69 Comments - Oswego Willy - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 10:46 am: ===“There is something wrong in Illinois when the speaker of the House and the president of the Senate could join together to propose a pension holiday for Chicago, yet they could not send a comprehensive pension reform bill to my desk,” the governor said.=== “There is something wrong in Illinois when the speaker of the House and the president of the Senate CAN’T FIND AN ABLE GOVERNING GOVERNOR TO WORK WITH AND COMPETE A pension reform bill to THAT COMPETENT GOVERNOR’S desk,” said EVERYONE ELSE. Governor Quinn, you are 1/3 of the state government, learn the levers to run the state, or give them to someone who will dust off the cobwebs and will actually fulfill the obligation of being governor. - Excessively Rabid - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 10:53 am: Only in Illinois can you look for ways to renege on your obligations and call it reform. - RNUG - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 11:03 am: Sheesh. The Chicago papers should start by hiring / listening to some reporters who actually understand the whole pension issue. Those papers have read to many CCC press releases without questioning them. For all of the SJ-R’s faults, and they have their share, at least the SJ-R has allowed their reporters and journalists, especially Doug Finke, to dig in, learn, understand, and actually report more or less factually on all the pension issues. - biased observer - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 11:03 am: there will not be significant pension reform until the underlying political forces are perceived to be changed by the ingrained politicians. once the pols start feeling more pressure from the public as a whole, than they feel from the highly vocal and organized unions/stateworkers/teacher minority, only then will they change the pension obligations. this whole issue of constitutionality is a farce. that is just a device being deployed by the unions because they know the court of public opinion is going against them. if things continue to deteriorate financially for the state of Illinois, I wouldn’t be surprised to start hearing rumors of changing the constitution to remove the language that unions claim protects diminishment of benefits. although I don’t think it is necessary, some people will start to think this may be a faster more expedient approach to the ultimate eventuality of pension reform. - RonOglesby - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 11:04 am: Editorial boards may be full of idiots and may even write stuff like the above… BUT, state legislators are the ones responsible and need to deal with it. If they passed a “fix” that these ed boards wrote against at least they did something. right now they have done nothing (yet again) and there are still valid points in the article. - biased observer - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 11:09 am: and let me just say that I understand by reading the Illinois constitution where this argument comes from. there is a valid legal argument. but the inability for the current legislators to pass pension reform is because of politics, not constitutionality. for example, do you think most members of the GA were sitting around reading thru the IL constitution and various interpretions of it and case law, etc. no but I guarantee you they were freaked out by all the calls they were getting from stateworkers, teachers, retirees, etc. and they were concerned about threats to cut off money to future campaigsn, and threats to give them primary opponents, etc. none of this stuff has anything to do with the constitution. - walkinfool - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 11:10 am: What RonO said. - RNUG - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 11:10 am: Pension “reform” as it’s been presented these past cpouple of years isn’t going to solve the State’s fundamental problems of both taxing the wrong things and spending on the wrong things. If they really want to fulfill their role as public watchdogs, maybe one of the papers should write an editorial about taking two steps back, honestly looking at both the spending and revenue structures of the State, and then trying again with a solution that addresses those issues. - Cassiopeia - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 11:13 am: Changing the constitution to remove the pension clause will only allow for reducing pension benefits going forward from the time of enactment of the amendment. - ZC - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 11:22 am: I’m sure right now Cullerton is quaking in his boots about the raw POWER the wrath of the Chicago Tribune editorial board is prepared to inflict upon him. - wordslinger - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 11:23 am: The institutional memory at the Chicago papers gets shorter and shorter. That’s what happens when you whack all the good writers and editors and keep the hacks. - RNUG - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 11:24 am: biased