Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Irrational exuberance

Posted in:

Illinois

State Sen. Chuck Weaver, R-Peoria, agrees with the governor.

“We need the pension reform and (Gov. Rauner) talks about $900 million in savings from implementing the pension model,” Sen. Weaver said. “I have almost unanimous agreement that will solve our pension crisis.”

Solved, I tells ya. Solved!

posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:02 am

Comments

clearly he was absent on the day the whole unconstitutional thing was talked about

Comment by theq Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:06 am
The cost will be paid through higher property taxes.

Comment by DuPage Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:07 am
Rauner’s inclusion of historically Democratic proposals was a savvy move, and seems to signal a bit of a shift for his regime. Problem is it’s happened about 3 years too late by my math…

Comment by BlackHawk Boone Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:07 am
The only tiny little hurdle, Senator, is the Illinois Constitution.

Comment by Ole' Nelson Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:07 am
Obsessive Hysteria the sequel.

Comment by Pundent Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:09 am
The only solution (as the Courts have consistently ruled) to the pension crisis is for Springfield to live up to its obligation and pay its debts.

Comment by Stones Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:11 am
===“We need the pension reform and (Gov. Rauner) talks about $900 million in savings from implementing the pension model,” Sen. Weaver said. “I have almost unanimous agreement that will solve our pension crisis.”===

… “We woulda got away with it too, if it wasn’t for that pesky constitution”

#ScoobyDooEnding

What employee would choose against a constitutionally guaranteed pension versus the choice to opt out in hopes it will be better, but it could also be worse?

It’s an embarrrassing thing to see how some formerly thoughtful legislators now are “easy-peasy” problem solvers, ignoring things in the past they knew were the real challenges in governing.

I’m sure Mr. Weaver feels better…

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:12 am
“I have almost unanimous agreement that will solve our pension crisis.”

Was Weaver interviewed at closing time at Boone’s?

The phrase “I have almost unanimous agreement…” can only make sense to someone who’s been doing 16-oz-elbow-curls for an extended period of time.

Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:13 am
And we expect legislators with this type of in-depth analytical skill to solve Illinois’ problems?

Comment by Norseman Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:14 am
Mr. Weaver your check from Rauner’s ILGOP is in the mail. Keep selling the unsellable, and you may get a bonus. (Clueless)

Comment by Retired Educator Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:18 am
==The phrase “I have almost unanimous agreement…” can only make sense to someone who’s been doing 16-oz-elbow-curls for an extended period of time.==

Was just thinking the same thing. Or perhaps 5 out of 6 of Weaver’s split personalities agree that Gov’s pension plan is dynamite? His 6th personality is probably just another one of those liberal dems to ignore.

Comment by Lester Holt’s Mustache Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:18 am
This should be exhibit B in the argument against term limits. Weaver, with his just over two years of experience has “unanimous agreement” that Rauner’s pension recycled idea will solve the problems. Weaver needs to hop off his unicorn and come back to reality.

Comment by 360 Degree TurnAround Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:20 am
Well, there ya go. Bruce says and Chuck agrees!

How much more convincing could one possibly need? *rolls eyes*

Comment by Cindy Lou Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:20 am
This pension talk is merely a distraction from 1)paying the debt accumulated and owed and 2)other issues–all of them.

But it sure does rile folks up. Paying the debt down is just so boring.

I guess this will be issue #1 every 4 years with nothing done about it in between. Not sure what value Supreme Court decisions hold anymore. None, apparently, in some peoples’ minds.

Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:26 am
Is that the same reality that Madigan and his minions used when they didn’t make the requirement pension payments year after year and passed budgets that they knew weren’t balanced?

Comment by Stand Tall Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:30 am
Anyone recall when the “consideration model” of pension reform was roundly dismissed as not saving enough?
Now it’s our savior.
Talk about a turnaround agenda.

Comment by Michelle Flaherty Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:30 am
After yesterday’s tragedy in Florida more thought is being given to keeping firearms out of the hands of the mentally ill.
Hope someone is keeping an eye on Weaver.
His mind is clearly empty. The same should be done to his gun closet.

Comment by Truthteller Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:31 am
=“I have almost unanimous agreement that will solve our pension crisis.”=

Among everyone except the Illinois Supreme Court but hey let’s not quibble over details.

Comment by Pundent Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:33 am
To be fair, isn’t this Cullerton’s plan? I believe it was Madigan’s plan that was deemed unconstitutional.

