patching...
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

Pension Foes Allied Against Constitutional Amendment

Pension-related amendment to state constitution on Nov. 6 ballot is confusing, catastrophic and fake reform, say foes and legal experts. What you need to know before you vote.

 

By Jayette Bolinski, Illinois Watchdog

SPRINGFIELD — Opposition to a proposed pension-related constitutional amendment that will go before Illinois voters Nov. 6 is creating strange bedfellows — from public employee unions to good-government groups that agree the question is not worthy of a change to the state’s constitution and does nothing to address the pension crisis.

Groups opposed to the amendment are numerous and come from all walks of life. It’s no surprise that public-employee unions are opposed to the amendment, which requires a three-fifths majority vote before any public body can approve a pension benefit increase.

Good-government groups, such as the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability and the Illinois Policy Institute, also are against it. So are Protestants for the Common Good, the state’s League of Women Voters and the Illinois Green Party.

The groups usually don’t see eye-to-eye on how to achieve pension reform. But Constitutional Amendment 49 has turned adversaries into allies, each with an eye on a common goal – defeating the amendment.

“I wish I could say that it was because of shared principles that such diverse groups are coming together to oppose this,” Diane Cohen of the Chicago-based Liberty Justice Center said of the unexpected alliances. “We certainly just view this as fake reform. It does nothing to address the pension crisis in the state. But worse than that, it sort of pulls the wool over the voters’ eyes to try to pretend that the legislators are actually doing something in the face of this crisis.”

Pension Shortfall of $85 Billion to $200 Billion

Illinois has a pension-funding shortfall of at least $85 billion. New reporting requirements by investment groups put the liability in the neighborhood of $200 billion.

In April, the Illinois House unanimously approved a measure put forth by Speaker Michael Madigan, a Democrat, that would ask voters if approval of public-pension boosts in Illinois should require a supermajority vote of three-fifths (60 percent) instead of a simple majority vote. Madigan called it “tough medicine” for a state deep in debt.

The Illinois Senate also approved the measure, with only two lawmakers there voting against it.

Since then, critics have called the proposal “catastrophic,” “do-nothing,” “misguided,” “incomprehensible” and “diabolical and feckless.”

“The only people we’ve seen pushing this so far are the politicians themselves,” said Anders Lindall, spokesman for the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 31, which represents thousands of state workers. “It really validates our view that this is a politician-protection amendment. This is not a pension amendment. It should be defeated.”

Groups that support the amendment are difficult to find.  Others have found numerous reasons to object.

For example, the language is too long and complicated for average voters to understand, some say. The proposed Illinois constitutional amendment is more than 700 words — longer than the preamble to the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Meanwhile, the diluted explanation of the proposed amendment that voters will find on the Nov. 6 ballot is just more than 200 words long.

This is what voters will see on the ballot:

"NOTICE THE FAILURE TO VOTE THIS BALLOT MAY BE THE EQUIVALENT OF A NEGATIVE VOTE, BECAUSE A CONVENTION SHALL BE CALLED OR THE AMENDMENT SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE IF APPROVED BY EITHER THREE-FIFTHS OF THOSE VOTING ON THE QUESTION OR A MAJORITY OF THOSE VOTING IN THE ELECTION. (THIS IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS A DIRECTION THAT YOUR VOTE IS REQUIRED TO BE CAST EITHER IN FAVOR OF OR IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSITION HEREIN CONTAINED.) WHETHER YOU VOTE THIS BALLOT OR NOT YOU MUST RETURN IT TO THE ELECTION JUDGE WHEN YOU LEAVE THE VOTING BOOTH.

CONSTITUTION BALLOT PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE 1970 ILLINOIS CONSTITUTION

Explanation of Amendment

Upon approval by the voters, the proposed amendment, which takes effect on January 9, 2013, adds a new section to the General Provisions Article of the Illinois Constitution. The new section would require a three-fifths majority vote of each chamber of the General Assembly, or the governing body of a unit of local government, school district, or pension or retirement system, in order to increase a benefit under any public pension or retirement system. At the general election to be held on November 6, 2012, you will be called upon to decide whether the proposed amendment should become part of the Illinois Constitution. If you believe the Illinois Constitution should be amended to require a three-fifths majority vote in order to increase a benefit under any public pension or retirement system, you should vote YES on the question. If you believe the Illinois Constitution should not be amended to require a three-fifths majority vote in order to increase a benefit under any public pension or retirement system, you should vote NO on the question. Three-fifths of those voting on the question or a majority of those voting in the election must vote YES in order for the amendment to become effective on January 9, 2013. For the proposed addition of Section 5.1 to Article XIII of the Illinois Constitution."

John Bambenek, a Republican candidate for state senate in the 52nd District, earlier this month joined a lawsuit filed in Champaign County against the Illinois State Board of Elections seeking to invalidate the ballot question, saying it’s deceptive and inaccurate.