observer @ 11:03 am: Even if you change the State Constitution, all you affect is going forward … and you can do those changes now without changing the constitution … that’s how Tier 2 came into being. What you can’t negate is the already owed debt, even though the GA keeps trying to find a way. That’s still protected under contract law and while contracts can be mutually modified, in general the courts take a very dim view of unilateral modifications … especially unilateral modifications of pensions. - Downstater - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 11:27 am: Attempting to deflect criticism of the Tribunes role in the lack of pension reform is just plain silly. The blame squarely is at the feet of the Democrats and their lack of leadership. But, what the heck do they care, the session was an overwhelming success, according to them. - biased observer - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 11:37 am: RNUG and Cassiopeia, I see where you are coming from….however, the GA cant get anything done because of politics, not because of anything to do with the constitution, even though I can see where the constitutionality argument arises. I totally get it. But they didn’t solve our problem because of political realities. The flip side of this issue is: if and when the pols ever decide to abandon their traditional union/stateworker base due to a changing political dynamic caused by the fiscal cratering which could be occurring over the next couple years, the constitution will not stop them from attenuating the pension obligations. if the pension obligations are ever diminished, it will be because of politics, and I would not count on the constitution to protect the benefits. - Shore - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 11:42 am: I’m sorry but everytime I see ty fahner ’s name come up I think that guy from chicago who invented those beanie baby toys. - cassandra - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 11:43 am: Fiscal cratering? Next fiscal year’s budget doesn’t seem all that austere. Rather the contrary. Sure, everybody wants more government money. But the agencies will survive and maybe some of them will get creative about implementing more efficiencies. It’s about time. - truthteller - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 11:48 am: One of the leading business advocates, Eden Martin ,for slashing pensions says SB1 is unconstitutional. The Speaker’s point person, Elaine Nekritz, says the sons of SB1 are unconstitutional, yet the Tribune editors and other yahoos continue to press for another vote on SB1. Meanwhile Cullerton’s bill, 2404 passed the Senate with 40 votes and could get 3/5thsin the House if the Speaker would allow a vote. The actuaries tell us that if Nekritz’s analysis is correct, the Cullerton bill would knock off over $30 billion on the state’s liabilities for pensions and health care. Why isn’t everyone insisting on a vote in the House for SB2404 which has real savings and which would likely pass constitutional muster? There is a quick, simple solution. Pass 2404. - biased observer - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 12:03 pm: Cassandra, it may not effect you personally, but in the school district where I live, they received 89% of the money “promised” to them by the state, and they were in fear of this level being decreased to 82% this year (thank god it looks like this won’t happen). most districts like mine (tax poor) are in similar boats. if it gets any worse, districts will have to make drastic cuts. our local hospital at times is nearly 2 years behind in its payments from the state. most hospitals are in similar predicaments. hospitals are on the verge of closing. vendors (including many non profits) are in the same boat with delayed payments. over 20% of state budget goes to pension payments right now. this will grow to over 30%within a few years if nothing is done. how does that number sound to you? the state of Illinois is becoming little more than a taxpayer supported pension plans unless tough choices are made. it is non sustainable. there isn’t enough money for the state of Illinois to make all its obligations. it will be interesting if nothing else, to see how this shakes out. - lake county democrat - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 12:04 pm: Note again the assumption that Madigan wanted his bill passed. Amazing how the current situation wound up with 1) the bill hardest-on-unions failing, 2) no bragging for Lisa Madigan’s 2014 opponent for pension reform/gay marriage/etc., 3) Madigan getting the media to praise him and 4) no talk of the Democrats as a whole being controlled by the state unions. Yeah, Mike Madigan must be really torn up about this - too bad his power ends at the House chamber doors (voice heavy with sarcasm). - Makandadawg - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 12:05 pm: The newspapers are just mouth pieces for big business: Look at this quote from Cullerton: “The real disappointment is we don’t even have a test case to go to the court because the business