Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** Combo of rate hike, tax increase make for dangerous political waters
Next Post: Veto session live blog
Posted in:
* The House Personnel and Pensions Committee meets this afternoon, but there is only one bill posted and it isn’t “the big one.” The bill, sponsored by House Republican Leader Tom Cross, would forbid Chicago union execs from basing their city pensions on income earned at their union jobs. The bill follows a series of stories a few years ago by the Sun-Times and more recently by the Tribune exposing the practice. There’s nothing in today’s Senate Executive Committee postings, and the same goes for the House Exec postings.
Tomorrow afternoon’s hearing is much the same stuff. It’s all about the union pension fund issue, but the major reform legislation hasn’t yet been posted, nor amended onto an existing bill in committee.
If a major reform bill surfaces, the whole thing could happen very quickly. And even if it manages to pass the House, the Senate is far more questionable. The Senate President doesn’t believe that Cross’ bill is constitutional because it alters the system for current employees. And members just haven’t been lobbied by the proponents like they have been in the House.
* From Gatehouse…
The [Civic Committee-backed pension reform] bill didn’t get a vote last spring. Since then, working groups of lawmakers, pension officials, union representatives and others have met to discuss where to go.
“Our pension expert attended the meetings and made clear our views, but it, frankly, seemed like a dog and pony show to promote the failed legislation from the spring,” Lindall said.
Brown said members are being surveyed to see what support exists for a pension change bill. Rep. Raymond Poe, R-Springfield, ranking Republican on the House Pensions Committee, is skeptical.
“I don’t see them working that bill at all,” Poe said. “No one’s talking too much about it.”
* Tribune…
House Republican Leader Tom Cross of Oswego is expected to push a number of pension reforms following Tribune reports about abuses that allow union officials to collect inflated pensions.
Cross’ legislation is aimed at closing loopholes that allow double-dipping by union officials who collect a city pension and union pension for the same period of work. He also wants to reorganize Chicago and Cook County pension boards to provide what he says is more accountability.
Cross also is working on a measure that would limit pension benefits for current employees, but it’s unclear if the measure will surface during the abbreviated fall session.
That’s the overarching challenge on many of these issues: It took months and sometimes years to put support together, and now lawmakers must find a way to retool in only a few weeks.
* DeKalb Daily Chronicle…
Pritchard said he’s heard rumblings that the pension issue might come up at the veto session, but his gut feeling is that it won’t happen. State Sen. Christine Johnson, R-Shabbona, said she doesn’t expect SB 512 to be called during the veto session, though she’s heard there are different proposals that could come up.
State Rep. Joe Sosnowski, R-Rockford, said legislative leaders will decide what is brought up during the Veto Session, and he noted there’s a lot of issues that will demand attention. […]
Fahner said he believes the chances are good that pension reform will come up at the veto session. The measure is sponsored by House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, and Republican House Leader Tom Cross, R-Oswego, and Fahner believes lawmakers have the votes to get it passed. […]
What should occur, Pritchard said, is employees and the state should work together to find a solution. There are many ideas out there, he said, like establishing a later retirement age or capping the amount of pension salary employees can earn.
Rep. Pritchard’s comment about a desire for a negotiated solution is something I’ve been hearing more and more these days. Republicans and Democrats want both sides to try to hammer something out. And the feeling is that has a better chance of happening if action is put off until the spring session. Some of the people pushing reform believe that union members will get antsy about having something jammed down their throats, so they’ll push leadership for a negotiated solution. Time will tell.
It’s possible that Leader Cross will address this issue at today’s committee hearing. Stay tuned.
* Roundup…
* State senator tied to target of ‘large-scale fraud’ investigation: In 2005, George E. Smith, a South Side health-care and social-services provider, bought two unfinished condominiums and a vacant lot from Illinois state Sen. Mattie Hunter for $240,000. Three years later, Smith’s not-for-profit mental-health group got $500,000 in state funding that Hunter — a Chicago Democrat and head of the Senate Human Services committee — helped arrange. That “disability behavioral health services” grant is now among more than $18.5 million worth of government deals that state inspectors say Smith used to commit “large-scale fraud” on Illinois taxpayers.
* Statehouse Insider: Is a smaller gambling bill even possible?: Quinn can complain that the expansion bill that was never sent to his desk is too big and therefore unacceptable. But so far in this state, no one has figured out how to pass a smaller-scale version. Like it or not, it has to be real big or it probably will be nothing at all.