“I get that Madigan and his Chicago friends want to stick it to us, but could they do us the courtesy of doing it in a way we can understand,” Bambenek said. “This ballot question and the amendment itself are incomprehensible gibberish.”

No Need to Put This in Constitution

The Illinois League of Women Voters opposes the amendment, saying the three-fifths majority vote requirement removes control from a majority and gives it to a minority. The organization also says the requirement does not belong in the state constitution.

“The Illinois Constitution is not the place for a provision that is this specific to a single issue and to one remedy for a larger problem,” the organization writes on its website. “If the legislature determines this needs to be done, a statute which can be modified more easily is the appropriate course to take.”

The Center for Tax and Budget Accountability opposes the amendment, saying it’s a misguided attempt to address the state’s pension problems but, most important, does nothing to reduce Illinois’ multi-billion-dollar unfunded pension liability.

Amanda Kass, a pension expert with the center, said it’s also impossible to know the full implications of the amendment until after it’s in place.

“There’s no reason this constitutional amendment can’t be part of state statute,” she said, urging voters to read the various analyses of the proposal that can be found online, including one she wrote for the center.

“But also ask themselves what’s the fundamental purpose of a constitutional amendment – What’s the purpose of the constitution, and is it appropriate to have a provision in the constitution about pension benefit increases?” she asks.

Ann Lousin, a law professor at the John Marshall Law School in Chicago and an expert on the Illinois constitution, described the amendment as “catastrophic,” noting that it is “very long and includes a number of  new concepts and terms which have not been interpreted by anyone.”

Certain to Inspire Lawsuits

She also noted that it probably would lead to an onslaught of lawsuits and that it would require a new level of bureaucracy “to monitor, referee and record countless votes, meetings and issues” for 7,000 governmental entities across the state.

“… (T)his proposed constitutional amendment does nothing for the state’s pension-funding problem,” she wrote. “However, it creates many new problems and, if approved, would, in my opinion, be a catastrophe for Illinois.”

Cohen of the Liberty Justice Center said the amendment presents a conundrum for voters.

“If you support the amendment, you’re kind of furthering this fallacy that it would actually mean something. But opposing it sends the signal to local decision-makers who already are spending beyond what the taxpayers can afford to just spend more,” she said.

“Really, the bottom line is it’s not worthy of the constitution, and we need to stand up and say this is fake reform and we simply can’t support it.”

Illinois Watchdog covers the Illinois General Assembly and state government and is sponsored by the Franklin Center for Government & Public Integrity. Contact Jayette Bolinski at jayette.bolinski@franklincenterhq.org. Find Illinois Watchdog on Facebook and follow its journalism on Twitter @ilwatchdog.

This post is published on all Patches in the suburban Chicago network. Have an opinion on this constitutional amendment? Share your views with readers throughout the Chicago area.

Related Topics: Illinois Watchdog, Mike Madigan, Pension Reform, Proposition 49, and constitutional amendment

Procrustes' Foil

5:20 am on Sunday, October 28, 2012

This amendment has only one purpose: to delude voters into thinking that state legislators are doing something about the pension problem.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Willie Wilmette

8:30 am on Sunday, October 28, 2012

LAC is correct, but you could say that about any thing they do.
They wait for a crisis, then overreact or pass something that does not fix the problem.

What we really need is an amendment that is a defined contribution so costs do not get passed on to future legislators. These defined contributions should show up as part of the salaries, then $100,000 per year teachers would show the real cost - maybe $150,000 to $200,000 per year (almost $300 to $400 per classroom hour). Passing on costs to future years should be stopped for almost all items not just pensions.

Comment_arrow

GuitarMan

9:16 pm on Monday, October 29, 2012

I'll agree with that. Amending our state constitution should be reserved for big ideas, not for addressing the fallout from changing economic and policy realities we know face.

Greg in Huntley

6:40 am on Sunday, October 28, 2012

This law would take a super majority to get anything approved - much like in the federal congress. Do we really want to mimic the feds where absolutely nothing is getting done for the citizens? This change should definately not be approved - VOTE NO!

Reply

b garrett

6:59 am on Sunday, October 28, 2012

Much Ado about nothing...."85-200 billion shortfall". Turn out the lights...the parties over! What possible difference one way or the other does all this "amendment" make? Just moving the deck chairs on the titanic....

Reply

MS

7:51 am on Sunday, October 28, 2012

And yet the people of Illinois keep putting Madigan and his Democratic cronies back in charge of the state each election. Remember what they say about insanity........

Reply
Comment_arrow

David

11:23 pm on Sunday, October 28, 2012

The Democratic cronies, as you call them MS, are still much better than any republican thug that you would replace them with. We need to move forward, not backward.

Comment_arrow

Diablo R

8:32 am on Monday, October 29, 2012

@david, I don't know. Seems to me the state ran pretty good when Thompson was in charge and its not with dems in charge.

Comment_arrow

GuitarMan

9:21 pm on Monday, October 29, 2012

@ MS.

