* May 3, 2013 Tribune editorial…
For more than six years, we’ve called for reform of Illinois’ public pension system. Some days we begged legislators, some days we harangued them.
Today we’re pleased to list the names of House lawmakers who took responsible action Thursday and voted “yes” on Speaker Michael Madigan’s pension overhaul.
Madigan acknowledged during debate that his bill is not salvation: It won’t solve the state’s financial problems — the unpaid bills, the (surely understated) pension system liabilities, the imminent budget pressures — but it hurtles the ball forward. That is worth celebrating.
Sixty-two House members voted for reform. By pushing the green button, they acknowledged that the status quo is harming our state, hurting taxpayers, discouraging potential employers and denying services to the truly vulnerable.
That bill was Senate Bill 1. One of the “No” votes was state Rep. Mike Bost. Rep. Bost voted “No” again on the conference committee report that was adopted in December by both chambers.
* From the synopsis of House Bill 1154 that same year…
For the General Assembly, State Employees, State Universities, and Downstate Teacher retirement systems, limits the salary of a Tier I member for benefit and contribution purposes to the greater of (i) the annual contribution and benefit base established for the applicable year by the Commissioner of Social Security under the federal Social Security Act or (ii) the annual salary of the member during the 365 days immediately preceding that effective date
The bill passed 101-15. One of the handful of “No” votes was Rep. Mike Bost.
* From the synopsis of House Bill 1165 from that same spring session…
For the General Assembly, State Employees, State Universities, and Downstate Teacher retirement systems, provides that, for a Tier I retiree, (i) the amount of each automatic annual increase in retirement annuity occurring on or after the effective date of this amendatory Act shall be the lesser of $750 ($600 if the annuity is based primarily upon service as a covered employee) or 3% of the total annuity payable at the time of the increase, including previous increases granted, and (ii) the monthly retirement annuity shall first be subject to annual increases on the January 1 occurring on or next after the attainment of age 67 or the January 1 occurring on or next after the fifth anniversary of the annuity start date, whichever occurs earlier.
That pension reform bill passed 66-50, with Rep. Mike Bost voting “No.”
* From the synopsis of House Bill HB1166 from that same spring session…
Amends the General Assembly, State Employee, State Universities, and Downstate Teacher Articles of the Illinois Pension Code. Increases the retirement age by various amounts for certain Tier I members and participants, based on the person’s age on the effective date.
That bill passed 76-41, with Rep. Mike Bost voting “No.”
* On March 24, 2010, the Illinois House passed Senate Bill 1946, which created the Tier 2 system. The bill passed 92-17. Rep. Mike Bost was one of 7 “Present” votes.
* In December of 2015, Congressman Mike Bost began receiving his state legislative pension of $73,017.60, which increases at a compounded 3 percent rate every year.
* And yet, Congressman Mike Bost signed this letter yesterday to Senate President Don Harmon…
Illinois must reform its pension system to reduce long-term liabilities and make the system more equitable to the people of Illinois before federal money is used to support the pension system.
[Hat tip: Glen Brown.]
- Ducky LaMoore - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 1:35 pm:
The unmitigated gall of Mike Bost is extremely old news. If you are loud and ignorant, you are the most likely to be elected these days.
- CCapilla - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 1:35 pm:
I realize in this increasingly nihilist, COVID-19 blasted world, facts may not actually matter anymore, but doesn’t that campaign add sort of write itself?
- CCapilla - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 1:36 pm:
And, of course, that was meant to say “ad” and not “add” but I don’t proofread anymore because, what does it even matter…
- DuPage Saint - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 1:40 pm:
Facts can be troublesome
Want pension reform? How about one pension per politician
Does he get social security too? Teachers cops and firemen do not. Not fair to double dip.
- Socially DIstant Watcher - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 1:41 pm:
You mean this guy isn’t behaving consistently? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUc7Ve6EPng
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 1:44 pm:
I remember freshman Mike Bost, Illinois House.
That member… and “this guy”… not the same.
What a shame. The regression of a man that was principled.
Mr. Bost doesn’t even realize how far he’s regressed.
- Give Me A Break - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 1:49 pm:
Let My People Go
- Annonin - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 1:49 pm:
Golly now you are goin’ pick on BossToss? BTW Empty suit LaHood voted N and Y along the way. What’s the point of being a fraud if you can’t act like one? Speaking of phonies how about askin the ES’s to give us their list of “cuts” It is hard to imagine this crew looking dumber that the letter they are respondin’ too.
- Candy Dogood - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 1:49 pm:
===The regression of a man that was principled.===
This presumes he started principled.
Though the argument could be made that he voted his district when he was in the state house, and that he continues to vote his district in the United States House of Representatives, but that the folks in his congressional district are just confused about what is in their best interests.
See the Perry County sheriff, or the folks in West Frankfort upset that the federal government took action to deport the owner of a popular local Mexican restaurant.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 1:51 pm:
=== This presumes he started principled.===
I stand by what I wrote.
- Howard - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 1:51 pm:
In the words of another famous downstate legislator when he voted against the compensation review board report ” I voted no but I was on my knees praying it would pass.”
That is Mike Bost everyday.
- illinifan - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 2:04 pm:
Synonym for hypocrisy, Mike Bost
- LocalGovGuy - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 2:07 pm:
===Does he get social security too? Teachers cops and firemen do not. Not fair to double dip.===
I understand your point, but facts matter. Many cops in Illinois do get social security. Roughly 100 towns police get both a pension and participate in SS. About another 200 towns will be the if they get to 5,000 population. The municipal share of both is, in at least the town where I work, over 40% of salary. The town has paid 100% or more of the required contribution every year.
