Grant Wehrli: Candidate profile, Illinois State House - 41st District

Republican incumbent Grant Wehrli of Naperville and Democrat Janet Yang Rohr are vying for the 41st state house district seat in the Nov. 3 general election.

Wehrli, a former Naperville City Council member from 2005 to 2014, has served the 41st state house district since 2014. In October 2018, he was made Assistant Minority Leader.

To explore his campaign website, visit grant4illinois.com.

The 41st House District includes parts of Naperville and Warrenville.

The Daily Herald asked the candidates a series of questions. Here are Wehrli's responses.

Q: Should Speaker Madigan resign from his leadership positions? If he does not resign, will you support him for a new term as House speaker?

A: In July, when Mike Madigan was implicated in the ComEd pay-to-play scheme, I was among the first to ask for his resignation as Speaker of the House and as Chairman of Illinois Democratic Party.

At a press conference a few days later, I called Madigan's breach of the public trust "despicable and irreparable."

I am a proud co-sponsor of HR 885, which would strip Mike Madigan of his title of Speaker of the House, and call for the election of a new Speaker. This legislation, which would include a vote of no confidence, is currently pending.

I have never, nor will I ever, vote for Mike Madigan for Speaker of the House.

I would encourage voters who want to get rid of Mike Madigan to follow the money and look at who is funding candidates. My opponent has already accepted well over a half-million dollars from campaign committees controlled by Madigan. That money comes with strings.

In exchange for funding her campaign, she will be expected to return the favor by voting to keep Mike Madigan in power next year. Voters have all the power here.

If they want to get rid of Mike Madigan, they need to stop electing people who are beholden to him and will vote for him as Speaker.

Q: What are the most important components that should be included in legislative ethics reform? What will you do to help them come to pass?

A: Right now I am listed as a sponsor of 14 different ethics reform bills. If I had to choose two that would provide the greatest positive impact, they would be term limits and fair maps.

Corruption grows over time as politicians grow their sphere of influence. If we had term limits for leaders in place, Mike Madigan would have been gone decades ago.

I am a Chief Co-Sponsor of HJRCA 12, which would limit the number of years any lawmaker could serve as legislative leader. Legislative leaders would be limited to serving for a total of eight years in any one position and 12 years combined in two or more positions.

With regard to fair maps, I have sponsored legislation to end gerrymandering every year I have been in office. Gerrymandering undermines our system of democracy because it allows lawmakers to draw boundaries that protect incumbents from their party.

The drawing of legislative maps should be taken out of the hands of politicians all together. Gerrymandering is wrong in Democrat-controlled states and it is wrong in Republican-controlled states.

Gerrymandering is a key way that legislators are able to stay in power. This reduced accountability leads to corruption.

Q: What should the General Assembly do to improve the state's unemployment benefits system?

A: The economic fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic has clearly strained Illinois Department of Employment Security's customer service capabilities.

The department needs to engage with private sector businesses that specialize in this kind of customer volume. My office receives calls daily from desperate Illinoisans who still cannot obtain unemployment benefits owed to them. My staff and I help as much as we can, and I have asked the governor to do whatever it takes to fix this broken system.

Q: Should Illinois use a nonpartisan process to redraw legislative districts?

A: I am a strong supporter of Fair Maps and am currently a Chief Co-Sponsor of HJRCA 10, which would end gerrymandered political maps once and for all by creating an Independent Redistricting Commission. Today's mapping process allows the majority party in Springfield to draw legislative districts that protect their incumbents so their seats can be retained and power can be maintained.

It stifles democracy, because lawmakers are essentially choosing their voters rather than allowing voters to choose their representatives. It's wrong when Democrats do it, and it's wrong when Republicans do it in GOP-controlled states. HJRCA 10, not surprisingly, was sent to Mike Madigan's Rules Committee and was never assigned a hearing.

Q: Do you support a progressive state income tax? Why or why not?

A: I am completely opposed.

Remember when lawmakers promised the income tax hike a few years ago would be temporary? Remember when lawmakers promised the tolls on our tollways would be temporary? Remember when lawmakers promised the lottery proceeds would be used exclusively to fund education?

