Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar » For guidance before he was against guidance
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax      Advertise Here      About     Exclusive Subscriber Content     Updated Posts    Contact Rich Miller
CapitolFax.com
To subscribe to Capitol Fax, click here.
For guidance before he was against guidance

Monday, May 11, 2015 - Posted by Rich Miller

* November 20, 2014

Making his first post-election appearance at the Capitol on Thursday, Gov.-elect Bruce Rauner said he hopes the Illinois Supreme Court eventually will provide guidance on what changes are acceptable when it comes to fixing the state’s more than $100 billion debt in the government worker pension system. […]

“My preference is probably to wait until the Supreme Court rules so we have some ground rules for what probably works and won’t work. I think that’s the smarter way to do it,” Rauner said.

* November 25, 2014

Republican Gov.-elect Bruce Rauner said Monday that he was hardly surprised by a judge’s ruling last week that found Democrats’ landmark 2013 pension reform law to be unconstitutional.

But he said he hoped future appeals of the decision would supply a blueprint for what type of reform might pass constitutional muster. […]

“Hopefully they will give us some feedback that will help guide the discussion for future modifications as appropriate for the pensions,” Rauner said.

* May 9, 2015

Rauner said he didn’t appreciate several suggestions for pensions fixes that the Supreme Court included in its 38-page decision. The unanimous decision included suggestions by the court that the state raise new revenue or enact a new schedule for repaying pension debt.

“I’m not sure it makes sense for the judiciary to comment on government policy. I think it’s their role to interpret the law, the existing law,” Rauner said.

Apparently, the governor didn’t get the guidance he wanted, so he slammed the justices for exceeding their constitutional roles.

Sheesh.

       

86 Comments
  1. - Illinois Manufacturer - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:32 am:

    Sheesh is right …and kind…..OW is right RNUG is we are in for an interesting summer


  2. - AnonymousOne - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:33 am:

    Just like the overwhelming vote in favor of the millionaire tax. If he doesn’t like the result, just toss it and disregard.


  3. - Precinct Captain - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:34 am:

    Attention Governor, Bozo is on line one


  4. - Johnny Pyle Driver - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:38 am:

    Obviously his November, 2014 comments came before he realized the Supremes were a bunch of corrupt insider cronies. Duh!


  5. - Roamin' Numeral - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:39 am:

    ==suggestions by the court that the state raise new revenue==

    Earth to Illinois: You need new revenue.


  6. - forwhatitsworth - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:39 am:

    And this is the person the majority of voters in the last election wanted!?!?


  7. - slow down - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:40 am:

    Reminds me of the default Republican position to whine about “activist judges” in any instance where the “activist judge” rules contrary to the Republican preferred position. If the “activist judge” rules the other way, then it’s a simply a well reasoned victory for conservatism.


  8. - Now What? - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:40 am:

    Second public slamming of the ISC. Cannot understand why he is not getting better advice from his inner circle. To let him make those statements just proves how dysfunctional his machine is, and why Durkin has no chance to rein him in. Good luck, ILGOP.


  9. - Anonymous - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:41 am:

    What do we expect from a court that is part of a corrupt system?


  10. - Mokenavince - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:42 am:

    Bruce it’s time for the rubber to meet the road. We need to raise the income tax, cut our 7000 governments in half. And Chicago should have 25 wards. And privatize every thing that can be.
    We owe what we owe.


  11. - MrJM - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:44 am:

    “What do we expect from a court that is part of a corrupt system?”

    Poe’s law: Without a clear indicator of an author’s intention, it is often impossible to tell the difference between an expression of sincere extremism and a parody of such extremism.

    – MrJM


  12. - Tornadoman - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:46 am:

    The ‘guidance’ was proof that this isn’t an emergency- there are other options to using police powers.

    Surprised BVR didn’t mention the shot fired across his bow about about changing the pensions in regards to the 14th amendment (US).


  13. - throwing Stones - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:48 am:

    “My Preference”
    “I think”
    “Hopefully they will give us”
    “I’m not sure”
    “I think”

    It’s all about Bruce with no regards to any insight from anyone else.


  14. - Wallinger Dickus - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:50 am:

    Isn’t that how you run government like a business?

