|
Examining the Moody’s downgrade
Friday, Oct 23, 2015 - Posted by Rich Miller * Today’s coverage of yesterday’s Moody’s downgrade was mostly he said/she said goofiness. Let’s look at the actual language, shall we?…
Did you see the date? It’s all about this year. This impasse. This particular problem. Forget about making excuses and playing the victim. Fix this crisis. * Let us continue…
Wait. Did Moody’s say Illinois has a “favorable economic climate”? Did it also say the state would be vulnerable to the next economic downturn unless “strong and swift” actions are taken on the state budget? Why, yes, they did. That’s one of the strongest independent third party rebukes of the governor’s ongoing effort to hold the budget hostage while pushing for his anti-union reforms I have yet seen. * More…
What? No mention of whacking unions? Nothing about term limits? C’mon, Moody’s! You’re off script! * More…
In other words, stay on this current track and you’re gonna get zapped again, dudes. * I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: I totally agree with the governor that we need some economic reforms if state taxes are increased. But as long as the governor sticks to his radical proposals on collective bargaining, this state ain’t going anywhere but down.
|
 |
|
|
- Arsenal - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 9:45 am:
All along, Rauner has conflated a state government budgeting crisis with a broader economic crisis. And that’s smart, ’cause most people conflate the two, too, but the problem is, he thinks we need to change the entire culture of the state just to write a balanced budget. And that doesn’t hold.
- VanillaMan - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 9:46 am:
After using up about 20-25% of his term in office, Bruce Rauner can’t keep finger pointing at the past. He has been in office too long, has had too many opportunities to govern, has had an incredible opportunity to submit and work out an Illinois state budget, to keep blaming today’s problems on others.
Bruce Rauner has been governor for long enough for him to be responsible for what we are seeing right now. He is choosing to wage a political war, split Illinoisans against their public servants, over doing his job. Rauner has chosen to ignore his own job. The methods he is trying to use as an Illinois governor are not working.
He is the governor. He is responsible. He isn’t doing his job. Bottom line - what the former governors from his own political party, what his own hand-selected comptroller, and what bond rating agencies are saying is what we have.
Stop the nonsense and be a governor, Governor!
- Norseman - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 9:49 am:
Moody says it all.
The problem is that Moody is part of the Madigan conspiracy to protect the political class. (/s)
- Wordslinger - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 9:50 am:
Rauner doesn’t have an economic agenda, but a political one.
If it were economic, we’d have seen the charts and graphs by now of the projected benefits.
- Xavier Woods - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 9:52 am:
“I don’t pay attention to news from Speaker Madigan and the Credit Rating Agencies he controls”
- Niblets - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 9:53 am:
XW
funny
- Keyrock - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 9:56 am:
Ow- does Rauner ask his broker to buy or sell Illinois bonds when he forces the credit rating down? I’m looking forward to the next episode to find out.
- Now What? - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 10:17 am:
Thank you, Rich. Echoes the same conversations we’ve been having at the office today with my great moderate Republican colleagues This governor has created this mess and only he can undo it by ditching the radical proposals. If my colleagues, who voted for Rauner, are any barometer, the governor is in serious trouble with constituents he thinks he is speaking for.
- Former Federal Prosecutor - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 10:22 am:
Here’s what I’m having trouble with.
Quinn paid the pensions. Quinn signed onto budget deals. By the standard set here, everything was just peachy under Quinn.
So, why were there 12 downgrades under his administration?
- @MisterJayEm - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 10:23 am:
Hey — where did all the Spin-Kids go?
– MrJM
- Keyrock - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 10:31 am:
FFP- Madigan (followed by Rauner) didnt make the income tax increase permanent. Also, the General Assembly, with bipartisan fault, didn’t approve a bond deal to replace 18% debt on outstanding bills with 2 or so % bond debts. Finally, everyone pretended that the pension debt didn’t have to be paid in full, while relying on magic beans.