Its not the political party who is at fault, its the economy. Take a minute and watch these two excellent documentaries on the recession:
FRONTLINE - The Warning
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/view/

FRONTLINE - Inside the Meltdown
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meltdown/view/

Comment_arrow

RationalTht

10:53 pm on Monday, October 29, 2012

@Guitarman - Why is IL one of the worst states though. Yes, all boats will rise and fall with the tides, but ours seems to be sinking more than the rest.

Eric Lewis

7:55 am on Sunday, October 28, 2012

I praise the HP Patch for covering this story. I read the blue guide on the constitutional amendment that generated more questions than answers. I have already voted and there was not enough information available to make an easy decision. Thank you for opening up the dialog!

Reply

b garrett

8:14 am on Sunday, October 28, 2012

Re :the democrates continued delusional behavior.. Socialism only works until politicians run out of other people's money... Illinois worst credit rating in the country and no question will be seeking a Greek style "bailout". Sooner rather than later.... If Obama re elected....federal government will be totally bankrupt / just like illinois/with rampant inflation before he finishes a second term....maybe china would be interested in buying Illinois ?:)

Reply
Comment_arrow

David

11:25 pm on Sunday, October 28, 2012

Wow b garrett. Maybe you should turn off Fox News for a while.

Comment_arrow

Diablo R

8:33 am on Monday, October 29, 2012

David adds so much to the conversation with his witty remarks doesn't he?

Comment_arrow

GuitarMan

9:23 pm on Monday, October 29, 2012

@ b garrett.

Get a clue about bailouts and our economic woes. Watch this:
FRONTLINE - The Warning
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/view/

FRONTLINE - Inside the Meltdown
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meltdown/view/

Daniel Krudop

8:29 am on Sunday, October 28, 2012

"Amanda Kass, a pension expert with the center, said it’s also impossible to know the full implications of the amendment until after it’s in place."

That's okay Amanda. As Nancy Pelosi said you sometimes have to pass things in order to know what's in them.

The only resolution is to amend our State Constitution to reverse the Amendment that protects public pensions.

Reply
Comment_arrow

GuitarMan

9:25 pm on Monday, October 29, 2012

@ Daniel Krudop.

Get a clue about bailouts and our economic woes. Watch this:
FRONTLINE - The Warning
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/view/

FRONTLINE - Inside the Meltdown
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meltdown/view/

Jac Charlier

9:19 am on Sunday, October 28, 2012

Make sure to hold your State Representative and State Senator accountable for this situation, as well as the backlog of overdue State bills ($9 billion) and budget "deficit", if they have been in office for more than 2 years. Why? The entire fiscal situation of the great State of Illinois has been 10 years in the making and well known. Organizations like CTBA (based right here in Illinois) have been documenting the coming situation for a long time. Your State elected officials ignored the news and banked instead on their own re-elections i.e. 1) campaign endorsements, 2) campaign cash, 3) campaign workers over our i.e. chumps=citizens future.

Reply

Bob G

9:42 am on Sunday, October 28, 2012

One word. MADIGAN . Anything this slime ball does is shady . Why else would this be slipped in without much fanfare or explanation ? I will vote NO on all incumbents in Illinois until we rid the state of him and all his crooked buddies. This is what the definition of organized crime. When will we the people stop voting this group of organized criminals in ? We put the little fish in jail and we leave the real thieves unchecked like Daley, MADIGAN et al. It's sick and needs to stop.

Reply

Mr. Rats

9:45 am on Sunday, October 28, 2012

It's wonderful to see the union drones panic. In the end it won't matter, there's too much debt. One way or the other, unions will lose. Math is still math no matter how the drones spin it. Say hello to the new normal drones!

Reply

League of Women Voters - Lake Forest/Lake Bluff

11:30 am on Sunday, October 28, 2012

If you would like to learn more about the five public pension systems and possible solutions, the League of Women Voters - Lake Forest/Lake Bluff is having a public program on Thurs. Nov. 1, 7:00 p.m. at Gorton Community Center, 400 E. Illinois Rd. Lake Forest. Amanda Kass from the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability and Robert Riley, a Partner with Robbins Schwartz, will outline the status and possible solutions. More informaiton on our website www.lwv-lflb.org

Reply

Jose

1:52 pm on Sunday, October 28, 2012

LETS DO SOMETHING ABOUT THE ILLEGALS USING OUR AMERICAN CITIZENS SERVICES FIRST. LIKE FREE HOSPITAL CARE--FREE SCHOOLING FOR THEIR KIDS--FREE WELFARE---FREE FOOD STAMPS---FREE SECTION 8 HOUSING...
STATES IN FINANCIAL TROUBLE ? have huge numbers of illegals...California--Illinois to mention 2.
Fact is that democrats do not want to deal with the huge problems of the illegals, they want the Hispanic votes.
I'm a conservative Democrat and a Hispanic, I'm honest and i call it the way i see it.

