Today, the Rauner Campaign launched a new statewide television ad promoting Governor Bruce Rauner’s $1 billion tax cut proposed in yesterday’s budget address. In his speech, Governor Rauner outlined a plan to enact pension reform using the ‘consideration model’ to save taxpayers nearly $1 billion.
Governor Rauner’s pension reform proposal coupled with the $1 billion tax cut is the first step needed to reverse the 32 percent income tax hike forced through the legislature last year by Speaker Madigan over Governor Rauner’s veto.
The Rauner Tax Cut will help grow jobs in Illinois and put more money in the pockets of hardworking families.
It’s time to end Mike Madigan’s tax hikes. It’s time to enact the Rauner Tax Cut.
So this spot was in the can before Rauner even presented the budget.
That means the budget was explicitly drafted by state employees to support the Rauner campaign message.
Who coordinated the efforts between GOMB and the Rauner campaign?
Yeah, that guy’s not a politician.
- Anon_with_a_ymous - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:37 am:
He cannot be shut up or shut down. He is from the show “Westworld”, and has been programmed for the same dot points, phony grammar/wardrobe, and “horror eyes” when asked a question a system glitch almost sets off a renegade reply. Hope he will be retired soon.
The Illinois Supreme Court has already shot it down. As OW says where is the 60-30 for any of his pie in the sky ideas? What a lousy attempt at a budget. Shut down multiple social services, make schools give back the school reform money for pensions, tax retirees, lower medical coverage that was worked for and promised. What a completely out of touch individual. Folks this guy has to go. ABB Anybody but Bruce.
Did I miss the bit about first paying down the backlog of bills (created during the no-budget period) and then thinking about a tax-cut? (Like paying off credit card bills before giving up overtime.)/s
…the tax shift will lead to a property tax increase, and…
… the real intent isn’t lowering overall taxes, but destroying both public sector labor and the trades opportunity for collective bargaining and/or prevailing wage.
So right that this isn’t a tax cut, rather a tax shift. Would love an explanation on how our debts get relieved by paying less toward them. Doesn’t work in my life.
Thanks to Rauner’s self orchestrated 2 year budget impasse, taxes or going to have to be raised higher than they would otherwise have to be. Rauner isn’t interested in paying back the unprecedented debt that he rolled up as Governor. This big tax cut would amount to around $10 a month for a $50k wage earner. There’s not much economic stimulus there. As many have stated this is just an election year smoke and mirrors budget proposal. This tax cut idea isn’t going anywhere and Rauner knows this but it was proposed as a campaign issue because this guy is going to need all the help he can get.
Pretending that a “pension reform” option exists only exacerbates the problem because it becomes a convenient excuse for doing nothing while waiting for the courts to weigh in.
I didn’t see the outline of the actual pension reform plan. Just a sentence that he wants one. So he has no idea how much he will actually save. Nor has he calculated the increased social services cost due to elderly state retirees having g lower incomes and qualifying for more services.
Notice he doesn’t include the increased interest payment cost if he delays payment of employee health insurance claims again.
Word- that person would be
Acting Director of GOMB Hans Zigmund.
The author of the infamous IDOR progressive income tax analysis.
The author of the 1.4% turnaround agenda numbers
The Lottery committee member
Rauners numbers guy
==That means the budget was explicitly drafted by state employees to support the Rauner campaign message.==
==Who coordinated the efforts between GOMB and the Rauner campaign?==
C’mon word. The budget is always a political document.
- Chris P. Bacon - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:52 am:
Rauner assumes he can get away with this Orwellian level nonsense because the press are such push-overs in this state. And because he has no respect for the intelligence of voters.
If you’re a regular reader of Cap Fax you are aware of the false statements that he makes. But with the main media not pushing him on what he says and no one to question a lot of people I know believe what he says, and continue to. Unpleasant future for our state if he wins another term.
Rauner also seems to forget it was a bipartisan override, of the budget bills and tax increase that occurred.
Bipartisan legislative action to save Illinois from Bruce Rauner.
Bruce Rauner has failed, like Pat Quinn failed.
If anything, this ad is a confession that Rauner is making that his own failures these past years are on him, and as Rauner himself says, he’s not in charge.