Rauner is continuing all 3 mistakes, while adding his own new ones.
- Daniel Plainview - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 10:32 am:
- I totally agree with the governor that we need some economic reforms if state taxes are increased. -
As smart as you are Rich, I don’t understand why you continue to say the Governor is interested in economic reforms for the sake of economic reforms. He wants to bust unions, for personal and political reasons. That’s it.
- Wordslinger - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 10:35 am:
FFP, Great Recession.
Also, rating agencies got religion when the federales started poking around as to how all those subprime MBS had AAA ratings when they could not possibly have had a clue as to their true creditworthiness.
They needed to show how tough they were.
- @MisterJayEm - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 10:36 am:
“So, why were there 12 downgrades under [Quinn’s] administration?”
Attentive readers may note the phrase “despite a favorable economic climate”,
recall the post-recession economic climate, and
make logical inferences.
– MrJM
- Politix - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 10:37 am:
“Hey — where did all the Spin-Kids go?”
I wouldn’t be surprised if we started seeing a bit of turnover soon.
- nixit71 - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 10:41 am:
@FFP - I was thinking the same thing. In 18 months, from 1/12 to 6/13, right in the meat of the tax hike time, our Moody rating went from A1 to A3. The state’s unpaid bills were still a huge issue, but only because that money was going into pension debt.
I thought the ratings agencies never met a tax hike they didn’t like. Does tax feasibility come into play in our rating?
- Pelonski - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 10:46 am:
This is why I just don’t understand the continued support for Rauner by Republicans. There are so many economic and political reforms that people could get behind: redistricting, tax code simplification, reduced business regulations, tort reform, worker’s compensation reform, etc. Instead, the Governor picked going after unions which isn’t near the top of most people’s list of what is needed to improve the economic climate in the state. In fact, I’ve yet to see a credible business trade group or economist list union rights as a major problem with Illinois’ economy.
- AC - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 10:46 am:
What do you get when you elect a governor who isn’t an info junkie?
https://capitolfax.com/2015/04/20/rauner-is-not-a-news-junkie/
Maybe Goldberg can read the Moody’s downgrade report to him. It’s not like it’s Sunday.
- SAP - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 10:47 am:
During the Quinn era, the ratings agencies started requiring the pension funds to make reasonable assumptions about rate of investment returns instead of assuming 8% annual growth regardless of economic realities.
- Former Federal Prosecutor - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 10:47 am:
The Great Recession ended in June 2009. The downgrades came in March and June of 2010, January and August of 2012, and January and June of 2013.
“Logical inferences” say that the Great Recession theory is bupkis.
- A Jack - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 10:56 am:
Illinois bond holders, and I am one of them, care about current and future cash flows that the state needs for debt maintenance.
The Governor has failed to quantify the impact of his reforms on state cash flows. In fact, I doubt if he is able to quantify the cash flows in any realistic sense. He “thinks” his reforms will improve the business climate.
Rauner’s argument assumes that a perspective business moving or starting in Illinois has a significant amount of union labor. However, the economic power houses of today: Google, Apple, the high tech startups, have little, if any union labor.
None of Rauner’s reforms are dealing with the massive pension debt which has almost nothing to do with unions, except that the unions will continue to battle attempts to diminish what is owed to its members.
Rauner created this cash flow problem by asking for an expiration of the last tax increase, which by the way has not caused a huge influx of job creation. And he has exasperated the situation by not considering revenue until his demands are met.
All that said, Illinois bonds are still a good investment and currently are still investment grade, although just barely.
- Springfieldish - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 10:56 am:
“The Great Recession ended in June 2009.”
That’s hilarious.
- Abe the Babe - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 10:59 am:
==The Great Recession ended in June 2009==
Even if that were true, the decline in tax receipts sure didn’t end in 09. And by the way, all this happened when the Edgar ramp went on steroids. In one fiscal year, funding obligations went up by $1billion+.