    The CEO sends the middle management back to their cubicles and exclaims, “and don’t come back here until you come up with the solution I asked for.”

    If you know what’s good for you …


  15. - Anonymous - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:51 am:

    The governor apparently thought he and his friends had paid enough in campaign contributions to the justices to win — or at least get “guidance” that he would like.

    I don’t like electing judges, but the Court did itself proud this time.


  16. - kimocat - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:51 am:

    “No, no, no, no, no. That’s not the guidance we need. We already knew that stuff! we need the guidance on how we can constitutionally stick-it to public employees and retirees. Oh yeah and corrupt unions too.”


  17. - Wordslinger - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:51 am:

    The Supremes went yard in their unanimous smack down. The decision read like a ray of sunshine, cutting through all the cynical nonsense of the boodlers and cheap hustlers.

    Quinn and the GA were hardly profiles in courage passing SB1 to get the hysterics and thieves off their backs prior to the election. And let’s not forget, Rauner said it didnt go far enough in stealing from employees and retirees. But it was probably necessary to get a definitive ruling.

    And we got one, with the bark on. Hopefully, Ty and the Tribbies will pile back into the clown car and go home and get their shine boxes.

    The grown ups have spoken, finally, thankfully.


  18. - Stones - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:52 am:

    The Governor made a big point about requesting “guidance” from the Courts. Sometimes, it’s best to be careful what you ask for because you may indeed get it. He absolutely looks like a rank amateur.


  19. - Corporate Thug - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:52 am:

    That’s his way of doing business. You don’t agree with me, you’re wrong. The venture capitalist way.

    You know what always puzzled me..there are plenty of business guys out there who know how to compromise to get things done. Why can’t he grasp this? He could be a very, very popular governor if he wanted to be if he dropped the my way or the highway act and learned how to listen. Instead, it seems like welcomes the road less traveled.

    Maybe he’s right with his way of thinking. But I don’t think so. I guess we’ll see!


  20. - downstate commissioner - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:55 am:

    At age 66, when I say stuff, and then forget I said it, like this, I chalk it up to early-onset alztimers…what’s his excuse???


  21. - AnonymousOne - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:55 am:

    Rauner (and others) are like a record stuck in one track, over and over again. He is determined to ruin the financial lives of public employees, for whatever fetish reason that might be. There is no other way to get money for programs than by sticking it to the public servants. No advice needed, no guidance needed. All efforts, all energy, all attention must be paid to grabbing what is left of these peoples’ money and dignity, apparently. This is what has been elected.


  22. - Juvenal - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:56 am:

    Ah yes, that activist liberal trial lawyer lackey, Justice Lloyd Karmeier.


  23. - The Colossus of Roads - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:56 am:

    Don’t tell me what you think, tell me what I want to hear.


  24. - Oswego Willy - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:56 am:

    Rauner is the 5th grader during recess trying to play a game with 8th graders, and the 5th grader can’t conprehend the questions he’s asking, and worse, the answers he’s getting from the 8th graders to his questions.

    Campaigns are hard, governing is difficult.

    Rauner lacks the real working knowledge of governing within the 3 co-equal branches, and those branches doing 2 important things;

    Governing together, and governing under the “rules”… the Constitution.

    I guess “some” governmental experience is good?

    Yikes.


  25. - A guy - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:57 am:

    ==== forwhatitsworth - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:39 am:

    And this is the person the majority of voters in the last election wanted!?!?====

    Answer: YES. Something to keep in mind. I do think the ISC made clear why they ruled the way they did. Guidance??? Not sure we got so much of that. Not sure we need them to propose a legislative solution, perhaps just comment on the constitutionality or not of the one in front of them and why. I think they mostly did that.


  26. - Minnow - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:59 am:

    Will the “real” Bruce Rauner please come forward? Does anyone remember the movie “Sybil” with Sally Fields?