Comment by Birdseed Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:33 am
What a sad excuse for leaders we have here in the State of Illinois…

Comment by Mouthy Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:34 am
I agree with bird seed. It was madigan who originally passed through his “reform”

Comment by Politically incorrect Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:38 am
He’s ignoring the various elephants in the room.

First - it’s all likely unconstitutional
Second- won’t likely be many takers for a consideration option
Third- shifting pensions to local districts and universities just shifts the cost from income tax to property tax. Which is a back door to making retirees pay as not all retirees get senior property tax freeze exemptions.
I’m sure there are more elephants that I haven’t thought of.

Comment by Thoughts Matter Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:38 am
Poor fella just doesn’t know much but hey, he’s promotin’ the SGOP caucus line.

Comment by Truckin' On Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:41 am
The Senate agrees and passed bipartisan pension reform that now sits in Mike Madigan’s desk drawer in the “cooperative and professional” file.

Comment by Lucky Pierre Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:43 am
Stand Tall - in which of the past 40 years did the (mostly Republican) Governors introduce a budget with a full pension payment that “Madigan and his minions” subsequently reduced to zero, over the objection of the (mostly Republican) Governors. I can wait while you fact-check that . . . . . .

Comment by Rasselas Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:45 am
Gonna waste a bunch more of taxpayers’ dollars in court with this turkey.

Comment by RIJ Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:45 am
Good lord. Here we go again. Surely all legislators can’t be dumber than a bag of hammers, can they? How about someone just come up with a payment plan for pensions and be done with it.

Comment by Generic Drone Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:46 am
Why not change the rules for the legislative pension and make them vest the same was as a normal state employee? Roll them into the regular pension system, not give them one for themselves that is overly generous and the one that is always used as an example of what every state employee gets when they want to point out that the pensions are way out of line.

Comment by anonime Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:46 am
“Almost unanimous agreement” was also a central feature of The Emperor’s New Clothes.

And how’d that turn out?

– MrJM

Comment by @misterjayem Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:47 am
Who didn’t see (the “constitutional” part of) this coming? Since it’s unconstitutional to diminish state pensions, then pass the cost along to the local level. This gives the State a “legal” way to dodge its constitutional and financial obligations. #Statesmanship #Snark

Comment by Diogenes in DuPage Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:49 am
It’s like the strategy of, “If we all get together we can solve this. It just takes hard work. We can do this. We MUST do this.”

Comment by Just Me Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:51 am
===The Senate agrees and passed bipartisan pension reform that now sits in Mike Madigan’s desk drawer in the “cooperative and professional” file.===

For the 9,578th time “Lucky Pierre”…

Rauner can put 60 or 71 House members on the stairs and publicly embarrass Madigan at any time, and behind a podium and microphones, those members on the stairs, tell Madigan to call a bill that will pass.

Why won’t Rauner?

It’s embarrassing you have no clue how to count.

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:53 am
== To be fair, isn’t this Cullerton’s plan? ==

Depends on which bill. One more or less started off as Cullerton’s plan. But then Cullerton, trying to get a deal and passage,modified it to include all Rauner’s pension wants. So at this point it is more Rauner’s plan.

There are several pension reform bills floating around.

One is pretty much the no opt-out Cullerton / Rauner “raises don’t count towards pension unless you take Tier 2 AAI” bill; if passed, I expect it will be found unconstitutional. This is the one that would save significant bucks if legal, but I wouldn’t count the savings this year.

There is another bill that offers a partial buy-out for Tier 1 to switch to Tier 2; since it is a voluntary opt-in, I expect it will be found constitutional. But the savings are most likely minimal because I doubt very many people would take the deal. Remember, for it to be a good deal for the State, it has to he a bad deal for the employee.

Comment by RNUG Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:55 am
“Almost unanimous” = not unanimous. Get that man a dictionary!

The consideration model that Cullerton supports lacks anything worth considering if you are a Tier 1 pension recipient.

The governor should only count on saving about $100.

Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 10:59 am
== shifting pensions to local districts and universities just shifts the cost from income tax to property tax. ==

I can see the local district shift happening. And it doesn’t necessarily mean property taxes will go up. Going to depend on the district, if they are already paying the employer portion as part of the union contract, and if the local district can claw back those payments. If they can, it should have no effect on local property taxes.

Community colleges, since they have taxing districts, could be the same.

Universities are a different matter. As far as I know, they don’t have taxing districts. So if they get hit with a pension pick-up, they will have to address it more head-on, by cutting programs, Services, staff or salaries.

I don’t totally dismiss a shift for current payments for K-12; in some ways that is logical. But expect it to drive down teacher’s salaries for years to come.

