* At first, a resolution sponsored by Rep. Linda Chapa LaVia seemed fairly straight forward. The Illinois Press Association and the Illinois Broadcasters Association asked the legislator to sponsor the measure to get some oversight hearings of the Illinois High School Association. From a press release…
“Citizens throughout Illinois have been calling for more transparency in government. With the General Assembly once again facing difficult budget decisions, its reasonable for the taxpayers of this state to know how the IHSA is spending the funds it is bringing in. I applaud the Illinois Press Association for bringing this to my attention,” [said Rep. Chapa LaVia].
Dennis DeRossett, executive director of the Illinois Press Association, said the following — “We thank Representative Chapa LaVia for introducing this resolution. The IHSA is presently subject to almost no accountability or oversight; they claim to be exempt from both the Freedom of Information Act and Open Meetings Act, and they argue that they alone should control any revenue that is ultimately derived from taxpayer-funded sporting events.”
He said the IHSA is clearly profiting directly off of public, taxpayer-funded events.
“It should be public knowledge how much revenue is being generated by these events and other exclusive arrangements, along with what percentage or amount of that revenue is being remitted back to local school districts,” DeRossett said. […]
“Kudos to LaVia,” echoed Dennis Lyle, President and CEO of the Illinois Broadcasters Association. “There exists today just too much confusion with both the public and those businesses associated with high school sports with respect to the IHSA’s role and limitations when it comes to high school athletics. The taxpayers of Illinois are the rightful owners of public high school athletics, just as they are of the gymnasiums and athletic fields where high school sports are played. LaVia’s resolution simply sets the stage for seeking clarity to the blurred lines that clearly exist today in regards to the IHSA and high school athletics.”
Rep. Chapa LaVia could’ve just held hearings on her own. She didn’t need a resolution. But this was obviously meant as a shot across the IHSA’s bow by the media groups, which have battled bitterly with the IHSA in the past.
* The IHSA zealously guards its turf, and they took full advantage of a line in the resolution that recommended that the House committee look at the feasibility of “statutorily transferring the duties and functions of the IHSA to the Illinois State Board of Education.” From Shaw Media…
[IHSA Executive Director Marty Hickman] said in a radio interview with WRMJ in Aledo that Chapa LaVia’s proposal amounts to a state takeover. In a phone interview with Shaw Media on Friday afternoon, Hickman said the IHSA felt blindsided by the legislator’s efforts.
“We feel like we’re a very responsible organization,” Hickman said. “We pay our bills, we fund our pension, we balanced our budget and I would be happy to put our record of fiscal responsibility up against anyone – including the state of Illinois.
“If it’s that kind of conduct that warrants the government coming in and targeting you, then we are really in a bad way.”
* The proposal was even bashed as a money grab by Illinois Watchdog…
The Illinois Legislature certainly does not want to administer the state’s high school chess tournament, but lawmakers wouldn’t mind getting a piece of the millions of dollars high school basketball and high school football bring in each year.
* Rep. Chapa LaVia had to push back…
The potential hearings have raised concerns from the IHSA, which was warning people in recent weeks the state was trying to take over its operations and place control with the Illinois State Board of Education. Chapa LaVia, though, said that’s not her plan.
“My intention is not to move the IHSA under ISBE,” she said. “My intention is to bring them forward to answer questions.” […]
Chapa LaVia said when she tried to talk with the IHSA directly, its leaders “thought they could give me their records right there and keep it at that in a closed-door meeting. That’s not what we do around here.”
* And…
The group overseeing high school sports and extracurricular activities in Illinois will answer questions about its finances, despite its protests, which, ironically, have helped place it in front of a legislative committee.
“(It’s) suspicious,” state Rep. Linda Chapa LaVia, D-Aurora, said Monday. “Why would anybody be afraid of a House resolution and hearings? If they don’t want to come, it’s kind of interesting.”
