Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY: Crosstabs and UPDATED events list
Next Post: Sen. Kirk begins to reemerge
Posted in:
* Via Greg Hinz, we have a new study of where government workers live in Illinois. A few dot points…
* Four of the ten House districts with the highest amount of public workers have Republican Representatives. Two of the ten Senate districts with the highest number of public workers have a Republican Senator.
* In the House, of the 782,212 public employees, 58 percent of are in Democratic districts and 42 percent are in Republican districts.
* In the Senate, 66% of public employees are in Democratic districts.
Keep in mind that we’re talking about all government workers, including state, federal, local, school and university. The study, which used data from the 2007-11 American Community Survey, also includes part time and temp workers.
* A full list of government workers by state legislative districts is here. Go check it out.
* An interactive state district map…
* Greg…
Some of his findings help explain why government pension reform is such a tough sell in supposedly conservative areas outside of Chicago. Others pose new questions, such as why North Side liberals tend to elect politicians who back spending that employs residents of other neighborhoods, not theirs. […]
Of the 15 Illinois House Districts that ranked highest in terms of share of the civilian workforce that was employed by government, 10 were in Downstate areas that were home to institutions such as the University of Illinois, Southern Illinois University and the like, or which had a large prison in or near the district. The other five were in black areas in southern Cook County. […]
Another question: What is the impact in black neighborhoods that already are behind the economic curve in some ways when one of the more stable sources of good jobs — government — pulls back.
* That’s a good question. Bloomberg had a story about this the other day…
Public-sector workers are [nationally] disproportionately black. In 2011, about 19 percent of black workers were employed by the government, compared with 14 percent of whites and 10 percent of Hispanics. That figure used to be even higher (21 percent in 2008-2010), but the recession and its aftermath have been hard on public-sector workers. Berkeley economist Steven Pitts has called government jobs a “pillar” of middle-class African-American life. […]
The upshot is pretty clear: Reducing the value of public pensions and other benefits wouldn’t just hurt blacks disproportionately; it would do so at a time when other economic trends have already hurt them more than most.
Discuss.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 9:44 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY: Crosstabs and UPDATED events list
Next Post: Sen. Kirk begins to reemerge
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
–Others pose new questions, such as why North Side liberals tend to elect politicians who back spending that employs residents of other neighborhoods, not theirs. […]–
That’s a silly question, unless you presume people are hyper-parochial on a block-to-block basis.
It also presumes that there is a real constituency for cutting services. Time and again it’s been shown that talk is cheap when it comes to cutting, and when it has to be done, make sure you cut the other guy; my spending is vital.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 9:59 am
This is why Rep. Bost is going to have problems, running for Congress. The Government workers and Retirees don’t forget. If you were retired and your retirment check got smaller and even smaller next year. Its real hard to support a man who voted to take money from you!
Comment by Retired Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 10:00 am
I’ve never understood why the media and moderate republicans were never harder on “conservative” republicans who go easier on spending-such as for the gov workers they represent as noted in that study.
“North Side liberals who elect people who support spending that employs people in other areas” Alex I’ll take the region that backs jonah edelman for $600 please.
Comment by shore Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 10:07 am
There are several reasons why employee demograhics are what they are, one of which is the priority given to diversity -
Comment by Marie Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 10:12 am
Seriously, Marie? Because the private sector has a history of passionately seeking African-American workers, but can’t lure them away from the government sector and its “priority given to diversity”?
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 10:31 am
Everyone on the Northside knows you don’t get rich working for the government you just have to know someone.
Comment by jeffin in chicago Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 10:36 am
“the private sector has a history of passionately seeking African-American workers”???
if you have a list of private sector companies that have “a history of passionately seeking African-American workers,” i’ll be happy to pass it along to african-americans seeking employment…
Comment by bored now Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 10:38 am
“In the House, of the 782,212 public employees, 58 percent of are in Democratic districts and 42 percent are in Republican districts.”
60% of the Reps are Democratic, 40% are Republican.
“In the Senate, 66% of public employees are in Democratic districts.”
67.8% of Senators are Democratic, 32.2% are Republican.
Comment by Bigtwich Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 10:54 am
What a crock! Does Hinz think if you don’t have many soldiers in your district, you shouldn’t support health care and pensions for them?
Maybe cops and firefighters can’t afford to live in affluent districts, so they should be dissed?
And why do Madigan, Cross, and Radogno dance to the tune of the Civic Committee. What percentage of their constituents are members?Why doesn’t Hinz criticize legislators for standing up for the rich guys who don’t live in their disricts?
And Feigenholtz, Biss , Nekritz, and Gabel who like to think of themselves as liberals are no friends of public pensions.WHo is Hinz talking about?
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 10:54 am
It would certainly be interesting to know who commissioned this/suggested to Paral that he slice the data this way. He could have included layers that would allow us to see local/state/federal separately, which would actually be instructive.
Honestly, the map I’d LOVE to see done for IL is the political bent/return-on-tax map (here is WA state):
http://www.thestranger.com/binary/ea57/CityLead-CLICK.jpg
Comment by crazybleedingheart Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 11:04 am
@ Bored now - I’m pretty sure that Anonymous 10:31 a.m. was being sarcastic.