I do tend to agree with Rauner that some of the salaries have gotten out of hand, but that seems to be at the administrative level, not the classroom. Probably the wrong prescription if you want to.cut administration. If teachers make less, they will all want to change to be better paid administration.

And before all the teachers jump me for supporting the cost shift, I’ll just note Mrs RNUG worked for the local school district, as did her sister … so I think I understand the teacher’s viewpoint.

Comment by RNUG Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 11:14 am
“I have almost unanimous agreement that will solve our pension crisis.”

What, pay back all of the years of under funding the State’s share of the pension costs? Like that will ever happen.

Comment by Huh? Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 11:22 am
=Remember, for it to be a good deal for the State, it has to he a bad deal for the employee.=

This is probably the single most important take away in this discussion and it succinctly captures why using the term “pension reform” is a misnomer. Nothing is being “reformed”. These are all attempts to reduce the state’s legal obligations. And the Supreme Court has given pretty clear guidance on that topic.

Comment by Pundent Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 11:24 am
===Remember, for it to be a good deal for the State, it has to he a bad deal for the employee.===

Back in the Blago years there was a limited buyout where people could volunteer to quit and the state would give them back double their pension contributions but leave the pension system. There were a few hundred takers, and I heard a story of someone quitting their job and taking the cash, and then trying to get a job with Corrections where they would get a higher rate pension, but starting from scratch. There’s always a few in every crowd. Like you say, this would be nibbling around the edges and a few crumbs in paying down the big debt.

Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 11:27 am
Pension reform is called pension theft for those in the systems.

Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 11:42 am
Thank you once again to RNUG for cogent, level-headed analysis of a pension proposal.

Comment by SAP Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 11:50 am
Nothing should be done until Illinois taxes the rich more and end some state corporate breaks. I’m confident that if the GA passed a millionaire surcharge CA, the voters would approve it.

Because of the massive federal corporate tax cut, the argument that Illinois is not competitive due to taxes has been substantially weakened.

We’ve extracted enough concessions from government employees without balancing the cuts with more revenue from people like Rauner and Pritzker.

Without expanded MMJ and legal recreational marijuana, missing out on hundreds of millions in annual tax revenue—billions over the long run.

Comment by Grandson of Man Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 12:00 pm
Instead of proposing cuts why not institute incentives to keep employees around longer
I retired several years ago and many of my coworkers and friends have passed away before reaching 67

Comment by anon Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 12:12 pm
RNUG…..

I understand the separation of the branches of government and that the ILSC wants to ” stay in their lane”.

But is it possible that the next time these crackpot pension “reform” ideas come before the court that they can ORDER the state to pay a set amount and hold the State in contempt for not doing so??

Or somehow otherwise COMPEL the State to pay what they owe.

I guess the best way to do this is to no longer hear any pension cases. I might have answered my own question.

Anyway, can you take a stab at it??

Comment by AGRRAVATION Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 12:19 pm
Kinda disappointed, thought this guy was different than so many of the Senate GOP “simon says” caucus, thought maybe a little smarter than this. He clearly does not have any clue about what is possible and has not given this any real thought.

Comment by Elliott Ness Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 12:20 pm
Words to remember:

“Crisis is not an excuse to abandon the rule of law. It is a summons to defend it.”

–Justice Lloyd Karmeier, In re Pension Reform Litigation, 2015

Comment by IllinoisBoi Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 12:20 pm
== Instead of proposing cuts why not institute incentives to keep employees around longer ==

Good point.

I would have worked longer but, with the prospect of no future raises as a SPSA, and the offer of the 2002 ERI, the math said I could either retire immediately or retire in 5 years, and get exactly the same pension benefit. The math clearly said to retire.

So the State started paying me a pension at least 5 years sooner than it needed to. That was the cost to the State of cutting out raises … penny-wise and pound foolish.

Comment by RNUG Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 12:32 pm
Back slapping glad handing know nothings, there are a lot of them in Spfld.

Comment by Obamas Puppy Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 12:41 pm
==I have almost unanimous agreement==

…after taking a straw poll with the voices in my head.

Comment by Jocko Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 12:45 pm
==Pension reform is called pension theft for those in the systems==

For a landlord (me), I’ll be paying more of these costs in the years to come. No wonder why capital is leaving Illinois. And there is record property abandonment (tax sale) in the southsuburbs. What isn’t sustainable isn’t sustainable. The majority of us work in the private sector.

==Nothing should be done until Illinois taxes the rich more and end some state corporate breaks==

The true rich are the corporations. Funny thing, with your proposal, corporations might leave, not expand and certainly avoid Illinois to set up shop.