It’s embarrassing that an ad like this needs to be a phony spin of the truth that Rauner has failed, Rauner believes he’s not in charge, and that people will be fooled by him, when people weren’t fooled by Pat Quinn.
If Rauner was a newcomer this commercial might work. But since he has not been in charge for nearly 4 years, and his approval rating is 26% - I don’t think this moves people.
If his pension plan is to require current employees to choose between pay increases or the annual 3% increase in their pension after they retire, its unconstitutional. In addition, he’s proposing a $1B tax cut at a time when the State has $8B in unpaid bills and no plan to repay them.
The Guv has been saying to all of us for the past 3 years either grant me my “reforms”, or I’m gonna bust out the state (so you will have no choice but to renege on promises to workers and defund programs for the needy).
Totally your choice.
This budget is just the continuation of that strategy.
Rauner repetition of outright lies, of technically impossible mathematics, is beyond belief! His campaign strategy seems to be, repeat the lie long and often enough, and people will believe it.
===Pretending that a “pension reform” option exists only exacerbates the problem because it becomes a convenient excuse for doing nothing while waiting for the courts to weigh in.===
This, all day. Remember when, years ago, during the Quinn administration, this was a problem that was growing by “$17 million a day” and demanded a solution ASAP? 4 years of fairies and unicorns later, nothing has changed.
- Six Degrees of Separation - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:21 am:
So he vetoed the Madigan tax increase yet for FY 18, complains that he still needs $1.1 billion more to spend.
He vetoed the Madigan tax increase but his FY 19 budget spends every single penny from that increase without a single dollar being used to pay down the billions of dollars of debt that he has racked up.
And then he wants to propose a billion dollars of tax cuts in the most regressive way imaginable, where 25% of the cut flows directly to the richest 1% of taxpayers.
Not to mention the fact that his plan on pensions is likely unconstitutional, since it’s a cap on pensionable salary, which was part of the 2013 plan, and was tossed in Heaton.
This is actually a very good ad that will work with the gullible and the dumb, which makes up a not-insignificant portion of our voting age populace. How many folks in Illinois will see this and actually think to themselves, “is this legal?”, “can this get enough votes?” or “is this workable?” Likely very few, more will say “Billion dollar tax cut - where do I sign?”
Not sure why he left out the phrase “waste, fraud and abuse” though - that’s the one the consistently works.
Boat captain- I think there’s a lot more push back being covered in the media following this budget address on the tax shiftiness than there has been in past “Rauner” years. Just do some Google Newsing searches. One of the best coverage observations came from Brian Mackey ( the last few words of the last sentence below)-
“He also wants to sell the Thompson Center in Chicago for a few hundred million dollars. The thing is, the expected savings from that already are counted in this year’s budget and, generally, buildings can be sold only once.”
The Rauner plan will shift more costs onto local governments, which will have no choice but to raise property taxes, creating more jobs for property tax appeal attorneys.
So I can get an income tax cut that will save me maybe $20 a month. Then watch my property tax go up $40 a month to cover the pensions that will be pushed back to the local level. Surely no landlord would ever increase rents based on increased costs. You just make up the difference in volume. Rearranging chairs does make you look busy.
Not really. There hasn’t been a clean “consideration” bill in front of the IL SC. And, in SB-1, the court did hint there was a path to legal pension modification.
But I pretty sure they were thinking about a voluntary opt-in plan with a different, presumably improved, benefit in exchange for additional employee contributions. That has happened several times since 1970.
The legal changes that come to mind off the top of my head were:
(a) the switch from state only pension (non-coordinated) to State plus SS (coordinated) where the State benefit went down, but so did the contribution level
(b) the addition of the AAI which was an improved benefit with additional contribution for some
If we do end up with a clean consideration bill in front of the courts, Rauner and the General Assembly better be prepared for the backlash. If the courts shut that down, they will have nowhere to go on pension reform.
The billion dollar state income tax cut of course was applauded by the Republicans in the chamber all the while knowing it was fiscally impossible. Let us call this the theater of the absurd.
- Chicago Cynic - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 11:38 am:
Rauner’s proposal would raise your property taxes.
Rauner’s proposal would raise your property taxes.
Rauner’s proposal would raise your property taxes.