* She backed all the way off yesterday during floor debate…
State Rep. Linda Chapa LaVia, D-Aurora, told colleagues Monday she was no longer trying to determine whether the Illinois State Board of Education should assume the duties now governed by the Bloomington-based IHSA.
“My intention is not to take them and put them under ISBE,” Chapa LaVia said. “That’s not my intention.”
* She also went on the attack…
She listed several instances where she contended the IHSA hadn’t acted properly and ought to explain itself.
She cited the 2013 controversy in which organizers of an IHSA-sanctioned Scholastic Bowl used plagiarized questions, and then the official who discovered they were plagiarized was fired.
Chapa LaVia also brought up how the IHSA had violated the rights of disabled athletes by preventing them from participating in sporting functions, which brought a lawsuit from Attorney General Lisa Madigan.
A ton of House members had excused absences yesterday, so the resolution only received 55 “Yes” votes. But 51 voted against it, and resolutions can pass with simple majorities of those voting.
So, on to the hearings. Ought to be great fun.
49 Comments  
|
Question of the day
Tuesday, Apr 8, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Sneed…
Mayor Rahm Emanuel, a heat-seeking missile, just got bazooka’d by Gov. Pat Quinn’s populist popgun.
◆ Translation: The pile driver just got poked.
◆ To wit: Rahm may be a tough cookie, but he got bitten in the butt by Quinn’s refusal Monday to back Rahm’s plan to solve the city’s pension crisis on the back of Chicago’s property tax payers.
◆ Upshot: It forced Rahm, the tough, foul-mouthed scrapper and tough, taciturn Illinois House Speaker Mike Madigan, D-Chicago, to erase language from legislation mandating a huge Chicago property tax hike.
◆ Hmmm: It begs the question: Didn’t Rahm know how Quinn felt about the property tax hike in the first place?
◆ Wow! How is Rahm, who is a close friend of GOP gubernatorial candidate Bruce Rauner, going to heal this ow ow now?
Ironically, Quinn dissed the property tax increase while announcing a massive plan to fix Chicago’s potholes with state funds
* The Question: What do you think the next conversation between the two men will be like? No profanity, please. Yeah, I know that makes it tougher and far less believable, but I don’t wanna spend all day deleting comments. One and only warning. Thanks.
30 Comments
|
* The Fox News Channel ran a story about former Democratic state Senator Rev. James Meeks’ support for Republican Bruce Rauner…
“The Democratic party just assume always that 97 percent of the African-American vote will go to the Democratic party. If that assumption is true, they never have to work for our vote,” Meeks said.
He speaks of the gun violence that plagues Chicago’s West and South Sides, the poverty and the appearance that there is no end in sight. “Our schools are still broken and getting worse. We’re last in employment or business. Our neighborhoods are deplorable,” says Meeks. “And we still get the same promises from the Democratic party, but we don’t get any deliverable. I think it’s time we should look at another candidate.”
Chicago political analyst Thom Serafin says few Republicans have been able to win statewide in Illinois without collecting 20 percent of the city vote. To do that, a candidate must win a significant portion of the African-American vote. Serafin believes Meeks can deliver. “He understands what it means to turn out the vote here in the city. He is well respected,” he said. […]
Rauner has already had an opportunity to speak to the faithful at Salem Baptist and Meeks is talking with other pastors about getting Rauner to speak to more African-American congregations.
“I would hope that I would get a chance to influence a lot of African-Americans to look at how we, as a voting bloc, [are] being take
The first time I had a chance to see just how influential Meeks was came during a visit to Springfield by then Mayor Daley. Hizzoner was in town for various meetings, and either before or after walking into the governor’s office, Daley made sure to have a long chat with Meeks, who was standing nearby. Speaker Madigan did the same. Other powerful folks walked up to pay tribute.
He’s lost some of his juice since then - on-again-off-again runs for governor and mayor had a lot to do with it - but he still wields a bunch of influence in the city.
