Q&A with Munson

1. Why are you running for this office, whether for re-election or election the first time? Is there a particular issue that motivates you, and if so, what? What will be your main priority?

Throughout my 6 years of service in the General Assembly I have represented the values, concerns and issues of my constituents. I am running for re-election to ensure that residents in the 43rd District continue to have a strong voice in Springfield. Additionally, I want to carry on the fight for government accountability and fiscal responsibility, and to make certain that the checks and balances put in place by our constitution remain viable. Finding solutions for constituents is what motivates me, whether it's funding for schools, programs for youth, relief for residents living in mobile home communities, or protection from identity theft, internet predators and gang crime. I believe my ability to work across the aisle and past experience as a business owner, city councilmember and community volunteer, helps me create and implement innovative solutions. I have been able to deliver results even under the most challenging of times - fixing our roads, funding schools, improving access to healthcare and spearheading job creation initiatives. I also obtained funding for our community for streetlights, parks, domestic violence and homelessness prevention, services for seniors, youth initiatives and gang prevention and intervention programs. My main priority is to represent my district by focusing efforts on job creation, education reform, public safety and improving access to healthcare.

2. For incumbents and non-incumbents. If you are an incumbent, describe your main contributions. Tell us of important initiatives you've led. If you are not an incumbent, tell us what contributions you would make.

During my tenure as State Representative I have focused on providing solutions, no matter how large or small, for my district. When safety became a concern on our roads, I coordinated with IDOT to move up the schedule for resurfacing Rt. 31 and reconstructing Rt. 20 and Shales Parkway. When snow was not being plowed on our state roads in Dundee Township I worked to fix the problem. I passed legislation to create fast growth grants for school districts like ours that are experiencing high levels of growth and legislation to protect residents of mobile home communities like Willow Lake Estates and Villa Gardens. I worked across the aisle to legislatively create the Health Access Network, a pilot program to provide specialty care, diagnostic testing and pharmaceutical assistance to the uninsured. I led the effort to create the Illinois Legislative Manufacturing Caucus and sponsored bills designed to retain and grow high-paying jobs in the State of Illinois. I passed several pieces of legislation protecting residents from the growing threat of identity theft including a law to require Recorders of Deeds to remove Social Security Numbers from their websites. Working with the Kane County States Attorney's Office, I passed legislation protecting our children from online predators and sponsored legislation to keep our families safe from gangs. Additionally, I worked with the community to create the AfterSchool & Beyond Initiative to let parents know of programs to keep their kids safe when they are not in school and the Veterans Network to provide resources to our newest veterans.

3. Under what circumstances, if any, would you support raising the state income or sales tax? Please explain.

I oppose raising the state income tax and sales tax. It is incumbent upon government to be a good steward of taxpayer dollars. For the past six years, the current administration has made irresponsible decisions to incur debt at record levels. Instead of using tax dollars to reduce our pension and Medicaid debt and pay our bills to social service agencies that contract with the state to provide needed services, this administration added new programs. Asking taxpayers to trust that the adminstration will now spend new tax dollars wisely is unrealistic. Past practices support this skepticism. This administration continues to plunge our state deeper into debt, when what it needs to do is set priorities and live within its means. The state should pay its bills and reduce our mounting debt. We cannot expect taxpayers to bear the brunt of bad fiscal management. I will not ask taxpayers to contribute to a dysfunctional government. We do need to create a sound fiscal plan that takes into consideration schools, transportation, infrastructure and paying our debt. Until this year, we had natural revenue growth from income and sales taxes. We must focus on energizing our economy so we once again can increase revenues without raising taxes. More good paying jobs will boost the coffers of the state and the financial health of Illinois residents.

4. Do you support the expansion of gambling by adding slot machines at racetracks? Do you favor licensing and building new casinos? Please explain.

I oppose adding slot machines at racetracks and any major expansion of gaming. Slot machines will only reduce revenues created by surrounding casinos and diminish the original intent of the legislation creating riverboat gaming to boost economic development for depressed areas. The reduction in revenue will not only affect the state budget, but it will negatively impact local communities that currently received revenues from existing casinos. In the case of the Grand Victoria Riverboat, it would mean less revenue to the numerous not-for-profit organizations funded through its foundation. It would be another blow to these organizations at a time when the state is cutting their budgets. I do, however, believe we should award the 10th riverboat license to be located in a community that meets the requirements of the original intent of the enabling legislation and target dollars created by the new casino to a desperately needed capital infrastructure programs. Also, because the needs of the state for capital infrastructure are so great, I would consider an additional casino license if: 1) it meets the original intent of the legislation 2) does not negatively impact my district 3) if stringent reforms are in place for transparency and accountability, and 4) revenues created are invested in a responsible statewide capital plan that outlines exactly what projects will be funded.