Dems, this message needs to be hammered into the body politics. This isn’t a tax cut. It’s a property tax increase. Do not let him get away with this shell game.
–C’mon word. The budget is always a political document.–
In the broad definition of “political,” i.e. “who pays for what.”
This particular budget is political in the sense that is was drafted to produce — through nonsense and lies — the phrase “billion-dollar tax cut” for a campaign ad.
The campaign ad came first. The budget was drafted to support it.
== … I’m gonna bust out the state (so you will have no choice but to renege on promises to workers and defund programs for the needy).
Totally your choice. ==
Actually, there is another choice … stiff all the bondholders
- Grandson of Man - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 1:36 pm:
Imagine if Democrats were really the liberal bogeypeople Republicans make them out to be. Then they’d stand against any pension reform without a millionaire surcharge and other tax hikes on the wealthy.
- Arthur Andersen - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 1:53 pm:
RNUG, another “legal” change to pensions would include the formula changes from the stepped to the flat formula with concurrent contribution increases.
Consideration proposals must not only be legal, but present at least one good choice. I don’t think the current proposal comes close to doing that.
Did anyone else notice with the commercial, in every scene Rauner is doing the talking to someone, not once does it show him listening to what someone else is saying.
===The Rauner plan: More take-home pay for working families; lower taxes for job creators and one billion dollars in tax relief for Illinois.===
OK but what about the over 1 billion dollars that downstate school districts will need to pay for pensions after the final 25% of the costs are shifted? My increased take-home pay will all be needed to pay my increased property tax bill. My net change in total taxes will be about zero
- Boone's is Back - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 3:04 pm:
This is so disingenuous. 1) He signed it into law and has tacitly supported it and 2) Rauner had the ENTIRE term to work on pension reform. He didn’t. Instead he opted to push his turnaround agenda.
But it makes my point; you can change things if it is voluntary … but it also often comes with an additional immediate cost to the State. The difference, it there is one, is that immediate increased cost sometimes is offset by a lower future cost.
A good example of that would be if the State abandoned the Edgar / Blago modified ramp and started making actuarial pension payments … more now but less later and less overall, except we can’t afford the more now out of cash flow. (And I know you know that -AA-, I’m just pointing it out to the other readers.)
The problem the State has is what benefit could the State offer that employees would jump on or how does the State sell a plan that is inferior to the current one so as to get employees to buy it?
It might be better to concentrate on getting more employee contributions since those funds are more reliable than State payments.
One idea I can come up with would be to offer a better survivors pension (100%, 80%, 75% ? instead of 50%) in exchange for a higher contribution rate. Not sure how it would play out (I’ll let the number crunchers at SRS figure out if it is actually a good idea) but I could see where I might have opted to pay more for that benefit.
It’s going to take creative thinking like that to come up with solutions with staying within the voluntary consideration area.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:30 am:
At this point I wish the GA would go ahead and pass this pension “reform” and let the court shut it down once and for all.
- wordslinger - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:34 am:
So this spot was in the can before Rauner even presented the budget.
That means the budget was explicitly drafted by state employees to support the Rauner campaign message.
Who coordinated the efforts between GOMB and the Rauner campaign?
Yeah, that guy’s not a politician.
- Anon_with_a_ymous - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:37 am:
He cannot be shut up or shut down. He is from the show “Westworld”, and has been programmed for the same dot points, phony grammar/wardrobe, and “horror eyes” when asked a question a system glitch almost sets off a renegade reply. Hope he will be retired soon.
- Retired Educator - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:39 am:
The Illinois Supreme Court has already shot it down. As OW says where is the 60-30 for any of his pie in the sky ideas? What a lousy attempt at a budget. Shut down multiple social services, make schools give back the school reform money for pensions, tax retirees, lower medical coverage that was worked for and promised. What a completely out of touch individual. Folks this guy has to go. ABB Anybody but Bruce.
- JS Mill - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:39 am:
To be truthful it isn’t going to be a “tax cut” it is going to be a tax shift. The bill still has to be paid, just through property taxes.
He does not mention that he is planning to spend the revenue from the tax increase. Just an oversight I am sure.
