It went mostly unnoticed at the Statehouse, but Senate President John Cullerton pulled a neat little trick at the end of the spring legislative session and may end up getting what he wants this fall.
We’re going to get into some “insider” terminology and a few numbers, but it’s really not all that difficult so stay with me here.
Cullerton (D-Chicago) refused to advance a measure known as a “budget implementation bill,” or BIMP, that transferred millions of dollars into special state funds, transfers known as “trouts.” For instance, the legislation transfers $4 million from the state’s general revenue fund (which is like the state’s checking account) into the underground resources conservation fund.
All told, Cullerton wants to fish out about $200 million from the “trouts” and use the cash to satisfy his members’ demand that schools be given more money.
Education took a big hit in the House’s budget. Overall, the education budget was cut about $200 million. It would’ve been more, but the House found $50 million from refinancing savings and put that into schools.
Several Senate Democrats initially voted against the House’s education budget. Those “no” votes kept the bill from receiving a majority and set off a scramble that resulted in what appeared to be a face-saving gesture of higher taxes on satellite TV providers and offshore oil company profits. Both of those tax hikes passed the Senate on partisan roll calls but were never called in the House.
Ever so quietly, though, while the media was watching the tax hike bills, the Senate decided not to pass that BIMP bill. The goal is to pressure the House during the fall veto session to use that cash for education.
This is the same game plan that the Senate Democrats used last year to increase state spending after the House jammed its budget down their throats. It worked last year, and the Senate Dems say it’ll work again this year.
The trout maneuver shows pretty clearly that Cullerton didn’t get the props for the spring session that he deserved. He worked quietly behind the scenes to advance proposals that weren’t high on the media’s radar.
For instance, Cullerton got the Senate to OK a bill to reform two of the state’s five pension systems, those that cover legislators and state workers. That happened even though the House failed to pass any major pension reforms due to partisan bickering.
Cullerton, however, put together a structured roll call with the Senate GOP and moved the bill forward. The move barely received any notice in the spring session’s immediate aftermath.
Cullerton’s pension reform theory also won the day. House Speaker Michael Madigan (D-Chicago) believed that the unions could negotiate pension changes for everyone in the system.
Cullerton, however, believed that workers and retirees needed to be given a choice between two pension systems to avoid violating the Illinois Constitution’s mandate that pension benefits “shall not be diminished.” In the end, Cullerton’s theory was adopted.
And while Cullerton was trying to put together the votes to pass the pension reform bill, Gov. Pat Quinn was busily doing horse-trading on a bill that had no chance.
The Quinn administration spent much of the last two days of the session vainly searching for votes to pass the so-called “management bill,” which would allow the governor to kick 1,900 state employees out of their union. The administration has fought hard for the proposal for two years straight. They passed it through the House but came up empty in the Senate.
Illinois government’s workforce is more unionized than any state in the country. Somewhere around 95 percent are in a union, including lots of management and political staff. The administration claims it’ll be 99 percent not far in the future if nothing is done.
Cullerton advanced the management bill out of committee, but a quick head count showed that it was nine votes shy of passage so he moved on to pension reform.
But Quinn kept trying to find votes for the management bill. Sen. Dave Koehler (D-Peoria) confirmed that the administration agreed not to close a halfway house in his district if he voted for the bill.
In the end, though, the governor could not come up with enough votes, and the bill was never called.
Quinn has received high praise for this session, but Cullerton deserves much credit as well.
- Moderate REpub - Monday, Jun 11, 12 @ 9:17 am:
Its hard for me to give Cullerton big praise for doing stuff hes supposed to do…
He’s the Senate President - Cullerton should be advancing agendas and getting things done on behalf of his caucus. It reflects the power that comes with the office.
I will say that its nice to see someone using the power in a “give and take” manner with the Speaker. The House has had it’s way with the Senate since Pate left. Better late than never I guess - I hope it continues.
- wordslinger - Monday, Jun 11, 12 @ 9:30 am:
–Sen. Dave Koehler (D-Peoria) confirmed that the administration agreed not to close a halfway house in his district if he voted for the bill.–
Careful. In the Age of SuperFitz, that might get some scrutiny.
- Curious - Monday, Jun 11, 12 @ 9:39 am:
Cullerton’s pension idea winning out is a major storyline that got buried. He’d been talking about that for over a year.
- RNUG - Monday, Jun 11, 12 @ 9:41 am:
Cullerton seems to work to understand the issues and actually get something done. The fact he does it mostly quietly is to his credit; it let’s him have some flexibility to maneuver when he needs to adjust to get the deal done. Yes, it is his job … but he is just doing it, not grandstanding … and in Illinois, that says lot.
- wishbone - Monday, Jun 11, 12 @ 9:46 am:
“Careful. In the Age of SuperFitz, that might get some scrutiny.”
Not really, no personal benefit sought. Unlike that Colorado prisoner.
- Sunshine - Monday, Jun 11, 12 @ 9:53 am:
Cudos to Cullerton but would rather he remain quietly doing for the citizens.
- wordslinger - Monday, Jun 11, 12 @ 9:55 am:
Wishbone, I’m not naive about politics, but there’s a fine line and it’s moved a few times over the years.