Reply
Comment_arrow

David

11:28 pm on Sunday, October 28, 2012

"I'm a conservative Democrat..."

No such thing Jose. Based on your statements above, you're a misguided, low-information republican voter. Simple.

Comment_arrow

Diablo R

8:37 am on Monday, October 29, 2012

David, you sure know a lot about politics. I can tell by your whining and name calling. Answer me this, since Illinois is an official deadbeat state and its been run by a majority of democrats, why should we keep voting for them. Seriously, give me just one answer without resorting to name calling

Comment_arrow

GuitarMan

9:27 pm on Monday, October 29, 2012

@ Jose.
Get a clue about bailouts and our economic woes. Watch this:
FRONTLINE - The Warning
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/view/

FRONTLINE - Inside the Meltdown
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meltdown/view/

Comment_arrow

RationalTht

10:56 pm on Monday, October 29, 2012

@Guitarman - you seem to like telling others to get a clue, telling them to watch some videos. What those videos do not explain is why IL is doing so much worse than other states. How is it that IL is so much in debt?

Jose

1:58 pm on Sunday, October 28, 2012

We no longer allow to speak the truth on patch ? ? Because it offense someone ?? that is not the America i know. first time one of my comments is getting pending approval....is everybody afraid of the Hispanic people ?? CNN--Huff post you can't talk about the hispanics--illegals--gays---if you do ? you get banned. un--American.

Reply

TakeBackIllinois

3:16 pm on Monday, October 29, 2012

VOTE NO on 49 !! Dan Biss, Mike Madigan and the other Springfield political elite have shamefully kicked the Pension Liability "can" down the road. This Amendment will consolidate their power to place the Future Pension Liability costs directly on the backs of property taxpayers via shifting the costs to Illinois school districts. This is financially catastrophic for local taxpayers and school districts alike. VOTE A RESOUNDING NO !!!

Reply
Comment_arrow

G.G.

3:50 pm on Monday, October 29, 2012

Agreed. No from me as well!

Mark

10:18 pm on Monday, October 29, 2012

The proposed amendment would not have made any difference for any past pension vote. If Illinois truly wanted real pension reform, the appropriate constitutional amendment would have been to clarify the "Pension Clause" in the Illinois Constitution to specify that it only protected already earned benefits, thereby without question allowing the State to change benefits for existing employees going forward for yet unearned work. Jobs are not guaranteed for life. Neither should the same level of benefits.

Reply

Deborah Barry

11:23 pm on Monday, October 29, 2012

Simple and direct. From here going back, untouchable. From today forward, new rules. Vote NO on the Constitutional Amendment.

Years ago, no one wanted to work for the government. Salaries were increased again and again until we all wished we sat for the Civil Service Exam. In a typical 45-year work life, one could collect at least two pensions!

Adjust salaries for public employees to what private sector employees are paid for similar tasks/skills. Withhold from their paychecks whatever the formula is for Social Security (adjusted as that fantasy is adjusted). Then, each of them can save, invest or stick their earnings in their mattress. If the government wants to write a model defined benefit and/or defined contribution plan for workers to adopt, fine. But few of us can even begin to understand these plans, and the cost of maintaining them is astronomical.

Like most of you, I saved for retirement. It's been decades since anyone now in their 60s or 70s realistically believed Social Security could survive. Nor did we expect to live to be 80, 90 or 100.

Adjusting for these demographic changes is what the government is supposed to do. To be our safety net. Instead, it's become a SAFE NEST for special interests and privileges the rest of us can only dream of.

Deborah Barry, candidate, Lake County Board, D19

Reply

Lennie Jarratt

9:57 am on Tuesday, October 30, 2012

This amendment would have done nothing in the past and will do virtually nothing going forward. IMO, this was a ploy by Michael Madigan to turn out the union vote.

Reply

Gary

4:03 pm on Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Vote YES.
This is kind of like closing the barn door after the horses are already out, but it can't hurt. One of the primary problems with the State pension plan is that the unions have been able to buy enough politicians to vote themselves increased benefits year after year. Of course they don't vote to put enough of their salary into the pension fund to support these increases because taxes can always be raised on the rest of us to pay for promises these people made to themselves.

The real solution is to dump the amendment that guarantees State pensions and unroll the whole mess into individual 401k-style retirement plans so the rest of us don't have to pick up the slack.

... and if we are going to discuss who should make a sacrifice to solve the pension mess, well the taxpayers already took a big hit with the tax increase and it didn't solve the problem. It's time for those receiving benefits to give something up, and here's my plan.

For 40 years State employees have had their salaries boosted in various ways right before retirement so that their pension would be permanently boosted for the rest of their lives. They have been cheating us. I say as an act of good will on behalf of the State pensioners toward the taxpayers who have been cheated all these years, the pensioners should agree to give up the portion of their pension that was scammed out of us through salary spiking.

Let's do that, and then see what the numbers look like.