- UIC Guy - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:39 am:
Did I miss the bit about first paying down the backlog of bills (created during the no-budget period) and then thinking about a tax-cut? (Like paying off credit card bills before giving up overtime.)/s
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:42 am:
What is missing is…
…the tax shift will lead to a property tax increase, and…
… the real intent isn’t lowering overall taxes, but destroying both public sector labor and the trades opportunity for collective bargaining and/or prevailing wage.
Rauner is as phony as he was in 2013
- Nick Name - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:42 am:
===At this point I wish the GA would go ahead and pass this pension “reform” and let the court shut it down once and for all.===
Been there, done that.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:43 am:
So right that this isn’t a tax cut, rather a tax shift. Would love an explanation on how our debts get relieved by paying less toward them. Doesn’t work in my life.
- Dude Abides - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:44 am:
Thanks to Rauner’s self orchestrated 2 year budget impasse, taxes or going to have to be raised higher than they would otherwise have to be. Rauner isn’t interested in paying back the unprecedented debt that he rolled up as Governor. This big tax cut would amount to around $10 a month for a $50k wage earner. There’s not much economic stimulus there. As many have stated this is just an election year smoke and mirrors budget proposal. This tax cut idea isn’t going anywhere and Rauner knows this but it was proposed as a campaign issue because this guy is going to need all the help he can get.
- wordslinger - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:44 am:
–Today, the Rauner Campaign launched a new statewide television ad…–
What state? West Virginia? Vermont? Maine?
Doesn’t look like Illinois, based on my daily experiences.
Who’s “in” and who’s “out” in TV spots doesn’t happen by accident.
- Pundent - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:48 am:
Pretending that a “pension reform” option exists only exacerbates the problem because it becomes a convenient excuse for doing nothing while waiting for the courts to weigh in.
- Thoughts Matter - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:48 am:
I didn’t see the outline of the actual pension reform plan. Just a sentence that he wants one. So he has no idea how much he will actually save. Nor has he calculated the increased social services cost due to elderly state retirees having g lower incomes and qualifying for more services.
Notice he doesn’t include the increased interest payment cost if he delays payment of employee health insurance claims again.
- Rage - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:50 am:
Word- that person would be
Acting Director of GOMB Hans Zigmund.
The author of the infamous IDOR progressive income tax analysis.
The author of the 1.4% turnaround agenda numbers
The Lottery committee member
Rauners numbers guy
- Demoralized - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:52 am:
==That means the budget was explicitly drafted by state employees to support the Rauner campaign message.==
==Who coordinated the efforts between GOMB and the Rauner campaign?==
C’mon word. The budget is always a political document.
- Chris P. Bacon - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:52 am:
Rauner assumes he can get away with this Orwellian level nonsense because the press are such push-overs in this state. And because he has no respect for the intelligence of voters.
- Demoralized - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:54 am:
Let’s try this again since my comments don’t seem to always post.
===That means the budget was explicitly drafted by state employees to support the Rauner campaign message.==
=Who coordinated the efforts between GOMB and the Rauner campaign?==
The budget is always partly a political document.
- Boat captain - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:55 am:
If you’re a regular reader of Cap Fax you are aware of the false statements that he makes. But with the main media not pushing him on what he says and no one to question a lot of people I know believe what he says, and continue to. Unpleasant future for our state if he wins another term.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:56 am:
Rauner also seems to forget it was a bipartisan override, of the budget bills and tax increase that occurred.
Bipartisan legislative action to save Illinois from Bruce Rauner.
Bruce Rauner has failed, like Pat Quinn failed.
If anything, this ad is a confession that Rauner is making that his own failures these past years are on him, and as Rauner himself says, he’s not in charge.
It’s embarrassing that an ad like this needs to be a phony spin of the truth that Rauner has failed, Rauner believes he’s not in charge, and that people will be fooled by him, when people weren’t fooled by Pat Quinn.
- 360 Degree TurnAround - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:57 am:
If Rauner was a newcomer this commercial might work. But since he has not been in charge for nearly 4 years, and his approval rating is 26% - I don’t think this moves people.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:58 am:
If his pension plan is to require current employees to choose between pay increases or the annual 3% increase in their pension after they retire, its unconstitutional. In addition, he’s proposing a $1B tax cut at a time when the State has $8B in unpaid bills and no plan to repay them.
