* I posted an Illinois Statehouse News piece in the subscriber section yesterday morning about a supposedly “hush-hush” legislative pay hike embedded in a Senate bill, but with some serious reservations. I couldn’t find the text they were referring to in the bill and no other news outlet seemed to have found it either. So, I kept it behind the firewall until I could learn more. The Senate Democrats eventually knocked it down, and I updated my post to reflect that. ISN took the story off its site yesterday, but WLS Radio flogged the piece yesterday and still has the false info on its website…
CHICAGO (WLS) - At the same time Illinois’ top lawmakers work to cut spending, some in Springfield are giving themselves a pat on the back.
The Illinois Statehouse News reports that the Senate Executive Committee passed an amendment to Senate Bill 260 on Monday which would give pay raises as high as 47 percent to Senate and House committee chairmen.
The same bill, sponsored by Sen. Dan Kotowski, would force other General Assembly members to take 12 furlough days to help balance the state budget.
The salary hikes are on top of each lawmakers base pay of $67,836.
Some commenters here asked about the story yesterday, so that’s why I decided to bring it out into the public sphere today.
* The confusion stems over a different, appropriations bill which was debated last Friday. Essentially what happened is there was a typo on page 22 of an amendment dealing with committee stipends. Instead of $1,064,000 for stipends it read $1,640,000. And, yes, it was truly a typo. I checked with the comptroller’s office, because the money is traditionally appropriated through that office to pay the stipends, and was told that “nothing nefarious or sneaky” was done by anybody. “It was just a simple typo.”
However, if the Senate Democrats had bothered to hold a committee hearing on this approp bill last Friday before they debated it, the typo might have been corrected. Instead, it got pointed out during floor debate and the bill was withdrawn.
* From the SJ-R’s coverage of the furlough bill…
Illinois’ top political figures would have to take 12 furlough days during the next budget year under a bill approved by the Senate Executive Committee Monday.
The bill also prohibits cost-of-living pay increases for lawmakers beginning July 1 and cuts daily expense money paid to lawmakers while they are in Springfield.
Sen. Dan Kotowski, D-Park Ridge, said the reductions are the same as those in place for top officials this year. It will save the state more than $1.2 million next year, he said.
The 12 furlough days apply to state lawmakers, statewide elected officials and top management at state agencies, including directors. For state lawmakers, who make a base salary of $67,836 annually, the 12 unpaid furlough days amount to about $3,119.
* Mistakes happen in this business, so it’s good that ISN took its story down. WLS should immediately follow suit, as should the Illinois Review.
* Meanwhile, speaking of the budget, the governor’s spokesperson said Pat Quinn isn’t giving up on borrowing, and she didn’t have kind words for the General Assembly’s budget-making abilities…
Spokeswoman Mica Matsoff insisted the Democratic governor isn’t giving up on that idea. “We haven’t been given any indication that all debt-restructuring is off the table,” she said.
She said Quinn will review both the Senate and House budgets and then work with legislators to dump their negative parts and keep the positives. The negatives, she said, include cutting education. As for the positives, “I’ll call you back,” Matsoff said.
Oof.
* Public employee retirees might wanna get ready for more out of pocket expenses…
A key Senate Democrat said Tuesday that roughly two-thirds of the state’s retired workers should begin paying more for their taxpayer-financed health insurance starting this year.
State Sen. Jeff Schoenberg, D-Evanston, wants to begin phasing in higher employee contributions by targeting retirees who were not part of any labor agreement during their tenure as state employees. […]
While most retirees pay at least half of their health care costs in retirement, the study said only about 9 percent of retired state workers pay anything - besides out-of-pocket costs - for their medical coverage. […]
Boosting the amount all state retirees pay into their health care plans to closer to a 50 percent level could generate an estimated $260 million to help offset an annual $680 million tab for employee health care.
* Fair cuts…
Among the budget cuts in the latest spending proposal is a nearly 10 percent cut to local and state fair budgets. The Illinois Department of Agriculture, which pays for the Illinois State Fair in Springfield and DuQuoin State Fair in DuQuoin, also helps to support dozens of local fairs in counties statewide.