But back to the point, this downgrade is on Rauner. And its not the cause of the pension ramp, another recession, or the overall economy…its generated by a strategic political crisis engineered by the man on the second floor.
Again, to any Rauner defenders: can you provide any analysis of the benefits of the turnaround agenda because the costs are adding up…and quickly.
- 47th Ward - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 11:02 am:
FFP, why don’t you go back and take a look at the ratings statements issued at the time of the Quinn downgrades. Why do you expect us to do your homework? Instead of being lazy, maybe you could actually bring something worthwhile to the conversation, like facts of links to credible news stories that support your argument.
- @MisterJayEm - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 11:02 am:
What’s your theory FFP?
That Moody’s is just dancing to Mike Madian’s tune when they say, in plain language, that “the downgrades reflect weakening of the state’s financial position during 2015 and our expectation that an ongoing budget stalemate will lead to further deterioration.”
Please tell us the REAL reason why Moody just downgraded Illinois.
– MrJM
- Pelonski - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 11:08 am:
A Jack,
I agree completely. Even if Rauner gets everything he wants, it will do little to address Illinois’ real problems.
- Former Federal Prosecutor - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 11:09 am:
I’m not sure what’s so “hilarious” about it. That’s not a date that I just pulled from a hat. That’s according to the National Bureau of Economic Research, which is widely regarded as the premier resource for the start and end dates to U.S. recessions. Have a look for yourself. (http://nber.org/cycles)
- Wordslinger - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 11:13 am:
FFP, are you for real?
And when, technically, the recession ended, there was gangbusters growth that miraculously restored all the wealth that was destroyed and jobs lost?
- Arsenal - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 11:13 am:
==As smart as you are Rich, I don’t understand why you continue to say the Governor is interested in economic reforms for the sake of economic reforms. He wants to bust unions, for personal and political reasons. That’s it.==
I’d love some economic reforms that really play to IL’s strengths- enhancing schools/job training, building up the transportation and communications infrastructure, stop publicly crapping on Chicago, etc.
- archimedes - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 11:14 am:
When Moodys downgraded the State to A3, the negative outlook noted the “continued increase in pension liabilities and that annual funding requirements will become unmanageable if no steps are taken address the loss of revenue from the expiring income tax.”
So - the downgrades, even after the increased income tax was in place, were based on concerns for the future expiration of the income tax and the failure to provide a financial plan to deal with pension liabilities.
It seems that their concerns for the future have been borne out - so we get the downgrade we deserve.
Wordslinger said it so well, Rauner doesn’t have an economic agenda - but a political one. Destroy public unions to starve off a main source of power and funding for the Democratic party. The economics and societal damage is simply collateral damage.
- Former Federal Prosecutor - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 11:16 am:
MisterJayEm, I never invoked Madigan not implied anything of the sort. You folks sure are awfully thin-skinned. Any inkling of dissent and you all whip out the “But Madigan…” strawman. Give it a rest.
I’m not purporting to have any theory, but I think it’s pretty clear. Going along to get along - passing swollen budgets and raising taxes to pay for them - didn’t work and will not work.
You can howl from the rooftops all the live-long-day that if we just raise taxes, pass another broken budget and move along to next year that the clouds will open up and rays of glorious sunshine will shine down upon the prairie once again. But the previous 13 downgrades under that sort of program say otherwise.
- A Jack - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 11:18 am:
And I was under the impression that the pension ramp was leveling off. However, if pension payments get missed because of cash flow problems, the ramp will have to go higher to make up for the missed gains from the late investments. If the ramp goes up, there may be a need for an even bigger tax increase than is required now. So the taxpayers are getting screwed by Rauner’s agenda.
- Demoralized - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 11:19 am:
==By the standard set here, everything was just peachy under Quinn.==
Apparently you didn’t get the whole stop playing the victim thing.
