Pension reform isn’t going anywhere until the roof of the house falls in. It is simply more “theater time” for the media coutesy of Pat Quinn. If it looks like a lame duck, walks like a lame duck, and quacks like a lame duck, then it is a “lame” duck.
Why did he wait until today to present his specific legislative proposals to the General Assembly? Oh, wait . . .
- Reformed Public Servant - Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 10:49 am:
Sine Die is a great excuse for getting in the way of all that great progress leadership was making…Oh well, back to the drawing board to await another credit rating downgrade, which will provide external cover for “a plan that erases the liability.”
Unfortuately I agree with Wilson Pickett. Once benefits can no longer be paid out something will be done, most likely under court order. I keep hearing that its 10 years to default for most of the funds, but I seem to recall reading it could be sooner for some of the pension funds. If we are faced with default how would you like to be the judge who gets that first case?
I may be wrong but it seems to me that PQ is more interested in wreaking havoc on state employees rather than coming to a consensus on what can be done to ease the pension problem.
What I would look for in a leader who is interested in truly solving the problem would be a presentation of what he wants along with an EXPLANATION of each individual item along with the savings. ie; Increase in amount employees will contribute to their pension. This will increase amount of money going into pension system by X amount of dollars which reduces the amount the state will have to pay by Y amount of dollars. Show your work!
Then take that iemized list to the unions and see what they propose. Next show side by side comparisons of what each sides plan will save in actual dollars. Take items each side agrees upon and build an agreement. HYave a joint press conference on what has been agreed upon, then go back to the table to contiue. If one side is short of the goal then show how that side is short and ask what they can give to reach the goal. Be willing to explain why you are asking for a particular item instead of seeking just a dollar amount of savings.
The upside of this approach is that it involves everyone. And gives them a say. It probably will reduce the impact on employees and if it becomes an agreement it does not have to stand the constitutional muster because it was mutually agreed upon.
Instead of doing this our Governor wants to continue to berate employees and propose things that are vindicitve in nature instead of solving the problem.
- Old and In the Way - Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 12:51 pm:
Yes! Your proposal makes perfect sense and may be what ultimately happens. Unfortunately Governor Dufus has never been good with that detail thing. His motto has always been Ready, Shoot, Aim. I have worked with him since his CUB days and nothing has changed and I suspect nothing will. Illinois only hope for leadership is from outside the Governor’s office.
Your proposal is what should happen regardless!
- Small Town Liberal - Tuesday, Jan 8, 13 @ 12:58 pm:
- continue to berate employees and propose things that are vindicitve in nature -
Can you point me to comments like that in the video? I must not have had enough coffee because I listened the speech and didn’t hear any berating or vindictiveness toward employees.
Can’t say the same for the public employees’ comments toward the Governor.
Abe - So why is the We are One coalition proposing increasing employee contributions to the pension and that is even included as part of some of the legislation, yet the Governor scoffs at it and calls it ground we have already covered? Why won’t he take that item and begin a discussion with them? Why are we seeing a building on that offer and transparent discussions where actual dollar savings are shown? The union has made an offer it would seem to me the correct response on the
governor’s part would be something like” We will take that as a start and see what savings that will generate. Then come back with it will only generate X amount of savings and we need to get to Y. So we are proposing that we include item B. There is no interest in that. PQ just wants to prove that he is The Governor!! And no one should question him.
Those billions of dollars should have been taken into consideration before the state borrowed against our money. We would not be having this huge debt if it were not for poor judgement on the state leaders.
@Irish yes they did propose that 2% from employees be included (they said gradually but i dont remember them giving a specific proposal) but that was after most proposals already had increased contributions on them. They essentialyl saw the writing on the wall. And in the same press release they claimed “Gov Quinn’s proposal is a devastating assualt on the life-savings of the state’s dedicated public servants.” How’s that for negotiating in good faith.
Per MotherTribune, Quinn has just thrown a “Hail Mary” pass and sought legislation to create a blue ribbon committee to study the issue and come up with a proposal in 4 months on ways to solve the problem.