community was fighting that as well. It had to be their test case. So this is why it’s so difficult. It’s not because we didn’t try, and there’s no blame to go around. People have different positions, and it’s difficult to get 30 votes on them.” - archimedes - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 12:06 pm: I think the Cullerton transcript is interesting, “The real disappointment is we don’t even have a test case to go to the court because the business community was fighting that as well. It had to be their test case.” SB1 was the only vehicle they (business) wanted going to court. Any of the others (including the three “stick your toe in the water” bills the House passed)did not have the needed setup (pre-amble of SB1) to defend the use of police power and breach the contractual obligation of the State. A court ruling on these (bills other than SB1) might make it more difficult - the feeling that all of these were not as fully crafted to get there. Maybe the Rhode Island case would serve as a lesson (although different State and different protections). They have been in mediation with labor for 6 months at the behest of the judge to attempt to compromise rather than proceed with the lawsuit on their reform (that will likely come down to State use of police power as well). The mediation is a sign that the court wants to avoid a ruling on State use of police power at all cost. - qcexaminer - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 12:10 pm: RNUG (and others) are right—who will be forced to take it in the shorts to finance all these generous pensions that cannot be dealt with politically? I haven’t seen any concrete plans on how to raise revenue and Dems don’t usually have a problem with raising taxes—who will be targeted to pay for the support they get from unions? - cover - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 12:10 pm: = if things continue to deteriorate financially for the state of Illinois, I wouldn’t be surprised to start hearing rumors of changing the constitution to remove the language that unions claim protects diminishment of benefits = If the General Assembly can’t muster a simple majority to pass a pension reform bill, how could they possibly find a 3/5ths majority to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot? - Cook County Commoner - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 12:13 pm: The pensioned government employees in Illinois may represent the single largest voting block in the state. We’re told that there are around 700,000 state employees and retirees. Wikipedia says there are 273,000 current local government employees and retirees vested in the Illinois Municipal Retrement Fund. Then there are the stand-alone pension plans in Chicago and County with who nows how many employees and retirees. We have certainly 1 million interested employees and pensioners. Add in one dependent, a spouse, and we can say we have 2 million people in Illinois vested in stalling pension reform at every level of government. A local pensioner will oppose reform to a state pension by figuring his or her turn is next. Seems to the pols have a vested interest in making a lot of noise and doing nothing. And the last session of the GA appears to bear out this hypothesis. - Harry Wasko - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 12:13 pm: For Biased Observer: Just how much of my $1,000 a month pension do you want me to give back? Some of us are not rich people drawing this meager pension. I also found out I have a serious heart problem and may not be around much longer. That should make you and Ty and Eden happy. One less freeloader to support huh. - cassandra - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 12:14 pm: Tax receipts will almost certainly go up as the economy improves, I realize that won’t fix everything, but we can’t assume the worst going forward just as we can’t assume the best. The tax hike will almost certainly be extended. A casino bill is not impossible, it just didn’t pass this time. Reducing the financial resources of a subset of middle class citizens (via the attack on pension amounts, most of which help sustain a subset of the middle class) should be a last resort. We’ve all read ad nauseam in recent years of middle class decline: stagnant incomes, loss of housing value, the vanishing of work because of outsourcing and, yes, improved technology, the list goes on. So the politicians, including many young, powerful and supposedly progressive Democrats (I’m looking at you, Ms. Nekritz) zero in on a subset of middle class citizens to pay for past fiscal mistakes with their increased economic insecurity. What would the Progressives of yesteryear think? - Phenomynous - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 12:27 pm: It certainly isn’t the Trib’s Editorial Board that is to blame for the lack of pension reform. This blame lays right at the feet of Madigan, Cullerton and Quinn, and there is no denying that. They campaigned hard for a super-majority. So they need to deflate their respective heads a bit and get to work. - Anonymous - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 12:28 pm: With the poor political leadership we have in Illinois, it is time to seriously consider moving out of state! The people who should not be in power, retain political power and the state keeps going down hill. If you vote for them, you will have to live with them! - Rich Miller - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 12:32 pm: ===With the poor political leadership we have in Illinois, it is time to seriously consider moving out of state! === From the same commenter on May 21st… ===Tax retirement income, and Florida here I come!