  27. - Andy S. - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 9:59 am:

    It is apparent from comments made on Friday and over the weekend that Rauner wants to remove the Pension Protection Clause (Art. XIII Sec. 5) from the Illinois Constitution, and if/when that is accomplished (2017 at the earliest) implement his plan to switch current employees into Tier 2 for future work. However, if you read the ISC ruling carefully, it is fairly obvious that even without Article XIII Sec. 5 the ISC will not allow changes to the pensions of both current employees and retires based on the contracts clauses of the Illinois Constitution (Art. I, Sec. 16) and the US Constitution (Art. 1, Sec. 10, Clause 1). In paragraphs 60-69 of the ISC ruling, the justices discuss at length how the state’s police powers defense to alter pension contracts falls short based on these contract clauses and NOT solely on the pension protection clause.

    Based on paragraphs 60-69 of the ISC ruling, I can predict with virtually 100% certainty that if Rauner and the legislature attempt to get around the ruling by repealing the pension protection clause, then even if they succeed with the public they will fail with the ISC. Another 3 years will be wasted with nothing accomplished.


  28. - Anonymous - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:00 am:

    - Guidance??? Not sure we got so much of that. -

    Maybe you wouldn’t worship Bruce so much if you’d actually read what he says. Like when he said he wanted guidance, and then when he said he wished the supremes hadn’t provided guidance.


  29. - stlboy - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:00 am:

    Aren’t those ISC justices from each party in a unanimous vote?


  30. - Austin Blvd - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:02 am:

    Lol Rich. Lol.


  31. - BlameBruceRauner - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:05 am:

    RAISE TAXES-nuff said.


  32. - Not quite a majority - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:05 am:

    “Not sure we need them to propose a legislative solution, perhaps just comment on the constitutionality or not of the one in front of them and why. I think they mostly did that.”

    Sorry, that’s why we have an Attorney General. If you have a question about a proposed law, the legislature can ask for an opinion on that law. But they can’t just hop across the street, one block down and ask the court. It’s called separation of powers. That’s why we had to wait so long for this ruling. I’m sure the Sen Pres would have loved to know this ruling in advance when everyone and his brother was telling him they had a better way.


  33. - West Side the Best Side - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:07 am:

    The Supreme Court has in past decisions made suggestions about legislative changes because they know they do not make laws. No one else in the executive or legislative branches has had a problem with that previously. This is especially hypocritical based on earlier comments inviting feedback.


  34. - AnonymousOne - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:09 am:

    Andy S. said it well. It is time to end the obsession with taking more (again) from the public pension system. Move along. There are other options as the Supreme Court said. Sorry the other options aren’t liked, but those in the pension systems did like having their future retirement money spent on other people either.


  35. - Austin Blvd - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:11 am:

    OW:
    “…governing is difficult…”
    For guys like “Sonny” especially
    This is a Sonny moment if there ever was one.
    Open the trunk and grab the machine guns, boys.


  36. - Shanks - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:15 am:

    Maybe Bruce should read the Illinois state constitution for guidance.


  37. - veritas - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:17 am:

    Guidance that helps me achieve my agenda - GOOD
    Any other Guidance - BAD


  38. - Arsenal - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:20 am:

    “And this is the person the majority of voters in the last election wanted!?!?”

    Well, he’s not Pat Quinn, so, yes.


  39. - walker - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:24 am:

    These benefits, including promised future increases, are set by contract, according to the ISC. The “not to be diminished” clause was really just piling on.

    Therefore, removing that Constitutional clause would have no impact on the legal restraints on Rauner’s potential plans, and there are other legal bases for the contract decision as well.

    Not sure there is a state constitutional amendment solution here.


  40. - Juvenal - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:26 am:

    The smart thing for Cullerton to do is to offer up a Constitutional amendment that would give all retirement savings in Illinois the same protections as the ones for public employees.


  41. - Juvenal - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:26 am:

    Walker: Bingo.


  42. - Soccertease - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:27 am:

    I think it was appropriate for the court to point out that the state has the authority and ability to raise taxes, revamp funding, etc. It explains why they ruled the way they did. Truth hurts sometimes.


  43. - Esquire1 - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:27 am:

    How soon will a legislative committee be formed and how soon will they come up with new unconstitutional legislation?


  44. - ZC - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:28 am:

    There’s no state constitutional amendment solution to our problems today.

    But (though I dislike admitting this in most contexts) as a long-term improvement, Rauner’s idea to get this pension language out of the IL Constitution is absolutely a good one.