- Anyone Remember - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 2:09 pm:
In the WSJ’s opposing viewpoints about “stay at home” he supported the cat. /s
- Oldtimer - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 2:14 pm:
After a few terms, Rep Bost did a 180 on the GA scholarships as well. Can you guess which way he flipped?
- Former Trustee - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 2:18 pm:
Homework assignment for some here on the SS comments above - better research windfall elimination provision
- Mr. K. - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 2:22 pm:
Bost has never — isn’t now — helping.
This “pension reform” thing is a reddest herring I know.
Tier 2 is the reform.
In my agency — full of new folks now — everyone is on Tier 2. I’m on Tier 1 — but I’ve only got a few years to go.
So, yeah, 90% on Tier 2, 10% on Tier 1. I’m not seeing the — or any — problem.
- Mr. K. - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 2:27 pm:
BTW –
The real question here — and what everybody seems to be pursuing but not saying — is that they want to take benefits away from *current* retirees. In other words, the folks that have already retired — and put in their 25, 30, 35 years — are the target.
It’s not the new folks — who get (essentially) nothing. It’s folks like me (95% of the way to the finish line) — and everybody else (100% and retired) that are the targets.
And I know Bost — and folks like Bost — want to make these folks (and myself) hurt — and hurt bad. This is the goal. Hurt the retirees — make them feel the pain — and ignore the fact that most folks working for the state now are Tier 2 — and aren’t even *close* to being part of the problem.
- Perrid - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 2:51 pm:
Mr. K, most plans that I’ve heard thrown around would NOT hurt current retirees, the ones who have already retired. They want to change the formula for current Tier 1 workers, who are still on the job. They want to change the formula for “unearned” benefits, benefits Tier I workers will earn in the future, before retirement.
And I have no idea where you got the idea “that most folks working for the state now are Tier 2″. That’s just not true. Looking at TRS (yes I know teachers aren’t State workers, but come on) in 2019 there were about 106,000 active Tier I workers and 28,000 Tier II workers.
Looking at SERS, in 2019 there were about 37,000 Tier I workers and 24,600 Tier II workers, again looking at actives.
- Mr. K. - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 3:12 pm:
BTW —
I’m not interested in TRS. The issue is the agency folks. Those are the targets. Not the teachers (at least for this argument. Teachers are the targets of other arguments.)
- Oldtimer - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 3:13 pm:
According to a COGFA report, Tier 2 SERS actives will likely outnumber Tier 1 actives by 2022.
- Give Us Barabbas - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 3:25 pm:
What’s the over/under on the Tier Ones being offered an early-retirement incentive? And what might that look like under today’s conditions? It would be unlikely, I know but…
- Jibba - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 3:26 pm:
Given that the federal constitution also protects benefits already earned, the only real possibility for “reformers” is to amend the Illinois constitution to allow changes to retirement terms for years not yet earned, while still preserving previously earned benefits. It would bend the cost curve a little, but it doesn’t wipe out the vast majority of the existing debt. But why let a crisis go to waste, I expect they think.
- LocalGovGuy - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 3:51 pm:
===Homework assignment for some here on the SS comments above - better research windfall elimination provision===
Former Trustee, if this was in response to my comment, according to the SSA, the Windfall Elimination Provision applies “If you
work for an employer who doesn’t withhold Social
Security taxes from your salary, such as a government agency…” The Police in my example ARE subject to SS taxes. I believe they will get both a Pension and SS. Please correct me if I am wrong.
- The Ghost of Sam Witwer - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 3:53 pm:
I could give a flying fig what Mike Bost said 10 years ago. And I don’t know what the world will look like 5 years from now except to say that Bost and everyone else who gets a pension from Illinois or a unit of local government will have those pension benefits curtailed significantly.
- Jocko - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 4:20 pm:
==most plans that I’ve heard thrown around would NOT hurt current retirees==
Those voices you’ve heard are in your head…not the Capitol…unless it’s over a round of drinks.
- Elliott Ness - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 4:24 pm:
Bost votes against an unconstitutional bill, so what. That was not reform and NEVER passed the test. It does not mean he is not for reforms, maybe just constitutional ones. The Tribunes? Meh.
- Glen Brown - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 4:33 pm:
Thanks, Rich.
- Six Degrees of Separation - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 5:58 pm:
===What’s the over/under on the Tier Ones being offered an early-retirement incentive?===
The only thing I can see is more voluntary lump sum buyouts that would save the state money in the long run. In these COVID-influenced times, maybe an increased number would be induced to retire and take the cash rather than depend on the state’s solvency to pay future benefits, despite Gov. Pritzker’s efforts to calm everyone down and assure the benefits will be paid.
- JSchool 101 - Tuesday, Apr 21, 20 @ 9:54 pm:
Did the reporter ask Bost for any comment?
- Siriusly - Wednesday, Apr 22, 20 @ 12:28 am:
makes me so mad I just threw a pile of papers across the home office / kitchen
- Pacman - Wednesday, Apr 22, 20 @ 7:01 am:
In reference to the discussion on the WEP, I am a retired LEO who receives a pension from the city I worked for and SS. My SS benefits are greatly reduced because I receive a public pension (WEP). I didn’t pay SS while working for the City. I only receive SS because I worked long enough in the private sector before entering public service.