55 Comments - Liberty_First - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 10:38 am: I’m sure it plays well at home…. Tea partiers are way too late to the war…. - HaroldVK - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 10:42 am: Not to be sarcastic — this is a serious question: Could somebody flesh out the downside of switching to a 401(k) style plan moving forward? Would be the actual cost to taxpayers of making that switch? We here a lot about it, but I’m not just getting details from any source. - Francis Underwood - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 10:43 am: Is anyone surprised with what Ives is saying? She likes to play up the fact she went to West Point and she would rather fight and fail than compromise and get things done. - Puddles - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 10:44 am: Ballsy thing to say about a graduate from the United States Military Academy, and an officer in the United States Army. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 10:45 am: Puddles, she’s not in the military when she’s in the General Assembly. She’s a legislator. - Downstater - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 10:48 am: =If she was here to learn, she’d already know the serious fiscal consequences of moving to a 401(k) system. No more employee pension contributions into a gigantic legacy system which still somehow has to be dealt with, and new state Social Security employer payments.= This statement makes no sense. - Wensicia - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 10:50 am: “As one of the major daily newspapers in the state, your advocacy and influence is powerful.” Not as powerful as the Tribune editorial board and Ms Ives would like to believe. - Mason born - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 10:51 am: Hard not to draw the corollary here. Ponzi schemes fail when you cannot get enough suckers to contribute. Pensions system cannot switch to a 401k because then there will be no more suckers contributing. Puddles Being a vet i completely agree with what Rich is saying. She is a politician when she is dealing with the IL House and those issues. - Meaningless - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 10:52 am: I hope other people can now feel some of the pain that I feel. I live in the district that has Rep. Ives for my representative. - geronimo - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 10:54 am: Dear Rep Ives, Please educate yourself so you don’t embarrass yourself. The system didn’t create the economic tragedy today. People like you stealing from it has created the problem with the pension system. Is this another one of those things that if you keep saying it often enough it might come true? - shore - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 10:54 am: when you worry about the tribune editorial board I urge you to call governor mckenna to see how his first term is going. - ArchPundit - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 10:56 am: == the pension reform plan put forth by Rep. Tom Morrison and me. Tom Morrison and I. Press release writers please note. It’s not a big deal in casual conversation or a blog post or comment, but if you are going to make a public statement for release for a state elected official, please proofread. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 10:57 am: ===Rep. Ives is a freshman… She’s here to teach.=== ===Well, there’s also an Illinois Constitution and Rep. Ives is sworn to uphold it. I don’t know of anybody who has ever come up with any sort of argument that switching everybody into a 401(k) program is in any way or form constitutional.=== From Rep. Ives - The QUOTE Rep. Ives CHOSE, on her own. - ===“Soldiers, when committed to a task, can’t compromise.=== Rep. Ives, it appears by her words, and her choice of quotes, has NO intention of trying to solve Illinois’ problems in a logical, thoughtful, rational, and honest manner. Logical - the 401(k) thought and process of switching over is not an option that can pass muster, nor will it make economic sense for the state of Illinois in a “cost” move as a “stand alone” move for a cure. Instituional Knowledge … is something many Freshmen lack, and it appears Rep. Ives is one. Thoughtful - Who uses a quote that allows themselves to be equated as a soldier. A soldier is a defender of the Constitution, faces real threats of death or harm in his/her actions, and uses PHYSICAL force to dictate the policies of the civilian goverment here in the United States. How is YOUR quote … thoughtful … to any soldiers, sailors, airmen, marine? You are a legislator in Illinois. You do not get up, eat Rations, Hike, or have any traits in your job that mirror anyone laying their lives on the line for Our Country. Thoughtful? Rational - “If it is “the perfect” vs. “the good” then why advocate for the lesser, simply because it is more popular or has bigger names signed to it?” - There is an “Art” to compromise, without surrender, and getting what you want, while giving what other need in return. For someone, as Rich puts perfectly, who wants to “teach” us all, you know nothing about the “Art” which can lead to your “work of Art” as a blank canvas, while you whine and cry “Foul! Foul! Foul!” and those cries fall on deaf ears. Rational? Honest - Is your 401(k) actually honest in how it can solve the crisis? Honest in its facts and how it can impact? Is it constitutional? You swore an Oath to defend the Illinois constitution, so are you being hinest with yourself and your Oath, given how you are “teaching” us to ignore the Institutional knowledge that seeps from the walls, but you choose to blatently ignore? Is this reall about YOU - RE. IVES? You question the integrity because ===…or has bigger names signed to it?