Gov. Pat Quinn’s budget proposal set aside $900,000 for county fair distribution. The state House proposal ups that amount by $900. The state Senate budget plan, however, trims the governor’s budget to $675,700.
* Related…
* Press Release: Kotowski Clarifies Lawmaker Pay Cuts (VIDEO)
* Freshman budget input differ in different chambers
* Press Release: Murphy’s audit resolution of questionable program held in limbo: A grant program allegedly meant to quell violence within the state’s most dangerous communities but whose funds were instead funneled into less violent Chicago communities just weeks before last year’s close governor election, is being called into question by State Sen. Matt Murphy (R-Palatine). On October 6, 2010, Governor Pat Quinn announced the release of grants through the Neighborhood Recovery Initiative (NRI) program within the Illinois Violence Prevention Authority (IVPA).
* Local leaders express concerns about Quinn proposal: “If they vote to support this, it’s a recipe for huge cuts in public safety,” Mayor Jim Ardis said Tuesday, one day before he plans to join a group of mayors in Springfield to speak out against the governor’s suggestion. “Frankly, I think it’s irresponsible for them to come after our percentage of the income tax to help balance a budget they can’t balance on their own.”
* Illinois budget will shape or limit service agencies: “The House version would cut 52 percent — about $28,500″ from an emergency and transitional housing program that serves women and children, said Madonna House Executive Director Barb Hicks.
* Advocates For The Homeless Back Senate Bill
* Illinois House, Senate Restore Drug Treatment Money Cut by Gov. Pat Quinn
- Are you kidding me! - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 10:56 am:
Sen. Jeff Schoenberg, So…The 8 percent of retirees not covered by the contract… Once again management (non-union) employees who have been working the last ten years without a raise and in some cases have had to take 24 furlough days.. and pay a significantly higher percentage more into their retirement… will now have to pay more for their health insurance? This is fair?
I had more respect for your integrity than that. It won’t impact 9 out of ten retirees but it sounds good in the newspapers. these are real people that you are being unfair with!
Either all pay an increase… or none do!
- Bigtwich - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 10:58 am:
Is Sen. Schoenberg saying that two-thirds of the state’s retired workers are non union? I confess I do not have the data but that looks suspect.
- Demoralized - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 10:59 am:
Agreed. I’m frankly sick of being treated like a dog by the past 2 administrations just b/c I’m not in the union. I have paid my fair share and LOT more. I also think this policy stinks because retirees based their retirement plans on certain income calculations. To now want to take a substantial portion of that income away is almost criminal. I don’t think anyone doubts that retirees have to start paying for healthcare but it needs to be either made reasonable or, if they insist on this ridiculous percentage, apply it to retirees going forward.
- University employee - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 11:02 am:
As a 28 year teacher, now college professor, I pretty offended that I have received 1% salary increase average over this period of time plus now I’m looking at being forced to get another job because if I take my earned retirement, I won’t be able to afford the insurance. All my tea party friends who are retired from big corps still have 100% insurance. I get tired of hearing their whining about public employees.
- Retired Non-Union Guy - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 11:09 am:
First the State takes away my lower cost options for health insurance like Health Alliance. Now the State wants me to pay more for my health insurance in retirement after they asked me to leave via the ERI so they could hire a cheaper replacement, saving them money. The State said if I stayed 20 years my health insurance would be free when I retired; I kept my part of the deal, I was there 32 years.
What’s with the big hurry to ram everything through the legislature int he next two weeks? They already said it couldn’t take effect until July 1, 2012 … which is over a year from now. Is there some kind of voodoo economic accounting that will allow the State to book the savings this year even though it won’t happen until next year?
Just one of my examples of the State not keeping their promises to their workers …
Forgot to add … the State took ObamaCare money to offset the costs of early retirees; they actually sent us a letter telling us they did. So the State already got money to help pay for the ERI health insurance. But the rules under which the money was doled out don’t require the State to spend the money on our health insurance; they can just toss it into GRF and spend the money on anything! I didn’t believe it either until I went and looked it up …
- Sammi - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 11:13 am:
University employee–
“Tea party”…. This Senator is a Democrat!