==You can howl from the rooftops all the live-long-day that if we just raise taxes, pass another broken budget and move along to next year that the clouds will open up and rays of glorious sunshine will shine down upon the prairie once again.==
Nobody is arguing that. People are arguing, though, that the Governor’s “Turnaround Agenda” isn’t necessarily the solution.
Again, you are playing the victim.
- In a Minute - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 11:20 am:
A few quick points:
1. No ratings agency is ever going to render an opinion on the kind of political and issues that Rauner and Madigan are fighting over. But that doesn’t mean that Rauner’s political and policy positions are bad.
2. There are a lot of people at ratings agencies and on Wall Street in general who are Democrats. They generally are Democrats because they believe in a women’s right to choose, a defense policy that isn’t based solely on the use of military force, not mixing politics and religion, and a belief that government has a role to play in promoting upward mobility and providing assistance to those in need.
3. My informed opinion from living there and now from living away from there is that Illinois Democrat’s seem to believe that government exists to provide economic benefits to a political class who then turn around and support their leadership in lockstep.
4. Seriously, state constitutional provision aside, who really believes that it is both fair to taxpayers and financially sustainable to have a public pension system that pays out millions of dollars in lifetime benefits to retired workers who paid in pennies on the dollar for those benefits? Illinois Democrats evidently believe that and if they do it is like believing in Santa Claus.
- Rich Miller - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 11:21 am:
===Nobody is arguing that.===
Exactly. Either live in the real world or find another place to comment.
- 47th Ward - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 11:22 am:
===Again, you are playing the victim.===
Yep. And trying to change the subject. Classic.
- Norseman - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 11:28 am:
In a Minute, pensions have already been reformed. Tier 2 is reducing pension costs. Do a little research and you’ll find out that’s true. You can stop the unsustainable stuff now.
Today’s problem is the debt that accrued because of the State’s underfunding. Unfortunately, instead of addressing that by refinancing most politicians want to try and take it from protected benefits. They need to get real and refinance the debt at more reasonable payment levels.
- @MisterJayEm - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 11:31 am:
FFP,
In the future, you may not want to follow your strawman accusation with a strawman argument.
It’s bad form.
– MrJM
- James Knell - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 11:38 am:
Unlike FDR, Rauner will never be called a “traitor to his class”. He may love Illinois, but he loves his “money” and his “money buddies” far, far more. So he will burn the state down to save it. Why to go, “he can’t be any worse than Quinn” voters. Things can always be worse.
- The Whole Truth - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 11:38 am:
FFP quoted reliable sources and drew logical conclusions. That doesn’t constitute a “straw man argument”.
- Demoralized - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 11:43 am:
Um, @The Whole Truth, this isn’t logical:
You can howl from the rooftops all the live-long-day that if we just raise taxes, pass another broken budget and move along to next year that the clouds will open up and rays of glorious sunshine will shine down upon the prairie once again.”
- Former Federal Prosecutor - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 11:45 am:
“Playing the victim.” Hilarious. The victim of what, exactly? I cannot understand how pointing out that repeating past failures is *key* to this issue is “playing the victim.”
What am I missing here? Seriously. I ask in earnest. If the argument here is not that the Governor should drop any and all of his reform proposals, raise taxes, and pass a ballooning FY16 budget as is, then what *is* the argument?
- The Whole Truth - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 11:46 am:
Logic and straw man arguments are two completely different things.
Denial of the facts is something else altogether. The Census Bureau, BLS, Pew, Reuters, Tax Foundation, credit rating houses, et. al. probably aren’t all wrong.
- Demoralized - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 11:52 am:
==What am I missing here?==
Um, a lot.
==If the argument here is not that the Governor should drop any and all of his reform proposals==
Only those that have absolutely no chance of ever happening. Find something that can be agreed on instead of stomping your feet and holding your breath until you get what you want. You are assuming that the Governor’s “reforms” are the only way to go.