=== Is it about YOU … or about Illinois … Honest? As you keep “teaching”, maybe some “lernin’” should be on YOUR agenda, and stop bringing down My Party as you are seen as a Grandtander, invoking yourself as a “soldier” all the while making it about YOU and not the bettterment of Illinois … ===…or has bigger names signed to it?=== There are many sad things, but claiming to be a “soldier” and making it about yourself is probably the saddest. Dope. - SenecaJones - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 10:59 am: So what Ives is proposing would have “serious fiscal consequences?” What do you have now in Illinois, exactly? She is there to teach and should be there to learn? From who, the people who have wrecked the state’s finances? - Anon - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 11:01 am: Puddles, West Point is a crucible which, through a grinding four year process, identifies men and women with the intelligence, courage and charisma to lead soldiers. The best of these get the choice infantry and artillery positions which lead to further promotions. After graduation Rep Ives was assigned to supervise a platoon of truck drivers in Germany during the Gulf War. Draw your own conclusions… - Downstater - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 11:01 am: =If she was here to learn, she’d already know the serious fiscal consequences of moving to a 401(k) system. No more employee pension contributions into a gigantic legacy system which still somehow has to be dealt with, and new state Social Security employer payments.= This statement makes no sense. Private companies have converted from defined benefit to defined contribution plans and saved money all the time. And most of those companies had unfunded liabilities. I don’t think you understand how this works. - Chris - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 11:01 am: ” put forth by Rep. Tom Morrison and me. Tom Morrison and I. ” Um, no, Arch. The release is correct. Take out the other person–’the plan put forth by [I or me]’–clearly ‘me’, right? Or, substitute [we/us] and see which makes sense–’the plan put forth by [we or us]’–clearly ‘us’, right? I = we; me = us. Only thing ‘right’ in the release. - geronimo - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 11:06 am: What kind of people are we electing? Can we recall them like cars? - Chris - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 11:07 am: “This statement makes no sense. Private companies have converted from defined benefit to defined contribution plans and saved money all the time.” That may well be true, but need to see some data. Can you name one *large* company (ie, $10 billion + in revenue) with a *large* (ie 10,000+ retirees) legacy pension class that actually saved $$ in the near term without running through a corporate re-organization of some sort? Not that it matters, really, as *that* proposal has *no chance* of surviving the lititgation. None. *Clearly* unconstitutional (unless the bill also fires *everyone*). - Really? - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 11:08 am: I hate this as a reason to vote against something because, often, (not always), I think they are using it as an excuse. Repubs want the income tax to go back to 3%. Let’s say some Dems wanted it down to 4% but still plenty wanted it at 5%, so repub votes were needed to lower it to 4%. Would repubs vote against a bill to lower the income tax rate to 4% because it doesn’t lower it to 3%? And thereby kill the bill? That seems silly to me. - Calhoun Native - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 11:08 am: “To delight in war is a merit in the soldier, a dangerous quality in the captain, and a positive crime in the statesman.” George Santayana Neither Captain nor statesman Ives be. - Chris - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 11:10 am: Oh, follow-up on the grammar: I *do* think that the proper PR format should be: “the pension reform plan Rep. Tom Morrison and I put forth” But only because it takes it into active voice. Want to avoid putting oneself into passive voice when touting what you’ve done. - Chavez-respecting Obamist - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 11:13 am: Yeah, yeah, private companies save money all the time dumping pensions in favor of 401ks. In the meantime, they mess with their employees’ retirement plans doing that. My father died a few months ago. That’s when my mother found out the company he retired from had dropped the $10,000 life insurance policy they told him was part of his retirement package. They did have a $3000 policy in place, which helped pay for things, but their plan had always been to use the 10K to pay for his funeral and other end-of-life expenses. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 11:13 am: Let me be quite clear on the “Soldier” bit …make no mistake. As a member of the Illinois General Assembly, Ives’ role as a Legislator, specifically, does not equate, specifically, to the task at hand. The civilian government does NOT go on manuvers, nor are they in Peril as part of the description of Illinois state Representative. While Rep. Ives may think her personal history allows for such a corollary in her mind, her role, as a member of the Illinois General Assembly, a civilian government, is based on laws and rules …and they are NOT equvilalent. - Mongo - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 11:15 am: Try this… “In fact, both Nebraska and West Virginia experimented with shifting from a defined benefit system to a defined contribution system and shifted back. The reason – simple. The investment management fees, record-keeping fees, educational programs and other administrative line items associated with a defined contribution system were substantially greater than the cost under the old defined benefit system. The failed defined contribution system didn’t provide enough income to live on and both Nebraska and West Virginia experienced former state employees having to go on welfare. The National Institute for Retirement Security reviewed this issue and made a very clear finding, “for any given level of benefit, a defined benefit plan will cost less than a defined contribution plan. This makes defined benefit plans, in the language of economists, more efficient since they stretch taxpayer, employer and employee dollars further in achieving any given level of retirement income.” Switching to a defined contribution plan from a defined benefit plan will not solve Illinois’ public employee pension crisis or eliminate the $54.4 billion current unfunded liability. It will, however, cost taxpayers more money and result in public employees having less to live on. Downstater, does that help? - Arthur Andersen - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 11:17 am: Downstater, if you don’t understand Rich’s comment about the costs of this proposal, maybe you are at the wrong blog. - Downstater - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 11:27 am: =“for any given level of benefit, a defined benefit plan will cost less than a defined contribution plan. This makes defined benefit plans, in the language of economists, more efficient since they stretch taxpayer, employer and employee dollars further in achieving any given level of retirement income.” Switching to a defined contribution plan from a defined benefit plan will not solve Illinois’ public employee pension crisis or eliminate the $54.4 billion current unfunded liability. It will, however, cost taxpayers more money and result in public employees having less to live on.= Using this rational would mean all private companies should switch to defined benefit plans to improve their bottom line. And saying they would not have enough money to live on is pure nonsense. - ArchPundit - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 11:28 am: ===Take out the other person So you are saying I should go back to bed and not be a grammar nazi? Probably correct on both counts. Sigh… - reformer - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 11:29 am: == This statement makes no sense. Private companies have converted from defined benefit to defined contribution plans and saved money all the time. == Private companies are already paying into Social security for all their employees. By contrast, the State does not pay Social Security for four out of five employees in the state pensions. If the pension were abolished, then the State would have to start making the employer contribution, thus adding 6.5% to costs that companies don’t face. In addition, the State would no doubt contribute to the new 401(k), typically 3%, for a total contribution of 9.5%, which is higher than the average 85 pension contribution. - Downstater - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 11:32 am: Mongo, stating employees would not have enough to live on is probably correct, if employees would continue to retire at age 55 with full benefits. If they work until age 65 before collecting full benefits, like most do in the private sector, most should be just fine. - reformer - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 11:32 am: I thought conservatives favored “strict construction” of the Constitution. Maybe that’s a principle they apply selectively. Rich raises a good point I have yet to hear one of our friends on the right answer: If the Second Amendment is sacrosanct, and should not be emasculated by loose interpretation, then why shouldn’t the pension clause also be strictly interpreted??? - Mason born - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 11:37 am: I wonder is it possible to lock in benefits as of the date legislation goes in effect and then adjust future benefits. Is there any case law on that? Such as on x date if you have earned 30% of your final salary then the State must pay 30% of your final salary but going forward