I would vote for concealed carry. I believe that in life, circumstances do exist in which some individual's actions would be just cause for the death penalty; I do feel that it is a deterrent to crime.

Share this page
    help here