What’s personal benefit? Trading a vote for jobs in your district? Could be, if it helps your supporters and helps you keep your job.
And how about an administration promising to spend funds on a state facility, not on policy merits, but in exchange for a vote?
I’m just saying, watch that moving line.
- Excessively Rabid - Monday, Jun 11, 12 @ 10:23 am:
Still, a forced choice between two cuts is a cut….
- langhorne - Monday, Jun 11, 12 @ 11:22 am:
“Cullerton, however, believed that workers and retirees needed to be given a choice between two pension systems to avoid violating the Illinois Constitution’s mandate that pension benefits “shall not be diminished.” In the end, Cullerton’s theory was adopted.”
this “choice” is like being asked if you want to be shot or stabbed. it is not a choice between two pension systems–there is still one pension system but with a “choice” of reduced benefits. it is a coercive manipulation to diminish or eliminate health insurance availability to achieve an end they could not legally accomplish otherwise. a) lose it entirely and keep your COLA, or b) keep it at a substantial charge and lose most of the value of your COLA. calling it a choice is cute, but wrong.
losing access to the state health care plan worth hundreds of dollars a month diminishes the value of my pension significantly. deciding to “keep health insurance” which will cost a yet unknown amount, likely to be hundreds of dollars a month, subject to annual increase, coupled with a reduced and delayed COLA, also diminishes the value of my pension. if i had known i wouldn’t get any COLA for years, i might have worked longer. do retirees get a “do-over”?
i realize health insurance is not covered by the constitutional guarantee against diminishment. i am willing to pay a reasonable amount. i have pre-existing medical conditions which likely make private insurance unaffordable. this is a “choice”?
i do congratulate Cullerton on passing the bill. pass it in the House, hopefully w a delayed effective date, so we can head to the courthouse.
at least we got the GA’s super-duper promise of priority funding of pensions in the future. oh wait, that disappeared.
i am confidently waiting for CMS to announce the sliding scale for charging for health insurance. remember, CMS is the outfit that bungled the health care contracts last time around that still hasn’t been fixed.
- wizard - Monday, Jun 11, 12 @ 11:25 am:
quinn said over the weekend that they needed to get facts and data in order to make a decision on shifting the costs to the schools and municipalities. shouldn’t they have done that BEFORE they put the plan together? you know, the one that madigan abandoned. now they want research???
- Liberty_First - Monday, Jun 11, 12 @ 11:38 am:
Passing the debt to retirees, employees and local taxpayers isn’t leadership.
- RNUG - Monday, Jun 11, 12 @ 11:41 am:
langhorne,
CMS still doesn’t have their act together … that’s why there are 90 day emergency contracts with the HMO’s starting July 1.
If SB-1313 ever gets signed (GA site shows it sent to Gov.), then the court case can start on whether the health insurance is protected under contract law as deferred compensation (since it required 20 years of work to ‘earn’ it). Or is Quinn deliberately sitting on SB-1313 and using it as a bargaining chip in the union negotiations?
- shouldawoulda - Monday, Jun 11, 12 @ 11:59 am:
Quinn shoulda thought about the possibility of mass unionization before he inflicted his “shared sacrifice” furlough days only on non-union members. What did he think people would do?
- langhorne - Monday, Jun 11, 12 @ 12:01 pm:
RNUG-
that was snark re CMS. i have no confidence in them other than to screw it up.
- soccermom - Monday, Jun 11, 12 @ 12:14 pm:
@Liberty - You mean those local taxpayers who sat on the sidelines and whistled while their school boards voted huge end-of-career salary bumps to top administrators to inflate their pensions - you know, so former administrators from Winnetka can have their six-figure pensions paid for 30 years by low-wage earners in Southern Illinois?
Or did you mean the local taxpayers in Chicago who are already paying the full cost of Chicago teachers’ pensions, as well as a big chunk of TRS costs?
- Liberty_First - Monday, Jun 11, 12 @ 12:18 pm:
langhorne- the state of Illinois is a participant in the early retiree reimbursement program under the Affordable Healthcare Act where the feds reimburse 80% of early retiree health care costs. This is in place until the insurance exchange sets up. Under COBRA, because the state is terminating your coverage, you might be able to get coverage until the state health exchanges are set up which is required by 2014…
What a mess the politicians have created.
- Bill - Monday, Jun 11, 12 @ 12:36 pm:
If Obamacare is upheld nobody will choose to cut their COLA. So how much of the pension “crisis” does this scheme solve? Not much. It is a bad bill and bad public policy. Typical. The longer this drags out in court the more early retirees will qualify for medicare and the less the state will realize in the end.
So 3 cheers to Cullerton for pandering.
- Liberty_First - Monday, Jun 11, 12 @ 2:36 pm:
Soccermom….. since when do taxpayers pay any attention to anything but slogans? Taxpayers in Chicago have little to complain about as there the state aid formula is not only unequal but is supplemented by big grants that benefit CPS.
Local schools are not the only ones paying big salaries to administrators. That is a rampent problem in all levels of education.
- RNUG - Monday, Jun 11, 12 @ 6:02 pm:
Langhrne,
Didn’t pick up on the snark … sorry.