==raise taxes==
Nobody has argued that’s all that needs to be done.
==and pass a ballooning FY16 budget as is,==
Nobody has done this either.
So, as I said, you’ve missed a lot.
How are you playing the victim? By arguing that not agreeing to the changes proposed equates to wanting the status quo.
Either be an adult and stop your pouting or go away. Some of us live in the real world of what is possible, and not what we want things to be. You can figure out reforms to do. Just because they may not be what the Governor wants or even what the GA wants doesn’t make this a status quo solution.
- archimedes - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 11:52 am:
In a Minute - as to your 4th point, I would suggest that most people - including taxpayers - would think it fair if the employees paid for half of their pension cost and the employer paid for half. This is how social security works as well (as a reminder, about 75% of the members of the five pension systems are not eligible - both do not pay nor receive - social security, so the pension system is their replacement).
And, low and behold, that is the case. Employees pay half and the State pays half of contributions to the normal cost of the systems. Those in Tier 2 pay the entire contribution (and then some). The pension systems then invest these contributions and the proceeds (plus contributions) provide the pension.
It is not “pennies on the dollar.”
- The Whole Truth - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 12:00 pm:
Demoralized:
If the reforms proposed by the Governor are a “no go”, then what economic reforms are possible, and effective, in your opinion? I’ve asked what commenters here would propose other than raising taxes on more than one occasion, and have yet to get a rational response.
- In a Minute - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 12:14 pm:
Archimedes–
1. Social Security provides a much more modest benefit.
2. Even in spite of this disparity in benefits between SS and Illinois defined benefit plans, SS too does not project to be solvent over the long haul.
3. Investment returns will be much lower moving forward. Retirees in private defined contribution plans will have to adjust their expectations and lifestyles in light of this. Illinois Democrats and the political class that champion the state’s defined benefit plan seem to want to remain willfully blind to this fact.
- archimedes - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 12:28 pm:
I did not try to equate Social Security to the pensions - social security is an entitlement, not a defined benefit system. I was pointing out the sharing of the payment into the system is 50/50 - just like social security. That the sharing is fair - although it is obvious that the Tier 2 is not fair, since employees are paying more than its cost in (as far as TRS and SURS) some cases and always more than half. The pension systems have made adjustments to investment return outlook, lowering the assumption for rate of return. The Tier 2 system (all employees hired since 1-1-2011 are in this system) provides a much reduced benefit level at a much reduced cost with no reduction in employee contribution.
As to the suggestions for compromise relative to the Governor’s “economic” agenda. Many have talked about compromise in workers comp, property tax freeze, prevailing wage, even some collective bargaining law. Rich has discussed it in his columns several times, saying that the D’s need to be open to some reform (he has listed specific examples) in exchange for increase of revenue.
- Juice - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 12:31 pm:
In a minute. Democrats pushed through the creation of tier two. They also pushed through reductions to tier 1, which a majority of Republicans were opposed to. And look at the roll call, it certainly wasn’t because the changes didn’t go far enough.
And on a defined contribution plan. Either freezing tier 1 benefits and shifting them over, or moving new employees in a DC plan would cost taxpayers billions of dollars in additional contributions in the short term at I time we can’t even figure out how to pay the water bills.
Just because you have preconceived notions of reality does not make it reality.
- Demoralized - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 1:19 pm:
==If the reforms proposed by the Governor are a “no go”, then what economic reforms are possible==
See, that goes back to the argument that if you don’t support the Governor’s “reforms” then it somehow means that there can’t be any reforms. That’s the attitude that has contributed to the current stalemate.
I have no idea what reforms are possible but I can tell you what “reform” isn’t - the proposals dealing with unions. Not going to happen. So he needs to stop wasting time on it. I don’t see the Democrats moving an inch until the Governor is willing to come back to dealing in reality. Only then do I think they can start a genuine conversation.