Rev. Meeks has the second largest congregation of any church in the state. He has so many churchgoers that the city has required him to station ambulances outside during services. His church building is the state’s largest, with as much square footage as the United Center. He also has a big, old Catholic church that he uses for youth services. It’s quite an impressive operation.
42 Comments
|
Wildy popular idea
Tuesday, Apr 8, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute’s latest poll…
Legislative Term Limits
Would you favor or oppose a proposal to limit state legislators to a total of eight years of service, whether in the House of Representatives , the State Senate, or a combination ofthe two?
Strongly favor 61.7%
Somewhat favor 17.8%
Somewhat oppose 8.5%
Strongly oppose 8.6%
Other/Don’t know 3.4%
Leadership Term Limits
Would you favor or oppose a proposal to limit how long state legislators could serve in leadership roles – such as Speaker of the House or President of the Senate – before they stepped down to let other legislators lead?
Strongly favor 65.1%
Somewhat favor 17.6%
Somewhat oppose 8.3%
Strongly oppose 6.3%
Other/Don’t know 2.7%
* From the Institute…
In statewide Simon Polls going back to 2010, between 75 and 80 percent of Illinois voters surveyed have supported legislative term limits. Support for leadership term limits — in offices such as Speaker of the Illinois House and President of the Illinois Senate — has been just as strong.
“Regardless of your position on term limits, it’s clear the idea has support. If organizers are able to get the measure on the ballot – and it’s not clear the courts will allow that – it should be easy for them to win approval,” said David Yepsen, director of the Institute. […]
Support for term limits is strong in every demographic, geographic, and ideological subgroup in the Institute’s poll. For example, while Republicans were among the groups most likely to support the term limit proposal (89.9 percent strongly or somewhat in favor), even an overwhelming majority of Democrats approved of it (73.4 percent strongly or somewhat in favor).
In the 2014 Simon Poll, the wording of the term limit question referred to a combined eight - year limit of service in either or both houses, in order to reflect the proposal pushed by the group Term Limits and Reform, backed by Republican gubernatorial candidate Bruce Rauner. Previous versions of the question referred to limits of five terms in the Illinois House and three terms in the Illinois Senate.
“Regardless of whom you ask or how you phrase the question, legislative term limits are extraordinarily popular among the Illinois electorate,” said Charlie Leonard, a Simon Institute visiting professor who supervised the poll. “Unable or unwilling to limit their own representatives ’ terms through the ballot box, the voters seem to hope a blanket constitutional amendment will do the job for them.
* And here’s a different take on leadership term limits, which came during a committee debate over a proposed constitutional amendment…
The amendment was sponsored by Sen. Matt Murphy, R-Palatine. Sen. Don Harmon D-Oak Park, asked Murphy if he knew how many leaders, past or present, the amendment would have applied to. Of course, as an attorney, Harmon already knew the answer to his question when he asked it. That answer was only two: House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, and former Senate President Phil Rock, D-Oak Park.
Murphy said he started toying with the term-limit idea after his first year in the Senate. That would have been 2007, a year that good ol’ Rod Blagojevich went particularly amok. He kept the legislature in session all summer before Madigan essentially told the House to go home and stay there until he called them back.
“It was my first experience with the concept of the consolidation of power in Springfield in just a few hands,” Murphy said.
Harmon had a different take.
“Without strong legislative leaders, can you imagine how awful that summer would have been that you experienced with a rogue governor and no one in the legislature to stand up and say no?” Harmon asked.
31 Comments
|
* I don’t think I’ve ever seen anything like this before. From a press release…
Springfield, IL – Hundreds of religious leaders from around the state will march on the offices of the Illinois Policy Institute (IPI) in Springfield beginning today at noon at the Lincoln statue at the Capitol building. The group will call on the organization – funded by the wealthiest corporate special interests in America – to stop their false attacks on a Fair Tax, and to let the citizens of Illinois make the decision for themselves about a Fair Tax on the November ballot.