    It won’t solve our current problems, no question. But it would be a breath of fresh air if we were actually proactive in this state and looked forward to solving -future- problems, for future generations.

    Because if we keep this pension language in, I predict 50-60 years from now, we’ll be doing this whole sad dance all over again. Let’s do the future a favor. Bonus points if we swipe out all the prohibitions on a progressive income tax, at the same time.


  45. - Federalist - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:30 am:

    let’s get this straight . Rauner criticizes the ISC for comments exceeding their authority but he wants ‘guidance, on what might be acceptable.

    As usual Rauner wants what he wants, how he wants it and when he wants it.

    I would agree that their suggestions on the state budget were out of line and smacked of judicial activism and overreach. However, that also means they rule on the laws before them and not stray beyond that.

    Difficult concept of political zealots of either side to understand this concept.


  46. - Shemp - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:30 am:

    Maybe he is just crazy-smart enough to want to throw every single option on the table, hope a few stick, then when he has to sign off on the inevitable tax increase, he can say he was truly out of options. Only thing I can figure.


  47. - VanillaMan - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:31 am:

    Even when we separate his politics from his governing, we see failure with Bruce Rauner.

    His Good Friday cutbacks were unnecessary and bad politics. His RTW-Pickett’s Charge is a continuing political bloodbath. His river of negative outlook for our state is bad politics. His insults towards the General Assembly and the party holding veto-proof political power is bad politics. His secret meetings are bad politics. As a politician, our new governor is a flaming Hindenburg of incompetence.

    As a chief executive and top administrator, Bruce Rauner fails as well. A whole lot of bad politics can be overlooked if voters see someone who at least keeps the state running daily. What have they seen with this guy so far? A governor who refuses to acknowledge the importance of the other branches of government and their roles. A man who couldn’t assemble a budget beyond a pair of prairie chickens as a prop. A man who casts aspersions towards everyone working in state government. As a chief executive, Bruce Rauner is a flop.

    If a governor can’t play the political game well, and can’t govern either - he is going to become irrelevant as our problems mount.

    Can anyone save this governor, and would he even listen to anyone trying to save him?


  48. - DuPage - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:33 am:

    Rauner is looking for a way to get out of paying for something. In the private sector, he would buy a company and have it go bankrupt. It seems he can’t understand a debt that he can’t get out of paying.


  49. - Rich Miller - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:35 am:

    ===Based on paragraphs 60-69 of the ISC ruling, I can predict with virtually 100% certainty ===

    No, you can’t. The ISC focused solely on legislative powers, not constitutional amendments backed by a popular vote.


  50. - Ronbo - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:43 am:

    Andy S. is right, but I don’t think the Governor will like his guidance either. Joe Sosnowski is already restarting a push to get his constitutional amendment bill out of the rules committee.

    Politicians are elected and swear an oath to defend and protect the constitution. It is a shame that many of them instead try to use their office to attack that same constitution when it becomes inconvenient to them.

    The Supreme Court has ruled. Accept that Governor. It is time to move on from the blame game and find a way for the state to fulfill its obligations.


  51. - A guy - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:48 am:

    === Rich Miller - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:35 am:

    ===Based on paragraphs 60-69 of the ISC ruling, I can predict with virtually 100% certainty ===

    No, you can’t. The ISC focused solely on legislative powers, not constitutional amendments backed by a popular vote.===

    Thank you for making this very important point.


  52. - ex-ISU - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:48 am:

    Just a couple of question on this idea of guidance: Is the ISC providing some guidance to members of the pension system with footnote number 3. I know contributors to Capital Fax have previously rejected the idea that the court would order state funding of pensions, but are we heading there? Nobody has asked the court to intervene on the funding side lately. I am not sure what constitutes imminent on pensions but has the state made the case for ISC intervention on funding?

    Footnote number 3 on page 7 of Friday’s decision:
    Consistent with an earlier opinion by this court in McNamee v. State, 173 Ill. 2d 433 (1996),
    and comments at the Constitutional Convention, we did not, however, foreclose the possibility that a
    direct action could be brought by pension system members to compel funding if a pension fund were
    on the verge of default or imminent bankruptcy. Sklodowski, 182 Ill. 2d at 232-33.