=== Why don’t you just go already? - Loop Lady - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 12:46 pm: and Radogno should have much more to say about isolation and getting nothing done by contributing little to the process because she has honed her skills so much since assuming a leadership position for the IL GOP… - RNUG - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 12:52 pm: Cook County Commoner @ 12:13 pm: Did this the other night … Using 2012 census info, IL population is 12,875,255 and excluding under age 18, the IL voting population is 9,785,194. Using 2012 annual reports from SERS, JRS, GARS, SURS & TRS, the active members plus retirees plus survivors total 590,485. Ignoring possible spouses or other immediate family members, the “state employee/retiree” voting block is 6.0% of the eligible IL voters. IMRF is a total of 198,242 members according to the report I accessed, or another 2.0% of the eligible voters. If you just look at “state” employees / retirees, that is 6.0% of eligible voters. Add in possible spouses and extended family members, and you could be looking at anywhere from 9% (only half with a spouse or one child) to about 24% (spouse plus one child who is married). Adding IMRF on top would jump those estimates a bit. Any way you figure it, that is a substantial voting block … - RNUG - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 12:55 pm: qcexaminer @ 12:10 pm: Then you haven’t been paying attention. Ralph Martire and the Center for Budget Accountability has a well thought out proposal on changing taxes. You may not like it, but a lot of analysis went into it. - qcexaminer - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 1:00 pm: Here’s where it gets tricky—as RNUG states unions are a formidable voting block, but the problem is how will the Democrats fund the perks for one of their most powerful and wealthy special interests? If they push the middle class too hard on taxes there will ultimately be a taxpayer revolt which brought GOP governance to various Rust Belt states, formerly ruled by Dems. It will be a fine line to get the $$$$ for the unions without torking off the middle class. - biased observer - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 1:01 pm: harry, I don’t think you should give any of your pension back. I don’t think it should be touched. hope this helps. - RNUG - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 1:03 pm: qcexaminer @ 12:10 pm: And anything the Dems do will lose the campaign contributions from either the unions or their wealthy supporters - qcexaminer - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 1:04 pm: I deeply apologize that I have not analyzed every word written here—I hope you will forgive me since I no longer pay taxes to finance the idiocy in Springfield. But do tell, has this tax policy been enacted or is it only a “proposal”? Words? or Deeds? - Mouthy - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 1:09 pm: “Using 2012 annual reports from SERS, JRS, GARS, SURS & TRS …..” As I remember a SJ-R story about a month ago they had the active and retired state employees at about 3/4 of a million. Wonder where they got their numbers from.. - Where will it end - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 1:23 pm: So, where do we go from here? Have more meetings with the legislative leaders so they can hash over the same old proposals? The same proposals they haven’t been able to get passed for over a year or will they finally start looking at other legal alternatives? - mythoughtis - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 1:28 pm: ==over 20% of state budget goes to pension payments right now. this will grow to over 30%within a few years if nothing is done. how does that number sound to you? the state of Illinois is becoming little more than a taxpayer supported pension plans unless tough choices are made. it is non sustainable. there isn’t enough money for the state of Illinois to make all its obligations. == The state legislature and the governor keep handing out grant money like it is candy. We have all manner of programs and ways to spend money, and we keep spending it on items that are not obligations or needs. I am not about to tell an elderly retired state employee that they can’t have their COLA because some community wanted lights for their baseball diamond. Especially since that type of handout is where the pension money went in the first place. - Original Rambler - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 1:41 pm: RNUG; I’m a future Tier 1 retiree but don’t put me in your voting bloc just yet. I don’t vote single issue, but I also want to see SOMETHING done to reduce this pension liability because I don’t want it to burden my children any more than it will be doing so already. In some ways, I prefer SB1 to doing nothing. And I agree with Rich that it’s time for anon 12:28 (and all others of his/her wailings) to relocate! - DuPage Dave - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 1:44 pm: The solution is that “haircut tax”, i.e. the service tax that reasonable people have been debating for quite some time. See the COGFA analysis from 2011: http://cgfa.ilga.gov/Upload/ServiceTaxes2011update.pdf COGFA says Illinois could bring in $4 billion a year via a service tax. In that report, Illinois ranked 47th in use of service taxes. The top 10 states included West Virginia, New Mexico and South Dakota, hardly hotbeds of lefty radicalism. I think most people would prefer to see a service tax coupled with a lowering of the income tax, perhaps back to the previous level or somewhere in between. It’s not like there are no revenue options out there. Instead of shafting the workers and skipping out on constitutional promises, it would be better to take in the money the state needs to live up to its obligations. - average citizen - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 1:54 pm: i am going to vote against every last person that is curently in office….with majorities in the house, senate a democratic mayor and governor…….absolutely nothing got passed……….Who is with me? - Pete - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 1:54 pm: “so they killed his bill that included all the pension reforms they ever could’ve wanted.” Last time I checked, I didn’t vote the Chicago Tribune to a seat in the state legislature. Not sure how an editorial ‘killed’ a bill. Please elaborate. - Ghost - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 2:02 pm: “…and the insolvent state government we’re all obliged to finance….” Says a company in bankruptcy asking the bankruptcy court to approve millions in unfudned bonuses to their editors and management at the cost of creditors being paid…. - Cook County Commoner - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 2:10 pm: RNUG @12:52pm Thanks for being more precise. And if you figure in voter apathy at the pols (20% to 50%?) and the understandable determination and bias of gov employees and retirees who undoubtedly will vote, I expect this voting bloc, especially with an aging population, may be insurmountable. - Challenger - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 2:36 pm: I would really like to know from anyone what they consider (an amount) to be a generous pension benefit? Just curious. Thanks - wordslinger - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 3:00 pm: I know I’m supposed to think the pension situation is a “crisis,” but I’ve seen this whole Malthusian movie too many times, including the screaming editorials. Social Security is supposed to go bust every 20 years or so. The world was supposed to run out of oil about 15 years ago. Mass starvation because of population growth. Nuclear war with the Soviets was inevitable. Terrorists would get nuclear weapons…. The pensions have been chronically “underfunded” since the 1950s, at least. Anyone missed a check yet? Some crisis. It’s a “crisis” in some minds now, because the state is actually ponying up their annual contribution, rather than spending it on something else. That squeezes the budget, but at least you can make adjustments based on an honest count. Keep making the full annual payments, and with historic investment and revenue growth, you’ll muddle through. I am sorry to see that Madigan broke the Tribbies heart. They were so sweet on him for a couple of weeks there. - Six Degrees of Separation - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 3:01 pm: @Challenger, the amount of $50k a year is often bandied about as being the top end of a “reasonable” pension, and of course there was the recent move (in failed legislation) to cap pensions at a maximum somewhere a little north of $100k. - Ghost - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 3:02 pm: Challenger if Ambrose Bierce were about he would priobably say it is: Someone not employed by the State who believes that anything promised to somone else can be ignored, unless such action would cause their own good fortune to be impacted. - cassandra - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 3:08 pm: It seems to me that major pension “reform” of any kind is unlikely before 2015. Starting this fall, but particularly next spring, legislators and/or gubernatorial candidates will be staring at, first, the primary, and then the general. These would not be times to be on record as making big cuts in the incomes of large numbers of Illinois residents. It’ll be interesting to see how the campaigners handle this always hot potato though. Not to mention making the tax increase