Documents exposed in a December news report revealed that the Illinois Policy Institute has been serving as a conduit for the national State Policy Network, a group financed by America’s wealthiest corporate interests, including billionaires David and Charles Koch. The documents revealed funding to IPI from the group as earmarked for the purpose of making a Fair Tax “politically toxic” to Illinois voters.
The Illinois Policy Institute is responsible for many false attacks on the Fair Tax, including claims it would raise taxes on low- and middle-income families—claims which have been thoroughly debunked. The truth is that a Fair Tax – implemented with a rate structure proposed by the Fair Tax Act’s chief sponsor, Sen. Don Harmon – would cut taxes for 94% of Illinois residents, including everyone making up to $205,000.
In February, more than 100 religious & faith leaders gathered in Chicago to call for a Fair Tax, with lower rates for lower incomes and higher rates for higher incomes. They believe the Fair Tax is important because it gives tax relief to vast majority of families while also preventing devastating cuts to important public priorities, which would have an especially harmful effect on Illinois’ most vulnerable citizens. Today, in addition to demanding accountability from the Illinois Policy Institute, faith leaders will be visiting their elected officials in Springfield to urge them, among other issues, to pass the Fair Tax Act before the May 4th deadline.
The march is being organized by the Community Renewal Society. Its legislative agenda is here. The group publishes Catalyst Chicago and The Chicago Reporter. Its board members include SEIU Healthcare’s Director of External Relations plus lots of ministers.
42 Comments
|
It’s a beautiful day, so let’s talk baseball
Tuesday, Apr 8, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Wordslinger demonstrated once again today why we named our best commenter of the year award after him with this perfect gem…
As an aside, my greatest baseball memory:
When I was about 12, my buddy Wags and I were hanging one hot summer Sunday afternoon at the Dairy Queen by the Kish on Lincoln Highway in DeKalb.
We’d been fishing at the lagoon on campus and had stopped off to freeze our brains with a Mister Mistee.
While we loitered in a booth there, a couple of old gents walked in for an ice cream cone, clearly coming straight from the golf course.
One of them was a giant — tall, thin, regal, decked out in the most elegant golf duds …
…it was Joe Dimaggio.
Wags and I about plotzed.
Turned out Joe was in town to visit a friend, Sam Brody, who owned Brody Coats in Sycamore. As my very jealous brothers told me later, they’d played together in the Pacific Coast League before Joe went east to take possession of New York, baseball, and Marilyn Monroe.
Joe and Sam stood and enjoyed their cones, then Wags and I finally mustered the courage to approach them.
“Excuse me, mister, are you Joe Dimaggio?”
The giant looked down, smiled and said “yes.”
“Can we have your autograph?”
“Sure. I see your fishing poles. You boys catch anything?”
“No sir.”
“You like baseball? I used to play baseball, you know….”
Joe Dimaggio on a Sunday afternoon at the Dairy Queen in DeKalb. When you’re 12.
Can. You. Dig. It.
Your favorite baseball memory?
93 Comments
|
*** UPDATE *** The mayor’s pension bill easily passed the House 73-41. On to the Senate.
[ *** End Of Update *** ]
* I told you this would happen yesterday…
Mayor Rahm Emanuel and House Speaker Michael Madigan Monday stripped out controversial language from city pension legislation that had authorized the City Council to impose a property-tax hike, putting the stalled measure back on the fast-track at the state Capitol. […]
Madigan, D-Chicago, filed an amendment to Senate Bill 1922 after the House adjourned Monday without taking any action on the stalled legislation. Sources now expect the legislation to be voted upon as early as Tuesday.
* More…
Unions had also opposed removing the property tax mandate from the bill, but City Hall is convinced labor leaders won’t object to Monday’s revisions because of language that gives the state the right to withhold state funding to Chicago during any year that the city fails to make its required contribution to municipal employees or Laborers pension funds
* To the bill…
Still in the bill are two provisions to penalize the city if it does not make the pension payments. The state comptroller would be allowed to divert millions of dollars in annual state payments away from the city and into the pension funds a provision that was made stronger in the most recent version.