  53. - Obamas Puppy - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:48 am:

    Why would he want advise from Judges who were elected by way of a “corrupt bargain”? Just like waiting for leaders to call for his RTW, pension and other language. How many sides can one mouth have?


  54. - Bushwacker - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:52 am:

    Same clown show…….same circus!


  55. - RNUG - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:56 am:

    - Andy S. - @ 9:59 expressed a lot of my thoughts.

    Rauner is going to try everything: a constitutional amendment, flipping employees to “Tier 2″ or “401K”, firing / rehiring and outsourcing. The only question is in what sequence and combination. Rauner is so used to circumventing the law on pensions and other debt during his bust-out operations he can’t conceive what he wants to do is mostly impossible under the law. The only place he may get a partial win is through outsourcing … but while it may have initial savings outsourcing usually costs the state more in the long run.

    Look for 3 more years of lawsuits.


  56. - WirePoints - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:57 am:

    No such thing as an unconstitutional constitutional amendment. That’s an oxymoron, if the amendment is drafted broadly and properly adopted. A U.S. Constitutional issue would remain, however. http://wp.me/p2Oseh-6yM


  57. - RNUG - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:59 am:

    - ex-ISU -

    I took that as a bit of a veiled threat to the General Assembly, something along the lines of ‘if you don’t get your act together, we could end up ordering a solution you may not like”.


  58. - RNUG - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 11:02 am:

    As far as the guidance the court issued, the court simply pointed out possible solutions; they didn’t order any specific solution other than saying pay what you owe.

    I suspect the entire opinion was carefully crafted to try to forestall the issue from returning to the court in the next few years.


  59. - ex-ISU - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 11:03 am:

    RNUG–

    Thanks. The problem with threats, veiled or not, is that sooner or later there has to be follow through on some of them or none have meaning.


  60. - Six Degrees of Separation - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 11:05 am:

    I think the only obvious thing that can be predicted with 100% certainty is that it ain’t over yet. However, it is 99 44/100% certain the existing retirees won’t be affected (even BVR says so), that any potential savings from changing plans for existing employees is at least 5-6 years away with the ensuing political theater and court battles, and that someone is gonna have to figure out how to fund the thing in the meantime, and very probably into the near and distant future without too much outside help.


  61. - Anon - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 11:10 am:

    This sort of comment plays well to his base, most of which are uninformed about what his comments were back in November.


  62. - Juvenal - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 11:17 am:

    ZC:

    Although the idea of coupling a progressive tax increase with the abolition of the pension clause may seem like a populist “grand bargain,” it is just the sort of grans bargain that brought together the AFL-CIO and Illinois Chamber to oppose a constitutional convention.

    Not impossible legislatively, but certainly unlikely.


  63. - Permanent partial disability - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 11:17 am:

    This wasn’t Rauner’s pension plan. He repeatedly stated that he felt it was unconstitutional before the ruling and while on the campaign trial.

    Losing by a unanimous vote in the Supreme Court were Governor Pat Quinn and the legislature as it existed pre-November 2014. That harsh opinion was as to the actions of the pre-November 2104 group.

    Tax increase to cover public pensions? The public won’t stand for it. Continued beating on public employees who played by the rules and paid into their plans by following the rules? Misguided and must stop.

    This failure is on Illinois Government pre-November 2014. The Supreme Court detailed those failures in their decision.

    So Governor Rauner, leaders Madigan, Durkin, Cullerton and Radogno, and members of the General Assembly. You going to continue those failures post November 2014?

    Any adults in Springfield? Now is your time to step up on this issue.


  64. - Anonymous - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 11:25 am:

    This is the same guy that froze all NON-ESSENTIAL Spending and then hired a $100K scheduler for his wife….his hypocrisy continues to be his hallmark- Governor Hypocrite strikes again. Is anyone really surprised by his pivot?


  65. - Six Degrees of Separation - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 11:25 am:

    Tax increase to cover public pensions? The public won’t stand for it.