Comment by Mister Nickel Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 12:49 pm
Whenever pension proposal come up I always think of this quote from Justice Marshall:

“The peculiar circumstances of the moment may render a measure more or
less wise, but cannot render a measure more or less constitutional”

John Marshall

Thank goodness for the rule of law.

Comment by Retired state employee Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 12:56 pm
When Weaver was appointed to replace Lahood, he was interviewed by one of the Peoria TV stations and stated that he was planning to support all aspects of the governor’s turn around agenda. Looks like he is being true to his word./s

Comment by G'Kar Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 1:00 pm
The burden is still on the people there is no reform for us. It just helps the state get out from under future obligations.

Comment by Shifty McGoo Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 1:13 pm
=== What employee would choose against a constitutionally guaranteed pension versus the choice to opt out in hopes it will be better, but it could also be worse? ===

@Oswego Willy

As i think RNUG explained yesterday, if you have just been diagnosed with Stage 4 cancer and only have six months to live, opting out might make sense.

I don’t think that gets you to $900 million, even if you can get past that pesky Constitution.

More importantly - from a purely actuarial basis - we do not want people with only six months to live opting out of the system. We want them to pay in for six months and then not collect their benefits.

Comment by Thomas Paine Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 1:23 pm
=For a landlord (me), I’ll be paying more of these costs in the years to come.= Yes, because you weren’t paying enough of these costs in the years that went.

Your argument is tantamount to complaining about all of the interest you’ve amassed on your credit card because you were only paying the minimum amount owed.

Comment by Pundent Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 1:27 pm
== Or somehow otherwise COMPEL the State to pay what they owe. ==

As you noted, it’s that Separation of Powers issue. The IL SC can prove guidance, but they won’t order any actual payment right now. For the full rationale, read the 1975 IFT decision.

The ONLY point where I could see the IL SC stepping in is f the pension funds were totally broke and unable to make the individual pension payments to the retirees. At that oint, the court will probably order the actual payments made from GRF … appropriations be damned.

Comment by RNUG Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 1:27 pm
=== === What employee would choose against a constitutionally guaranteed pension versus the choice to opt out in hopes it will be better, but it could also be worse? ===

@Oswego Willy

As i think RNUG explained yesterday, if you have just been diagnosed with Stage 4 cancer and only have six months to live, opting out might make sense.===

If that percentage gets to 1% of that workforce, you give me a call.

===I don’t think that gets you to $900 million, even if you can get past that pesky Constitution.===

Since that’s the whole point, I’m glad you made your point if it makes you feel better I guess, but since you seem to agree this won’t get us to $900 million, or that anyone would wish that circumstance upon anyone, I’m just glad you felt compelled to set me straight.

(Sigh)

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 1:31 pm
Leave The Retirees Alone Republicans.. Rauner, Durkin, Brady. They Earned There Pensions.. You Guys Didn’t.

Comment by Shake Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 1:47 pm
=For a landlord (me), I’ll be paying more of these costs in the years to come.= Yes, because you weren’t paying enough of these costs in the years that went.==

You may not have read my post in its entirety. Let me expound and rebut your argument. There are numerous properties in Cook County, and growing, where the tax exceeds the potential revenue of the property. AKA - 100% tax. There are growing numbers of abandoned commercial properties in hardest hit communities. I have some, not all, that the tax burden is taking over. Yes, I am paying my full share of taxes. And I expect my State and local governments to be run well.

I’m not a Raunerite and generally I am pro-union, by the way. Keep in mind, our state is last in population growth (decline). I’m not off the mark here.

Comment by Mr. Nickel Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 2:11 pm
@Mr. Nickel - I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said. But there’s only one solution to this problem. There’s a debt that has to be paid. Ignoring it or pretending that some magical “reform” will somehow fix it will only make the problem worse. The sooner we talk about how to manage and ultimately reduce the debt the better off the state will be. Unfortunately there doesn’t seem to be much political will on either side of the aisle for that.

Comment by Pundent Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 3:18 pm
@Pundent
Agreed. That is the reason I am so interested in Illinois State politics. Willing to share additional tax burden, but I expect good governance. I only count for one vote. But homeowners together are a powerful force.

Comment by Nickel Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 3:24 pm
== The majority of us work in the private sector.==

So what? Is that supposed to be justification for trying to take away people’s pensions?

Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 4:01 pm
You Go Demoralised…

Comment by Shake Thursday, Feb 15, 18 @ 5:06 pm