Reply
Comment_arrow

The Oracle

10:20 am on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Gary,
One problem with converting to 401 k-style retirement plans (which I agree with) is the state doesn't have the cash to make the pensions whole for the conversion.

On the spiking issues, the problem is already being addressed by extending the "average final salary" period to more than two years, although it's not uniform. Because it's a long-term payout, why not extend it further, say the highest 10 years?

Last, the automatic 3 percent COLA should be replaced with an inflation-indexed COLA, like SS. In fact, to make it simple, why not use the SS COLA so it's equitable across the board?

Jim

4:24 pm on Tuesday, October 30, 2012

The amendment is meaningless. Won't solve a thing. In a few short years Illinois will be one trillion in debt. The state will be insolvent (cannot operate day today and cannot borrow) and then all of the idiots who keep voting for the same pols will wonder what happened and how. Anyone who wants to do something about the situation should probably move to another state. That is what Masigan and his minions will do when there is no more money to loot.

Reply

TakeBackIllinois

5:06 pm on Tuesday, October 30, 2012

$More Tax=Dan Biss. More important to vote Dan Biss out of office then voting NO on Amendment 49. A YES Vote will consolidate Biss' and Madigan's power to dump future pension liabilities on strapped school districts-- and then to property taxpayers.

Reply

McCloud

6:52 pm on Tuesday, October 30, 2012

How about they hand out 401K brochures to teachers, like the rest of us who don't work for government. Pensions went away in 1979 for most private companies, grab yourself a brochure and keep my tax money away from your retiring on my dime at age 52.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Bucephalus

8:49 am on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

McCloud, I'm honestly curious about something. Much of your dislike for the pension system seems to be based on the, regrettably, true fact that pensions have fallen out of favor in favor of the various stock-based retirement programs (Roth IRA, 401k, 403b, etc.).

My question for you is why is that necessarily a good basis? I'm not saying that there are no reasons to reform, or perhaps even eliminate, pensions. What I am asking is why is the absence of something in the private sector automatically a better situation than what exists in the public? If, for a hypothetical example, all employers moved to a 45 hour work week, would it be reasonable to demand public sector employees do the same? Or if private sector employers slashed all the work hours so that nobody worked more than 20 hours a week, should government do the same there too?

The pension situation in Illinois is pretty bad but it seems to me that arguing against it because the public sector has something you don't have is a bit petty and trivializes this otherwise significant issue.

Comment_arrow

Gary

10:26 am on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Government pensions were put in place because private industry had them and government had to compete for workers. Now that pensions are almost completely gone in the private sector, the justification for government pension plans no longer exists. The point needs to be made and is part of the overall case to be made for ending government run pension plans, but the case against government pensions can be made on much broader terms.

For example: Government run pensions are doomed to collapse because the politicians who control them have every incentive to make unsustainable promises to buy votes today, but have no incentive to inflict the taxing pain on their constituents to honor those promises tomorrow.

If I could make that rhyme I would be a politician.

Sound economic policies always make sure people are incentivized to do the right thing. Government run pension plans fail, not because of corruption, not because of greedy people gaming the system, not because of economic cycles, not because of crass politicians... which all contribute to the problem. Ultimately they fail because they are unstable economic constructs which push leaders to make the wrong decisions. They were doomed to collapse the day they were put in place, and no amount of benevolent leadership or management can save them in the long run.

The same is true of Medicare and Social Security.

Ideology and economic principles matter. They are like a road map, showing you where we are headed.

Comment_arrow

D man

12:18 pm on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Says the person who collects social security.

Comment_arrow

Gary

12:57 pm on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Who are you talking about? I'll never see a dime of Social Security.

Comment_arrow

McCloud

2:34 pm on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

A majority of people in the private sector fund most of their retirement by themselves, rather than the company having to fund it entirely. It's more cost effective and eliminates the pot of gold that tempts so many elected to govern. A good rule of thumb for me is, if the private sector changes to something different, there must be a good reason, since in theory there are no safety nets for them. Conversely, innovation escapes many in the public sector, as there it lacks incentives and is fortified with safety nets (politicians).

Comment_arrow

Bucephalus

4:06 pm on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

"A good rule of thumb for me is, if the private sector changes to something different, there must be a good reason."

And whatever is good for the corporate bottom line is automatically good for the worker? Moving to 401ks is a great move for businesses. It lessens their responsibility to their workers and frees up great sums of cash. They can then contribute smaller amounts of money into 401ks on the belief that the money will create an equal amount of wealth as a pension would.

For the employee they go from a stable outlook to being held hostage to market forces. If you retire in the 1990s, you were set. If you retired in post 2008, you were boned. And the result is a less financially secure position for our retirees who then feel compelled to work longer. And as they work longer, there are fewer job openings and so the supply curve for workers becomes over saturated. This allows a further reduction in wages, benefits, and all other forms of compensation.

I see the logic in this from business. I don't see the "good reason" for the employee.