* Illinois veto session expected to focus on budget, differences between Quinn and Legislature
* Hopf: Proposal for ROE funding will generate protest from communities: Has the funding for the regional superintendents’ salaries been put on the back burner? Not exactly. House Speaker Michael Madigan introduced legislation earlier this month to restore the funding with money collected through the personal property replacement tax, which the state collects from corporations and business partnerships and distributes as income tax to schools, counties, cities and other government bodies. This looks like a victory for Quinn, who has made it clear that if regional offices of education remain open, they should remain open with local revenues. However, with talk of moving PPRT from this budget cycle, municipalities and counties across the state will be gearing up for a battle.
* Regional superintendent, assistant should receive paycheck soon
* Nonprofit hospitals’ huge tax breaks under increasing scrutiny
* Mercy Health systems operates as a ‘church’ for tax purposes
* Chicago hospital helping Haiti rebuild - Chicago’s Children’s Memorial Hospital helping Port au Prince’s Grace Hospital
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Oct 24, 11 @ 11:18 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** Combo of rate hike, tax increase make for dangerous political waters
Next Post: Veto session live blog
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
So Cross leaves out downstate pensions and all of the Republicans who benefit from abuse down there, including some double dipping education administrators in his caucus. Like Roger Eddy.
What a joke.
Comment by just sayin' Monday, Oct 24, 11 @ 11:34 am
So Senator Hunter who is one of the most outstanding legislators in Springfield has her name drug thru the mud with a loose connection to someone who had a good reputation then apparently did wrong. This story is lazy journalism at its worst!
Comment by wow Monday, Oct 24, 11 @ 12:05 pm
I hope you’re right about the resurrected SB512 not coming up in the veto session Rich, but I still fear a Madigan/Cross/Civic Committee rush job. They didn’t like the time given to state employees, and their friends to email and call state legislators and register their objections to the bill during the last regular session.
Also, notice that Fahner was asked what his opinion was. I wasn’t asked mine. But I’m sure that was just a coincidence and he has no more clout with the legislation than I do.
Additionally Rich, I really hope Rep. Pritchard is right about the legislature pursuing a negotiated solution, although I’m not sure how they’ll negotiate with non union employees.
Comment by PublicServant Monday, Oct 24, 11 @ 12:22 pm
Rich, while scrolling through the veto session live feed, I saw a tweet about the IGPA posting the results of it’s State Summit on Pensions. Here’s the link, it’s an interesting read:
http://igpa.uillinois.edu/system/files/IGPA_State_Summit_on_Pensions_REPORT.pdf
Comment by PublicServant Monday, Oct 24, 11 @ 1:47 pm
I am hoping they do pass some sort of opt-out for state workers - the younger ones could at least roll the dice and have cash $ in their own 401(k) style acounts rather than an unfunded IOU in a pension fund. Employees within spitting distance of retirement surely feel otherwise, but honestly, at this point, I’d rather have the retirement $ in my account than imaginary $ in a state plan that depends on which way the political winds blow over the course of the next 35 years, which no one can possibly know.
So I say, bring it on.
Comment by Peter Snarker Monday, Oct 24, 11 @ 4:22 pm
It’s not unfunded Pete, it’s underfunded, and TRS, for example, is about as underfunded as it was in 1953, and it hasn’t missed a pension payment…ever. State employees can opt-out now by quiting, and getting a better paying job in the private sector for the same work performed.
Comment by PublicServant Monday, Oct 24, 11 @ 4:39 pm
Nothing’s changing boy’s, the voters are all asleep at the switch.Cross is as big a joke as Quinn.just sayin is 100 % correct. Bravo!
Comment by mokenavince Monday, Oct 24, 11 @ 6:09 pm
Now that’s just plain wrong, Moke. What you wanted isn’t gonna happen, but that’s far from “nothing’s changing”.
Comment by PublicServant Monday, Oct 24, 11 @ 8:46 pm
Has anybody looked at the constitutionality of those special purpose pension provisions. If they have never been tested in Court, now may be the time. The “beneficiaries” will have to be fumigated before going before any court and wouold have a tough time arguing they didn’t receive “special purpose” consideration in derogation of the constitution. Maybe somebody should talk to L. Madigan the AG to bring such actions. If she would most special pension beneficiaries would probably fold.
Comment by Roscoe Tom Tuesday, Oct 25, 11 @ 5:00 pm