Illinois lawmakers have a long-standing history of promising one thing and then doing another. I am opposed to the graduated income tax and absolutely believe that middle class taxpayers will see rate hikes.

As our wealthiest leave the state, which has been happening already for at least a decade, tax increases will hit middle income earners.

That's what we've seen in other states that have approved a graduated tax system. Lawmakers could have written tax rates into the ballot question to ensure that only the wealthiest would pay more. They chose not to do that. They wanted the flexibility to adjust tax rates as needed to pay for future spending.

Plus the amendment's passage would allow legislators to tax retirement income. I will never support the taxing of retirement income. State Treasurer Michael Frerichs has publicly stated that they need the graduated income tax so they can tax retirement income.

Q: Describe at least two circumstances in which you have shown or would show a willingness and capacity to act independently of the direction or demands of party leadership.

A: On issues related to environmental protection, I often break with my party.

One such example is my Chief Co-Sponsorship of the Clean Energy Jobs Act, a bill that is not generally well-liked by Republicans. This bill seeks to increase jobs and economic development by increasing clean energy production in Illinois.

I also served as a Chief Co-Sponsor of PA 101-0171, which provides new regulations for coal ash, a toxic byproduct of coal burning. I have also had success in sponsoring and co-sponsoring bills relating to conservation and wildlife, including measures that provide funding for new public-private partnerships to care for natural lands, prevent municipalities from prohibiting milkweed, protect pollinators, and promote pollinator planting at large solar fields.

I also broke with my party with my support of the ERA (Equal Rights Amendment), and with support of legislation to increase pay for those who provide care for the developmentally disabled. While I shared the concerns of my colleagues in my party on many of these issues, I believed that environmental concerns, women's rights, and making sure vulnerable members of our community were taken care of are far more important than partisan politics.

Q: How would you rate the governor's handling of the COVID-19 crisis? Does the legislature need to have more input and influence in establishing rules and policies related to stemming the spread of the disease? What would you have done differently, if anything? If nothing, please say so.

A: I would rate the governor's response as average or slightly above average. In the initial response period, I was supportive of the governor's efforts to slow the spread of COVID-19 and ensure adequate hospital space and equipment for those who fall seriously ill with the virus.

I still support many of the preventative measures he has put in place.

However, I am strongly opposed to the governor's decision to shut out the General Assembly during this health pandemic. As policymakers, legislative input should have been part of every coronavirus response decision.

We live in the communities and have the greatest understanding of local differences and unique circumstances.

His "go it alone" approach flies contrary to how our system of government is supposed to work. I also feel that the governor's decision to allow big box stores to remain open while forcing similar small businesses to close down lacked common sense.

That decision, made without consulting the legislature, decimated small business owners. That's why I am a Chief Co-Sponsor of the Fair Business Treatment Act, a measure that would treat all businesses the same during a health crisis.

Q: Regardless of whether the federal government provides assistance, what is the impact of the pandemic on the state's economic outlook and what immediate and long-term actions should be taken to address it? Would you support increasing taxes to pay for COVID-19 response or to make up for lost revenue related to COVID-19?

A: Illinois' annual budget process requires an approved revenue estimate. Despite this mandate, the Illinois General Assembly has not adopted a revenue estimate since before I took office.

But even without a revenue estimate, legislators knew they would be facing a significant revenue shortfall for FY21 due to COVID-19's impact.

At a time when states all around Illinois found ways to cut costs, Illinois enacted the largest budget in our state's history.

I did not support the budget because I believe budgets should be balanced on existing revenues and not rely on massive borrowing and the hope of a federal bailout.

Agency directors need to do an audit of their departments and eliminate duplicative services/jobs, reduce membership on boards, and find at least 6% to 8% in reductions.

I would also recommend a legislative review of all new programs. One example would be the new law that directs the comptroller to put $50 in an account for every new baby born in our state.

We simply cannot afford programs like that, as well-intentioned as they may be. I do not support increasing taxes to pay for COVID-19 response measures or to backfill lost revenue.