The proposal also spells out that pension boards could sue to get the state to divert millions in city funding to the pension funds. […]
The new plan also includes a minimum cost-of-living increase of at least 1 percent every year for retired workers who are getting pensions of $22,000 or less. The bulk of retirees would get annual increases of half the rate of inflation or 3 percent, whichever is less, based on the amount of their annual pension payments upon retirement. Currently, all retirees get 3 percent, based on their previous year’s pension income. […]
The latest version also includes a new provision that would allow Emanuel to change the makeup of the two retirement boards that oversee the laborers and municipal funds. It would terminate the terms of current members next year and allow the mayor to recommend how new members of the board should be appointed.
* A labor activist who opposes the bill sent me this commentary about that last paragraph…
Here’s what that means: The supposed “funding guarantee” in this legislation is a provision that the municipal and laborers funds may go to court if the city doesn’t pay what’s required. Now, the municipal fund’s board consists of three elected members who are employees, plus the city treasurer and comptroller. But under this provision, the entire board could be political appointees of the mayor. Besides eliminating the voice of employee participants, it could give mayoral appointees total discretion to enforce the funding provision – or look the other way.
Except the state comptroller is also required to skim city grants, and the comptroller’s office says that includes Chicago’s giant pile of revenue-sharing cash from the Local Government Distributive Fund.
* And this shows how weird some folks can get around here…
To some, Quinn’s decision to draw a line in the sand on property taxes and dangle the city’s elusive quest for a Chicago casino as a replacement was part of an elaborate political dance.
Those Machiavellian theorists believe the plan for $50 million property tax hikes for each of the next five years may have been a stalking horse for a casino all along.
But the fact is, Chicago probably needs both property tax hikes and the jackpot from a land-based casino to wipe out an $32 billion unfunded pension liability that’s eight times the city’s operating revenue and, what Moody’s calls “by far the highest” of any rated U.S. local government.
That last sentence is far more in line with reality.
21 Comments
|
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
A new amendment to the Ridesharing Arrangements and Consumer Protection Act (HB 4075) now creates a reasonable compromise between ridesharing companies and full-time taxi drivers, striking the right balance between securing public safety and promoting new transportation options in Illinois.
The taxi industry has been working with the rideshare industry to find a fair set of common-sense safety standards that maintain a level playing field. We have also heard the concerns of members of the General Assembly, who support the idea of ridesharing in Illinois and who want to make sure these companies can operate safely in our state.
Our amendment creates a two-tiered system of regulation for part-time rideshare drivers that does not require them to obtain chauffeur’s licenses, though stringent background checks must be conducted and their vehicles must pass annual safety inspections. Drivers working more than 18 hours a week must have a chauffeur’s license, distinctive license plates and comply with local regulations for taxi and livery service.
Though we’ve made great progress, adequate insurance and public safety must not be compromised. All drivers, regardless of how many hours they work, must have primary commercial liability insurance in case of an accident through an insurance company authorized to do business in Illinois.
Pass HB 4075 as amended to allow ridesharing to prosper in Illinois while keeping our roads safe and promoting choice for customers throughout Illinois.
www.whosdrivingillinois.com
Comments Off
|
So, now they’re against testing?
Tuesday, Apr 8, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* As I made clear yesterday, I like choices in education and am not a big fan of the educational establishment and the educational system we have here. But now that mandatory student testing shows there’s not a whole lot of overall difference between Chicago charter schools and Chicago neighborhood schools and on the same day as a big pro-charter school rally in Springfield, the Tribune editorial board trots out a study from three years ago that shows charters are better…
Not every charter is superior to local schools. Some lag and should be shuttered. But check out a recent study by Mathematica Policy Research on the effects of charter schools in Chicago and Florida. The group found that charter high schools “appear to have substantial positive effects on students’ long-term educational attainment.” In Florida, researchers found evidence that charters may have “large positive effects” on students’ later earnings.