- Henry Francis - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 9:59 am:
The Guv has been saying to all of us for the past 3 years either grant me my “reforms”, or I’m gonna bust out the state (so you will have no choice but to renege on promises to workers and defund programs for the needy).
Totally your choice.
This budget is just the continuation of that strategy.
- Huh? - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:00 am:
The ad is all pineapple word jumble. Don’t believe a word of it.
- DuPage - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:02 am:
Rauner repetition of outright lies, of technically impossible mathematics, is beyond belief! His campaign strategy seems to be, repeat the lie long and often enough, and people will believe it.
- Norseman - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:10 am:
=== The Rauner Plan ===
The Rauner Fraud There I fixed it for you.
- NoGifts - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:12 am:
Did anyone introduce Gov. Rauner to Sam Brownback of Kansas? And the Kansas experiment in tax cuts? https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2017/06/13/what-the-kansas-tax-cut-about-face-means/
- Anonymous - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:20 am:
===Pretending that a “pension reform” option exists only exacerbates the problem because it becomes a convenient excuse for doing nothing while waiting for the courts to weigh in.===
This, all day. Remember when, years ago, during the Quinn administration, this was a problem that was growing by “$17 million a day” and demanded a solution ASAP? 4 years of fairies and unicorns later, nothing has changed.
- Six Degrees of Separation - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:21 am:
10:20am was me.
- Juice - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:21 am:
So he vetoed the Madigan tax increase yet for FY 18, complains that he still needs $1.1 billion more to spend.
He vetoed the Madigan tax increase but his FY 19 budget spends every single penny from that increase without a single dollar being used to pay down the billions of dollars of debt that he has racked up.
And then he wants to propose a billion dollars of tax cuts in the most regressive way imaginable, where 25% of the cut flows directly to the richest 1% of taxpayers.
Not to mention the fact that his plan on pensions is likely unconstitutional, since it’s a cap on pensionable salary, which was part of the 2013 plan, and was tossed in Heaton.
- Lester Holt’s Mustache - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:38 am:
This is actually a very good ad that will work with the gullible and the dumb, which makes up a not-insignificant portion of our voting age populace. How many folks in Illinois will see this and actually think to themselves, “is this legal?”, “can this get enough votes?” or “is this workable?” Likely very few, more will say “Billion dollar tax cut - where do I sign?”
Not sure why he left out the phrase “waste, fraud and abuse” though - that’s the one the consistently works.
- Anon221 - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:41 am:
Boat captain- I think there’s a lot more push back being covered in the media following this budget address on the tax shiftiness than there has been in past “Rauner” years. Just do some Google Newsing searches. One of the best coverage observations came from Brian Mackey ( the last few words of the last sentence below)-
“He also wants to sell the Thompson Center in Chicago for a few hundred million dollars. The thing is, the expected savings from that already are counted in this year’s budget and, generally, buildings can be sold only once.”
http://northernpublicradio.org/post/new-rauner-budget-relies-tax-hike-he-opposed
- 47th Ward - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:43 am:
The Rauner plan will shift more costs onto local governments, which will have no choice but to raise property taxes, creating more jobs for property tax appeal attorneys.
Mike Madigan and the Bruce Rauners he controls.
- RIJ - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:56 am:
It’s truly weird how Rauner runs more against Madigan than Rauner’s actual opponents.
- zatoichi - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 11:06 am:
So I can get an income tax cut that will save me maybe $20 a month. Then watch my property tax go up $40 a month to cover the pensions that will be pushed back to the local level. Surely no landlord would ever increase rents based on increased costs. You just make up the difference in volume. Rearranging chairs does make you look busy.
- RNUG - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 11:27 am:
== Been there, done that. ==
Not really. There hasn’t been a clean “consideration” bill in front of the IL SC. And, in SB-1, the court did hint there was a path to legal pension modification.
But I pretty sure they were thinking about a voluntary opt-in plan with a different, presumably improved, benefit in exchange for additional employee contributions. That has happened several times since 1970.