    Unfortunately, this leaves only a few options, or combinations, available. Cut services to a heretofore unthinkable level, have a fire sale of state assets (with the tollway being the crown jewel), or find a way to raise substantial income (casinos, legal MJ, extraction tax on fracking) without calling it a tax.


  66. - Jasper - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 11:26 am:

    I think the “guidance” was there and it was very clear. Our state leaders (gag) created this crisis…and will not be allowed to blame the workers and retirees for the failures of the GA and past governors.


  67. - Norseman - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 11:27 am:

    === Any adults in Springfield? Now is your time to step up on this issue. ===

    We had adults in Springfield step up on Friday. Now you’re looking for adults in the Capitol Building. That appears to be a much harder ask.


  68. - anon - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 11:28 am:

    In the case about county treasurer stipends, the Appellate Court ordered payment out of the general fund when the legislature refused to appropriate enough money to pay the constitutionally-required stipend. I think that footnote is a warning that separation of powers will not stop the court from ordering payment of pensions if the legislature actually stiffs anyone on a check.


  69. - zonz - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 11:34 am:

    *** The author’s words here are 100% snark ***

    Pension problem?
    Pffttt.
    Implement the Koch Bros / Menard / Wisconsin solution:
    1. Buy some puppets to serve as Justices of the IL Supreme Court
    2. Tap the endless supply of Tea Party geniuses and let them *LEAD* IL TO PENSION *REFORM*
    3. Have the Supreme Court’s new puppet Justices bless the *reform*

    What’s the mechanism?
    HJRCA0009
    Filed with the Clerk by Rockford’s Rep. Joe Sosnowski (1/23/2015)
    Added Co-Sponsor Palatine’s Rep. Thomas Morrison (2/18/2015)

    Proposed HJRCA0009
    proposes to amend Section 5 of Article XIII of the Illinois Constitution BY SIMPLY REPEALING IT

    SYNOPSIS AS INTRODUCED: Proposes to amend the General Provisions Article of the Illinois Constitution. Repeals a provision that specifies that membership in any pension or retirement system of the State, any unit of local government or school district, or any agency or instrumentality thereof shall be an enforceable contractual relationship, the benefits of which shall not be diminished or impaired
    http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/99/HJRCA/PDF/09900HC0009lv.pdf

    See below for links to their explainers - - in full glory - - which appeared in
    1. Illinois Review | Crossroads of the Illinois Conservative Community
    and
    2. the Daily Herald.

    December 10, 2014
    Sosnowski: Real pension reform requires voters to change the state constitution
    http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisreview/2014/12/sosnowski-real-pension-reform-requires-voters-to-change-the-state-constitution.html

    State Rep. Tom Morrison of Palatine
    3/27/2015 1:00 AM
    Change in constitution is only permanent solution to pension crisis
    http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20150327/discuss/150329153/


  70. - Anonin' - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 11:37 am:

    Meanwhile slumberin State Chamber has awakened and sent out this great website http://www.ilturnaround.com/page.asp?content=startpage&g=il_turnaround


  71. - cover - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 11:41 am:

    = Footnote number 3 on page 7 of Friday’s decision:
    Consistent with an earlier opinion by this court in McNamee v. State, 173 Ill. 2d 433 (1996), and comments at the Constitutional Convention, we did not, however, foreclose the possibility that a direct action could be brought by pension system members to compel funding if a pension fund were on the verge of default or imminent bankruptcy. Sklodowski, 182 Ill. 2d at 232-33. =

    IMHO, I doubt that we’re going to get to that point in the state’s retirement systems. But this could soon become very relevant to pension funds like Chicago’s multiple funds, or all those downstate municipal police and fire pension funds, many (most?) of which are in worse shape than the state’s. Local governments, even Chicago, simply have fewer options than the state to cut services and/or raise revenue.


  72. - Arthur Andersen - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 11:49 am:

    Anonin’, I hope they didn’t spend much on that clunker.


  73. - tominchicago - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 11:54 am:

    - Juvenal - The smart thing for Cullerton to do is to offer up a Constitutional amendment that would give all retirement savings in Illinois the same protections as the ones for public employees.

    Probably pre-empted by ERISA.


  74. - Big Mike - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 12:15 pm:

    Of course, bullies never like to take suggestions. It is their job to make them!