Comment_arrow

GuitarMan

6:18 pm on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

@ McCloud.

Prior to 401K's companies funded pensions, ask your parent about this. In affect, 401K's are a pay cut because you are now funding it. Same was true about health coverage. I know, don't pick on wealthy corporations because they are just making it from day to day.

Comment_arrow

McCloud

6:25 pm on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

With so many complaints about jobs going overseas, I would think things need to be done to help prevent the US from losing more to the cheaper labor. On the one hand we have the left painting CEOs as rich monopoly guys with monocles holding large sums of cash with $$ signs on them, and on the other hand we have pragmatic thinkers who attempt to preserve jobs here in the US. The basic undeniable fact here is the teacher union pensions are unsustainable and protected from market forces which exacerbates the problem.

TakeBackIllinois

11:31 pm on Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Glenn Farkas has it right. He won't take a pension when elected for State Senate.. now that is a start in the right direction in Springfield.

Reply

G.G.

8:36 am on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

I agree, the ammendment should be to cancel ALL state employee pensions and unions. I don't believe that the public needs to provide for the retirement of government employees (with the single exception of military service). Government unions and pension plans are breeding grounds for corruption. Get rid of both of them. Let the individual save for their own retirement.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Bucephalus

8:52 am on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Why is the military deserving of a pension? If a pension is a breeding ground for corruption, why would we want our veterans to be given such a corrupt "benefit?"

Comment_arrow

The Oracle

10:25 am on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Getting out of the defined benefit approach is a good idea, but simply declaring the pensions "canceled" is a problem. Remember public sector employees have been prohibited from contributing to SS and they can't collect it.

So instead of "canceling" we would need to make them whole and convert them to 401(k)-type plans. The problem is how to make them whole.

Comment_arrow

Gary

10:32 am on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

The corruption is in the politicians, not the military retirees. As far as I know the military has not unionized yet, and is not threatening to go on strike.

I agree with keeping pensions for military personnel because we are asking them to take extraordinary risks, so we should offer benefits to match.

Comment_arrow

G.G.

11:07 am on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

The military (to my knowledge) doesn't contribute to / support political campaigns unlike the AFT, NEA, NAGE, APWU, AFSCME, NTEU, AFGE, and the AFL-CIO.
Here's an example:
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=P04++
Another reason the military should receive a pension... They earned it by volunteering to protect and defend the country. (Unlike any other public / govt. worker)

Comment_arrow

Bucephalus

11:26 am on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

But Gary, pensions are doomed to collapse the day they were put in place. Why would we support them at the national level? How do military pensions not collapse the same way you project state pensions and Social Security will? This sounds to me like you just being afraid, or unwilling, to detract a benefit from a group of people you support instead of any actual economic theory.

Furthermore, I assume (yes that's a risk on my part) that by "extraordinary risks" you mean putting your life in danger. If that is correct, then why not leave police or firefighter pensions? They risk their lives as well (especially, dare I say, cops who work the Chicago streets).

The same question applies to you G.G. I don't recall a draft for the police. In fact I personally know two former cops and both of them were MPs before mustering out and enlisting as cops. I'll grant you that two is a pretty small sample size but I do believe that a large percentage of police are army veterans. When did they stop serving their country and start being corrupt unionistas?

Comment_arrow

Gary

1:14 pm on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

The military pension plan could possibly threaten the fiscal viability of the entire country if politicians decided to buy them all off with outrageously generous benefits like we see for State employees. It could happen. But I'm willing to take that risk, because without the military, we're not even having this discussion. The military is the firewall that protects everything else that happens in our country.

I am glad to see you embrace the economics surrounding pension plans so quickly though. No one can deny they've destroyed Illinois. Now that you're on board, all we have to do is decide how to end these plans gracefully.

What do you recommend Bucephalus? Got any ideas? It's going to be real tough.

Comment_arrow

G.G.

1:41 pm on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

The court has found that police have no legal obligation to protect you or anything else for that matter whether on or off duty. If they did, you could sue them if you get robbed or if your car is broken into. In fact, police cannot be held responsible for "mistakes" while performing their duties. If a police officer accidently shoots an innocent bystander for example, they cannot be held responsible. So police officers don't have to take a bullet for you and firefighters don't have to save any property or run into a burning building (legally). The military on the other hand is responsible. Individuals can be court martialed for dereliction of duty punishable by imprisonment on up to the death penalty forall kinds of infractions while a service member.
Bucephalus; Yes, police officers become unionistas when they join the force. I dont think the club would allow an officer to be on the rolls without being a union member.

Comment_arrow

Bucephalus

1:59 pm on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Actually, I don't agree with ending them at all. If you thought my quoting of you was a sudden epiphany you are wrong. My quoting of you was to highlight what I saw as a disconnect between the military and everyone else. As you rightfully pointed out, being in the military does not change the economics. I happen, however, to disagree with your assessment of the psychology behind pensions and your perceived solutions to Illinois' pension shortfall.

