* Crain’s op-ed…

Not that it ever really did, but Illinois no longer has any excuse for not dealing with its pension crisis, given how Arizona has reformed its system. Arizona’s state constitutional pension protection clause was identical to Illinois’ in promising that “benefits shall not be diminished or impaired.” As in Illinois, its courts struck down, as violations of that clause, legislative reforms that would have reduced certain pension benefits.

But this month, Arizona voters passed Proposition 125 to amend the constitution to reduce benefits for two of its major pensions, covering corrections officers and elected officials. In 2016, voters passed Proposition 124 for an amendment to reduce pension benefits for police and firefighters.

The world hasn’t ended in Arizona. The working class hasn’t been destroyed. Pensioners aren’t dumpster diving. Prospects for pensioners actually getting a fair, predictable benefit have improved.

The particulars of the benefit reductions in Arizona aren’t important for now—they mostly addressed cost-of-living increases. Exactly what an Illinois amendment should say and what the resulting reforms should be are a discussion for a different day. The point for now is just that if the state constitution has to be changed to address an otherwise insurmountable pension crisis, then change it.

The actual benefit reductions are almost always “a discussion for another day.”

* Amanda Kass brought up a very valid point last week. How much should pensions be cut for real people?…

* Bad laws are often made during trying times because legislators can get caught up in the emotions of the moment. It goes without saying that a proposal to cut police pensions and survivor benefits wouldn’t go very far on a day like today, regardless of the fiscal need.

But it’s also important to remember that current and future pensioners are not just random entries on a spreadsheet. These are human beings.

…Adding… From the op-ed writer…

Spare us the melodrama. The sooner we get real pension reform, the smaller the haircuts will be and the more fairly it can be done. It's deniers like you, who have delayed reform, who will be held culpable in the end.

— Mark Glennon (@GlennonMarkE) November 20, 2018

First, these are not “haircuts.” You get a haircut at a barber shop. These would be benefit cuts to real Illinoisans, something he still won’t fully admit to. How big do these cuts have to be? And who would see their benefits reduced?

And I’ve never said that the pension systems are in fine shape. That’s a complete fabrication on his part. But that’s what people like him do. Anyone who disagrees in the slightest is a “denier” who will be “held culpable in the end.” Such a tough guy.