And please stop with the claims that all anybody ever proposes is tax increases because that’s a bunch of baloney. Anybody that says that hasn’t been paying attention.
- Rich Miller - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 1:26 pm:
===See, that goes back to the argument that if you don’t support the Governor’s “reforms” then it somehow means that there can’t be any reforms. That’s the attitude that has contributed to the current stalemate.===
+1
It’s like we’re dealing with petulant, spoiled rotten, self-absorbed children here.
- Former Federal Prosecutor - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 1:42 pm:
Not to speak for TheWholeTruth, or anything, but I don’t think that he or she was making that argument at all. It’s a simple question: you say the Governor’s proposals are off the table, so what would you favor instead? We are ostensibly all in quite unanimous agreement that the “status quo” is not working, so what would you propose that we do differently? It’s a valid question.
Furthermore, Madigan’s public position amidst this impasse is that the budget is what matters. Passing it is foremost, and all else is extra. And while he does say “some cuts, some revenue,” what cuts are being proposed? And what else, aside from that, is he proposing be changed?
Trust me, I’m paying plenty close attention. I’d be interested in actually getting an answer, rather than being told to shut up and go away.
- Arsenal - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 1:55 pm:
==My informed opinion from living there and now from living away from there is that Illinois Democrat’s seem to believe that government exists to provide economic benefits to a political class who then turn around and support their leadership in lockstep.==
God, I’d hate to see your uninformed opinion.
==Seriously, state constitutional provision aside, who really believes that it is both fair to taxpayers and financially sustainable to have a public pension system that pays out millions of dollars in lifetime benefits to retired workers who paid in pennies on the dollar for those benefits?==
I think it’s decidedly unfair for an employer to be able to break its contract with its employees. I think it’s flat out dangerous for a government to be able to do that.
- Demoralized - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 1:57 pm:
==It’s like we’re dealing with petulant, spoiled rotten, self-absorbed children here.==
I think I’ll leave my response to you as this.
It’s less painful than trying to explain it again - for the 1,000th time. You don’t like the conversation, nobody is forcing you to be here.
- Arsenal - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 1:58 pm:
==It’s a simple question: you say the Governor’s proposals are off the table, so what would you favor instead?==
That’s a sideshow. The Governor isn’t having a temper tantrum over anyone else’s ideal reforms, he’s having a temper tantrum over his, and his won’t pass. No one’s going to take your bait here.
==I’d be interested in actually getting an answer, rather than being told to shut up and go away.==
THAT is how you’re playing the victim.
- Demoralized - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 2:05 pm:
Ok, @ Former Federal Prosecutor, let me try to explain this again. First of all, I haven’t the faintest clue what “reforms” we should do. That’s not really the point here. The point is what we know can’t be ACCOMPLISHED. That’s the key word - ACCOMPLISHED. The arguments being made are akin to my 7 year old arguing with me that if she can’t do something in particular then what can she do. I don’t care. What I care about is what she can’t do. Take that lesson.
- Demoralized - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 2:07 pm:
And, as I’ve said before, you aren’t going to get to any discussions about what we can do until what we know can’t be done is thrown in the trash bin. There’s no basis for a conversation when items that cannot be done are continually pushed.
- Demoralized - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 2:09 pm:
Sorry. One more thing. Take a look at Jack Frank’s bill. He proposed a whole boat load of stuff. Seems like some good ideas could be taken from that, or at least be used as the basis to start a conversation. Why? Because it’s a new discussion. That’s just one example.
- The Whole Truth - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 2:48 pm:
As I’ve noted before, I identify as more of a pragmatist than with political affiliation. That said, it appears many here require a precondition of eliminating some proposed reforms before others can be discussed. While some ideas will always be unpopular to many, their presence shouldn’t be the reason additional and new ideas can’t be broached and discussed. With that precondition, discussion here becomes no more useful than what’s been going on in Spfld. for years…..and that, by consensus, hasn’t turned out so well.