you earn 1% per year. As an example am not advocating that. - Mongo - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 11:41 am: Two points Downstater. First, it does not help to compare businesses to states. They are different entities, with different missions, and are governed differently. A business can unilaterally drop bennies, reduce wages, layoff staff. States have to go through that pesky due process and tend to other constitutional requirements. By the way I am not an expert on the def-ben switch to def-con. But I have seen enough about it to be a skeptic, and have legislator friends in other states who have not moved that way. The other point addresses retiring at 55. I know a lot of state employees and the majority who retired at 55 (or 56, 57) did so as part of an ERI, not on their own. It would be really interesting to examine the effectiveness of ERI programs in general here. - Obamas Puppy - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 11:45 am: To suggest that all teachers should have in this state is a 401k plan with no underlying safety net of Social Security for retirement security is an insult to all educators. It is unfortunate when legislators who are elected to represent all of their district decide to ignore those that have choosen a career in education. The policy institute testified carefully on this bill and only mentioned state employees, but the bill impacts all those in public pension systems. Mistake? - Jimbo - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 11:55 am: Downstater, business doesn’t have to provide food stamps or welfare when the defined contribution plan doesn’t cut it. The state subsidizes businesses who switch to a defined contribution plan by taking care of the folks those plans leave in poverty. - 47th Ward - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 12:03 pm: ===As Military Historian, John Keegan states, “Soldiers, when committed to a task, can’t compromise. It’s unrelenting devotion to the standards of duty and courage, absolute loyalty to others, not letting the task go until it’s been done.”=== Reminds me of Cardinal Ximinez: Our chief weapon is surprise!… Surprise and fear… fear and surprise… Our two weapons are fear and surprise… and ruthless efficiency! Our three weapons are fear, and surprise, and ruthless efficiency… and an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope… Our four… no… Amongst our weapons… Hmf… Amongst our weaponry… are such elements as fear, surpr… I’ll come in again. She sure is making a name for herself. I’ll give her credit for that. - Meaningless - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 12:42 pm: A little more about Rep Ives (R) and her leadership style and representative beliefs. Prior to the last election I had a cordial relationship with Rep Connelly (R) (before he moved to the Senate), and even though we had some differences on certain issues, he always responded to my concerns in a personal manner that made me feel my voice was at least being listened to. After Jeanne Ives was elected I had hopes of establishing a cordial relationship with her since she was my representative in the House. I sent her a very professional email expressing my concerns about important issues and asked her to reply with her thoughts to the concerns that are so vital to me. I received a mass-generated uncanny email from her (or someone in her office) that said nothing about my concerns and had 90 internet links for me to check out. For some reason I don’t get the feeling that my voice is being heard. It’s almost like the bumper sticker I saw recently … “I Respect Your Opinion - I Just Don’t Want To Hear It” - except in this case I don’t think she even wants to hear it. - Cincinnatus - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 12:58 pm: - reformer - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 11:32 am: I thought conservatives favored “strict construction” of the Constitution. Maybe that’s a principle they apply selectively. “Rich raises a good point I have yet to hear one of our friends on the right answer: If the Second Amendment is sacrosanct, and should not be emasculated by loose interpretation, then why shouldn’t the pension clause also be strictly interpreted???”" Not all people on the right believe contract law should be overturned, which is why so many of us had problems with the GM/Chrysler bailouts where holders of bonds had their claims negated. Do not make sweeping condemnations of the right, you may find you have sympathizers on this issue… - Seriously? - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 1:00 pm: First things first, is this Ive’s language or her pal Proft’s and IPI’s? Second, it appears that folks like Ive’s, Morrison(who’s actually a good guy) , Proft, Walsh, Kelly, Oberweis, etc. are more concerned about getting their names in the papers than serving their constituents and working as legislators. Maybe being a radio personality is the “new” career path for these folks. The gift that keeps giving to the Democrats continues indefinitely. Thank you GOP! - Mason born - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 1:13 pm: Reformer consider this a seconding of what Cincinnatus said. 12:58 - Liandro - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 1:17 pm: I know I’ve come to the wrong thread when anonymous comments are made disparaging someone’s military service in an attempt to argue a point. Classy. - Tea for Two - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 1:29 pm: Smaller than expected crowds? Most Tea Partiers have jobs, so they would have to take time off of work to attend a weekday rally or protest. Not like “the grassroots” and the Progressives who “rent” mobs to picket. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 1:34 pm: ===Not like “the grassroots” and the Progressives who “rent” mobs to picket.=== I am glad to hear that the Tea Party “mobs” that are tearing away My Party are not rented, but are “owned”. Maybe Tea Party “mobs” are “leased, with an option to buy?” - Anon - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 1:36 pm: Liandro, If Rep Ives wants to throw out her military service to make her point, that service is free to be examined and discussed. I was in the military. There are just as many, if not more, unqualified hacks there as anywhere else. I’m not saying anything about her service other than in a time of war, she was placed in a non-theater position that effectively blocked her career. Generally there is a reason for such actions. - Liandro - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 2:06 pm: Anon, You are disparaging anyone who has graduated from West Point as anything other than Infantry or Artillery, AND anyone who served stateside or non-theater during any conflict. I, too, was (am) in the military, and I am multi-tour combat vet. Unless you can provide documentation for a problem, you are clearly disparaging someone’s military service, and you didn’t even put your name on it. Doing that, especially based purely off of broad assumptions, is pure hackery. - Big Guy - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 2:09 pm: Rich: it simply is not true that moving to 401Ks requires contributing to Social Security. SURS already has a SS-exempt 401k plan. As do other states, like Alaska. Ives’ plan was based on the SURS plan and is SS-exempt. - Big Guy - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 2:14 pm: ==I don’t know of anybody who has ever come up with any sort of argument that switching everybody into a 401(k) program is in any way or form constitutional.== Ives’ plan only applies to future, still-unearned service credit. Whether you agree with them or not, there have been multiple big-name firms (including Sidley Austin) who have concluded that only past benefit accruals are protected. - Happy Returns - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 2:26 pm: ” — this is a serious question: Could somebody flesh out the downside of switching to a 401(k ) style plan moving forward?” try this as a google search: “site:https://capitolfax.com/ problem with 401k” Refine as needed. (Teach a man to fish…) - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 2:26 pm: ===who have concluded that only past benefit accruals are protected. === Winston and Strawn was also on that list, but when I called to check into it, I was told by the firm’s spokesman that they had no idea why they were on the list. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 2:30 pm: Big Guy, updated to add your points. See, I’m hear to learn, too. - HaroldVK - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 2:40 pm: Happy, What exactly was going through your head when you suggested Google? Were you trying to be witty? Because it didn’t come off as witty. It came off as oddly hostile and rude. Are you having a tough day, Happy? Did you feel like you needed to lash out? I’m really curious as to why you thought “try Google” would add to the conversation or would be welcomed by anybody. But in any case, if anybody is interesting in being helpful rather than rude, I’m interested in an analysis. We keep seeing the point over and over, but we’ve never really dug into the merits. - Big Guy - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 2:47 pm: ==Winston and Strawn was also on that list, but when I called to check into it, I was told by the firm’s spokesman that they had no idea why they were on the list.== Interesting. I think Eric Zorn was the first report that they concurred with the Sidley Austin memo (it was a few years ago). Maybe he has some info? I think he reported that Jenner & Block, Mayer Brown, Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal also concurred… - wordslinger - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 5:47 pm: The Tribbies like to play fast and loose with the rules when it comes to other people’s earned compensation. You think they would learned after Zell wiped out their $250 million ESOP taking Tribune Co. private and into bankruptcy. - RNUG - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 6:19 pm: Bug Guy, I’ve read the Jenner IL Pension handbook they use internally (it’s on the web). If my memory isn’t too fuzzy, it reads a lot like Eric Madiar’s report. - RNUG - Tuesday, Apr 16, 13 @ 6:20 pm: Opps .. supposed to be Big Guy Sorry. Everybody here knows I can’t type worth a darn. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.