5. Would you support giving voters the ability to recall elected officials?

Yes, I support giving voters the ability to recall elected officials. Ineffective leadership has caused the current morass in Springfield. Voters should have the right to remove any elected official who is not doing their job. This year, I voted for HJRCA 28 that would put the recall measure on the ballot so that voters could decide if it should be implemented here in Illinois. Unfortunately, the State Senate did not pass the initiative so it will not be on the ballot this November.

6. Did you support the suburban tax increases that were used to keep the public transportation trains and buses running without cuts or fare increases?

I voted against sales tax increases for public transportation for the following reasons. First the tax increase was used to bail out a mismanaged pension system not to improve services. While suburban residents would have to pay higher sales taxes we would not see any increase in services. In fact, status quo would be maintained. For public transportation to be effective in our community we need PACE to extend service hours to accommodate residents working 2nd and 3rd shifts or who work retail past 8:00 p.m. Additionally, routes need to be added so people could use busses to get to work. Second, the revenue generated by this increase in taxes is not being used for infrastructure improvement or the purchase of new vehicles, something the RTA said was necessary or they'd be back before the General Assembly asking for yet more funds. Finally, the sales tax was applied to food and medicine. At a time when our residents are struggling to make ends meet, taxing them to fund a service they cannot or do not use because it doesn't meet their needs does a great disservice to all of us. One of the most problematic aspects of the recent vote to increase the sales tax for mass transit is that it failed to provide additional dollars for capital needs to expand and revitalize current systems. I do support a statewide capital plan that directs revenue into transportation infrastructure that would ultimately enhance suburb-to-suburb public transportation like the STAR line, repairs tracks so riders are safe and invest in new energy efficient vehicles.

7. If you are elected, will you vote for the current party leader of your legislative chamber? Why or why not?

The Illinois General Assembly is comprised of four caucuses, the House and Senate Majority and the House and Senate Minority. The political party that has the greatest number of legislative members controls leadership in their respective chambers, choosing the Speaker of the House or the President of the Senate from among their ranks. The Minority party chooses their Leaders for each chamber. Each caucus then votes on its own rules dictating the organizational structure of its caucus and how their internal leadership team (deputy leaders, assistant leaders, etc) is selected. In all but the House Republican Caucus, the caucus leader appoints the entire leadership team. The House Republican Caucus members (of which I am one) elect half of our leadership team. It is argued that the lack of term limits and the appointment of the entire leadership team by the caucus leader consolidates power into a handful of individuals, making it very difficult for rank and file members to influence policymaking. In fact, one could point to the current stalemate in Springfield as evidence. One Majority leader can hold up a piece of legislation, a budget or even a much needed capital plan. It was precisely this thinking that led to the reforms implemented by the House Republican Caucus in 2003. Individual members wanted a stronger voice and voted on new rules that among other things provided for half of the leadership team to be elected. These rules opened the door for more member participation in policymaking and more input into the legislative process. At the same time we elected Tom Cross as our new leader because he was committed to these ideals. He has kept his promise to solicit input, allow for election of our leadership team and encourages members to vote their districts. It is why I will vote for him again as the leader of my caucus.

8. What do you think of the idea, widely circulated, of impeaching Gov. Blagojevich?

It has not been lost on the people of this state that the Governor's actions have contributed to the current stalemate in Springfield. People have lost faith in the Governor as a leader and they are looking to the General Assembly for a solution, which is why impeachment and recall measures are being discussed. Impeachment is the tool of last resort and should be used judiciously and according to the constitutional provisions creating the process. The impeachment process is not intended to be used in cases where a failure of leadership has occurred. Its purpose is to remove an elected official in situations where that official has committed a crime. While our current governor is under investigation, he has not been indicted of a criminal offense so there is a question of whether impeachment could occur. Some House members have called for impeachment but a committee to study impeachment articles, the first step in the proceedings, has yet to be established. Should the Governor be indicted on criminal charges impeachment proceedings become a more viable solution and must be considered. In comparison, a recall measure would allow voters to remove an elected official if they felt the leader was not adequately doing their job. Impeachment decisions are made by the legislature, recall decisions are made by the voter. It is true that passing a recall amendment now would not affect the current governor but it would provide a recourse for voters in the future. We should continue to look at a recall measure as a mechanism to prevent future elected officials from engaging in similar unacceptable actions.