- JustaJoe - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 11:16 am:
Agree with those non-union folks who are tired of being dumped on…both in lack of support in doing their jobs, but also lack of raises…just to be the ones subject to actions that sound good in the press. My understanding has been that health care for retirees was supposed to be whatever applied to current employees. So, if that is correct, it would mean that all pay more or none do. That would be fair, no?
- Cincinnatus - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 11:19 am:
“She said Quinn will review both the Senate and House budgets and then work with legislators to dump their negative parts and keep the positives.”
In Quinn-speak, this means he will dump the spending cuts and keep the revenue enhancements, right?
“Meanwhile, speaking of the budget, the governor’s spokesperson said Pat Quinn isn’t giving up on borrowing, and she didn’t have kind words for the General Assembly’s budget-making abilities…”
Quinn’s legendary budgeting was on display last year when the GA punted and gave block budgeting ability to Quinn, right? Perhaps it was this year’s budget created by Quinn that was only a few billion bucks out of whack AFTER a huge tax increase, right?
- Sammi - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 11:25 am:
Sen. Schoenberg - With all due respect, you talk about saving $260 million dollars. This will affect thousands of Illinois families who have worked (full time)their whole life and planned a budget for this promise. Some will probably lose their homes… and there is a question constitutionally wether you can do this or not.
I have an idea that will affect LESS THAN A HUNDRED (PART TIME) politicians. Cut the legislative leader stipends worth $1,064,000… this will save 4 times the money and if a legislature can’t get by… they can become a lobbyist.
- University employee - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 11:29 am:
Justajoe - state law has been there is a sliding scale with the state paying more of your insurance the longer you stay up to the max of 100% after 20 years. You still have to pay the going rate for your dependents.
Sammi, your right about this being a democrat - so much for the democrats being for the little guy…. sad to get it from both sides.
- Sammi - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 11:29 am:
Obviously.. my math is way off target… As I am pretty much absolutely bonkers upset about this crap right now… but you get the idea.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 11:32 am:
I’m a big fan of the fairs. I wonder if the state could be more aggressively pursuing corporate sponsorships to help support them.
The link below lists the 2011 Illinois State Fair corporate sponsors.
http://www.agr.state.il.us/isf/sponsor/
There are some Illinois corporate names you’d expect, but not a lot. Some corporate bigfoots are very conspicuous by their absence.
And whole sponsorship categories seem to be missing. For example, no soft drink sponsor? No major media outlet sponsor? No fast food chain? No banks? No statewide associations? Those would seem to be slam dunks.
Of course, becoming a sponsor might not be that easy. When you click the sponsorship packet link on the page, up pops a PDF on how you can sponsor the state fair — the 2008 state fair.
Might want to update that one of these years.
- Sammi - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 11:33 am:
And for the record.. I am an Obama.. Kennedy… Clinton… and yes Madigan
Democrat! For a while….any way.
- Retired Non-Union Guy - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 11:38 am:
JustaJoe
… the deal was that retirees with 20 or more years of creditable service receive free health insurance for themselves; they still have to pay for health care for any spouses / dependents. That usually didn’t cost the State much because once the retirees went on Medicare, the State health plan became secondary and basically served to pick up whatever Medicare didn’t. In effect, the State health plan became (mostly) the retiree’s drug coverage plan … and that is actually cheaper to the State than “full” coverage for an active employee.
Retired State employees with less then 8 years credit are not entitled to any State health coverage (although ObamaCare may have changed that, not sure because it doesn’t apply to anyone I know). Retired employees with between 8 and 20 years pay a pro-rated percentage based on the years of service.
Note: the “free” health coverage retirees receive isn’t all that free … every option has deductibles and co-pays we have to cover, which can easily run thousands a year. I pay the same as a current employee for spouse coverage. Off the top of my head, just the prescription co-pays I have for two people totals about $1,100 per year … and we’re both fairly healthy! Add in some doctor and specialist visits and there are anywhere from hundreds to thousands more already being paid.
- Past Warden - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 11:42 am:
I was a union member for 25 1/2 years. I then took a promotion to warden. I paid more for my retirement benefits, got no raises, no overtime and no job security. Now you want to take some of my retirement. Where is the thank-you for stepping up, job well done, appreciate your service and dedication?
