* One of the components of the possible pension reform compromise that’s under discussion would be to use money currently appropriated for pension bonds to make pension payments once those bonds are paid off. The Tribune editorial board doesn’t like the idea…

The state sold a total of $17.2 billion in bonds to make payments into the pension funds in 2003, 2010 and 2011. The state will be done paying off some of the bonds by 2015. One huge bond sale — the $10 billion borrowed under Rod Blagojevich — will be retired in 2033, freeing up more money to pay down the pension system’s liability.

That component — one of the linchpins of the draft proposal — worries us.

First, future money that would be set aside after the bonds are paid off is money that might better be spent elsewhere on education, Medicaid and services for the state’s most vulnerable. Or — get this — tax relief. Instead, under this plan it would be spent propping up a system that will perpetuate overly generous benefits that taxpayers simply cannot afford.

* OK, but the Tribune has repeatedly and forcefully editorialized in favor of House Speaker Michael Michael Madigan’s pension reform proposal, including this May 8th diatribe entitled “Knock yourselves out, Senators - But know that the fate of Madigan’s bill will define you”…

Madigan’s plan makes it easier to project savings because it is based on more predictable outcomes.

* From an April 30th SJ-R story about Speaker Madigan’s pension plan…

Madigan’s plan also calls for the state to use $1 billion a year now allocated to repaying pension bonds to paying down pension debt once the bonds are retired.

So, the Trib is now attempting to slay a proposal that it has long supported. Why? I dunno. But I think it’s fair to suggest the same answer that the Tribune itself discussed on June 12th…

And there’s plenty of suspicion that good buddies Madigan and Cullerton aren’t really at impasse, they’re just gaming everybody; failure, for some reason, suits them.

* Now, let’s go back to the more recent editorial blasting the possible compromise plan…

Money from the state’s main checking account that now pays down pension borrowing debts would be redirected once the debts are paid off. The money would be invested and, assuming an 8 percent return, eventually get pumped back into the pension system to reduce the liability.

Any investment adviser will tell you that expecting an 8 percent return is, um, an arguably fanciful projection. Yet the plan would work only if those steady returns materialize.

* From the Tribune Company’s 2012 financial statement…

Effective Dec. 30, 2012, the Company began utilizing the Aon Hewitt AA-Only Bond Universe Yield Curve for discounting future benefit obligations and calculating interest cost. The Aon Hewitt yield curves represent yields on high quality (AA and above) corporate bonds that closely match the cash flows of the estimated payouts for the Company’s benefit obligations. Prior to Dec. 30, 2012, the Company had utilized the Citigroup Pension Discount Curve for discounting future benefit obligations and calculating interest cost.

The Company used a building block approach to determine its current 7.5% assumption for the long-term expected rate of return on pension plan assets. This approach included a review of actual historical returns achieved and anticipated long-term performance of each asset class.

Emphasis added for obvious reasons.