Comment by Joan P. Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 11:11 am
Party lines are too simplistic to be of value when looking at this issue. Some of those who have pushed hardest for serious pension “reform” have been Democrats.
Comment by walkinfool Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 11:11 am
Including temp workers in that date range means it includes Census workers which certainly increases the number beyond normal payrolls and may also skew the data.
Comment by Distant Viewer Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 11:32 am
Ok. You know how much I am paid, where I live, what my politics are, what religion I am. What’s next - what I eat??? For cryin’ out loud, leave me alone and get a life.
Comment by lincolnlover Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 11:32 am
LaHood has 12
Twelve percent of the workforce in LaHood’s district work in government jobs. What percent of the workforce is employed by Caterpillar? I doubt it’s 12%, yet he carries water for the company and p….s on public employees. How does Hinz feel about that?
Comment by Truthteller Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 11:59 am
Retired
Bost voted NO on SB1, just like the majority of House Republicans, who talk a good game about reform, and do a lot of finger-pointing.
Comment by reformer Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 12:09 pm
@Jeffin
===Everyone on the Northside knows you don’t get rich working for the government you just have to know someone.===
Nice driveby. Care to even try to back that up bud?
Comment by PublicServant Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 2:33 pm
- reformer - Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 12:09 pm:
Retired
Bost voted NO on SB1, just like the majority of House Republicans, who talk a good game about reform, and do a lot of finger-pointing.
http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisreview/2012/05/il-house-debates-ending-free-health-insurance-for-il-state-retirees.html
“Realize that we’re up against the wall now, and if we don’t become more sensible with operations of state, we may have to make cuts for those mentaly ill,” State Rep. Mike Bost (R-Murphysboro) said. “This is not perfect. I wish it was. I wish I could do nothing in response to the many calls I’ve gotten. Should I do nothing or should I do my job that I’ve been sent here to do.”
“Today is the start of making some very tough decision. A politician is someone who votes for the next election. A statesman votes for the next generation. Ladies and gentlemen, we must vote for the next generation,” Bost said.
Comment by S. Illinois Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 2:59 pm
Couldn’t help but notice the Commercial Club’s HQ, and the districts of some of the supposedly “liberal” pension reformers, are in areas shaded the lightest greens. I remember talking to a chief staffer at DuPage County a few years ago who lamented that very few of his workers could actually afford to live in the county they worked in.
Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 3:22 pm
For some occupations, there is indeed a premium on qualified African American hires by some corporate sectors. Anonymous 10:31’s ill-worded post actually has some truth in it; the problem is that this highly valued subset (who have the right credentials and degrees) is just a slice of the AA people out there actually looking for jobs.
Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 3:26 pm
These numbers are somewhat useful, but mostly meaningless. In addition to the 782,000 public employees, there are about 400,000 or so public sector retirees receiving retirement benefits in Illinois.
if you are doing political calculus regarding pension reform, you can’t leave those folks out. Start figuring in household members and the numbers really start to explode.
My best guess: 1 in 5 Illinois adults lives in a home where atleast one person is either receiving public retirement benefits or paying into a public retirement system (excluding federal employees).
Comment by Juvenal Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 6:09 pm
“Couldn’t help but notice the Commercial Club’s HQ, and the districts of some of the supposedly “liberal” pension reformers, are in areas shaded the lightest greens.”
I noticed that too and was a bit surprised. At least the liberal folks up north who support pensions are good for the government workers in the southern part of the state.
Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 6:17 pm
==What is the impact in black neighborhoods that already are behind the economic curve in some ways when one of the more stable sources of good jobs — government — pulls back==
What is the impact? The impact is people aren’t able to put food on the table, they aren’t able to pay bills, mortgages and car payments go unpayed, etc. While nothing may not have been written or researched specifically on black neighborhoods and the decline in government employment, there has been plenty written on government employment and the black middle class and it is easy to see the effect on neighborhoods when you combine that with the literature of poverty’s effect on neighborhoods as it relates to recent/mass unemployment from local economic sectors in distress (for examples, see Flint during the 80s auto shutdowns or Detroit or the Southeast Side of Chicago and Gary after the steel mills left).
http://www.npr.org/2012/05/09/152297370/government-job-cuts-threaten-black-middle-class
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/29/us/as-public-sector-sheds-jobs-black-americans-are-hit-hard.html
Comment by Precinct Captain Tuesday, Aug 13, 13 @ 6:49 pm
BTW, it is a mistake to argue or presume that “liberal” Democrats should vote in the narrow self-interest of their relatively affluent constituents.
They, like their constituents, are “liberal” Democrats precisely because their world view is not as constricted by self-interest. When it comes in particular to issues of race, poverty, social justice, civil rights, environmental protection and equality, they believe that government has a critical role to play ensuring a society that is socially, morally, economically and environmentally sustainable.
That requires people to do the work, and while we can have a reasonable debate about how many people it takes, what work they should be doing, and how much compensation we need to offer to get the best people for the job; at the end of the day, the anti-government worker argument (by their very nature anti-government) fundamentally conflict with the world view of liberals, as does the argument for narrow self-interest.
Comment by Juvenal Wednesday, Aug 14, 13 @ 9:07 am