The rest of the story is that a new, better, more workable idea will automatically replace the unworkable ones if offered….if the opportunity to offer it is ignored or denied, it doesn’t happen and gridlock is the result. Again, look to Spfld.
These discussions would better benefit all were we to move past what Spfld has been doing and actually discuss constructive reforms. If we can’t do that, I’m not sure we can assign blame for not doing so in Spfld with much conviction.
- Arsenal - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 2:51 pm:
==That said, it appears many here require a precondition of eliminating some proposed reforms before others can be discussed.==
Appearances can be deceiving. If you have a better idea for reform, by all means, express it. But Rauner’s ideas won’t pass, and “Well, what will?” isn’t a useful rejoinder to that.
- Wordslinger - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 3:01 pm:
Throwing out the word “reform” is meaningless.
1. Identify a specific issue.
2. Explain the components and objectives of your “reform.”
3. Provide evidence-based projections on measurable and quantifiable results.
- Demoralized - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 3:03 pm:
==appears many here require a precondition of eliminating some proposed reforms==
If they aren’t possible then why not eliminate them? Do you really think the union stuff is going anywhere?
==ideas will always be unpopular to many, their presence shouldn’t be the reason additional and new ideas can’t be broached and discussed==
Some of the ideas have been discussed and the various parties have been told they are not going anywhere. So move on to other discussions instead of constantly bringing up an idea that’s been refused.
- The Whole Truth - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 3:19 pm:
Moving on to other discussions is exactly what I propose. Usually, a good way to initiate that is to ask what different ideas others may have. If some other method of getting new ideas on the table is needed, let’s do it.
For the sake of discussion, let’s assume all of Rauner’s ideas are off the table, and never to be brought up again. With that clean slate, what reform(s) do you propose?
WS, I’ve noted the disparities between Illinois and other states, especially neighboring ones, including the possibility of $$2B+ in savings were we to match Indiana in State salary and governmental administration before. That “reform” meets all 3 of your criteria. So I’ll ask you once again (since you have yet to answer the question when asked in previous posts): What do you propose other than raising taxes? And for consistency, try to meet all 3 of your criteria from 3:01PM.
- Rich Miller - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 3:23 pm:
===For the sake of discussion, let’s assume all of Rauner’s ideas are off the table, and never to be brought up again.===
This isn’t a freshman dorm. You have to deal with reality.
- Dilemma - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 3:48 pm:
@The Whole Truth == If the reforms proposed by the Governor are a “no go”, then what economic reforms are possible, and effective, in your opinion? I’ve asked what commenters here would propose other than raising taxes on more than one occasion, and have yet to get a rational response.==
Here’s the thing. You might recall that the GA proposed bills that contained the governor’s proposed reforms, but without the anti-union proposals. The Governor refused to allow the GOP members to vote for those efforts because he doesn’t want his own reforms unless he gets the one thing he can’t get. There has been willingness to discuss reforms to tort law, workers comp (although the savings from prior reform are just starting to be seen), property taxes, and a myriad of other things. Take away the union demands, and any number of things could be accomplished.
I’ve said it before, but has anyone made a case that the union demands being made are “economic reforms?” Has anyone made a case that these demands will save the state any money or will increase economic development? I know it’s dogma for some people, but where is the evidence?
@FPP =It’s a simple question: you say the Governor’s proposals are off the table, so what would you favor instead? We are ostensibly all in quite unanimous agreement that the “status quo” is not working, so what would you propose that we do differently? ==
California might be a good model to study. They raised taxes, were conservative in their revenue forecasting models, made cuts and have been very careful about spending beyond their means and very conservative when it comes to adding any new spending.
- Juice - Friday, Oct 23, 15 @ 3:52 pm:
The State spends about $4 billion on salaries. I think you are really exaggerating potentials savings there. Cutting payroll in half is not realistic.