permanent. But I wouldn’t count on a great wave of voter support for dinging pensions. For whom the bell tolls and so on. Maybe the budgeteers as well as the campaigners will just have to go back to the drawing board instead of claiming that pension reform will “fix” everything. A little thinking out of the box maybe. And not even that far out. They should start by asking themselves the question what if the pensions are untouchable and go from there. - biased observer - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 3:12 pm: wordslinger: although the pension has always been underfunded, state has always had plenty of cashflow to cover the obligations. now they don’t. that is what is different now. you are right, underfunding obligations isn’t relevant if you have all kinds of money to pay obligations anyway. now we don’t. times are changing my friend. - wordslinger - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 3:18 pm: –although the pension has always been underfunded, state has always had plenty of cashflow to cover the obligations. now they don’t.– I’m not sure what you’re trying to say there with “cashflow.” Pensions, bonds, payrolls get paid first. Everyone else waits depending on cash available. It’s always been that way. - Name Withheld - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 3:48 pm: It’s been a while, but what about Rich Whitney’s proposal to tax financial transactions tax on speculative trading? I can’t find any articles on it now, but didn’t it purport to tax some miniscule percentage (like a tenth of a percent or something) and raise about a trillon dollars? That would more than help the pension debt and fund the programs we need funded. That kind of thinking is what we need. We can’t go and just keep increasing taxes/fees on current stuff - we have to find new sources of revenue to supplement our existing one. - wordslinger - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 3:56 pm: –It’s been a while, but what about Rich Whitney’s proposal to tax financial transactions tax on speculative trading?– If you’ll recall, at the lowest point of the worst economic disaster since The Depression, the boys from CME and CBOE came down to Springfield and got themselves a sweet tax cut — while individuals and small businesses got a tax hike. So, that’s where a trading tax stands. - Name Withheld - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 3:58 pm: Ah. Thanks WS. - wordslinger - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 4:04 pm: Fitch apparently want to be first in something. They just whacked Illinois debt. - biased observer - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 4:05 pm: word, by cashflow I mean they had enough money to meet all of their obligations when they were due. and there wasn’t the specter of a dramatically worsening cash crunch in the next few years. word, yes or no. do you really feel like this is a manufactured crisis and that Illinois doesn’t really have a financial situation that demands addressing? do you think this is all about sticking it to pensioners so that the pols can cont their “pet projects” and “spending money on illegals?” are you one of those? - biased observer - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 4:09 pm: word, for example I may have missed a few mortgage payments, but if I have a bunch of money in the bank, no big deal, I just cut a big check and I catch up. State of Illinois is like having a couple home mortgages, couple car payments on luxury cars. but at same time, state of illinois is trying to do payday loans to make payments from almost 2 years ago. plus state of Illinois gots no money for food. - wordslinger - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 4:10 pm: –by cashflow I mean they had enough money to meet all of their obligations when they were due.– When was that? And no, I don’t want to stick it to pensioneers. But I don’t think that there is currently a “crisis” regarding pensions. As I said, make your full payments, and with historic growth you should be okay. The crisis is being manufactured by those whose long-term goal is to get out of the publicly funded pension business altogether. Except they always forget that they’ll roll right into Social Security if they ever get their way. - Denim Chicken - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 4:14 pm: This link to COGFA’s report (page 97) suggests that the growth in unfunded liabiilty grows at a rate of $5.5M per day. This is still a good chunk of change, but not as high as the $17M per day claim started by the expert Dick Ingram. http://cgfa.ilga.gov/Upload/FinCondILStateRetirementSysFY2012Feb2013.pdf - RNUG - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 4:28 pm: Six Degrees of Separation @ 3:01 pm: That recent move was to cap the pensionable SALARY for CALCULATING the pension at SS earnings level, a bit over $100K as you state. That means the maximum starting pension under current SERS rules would be about $75K; it would be a bit different under the other systems but the highest possible would be about $80K