The legal changes that come to mind off the top of my head were:
(a) the switch from state only pension (non-coordinated) to State plus SS (coordinated) where the State benefit went down, but so did the contribution level
(b) the addition of the AAI which was an improved benefit with additional contribution for some
(c) changing the AAI from simple to compounded
- RNUG - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 11:30 am:
If we do end up with a clean consideration bill in front of the courts, Rauner and the General Assembly better be prepared for the backlash. If the courts shut that down, they will have nowhere to go on pension reform.
- Rod - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 11:30 am:
The billion dollar state income tax cut of course was applauded by the Republicans in the chamber all the while knowing it was fiscally impossible. Let us call this the theater of the absurd.
- Chicago Cynic - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 11:38 am:
Rauner’s proposal would raise your property taxes.
Rauner’s proposal would raise your property taxes.
Rauner’s proposal would raise your property taxes.
Dems, this message needs to be hammered into the body politics. This isn’t a tax cut. It’s a property tax increase. Do not let him get away with this shell game.
- wordslinger - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 11:49 am:
–C’mon word. The budget is always a political document.–
In the broad definition of “political,” i.e. “who pays for what.”
This particular budget is political in the sense that is was drafted to produce — through nonsense and lies — the phrase “billion-dollar tax cut” for a campaign ad.
The campaign ad came first. The budget was drafted to support it.
- RNUG - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 11:53 am:
== … I’m gonna bust out the state (so you will have no choice but to renege on promises to workers and defund programs for the needy).
Totally your choice. ==
Actually, there is another choice … stiff all the bondholders
- Grandson of Man - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 1:36 pm:
Imagine if Democrats were really the liberal bogeypeople Republicans make them out to be. Then they’d stand against any pension reform without a millionaire surcharge and other tax hikes on the wealthy.
- VanillaMan - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 1:40 pm:
Coming from this failed governor?
Not believable.
- Arthur Andersen - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 1:53 pm:
RNUG, another “legal” change to pensions would include the formula changes from the stepped to the flat formula with concurrent contribution increases.
Consideration proposals must not only be legal, but present at least one good choice. I don’t think the current proposal comes close to doing that.
- Henry Francis - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 2:07 pm:
Did anyone else notice with the commercial, in every scene Rauner is doing the talking to someone, not once does it show him listening to what someone else is saying.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 2:51 pm:
===The Rauner plan: More take-home pay for working families; lower taxes for job creators and one billion dollars in tax relief for Illinois.===
OK but what about the over 1 billion dollars that downstate school districts will need to pay for pensions after the final 25% of the costs are shifted? My increased take-home pay will all be needed to pay my increased property tax bill. My net change in total taxes will be about zero
- Boone's is Back - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 3:04 pm:
This is so disingenuous. 1) He signed it into law and has tacitly supported it and 2) Rauner had the ENTIRE term to work on pension reform. He didn’t. Instead he opted to push his turnaround agenda.
- RNUG - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 3:04 pm:
AA ==
Forgot about that one.
But it makes my point; you can change things if it is voluntary … but it also often comes with an additional immediate cost to the State. The difference, it there is one, is that immediate increased cost sometimes is offset by a lower future cost.
A good example of that would be if the State abandoned the Edgar / Blago modified ramp and started making actuarial pension payments … more now but less later and less overall, except we can’t afford the more now out of cash flow. (And I know you know that -AA-, I’m just pointing it out to the other readers.)
The problem the State has is what benefit could the State offer that employees would jump on or how does the State sell a plan that is inferior to the current one so as to get employees to buy it?
It might be better to concentrate on getting more employee contributions since those funds are more reliable than State payments.
One idea I can come up with would be to offer a better survivors pension (100%, 80%, 75% ? instead of 50%) in exchange for a higher contribution rate. Not sure how it would play out (I’ll let the number crunchers at SRS figure out if it is actually a good idea) but I could see where I might have opted to pay more for that benefit.
It’s going to take creative thinking like that to come up with solutions with staying within the voluntary consideration area.
- James Knell - Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 4:08 pm:
=== The Rauner Plan ===
Looks like it is printed on yellow police tape used to fence off crime scenes. How appropriate.
- Jerry - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 10:45 am:
The “tax cut” is really laughable. For a person making $50K a year, the quarter percent amounts to $75 a year or $6.25 per month. Big Whoop.