For example, I think you are shortsighted to blame the state of Detroit on pensions when the city's population has dropped by 2/3. You can try to draw a link from unions to the auto decline to the population exodus, but none of that pertains to public sector unions. Detroit's problems are more systemic than Michigan teachers having a pension and I believe it to be a simple cop-out to try and pin that same line of thought here on Illinois.

Perhaps we can all agree that this mess was exacerbated by Blagojevich and the rest of the Illinois government who, when things weren't bad, deferred state contributions in favor of more pet projects. Now, after things went south, I don't believe the appropriate course of action is to punish those people who got screwed once already by the state government.

Likewise G.G., having spent four years working with the Navy I can tell you this: your view of the military is way off in terms of discipline and expectations. Nor do I share your view on the corruptibility of all the police.

Comment_arrow

Gary

2:33 pm on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

So who do we screw? Promises have been made, and the money isn't there. The tax payers have already had their taxes raised. Have the pension beneficiaries had their benefits cut yet? No. I say it's their turn.

My solution would be to dump the whole pension problem on the unions themselves. Give them all the assets and let them fight among themselves to see who gets what, and what compromises should be made. Why should I have to pay for any of that? I have no guaranteed income, why should I have to provide a guaranteed income for someone else?

None of it makes any sense.

Comment_arrow

G.G.

4:31 pm on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Solutions:
- We should freeze all pensions where they are for existing employees.
- No Cost of living increases on any public pensions
- No new public employees get pensions. (Except military)
- No unions for any public employees,
This would put public employees on equal ground with ~70% of private industry.
- No salary for anyone serving in congerss at the federal level (It's supposed to be public service NOT a 40 year carreer)
- TERM LIMITS! at the fed, state and local level.

This would go a hell of a long way in saving a little $.

John

8:58 am on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

I'm voting Farkas and Lieberman!

Reply

TakeBackIllinois

10:44 am on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Simple IL.math.Yes=Farkas; no more Biss

Reply

Jim

12:01 pm on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

If Madigan has his way in the lame duck session in which only a simple majority is required, the pension funding will be put on the backs of the local school and city taxing districts and in Evanston your property taxes will double. In that event, you will nnot be able to sell your house and most business will leave. Do you think Madigan cares? NO. The state is already ruined but then it will be ruined ruined. And yet the voters will keep electing Madigan's minions who will vote him into the speaker position. It is a little like selling the rope for your hanging to the hangman. But these voters think of themselves as good "liberals" who think that the old fashioned democrats still exist. Go ahead, vote them in again. They are counting on your ignorance.

Reply

Gary

1:23 pm on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

If the Democrats succeed in transferring the burden of pensions to local governments, then what will actually be happening is they will be converting your property values into their pension checks. That process will occur until your property is completely worthless. If you don't think this is possible, check out Detroit.

Without pension reform they HAVE to get the money from somewhere, and that's where they will get it. They will take every dime you have if you don't stop them.

Reply

TakeBackIllinois

4:28 pm on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Biss and Madigan are political twins....Gary, if this is really how you feel, then make sure that you do everything you can to reach out to your neighbors, relatives and friends to make sure that Dan Biss is not re-elected as he is a HUGE supporter of what you outlined above in your post. You are right on the money. He believes the wealthy Senate 9th District can afford it as his fuzzy math excuse! He also supports a double whammy of a new, higher Progressive Illinois Income Tax. Fact. So, if you are serious, Vote Biss out.

Reply
Comment_arrow

GuitarMan

6:20 pm on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Take Illinois back to where? Back to the good old days when employers funded both pensions and healthcare? What and where is the back to you are referring to?

Eric Lieberman

5:29 pm on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Illinois voters should be personally offended that the gangsters in Springfield would even propose this! It really only takes minutes to realize that this amendment is nothing but a scam, meant to hyptnotize voters to think that our legislators are hard at work finding us real solutions. The only thing they are hard at work at is getting themselves re-elected so they continue their work of flushing Illinois down the financial toilet. It is sickening and tragic how little respect they have for your intelligence. How many times do Illinois voters have to get hit in the head with a 2X4 before they get it???

Eric Lieberman
www.liebermanforillinois.com

Reply

TakeBackIllinois

6:07 pm on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Biss supports The new ATM Pension Machine- your home ! . Having been in the pension business for over 30 yrs., I am getting the sense that a number of bloggers on this micro-blog site don't really understand how DB plans work, are funded or the underlying actuarial calculations in their assumptions. One of the very basic premises is that they need to be funded, right? During some very critical years of investment opportunity the Illinois pension funds were either severely underfunded on their Normal Cost basis or not funded at all. This is a Springfield-made problem. Another important assumption is how the actual performance measures up to the assumed actuarial rate of return. TRS just announced an abysmal .72% return in a year when 12 mos. stock market performance is in the double digits. On another note, in the post above does not take into effect that Teachers must opt of SS, AND pay into the system as well. At this point, this is not about DB vs, 401k ( which may be a good idea , if equitable), private vs. public pensions, teachers vs. Property taxpayers (the current Dan Biss spin) , but about our current legislator's, in Springfield, complete and utter mismanagement of the pension liability problem. Under Dan Biss, Madigan and Elaine Nekritz, their ONLY solution is to use your home's value- through local property taxes- as their Pension ATM Machine . Get ready; if they are elected, this will become the new normal.