Bottom line: “Charter high schools seem to be endowing their students with skills that are useful for success in college and career but that are not captured by test scores.” [Emphasis added.]
*Facepalm*
This is the same Chicago Tribune that demanded more testing of students and teachers during the education reform debates a few years back. And now testing doesn’t really gauge outcomes? Who knew?
Sheesh.
* Meanwhile, Mayor Rahm Emanuel was asked yesterday about the standardized testing results…
The mayor was asked whether charters funded by CPS, but freed from regulations impacting traditional public schools shouldn’t have students performing “measurably better” on test scores.
He never answered the question.
“It’s an old debate to look at brand. The new debate is to look at high-quality education that achieves the goal of college readiness, college preparation and career readiness. That’s what I’m focused on at every level,” he said.
“[That’s] why I made sure our neighborhood schools at [the] high school [level] gave parents choice. They need to have the choice. We need to provide quality. Regardless of whether it’s military, selective enrollment, STEM, IB or charter, I want to make sure there’s quality throughout the system and parents will then have the choice of high-quality options.”
* And, while we’re at it, take a look at this story about how New York’s mayor got steamrolled by the big bucks charter school backers.
26 Comments
|
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
In any discussion about treating mental illness, patients and their families must come first. But Senate Bill 2187 – sometimes called “RxP” – puts the interests of a small group of professionals ahead of protecting patients.
SB 2187 would allow psychologists who have no medical training to prescribe medications. Current Illinois law allows only people who have medical training – doctors, nurse practitioners and physician assistants – to prescribe drugs.
Why does medical training matter? Physical illnesses and mental disorders are often intertwined. Additionally, psychiatric medication, such as drugs for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, can interact negatively with medication for chronic illnesses. Finally, many drugs are powerful and have risky side effects. To understand these complexities, psychiatrists go through four years of medical school and four additional years of residency, on top of their college training in the sciences. They learn to treat the whole patient – not just the brain.
“When you talk about prescribing medicine, the Number One point that you want to drive home is safety,” says Dr. Napatia Tronshaw, an Orland Park psychiatrist and medical doctor. “In order to safely approach prescribing medication, there is a certain knowledge base that you should have.”
Psychologists who want to prescribe can follow the route taken by Illinois nurse practitioners, physician assistants and doctors. They can obtain medical training – instead of insisting on a law that would put patients at risk. To become involved, join the Coalition for Patient Safety, http://coalitionforpatientsafety.com.
Comments Off
|
Biss savings bill picks up momentum
Tuesday, Apr 8, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* I watched the debate on Sen. Biss’ retirement savings bill in the Senate Executive Committee not long ago. The NFIB and the Republicans spoke against the proposal, despite claims by Biss that this was actually a creation of the Heritage Foundation and the Brookings Institute in 2006. It was, he says, supported by both John McCain and Barack Obama in 2008.
The Tribune looked beyond the partisan politics of the moment today and wholeheartedly endorsed the bill…
Americans have longer life spans than their ancestors dreamed possible. The private-sector pension, by contrast, flirts with extinction. Federal trustees warn that Medicare’s hospital insurance trust fund goes insolvent in a mere 12 years — followed seven years later by the main Social Security trust fund. And many among us save so little for the future that they risk a retirement diet of Meow Mix.
Sum those perils and the money math looms menacing for today’s workforce. Fitting, then, that the Illinois Senate’s sole research mathematician, Evanston Democrat Daniel Biss, proposes a clever savings plan for some 2.5 million private-sector Illinoisans whose employers don’t offer retirement plans. […]
Workers at companies with 25 or more employees but no retirement plan would be automatically enrolled, with the choice to opt out at any time. Smaller companies could join voluntarily. The workers could choose how much to invest in a selection of mutual funds managed not by the state, but by a low-cost provider (think Vanguard or T. Rowe Price). Individuals who make no choices would have 3 percent of their wages go, via payroll deduction, into diversified target-date retirement funds. Many companies that offer 401(k) plans do the same, automatically enrolling employees in default target-date funds.