  75. - ZC - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 1:06 pm:

    Juvenal 11:17 am -

    I don’t disagree.

    Way easier for the peanut gallery to throw up ideas, than for elected officials down in the trenches to enact them. Well aware of that.


  76. - zonz - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 1:44 pm:

    may be too dicey (issue would be have US Govt occupied the field?)

    ====== - Juvenal - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:26 am:

    The smart thing for Cullerton to do is to offer up a Constitutional amendment that would give all retirement savings in Illinois the same protections as the ones for public employees.


  77. - Minnow - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 1:46 pm:

    The ILSC quotes Article I-section 16 of the constitution that says no law impairing contracts shall be passed. Then down in paragraph 80-it says ‘It cannot exceed the bounds imposed by the
    constitution or, through legislative DECREE seek to alter them, for the constitution; etc. Does that mean a resolution to put an amendment on the ballot would not be allowed since it ultimately would lead to a change in a contract? (I define a decree ‘as an initiative by the legislature’, which is possibly wrong on my part) All answers/comments would be appreciated.


  78. - Andy S. - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 2:22 pm:

    Rich, Wirepoints:

    Here is Article 1, Section 16 of the Illinois Constitution:

    No ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts or making an irrevocable grant of special privileges or immunities, shall be passed.

    Are you saying, then, that a constitutional amendment is not a law (even though the legislature must pass it), so an amendment can be ex post facto and revoke a pre-existing contract?

    This is a crucial question because in paragraph 61 of its ruling, the ISC cites an Illinois case from 1961 that predates the pension protection clause in the 1970 Constitution, but the ISC (in 1961) nevertheless ruled that a pension was a contract and diminishment of it violated the contract clause of the old constitution. The link to that case (Bardens vs Board of Trustees of the Judges Retirement System)is here:

    http://law.justia.com/cases/illinois/supreme-court/1961/36073-5.html

    Obviously the key question is whether the people of Illinois can unilaterally revoke an existing contract by amending the constitution, and whether if the legislature and governor attempt to do that, could the courts void such an amendment before it even goes to a popular vote?


  79. - zonz - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 2:41 pm:

    Rich,
    Whatever the people can do in amending the Illinois Constitution, it could delegate to have the GA do.

    I do not, but apparently you DO think the IL Sup Court (and US Sup Court) would bless the following amendment to ARTICLE I, Constitution of the State of Illinois:

    NOTE: the included language “within twelve months following the effective date of this provision of the Constitution” is optional but highly advisable

    == Add New ==
    SECTION 25.
    DELEGATION FOR GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO SOLVE FISCAL CRISIS NOTWITHSTANDING ARTICLE XIII, SECTION 5 and ARTICLE I, SECTIONS 2 and 16.

    A. We, the People of the State of Illinois delegate to our representatives as follows:

    The General Assembly, by the vote of three-fifths of the members elected to each house within twelve months following the effective date of this provision of the Constitution, may by law find that the State government is in a fiscal crisis, and adopt a package of solutions it deems necessary to addresses the fiscal crisis which includes the diminution of the benefits of membership in one or more pension or retirement systems of the State, or units of local government or school district, or any agency or instrumentality thereof.

    B. No law passed in accordance with the foregoing provision shall be declared invalid under the following provisions of this Constitution (refer to 3 sections of the Illinois Constitution - see below).
    ………………
    ………………
    ARTICLE XIII, SECTION 5. PENSION AND RETIREMENT RIGHTS
    Membership in any pension or retirement system of the State, any unit of local government or school district, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, shall be an enforceable contractual relationship, the benefits of which shall not be diminished or impaired.
    (Source: Illinois Constitution.)
    ………………
    ………………
    ARTICLE I, SECTION 2. DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION
    No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law nor be denied the equal protection of the laws.
    (Source: Illinois Constitution.)
    ………………
    ………………
    ARTICLE I, SECTION 16. EX POST FACTO LAWS AND IMPAIRING CONTRACTS
    No ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts or making an irrevocable grant of special privileges or immunities, shall be passed.
    (Source: Illinois Constitution.)


