Gov. Pat Quinn wants to test the dubious proposition that a state can borrow its way to prosperity.

It was just five months ago that Illinois legislators passed a gigantic state corporate and personal income tax increase.

The tax hike angered a lot of people, but defenders of the increase claimed they had a very good reason for doing what they did.

The tax increases were necessary, they said, to pay off the state's multibillion-dollar backlog of bills.

Well — as they say in politics to explain a policy backflip — that was then, and this is now.

With the tax increase in place and increased revenues flowing in to state coffers, Quinn and some legislators have a new plan to deal with the $6 billion-plus backlog of unpaid bills. They want to borrow the money and then pay that debt plus interest off over the next seven years.

Taxpayers have seen this move — borrowing money and using it to pay debt — before. Unfortunately, that's what states that have run themselves into the ground perceive as sound fiscal management.

It's not. But that's irrelevant. The question is whether Gov. Pat Quinn is going to be able to persuade legislators to do it anyway.

State Treasurer Dan Rutherford is among those leading the charge against the plan. He is not only urging legislators to oppose the plan but vowed to "alert the (bond) rating companies ... and bond houses that the treasurer of Illinois is not in favor of furthering the debt."

Quinn has been pitching more borrowing as a solution for months now, largely without success. He has dropped his request for borrowing $8.7 billion to be repaid over 14 years to $6.17 billion to be repaid over seven years, and he's finding some takers.

Senate Democrats appear to be largely on board, but they need at least one Republican to pass it.

It's easy to understand the appeal — if you understand how desperate some legislators are to avoid facing the financial catastrophe they have created. Borrowing money temporarily eases the state's cash flow problem, providing more money to spend now while increasing costs later.

Who cares about later? Most politicians only care as far ahead as the next election.