Earlier this week, we reported on efforts to revise Sen. James Meeks' HB 174, which is gaining support as a potential vehicle for pulling the state's finances out of the ditch. But Meeks' plan -- which would tax services and raise the income tax rate across the board while offering property tax relief and tax credits to low- and moderate-income families -- isn't the only approach to generating revenue. As part of his overall budget plan (PDF), gubernatorial candidate Dan Hynes is pushing a counter-proposal -- which calls for a series of budget cuts in exchange for taxing services and hiking the personal income tax rate on people earning upwards of $200,000 a year. Hynes' income tax proposal -- from a flat to a graduated rate -- would require amending the state constitution, which currently mandates a flat 3 percent rate.

Over the past decade, few have followed the state's finances as closely as Center for Tax and Budget Accountability executive director Ralph Martire. So, we caught up with him for his take on how effective the dueling proposals would be at addressing Illinois' mounting fiscal problems. Here's an excerpt from our interview:

PI: A key part of Hynes' budget proposal is to roll back state spending to 2005 levels. What sort of effect would that have on state operations?

MARTIRE: Let's put it in perspective. Between 2000 and 2010, after adjusting for inflation, state spending is down by $1 billion in real dollars. To make any argument that we're a high-spending state doesn't flush with the facts ... The bigger picture is that in the $26 billion budget that we have in 2010, between $7 billion and $8 billion is mandatory spending. To get to 2005 levels, you're going to have to turn largely to you're education and human service spending. And if you don't want to eviscerate schools, even more is going to come out of human service spending.

PI: Hynes' plan necessitates winning legislative approval, passing a constitutional referendum on the November 2010 ballot, and finally collecting the new revenue in January 2011 at the soonest. What impact would that lengthy process have on the state's operations?

MARTIRE: We're going to have to do short-term borrowing one way or another. I'm not concerned about that as long as we have a rational plan in place ... The problem is that time is of the essence. And I can't emphasize that enough ... Illinois needs structural reform. And Dan's plan addresses that. But it's not going to happen right away ... If you lose four or five months of revenue collection, you're almost 47 percent in the hole. There's not a luxury to wait.

PI: HB 174 already passed the Senate last Spring, but wasn't even called for a full vote in the House. Is there any reason to believe that Speaker Madigan will support the proposal this time around?

MARTIRE: It's not like there's some philosophical thing about a tax increase [that Madigan opposed]. What he doesn't like is a strict partisan vote on such a big issue. What you have to do to make it viable is to get more Republicans to sign on ... I'm pretty confident that there are already five or six Republicans who support it.  For Madigan to [lend] his full support it will take doubling that to 10 or 12.

PI: Do you think legislators are more educated about the state's finances than they were when they voted for the stop-gap budget?

MARTIRE: There's more work to be done. You need to work on that right up from the veto session and beyond.