Administrative costs for the investment provider and the state could total no more than 0.75 percent of invested assets. An unpaid, seven-member board including the state treasurer, comptroller and governor’s top budget officer would choose the provider and perform risk management and oversight duties. The best protection against corruption, theft or pinstripe patronage: Illinois never would touch the investments. State government instead would wave at the payroll deductions as they travel to employees’ accounts. Those accounts would be portable from job to job; workers with more than one employer would have a single account.
* The Sun-Times looked closely at the opposition…
Business groups, including the Illinois Chamber of Commerce and the National Federation of Independent Business are opposed, saying it will burden small businesses, financially and administratively, forcing employers to act as a go-between on a program many don’t want to offer. Insurance and financial advisers also are opposed, but we suspect that’s mostly because the automatic IRA would cut into their business.
The business concerns are legitimate, but given the careful design of the Illinois program, we think the burdens would be minimal. In a country that’s reliant on employer-based retirement systems, it’s inevitable that business will face burdens. The question is how much is too much? This bill does not tip the scales.
Jeffrey Brown, a University of Illinois finance professor and expert on retirement security, is one of many supporters of automatic IRAs, citing research on the power of automatic deductions in increasing participation rates. Brown tell us he likes Biss’ idea, particularly since it avoids the pitfalls of automatic IRA proposals in other states, including ill-advised attempts to guarantee a rate of return. He worries, though, that the state board, as currently envisioned, may become politicized, something we’d like the bill sponsors to address.
Brown, to whom we were referred by the bill’s opponents, the American Council of Life Insurers, said he would prefer a federal automatic IRA program, as would we. But the odds of that passing Congress aren’t good.
Opposition by the insurance industry is probably more important here than anything else. We’ve got a lot of big insurance companies in this state, so that may explain much of the GOP opposition in committee.
* SJ-R…
The slow economic recovery has contributed to the problem. More Americans have found themselves chronically unemployed or underemployed. Companies have cut back on wages and benefits, including retirement plans, for workers.
Low-wage workers aren’t just high school lifeguards or college students selling jeans at the mall on weekends. They include manufacturing workers, retail staff, salespeople, cashiers, restaurant cooks and wait staff, small-business owners and employees and more.
Dreams of a comfortable, carefree retirement are considered out of reach for many Americans. Sen. Daniel Biss, D-Evanston, calls it “a straight path to poverty in old age.”
“There is no example in America or elsewhere now in history of a system that just kind of hopes for the best and educates people and leaves 25-, 30- and 40-year-olds making the kind of decisions necessary for a dignified retirement,” he said. “I know that sounds paternalistic, but I think there is a giant wealth of overwhelming research that makes that clear. So you have to do something.”
Thoughts?
25 Comments
|
|
Comments Off
|
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
During some extremely challenging financial times facing consumers, one bright spot in the financial services arena has been credit unions. Credit Union 1 is a shining example of how one credit union serves its membership through good times and bad. In 1995, Credit Union 1 introduced an “Employee Loan Assistance” program designed to provide payroll gap assistance for its members facing the threat of a missed or delayed paycheck. In June 2007, this program was utilized for the first time to assist state employees that incurred a delayed paycheck due to the Illinois budget crisis that occurred. Most recently, Credit Union 1 offered the program to their members of the Illinois General Assembly and staff to assist during an interruption in the legislative payroll cycle. While fortunately this program has only been needed on a limited basis since its inception, Credit Union 1 members are afforded great comfort and security in knowing that their credit union is there for them whenever the need arises. Credit unions are “People Helping People” — dedicated to serving the needs of their membership as well as providing “peace of mind” that the credit union is always there. And that’s the credit union difference.
Comments Off
|
|
Comments Off
|
|
Support CapitolFax.com
Visit our advertisers...
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
|
   
|
Hosted by MCS
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax
Advertise Here
Mobile Version
Contact Rich Miller
|