- one day at a time - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 11:52 am:
I recently retired from a non-union state position. I am 60, and my SERS pension take-home is about $26,000. The benefit of no medical care insurance premiums after 20 years of service was part of my retirement decision. The legislature’s current efforts to change these laws to avoid their legal/constitutional obligations is unconscionable.
- PublicServant - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 12:11 pm:
Exactly, One Day. That’s my argument when people state only future benefits will be affected. Depends on your definition of future. I relied on the 20 year free health insurance promise, the cola promise etc. To me they’re accrued benefits, not future benefits.
- Traveler - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 1:28 pm:
Sammi - I believe you when you say your are a democrat because your math is just as fuzzy as the Dems sinking our state’s fiscal ship - $1,064,000 is not 4 times $260 million!!! And no, I don’t get the idea - not even close - but this better explains how democrats count in “cutting” government spending!!
- Sammi - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 1:50 pm:
You’re a smart man Traveler. You probably thought Bush was a fiscal conservative.
- Secret Square - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 1:52 pm:
Sammi may have simply mistaken the latter figure for $1.064 BILLION instead of $1.064 MILLION and done the math accordingly — which is a mistake anyone, Democrat or Republican, can make, particularly when hurried or upset.
- Sammi - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 1:53 pm:
Thanks SS…
- Howard - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 1:55 pm:
Illinois Review isn’t a news site. If they were forced to remove content that wasn’t true, the page would be blank.
- Secret Square - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 2:32 pm:
Of course I can just imagine the scrambling for committee assignments if that figure REALLY were $1 billion….
- Traveler - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 2:45 pm:
Really Sammi - How did Bush get involved in this discussion? Typical …
- JustMe_JMO - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 3:42 pm:
Furlough Bill for top DOGS
It would be nice if wording was included in this (or some) bill that defined the number of days a year that their based pay amount is for!
- Newsclown - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 3:59 pm:
Remind me please, who bankrolls ISN’s operations again?
Just sayin’.
- Ebcdic - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 5:14 pm:
No hidden pay raises? You got to be kidding. When the IGA refuses to include the Judges in the pension reform that equates to one big pay raise for them. I cant believe that the IGA states that they believe the Judges would not have the morals or ethics and would find any pension reform illegal if it included them. If they would find it illegal for them would that not also apply to the state employees? We need to begin recall action on our IGA and Judges. Isn’t it amazing that the majority of all earning greater than $80,000 a year in retirement are the IGA, Judges and elected officials. Now that is illegal,immoral and unethical.
- Michelle Flaherty - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 9:28 pm:
Uni employee, here’s an idea, keep working if you want the state to provide you health care. As a uni employee you already get quite a bit for essentially doing nothing so sorry if I don’t feel sorry for you that you don’t get all these freebies for quitting your job early.
And I do love it how on one hand public sector employees talk about their devotion to their jobs and on the other complain that they don’t get full benefits for leaving early. One minute you make it sound like you’ll work til the day you die because you love public service and the next minute you complain that you have to work past 55.
Just think how long the kids you taught are going to have to work in order to pay for all of your benefits.
- Contract - Wednesday, May 18, 11 @ 10:40 pm:
I have a contract with the State of Illinois for my pension; guaranteed by the constitution. I don’t have to belong to a union for this contract. This in violation of the constitution and it reflects on the integrity of those proposing it. Even the “labor act” does not give the union the right to bargain this away for it’s members.
“Membership in any pension or retirement system of the State, any unit of local government or school district, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, shall be an enforceable contractual relationship, the benefits of which shall not be diminished or impaired.”
- win - Thursday, May 19, 11 @ 12:01 am:
According to that Mercer report on the retiree health care, there are a whole lot of retirees that will move to medicaid and subsidies as the new federal health care bill comes in.
- JustaJoe - Thursday, May 19, 11 @ 7:23 am:
Thank to posts above for specifics on retiree and dependent coverage costs, however, the point is that if the basis for calculation of the retiree cost is the cost for current employees, cost increases or benefit reductions targeted at retirees diminishes the retirement benefit and that would seem to be unconstitutional.