  80. - zonz - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 2:44 pm:

    i.e., limiting condition: vote must be taken within twelve months following the effective date of the Amendment to the Constitution


  81. - Juvenal - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 3:12 pm:

    Reboot Illinois, the decidedly pro-Rauner news generator summarizes the ISC ruling well in two words: “Pay Up.”

    Those looking for alternate meanings between those two words, via back-masking, and other methods would be well-advised to move as quickly as possible through the five stages of loss:

    1. Denial (Rauner)
    2. Anger (Chicago Tribune)
    3. Bargaining (Cullerton)
    4. Depression (Nekritz)
    5. Acceptance (Raoul)


  82. - zonz - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 3:22 pm:

    TO: WirePoints re
    ==========- WirePoints - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 10:57 am:
    No such thing as an unconstitutional constitutional amendment. That’s an oxymoron, if the amendment is drafted broadly and properly adopted. A U.S. Constitutional issue would remain, however. http://wp.me/p2Oseh-6yM ==========

    The 2010 & 2012 decisions in the California Prop 8 case discredit your 1st statement (”No such thing”), and validate your 2nd statement.

    http://www.clearinghouse.net/chDocs/public/PB-CA-0029-0002.pdf
    Perry v. Schwarzenegger, 704 F. Supp. 2d 921 (N.D. Cal. 2010)

    On August 4, 2010, United States District Court Chief Judge Vaughn Walker declared Proposition 8 a violation of the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the U.S. Constitution in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, a decision upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on February 7, 2012.
    see
    1. http://www.clearinghouse.net/chDocs/public/PB-CA-0029-0001.pdf
    2. https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/prop-8-enbanc-denial.pdf


  83. - zonz - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 3:31 pm:

    TO: Andy S. - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 2:22 pm

    I believe mine @ 2:41 pm shows starkly by example why this idea of a Constitutional Amendment is so silly - - unless it addresses this:
    SECTION 3. LIMITATIONS ON INCOME TAXATION
    (a) A tax on or measured by income shall be at a
    non-graduated rate. At any one time there may be no more than one such tax imposed by the State for State purposes on individuals and one such tax so imposed on corporations. In any such tax imposed upon corporations the rate shall not exceed the rate imposed on individuals by more than a ratio of 8 to 5.
    (b) Laws imposing taxes on or measured by income may adopt by reference provisions of the laws and regulations of the United States, as they then exist or thereafter may be changed, for the purpose of arriving at the amount of income upon which the tax is imposed.
    (Source: Illinois Constitution.)


  84. - Skeptic - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 4:25 pm:

    “Are you saying, then, that a constitutional amendment is not a law … so an amendment can be ex post facto and revoke a pre-existing contract?”

    I would say that your question is mixing apples with oranges. An amendment allowing diminishment of pensions would only a law to be written to do that. If that law were to be ex post facto, or break an existing contract, unless *that* clause of the Constitution were repealed, then the law would also fall.


  85. - Skeptic - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 4:30 pm:

    “…would only _allow_ a law…”


  86. - work in progress - Monday, May 11, 15 @ 7:52 pm:

    Six degrees of separation
    All though I mostly agree with everything you said in your 11:05 am post,i have a nagging suspicion that when rauner says everything they have already earned ,he still believes he can get out of the AAI with a ca .


Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.


* Isabel’s afternoon roundup
* Feds, Illinois partner to bring DARPA quantum-testing facility to the Chicago area
* Pritzker, Durbin talk about Trump, Vance
* Napo's campaign spending questioned
* Illinois react: Trump’s VP pick J.D. Vance
* Open thread
* Isabel’s morning briefing
* Live coverage
* Yesterday's stories

Support CapitolFax.com
Visit our advertisers...

...............

...............

...............

...............


Loading


Main Menu
Home
Illinois
YouTube
Pundit rankings
Obama
Subscriber Content
Durbin
Burris
Blagojevich Trial
Advertising
Updated Posts
Polls

Archives
July 2024
June 2024
May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004

Blog*Spot Archives
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005

Syndication

RSS Feed 2.0
Comments RSS 2.0




Hosted by MCS SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax Advertise Here Mobile Version Contact Rich Miller