Reply

TakeBackIllinois

6:33 pm on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Take Back Illinois from corruption foisted on the voters by Springfield. Take Back Illinois from the economic destruction and near bankruptcy instituted by our current Madigan oligarchy. Take Back Illinois for the future of my children and grandchildren who would like to live, and not just visit, our great State. Take Back Illinois for the small business owners who would like to stay here, but are fleeing small business creation in Illinois indroves. This transcends Democrat, Republican, Green, Independent ideology. It is about Taking Back Illinois for ALL voters and taxpayers, including you Guitarman, unless you live elsewhere.

Reply

Jac Charlier

10:11 pm on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

The IL Constitutional Amendment is no solution at all but a smokescreen being cast by Springfield because they cannot do their job (for which they are well paid + benefits). The elected state officials (Reps and Senators) have known about the pension and budget situation for 10 years. Despite this, they now want to "act" and "fix the problem" (which they caused) but oddly, do not speak about accountability. Why? Who could be accountable? Oh yes, you know who...but will you let it happen?

Reply

Eric Lieberman

10:47 pm on Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Hey, FUJI! Great news! I am an attorney and a technologist! Seriously, I, too, believe groupthink has replaced Critical Thinking. Let's get together after Nov 6 and talk about CT.

Best, Eric Lieberman, Republican Candidate, 18th DIstrict State Rep

Reply

Eric Lieberman

12:10 am on Thursday, November 1, 2012

Fuji - and so many people don't get that! Hang in there! - Eric

Reply

TakeBackIllinois

8:38 am on Sunday, November 4, 2012

What has Biss done for jobs creation? Nothing. In fact, he wants to also financially strap school districts by shifting the future pension liability costs to local School districts. Is this nutty or what? I am not voting for this "professor" with his fuzzy math to
further devastate property taxpayers.

Reply

TakeBackIllinois

1:30 pm on Sunday, November 4, 2012

Will the real Dan Biss stand up? A vote for Dan Biss is a vote for higher property taxes and much higher Progressive Illinois Income Taxes. Biss is no moderate; he wants to use your home for Springfield's Pension ATM Machine.

Reply

uyhghghgf

2:17 am on Monday, November 5, 2012

they have begun trying to lower http://www.coachoutletmls.com expectations.Consolidated Edison, for example, tucked an especially http://www.hemesbelscq.com dire note into a news release on Thursday afternoon. It said the http://www.coachfactoryoutletion.com “vast majority” of its customers in New York City http://www.coachoutletonlinehl.net and the northern suburbs should have power by Nov. 11, http://www.coachoutletonlineef.org but a significant number could remain in the dark for http://www.coachoutletuso.net a week or more beyond that.John Miksad, the company’s senior http://www.coachfactorystorebg.org vice president for electric operations, said some “stragglers http://www.coachoutletonlinetb.com ” might not get electricity again until the middle of this http://www.coachoutlethcs.com month. Those living through the worst-case situation may http://www.coachoutletb1.com account for just a few percent of the 850,000 Con Edison http://www.coachoutletdi.org customers who lost power,

Reply

farefarjey

8:31 pm on Thursday, November 15, 2012

We’re not quite at that http://www.coachfactoryoutletonlinebc.org stage yet. But we may be on the right path. For http://www.coachoutletod.com perhaps the greatest geek triumph of the 2012 presidential http://www.coachfactoryoutletbo.net elections was the unlikely figure of statistician Nate Silver, http://www.coachoutletpn.com whose FiveThirtyEight blog – which algorithmically assessed http://www.coachfactorystoredo.com hundreds of polls based on their historical accuracy – http://www.coachoutletos.org managed to successfully predict the result in 50 out http://www.coachoutletstorefb.com of 50 states.His analysis – like every political story – divides http://www.coachoutletstoreonlinert.com opinion. To my mind, though, his work shines a light on a bigger story about our future relationship http://www.coachoutletonlinelc.net with technology, and in particular on a vision of progress http://www.coachoutletonlinelon.com where there’s an increasingly clear divide between those http://www.coachoutletonlinelsa.com endeavours that can safely be left to humans, and those where http://www.coachoutletdt.net machines and mathematics are preferable.It’s something that http://www.louisvuittonoutletcft.net is already happening. From automated explorations of Mars, http://www.louisvuittonoutletsc.com the use of unmanned drone aircraft for reconnaissance and http://www.burberryscarfoutletvip.com remote assassination, to the analysis of pr

Reply

Leave a comment