starting. - Just The Way It Is One - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 4:55 pm: The option of combining the bills is still out there. Cullerton ready to proceed. Quinn open to anything with “Pension Reform” written on it that lands on the Governor’s desk…oh yeah, only one obstacle of a fella so far who has either already inwardly balked at this Compromise or played Switzerland up ’till now, and we all know what initials belong to MJM…! For land’s sake, THAT appproach WILL MAKE HIS HOUSE BILL LAW, with the Senate version ONLY clicking in to take immediate effect as Law IF the Illinois Supreme Court finds that MJM guy’s version UNconstitutional–otherwise, as is his usual, obsessive M.O., MJM would have it exactly as he wants it…! C’mon Speaker–make the move, and everybody can smile then, and you can take the bulk of the credit ‘cuz, after all, assuming you’re correct and the House Bill IS Constitutional in the end, then you WIN! And if, unthinkably, the Court finds otherwise, at least you’ve all done your best, made some solid reform in pensions, and we can all move ON already to other pressing matters our grand State can benefit from…! Sounds plausible to me, nobody that I am. But for Heaven’s Sake, Mr. Speaker, as you and we well know, you ARE Somebody and could make it happen in the blink of an eye. Something so very important and for the good of Illinois EVERY SINGLE DAY as you save us millions upon millions for decades and decades to come…! Just imagine what a truly great thing that would be for the place you love so dearly and call home as we do…. The rest is up to you now. With that $17 Million a day which you control, and that belongs to ALL of us, just falling out of the Capitol’s windows every day, for Heaven’s sake, please don’t do it…and let us all down now…! - Six Degrees of Separation - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 4:55 pm: @RNUG- Thanks for adding the detail. $75-80k max pension calculated on a max $100k limit on pensionable salary…I assume employees like the football coach at U of I and surgeons on state staff would still collect paychecks well over the pensionable amount, but be limited in the ability to collect a pension to the lower amont. Not sure how they’d get that one past the constitution, especially if you are already over the limit. - RNUG - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 5:58 pm: Just The Way It Is One @ 4:55 pm: Madigan KNOWS his bill is unconstitutional and the only way it can fly is through invokation of “police powers” which (to oversimplify) basically says there is no other possibility than the one being presented. Having Cullerton’s alternative proposal in the same bill belies the “police powers” argument. - RNUG - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 6:02 pm: Six Degrees of Separation @ 4:55 pm: The fine print in the bill said existing salaries were exempt for the duration of the CURRENT contract; that’s how they get around one of the restrictions. pretending the pension clause in the constitution doesn’t exist and only contract law applies. IMO, a false contention … but they have some fairly smart lawyers drafting all this stuff to try to skirt the rules. - RNUG Fan - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 7:16 pm: RNUG There really aren’t many big contributions from these wealthy people. The union contribs dwarf them and is the commercial club and IPI going to be out door knocking …..Most business money is from contractors who may want their money first but who really mostly are not part of the anti pension crusade. Without the unions there is no democratic party and they are going to see that in Chicago …I think the unions have been too mild I think they should have been as blunt as the ILSRA and the resources of the unions are greater than the NRAs are nationally and their success rate is the best. I would have bluntly said its endless primaries and no money and no workers because what is the difference between Rauner and Madigan/Quinn. And I am not buying the conspiracy theories. If so why did we keep hearing the mushrooms wanted a vote on 2404. Because they were worried. I wids they were paniced - Former Merit Comp Slave - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 10:17 pm: I’m with Word all the way. crisis schmisis. I the way back recesses of my mind I have to wonder if Madigan feels that way too therefore sabotaging so called pension reform. - Al - Monday, Jun 3, 13 @ 11:26 pm: As a life long union democrat I can honestly say “never again”. The democratic party has destroyed the state beginning the day Blago took office. I will never vote for this group of incompetent bums again and when my father passes, I will move far far away. Good luck Illinois! - MathCounts - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 8:33 am: Cassandra: The Dow going up probably has a bigger impact on the unfunded pension liability than tax receipts. Pension funds nationally lost about 25 percent of their value when the housing collapse happened. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.