Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

A constitutional amendment for pensions is just not in the cards

Posted in:

Illinois

* The Chicago Tribune has editorialized three times on public pensions in the past several days…

* Goodbye to Illinois’ $130 billion pension hole. Now it’s $133 billion. And getting deeper.

* Even pension loopholes are protected? Then amend the Illinois Constitution.

* What Emanuel should say: Amend the Illinois Constitution

Two of those editorials were calls to amend the Illinois Constitution so the state could cut pension benefits of current employees/retirees going forward…

Reworking that amendment and giving elected officials the ability to adjust pension benefits going forward is the only transformative solution for Illinois. It is the most pro-growth, pro-taxpayer, pro-jobs pathway the state’s leaders could embrace. But it will require them to stand up to public employee unions.

* Gov.-elect Pritzker’s response…

“What’s most important to me is the principle that people who’ve been promised a pension should get the pension they’ve been promised,” Pritzker said. “That’s the principle we’re going to go by. But there’s no doubt that we’ve got to address the challenge in the budget of the increasing share of the budgeting going into pensions.”

Pritzker supports putting more tax dollars into pensions in earlier years of a pension ramp to lessen how much needs to go toward the funds in later years. One idea is to sell bonds to make those payments in earlier years. Pritzker said everything is on the table.

The Tribsters and others can scream “But Arizona!” until they’re blue in the face. The incoming governor is dead-set against the idea and I doubt there’s even a super-strong majority of legislative Republicans who would be for it and they’re in the super-minority anyway.

In other words, the anti-pension chattering class needs to come up with another idea. Right now, they’re simply shouting into the wind. They may prefer that role, but it doesn’t move anything forward.

Also, the gubernatorial candidate who hated public unions received 38.8 percent of the vote last month. His position was thoroughly rejected.

posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:06 pm

Comments

“But it will require them to stand up to public employee unions.” Please see the FAQ.

Comment by Skeptic Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:10 pm
It’s not ‘standing up to the public unions,’ it’s standing up to the public servants who’ve worked for this state the majority of their lives under the agreement of such benefits who’ve had nothing to do (but a vote for a politician) about the neglect of the pension system.

Comment by Shanks Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:11 pm
===His position was thoroughly rejected.===

More than that, the position the Tribune so passionately embraced over the last four years was rejected. They went all in on Rauner and lost. Instead of insisting they’re still right, they should start the process of making amends.

Comment by One hand //ing Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:14 pm
==Right now, they’re simply shouting into the wind. They may prefer that role, but it doesn’t move anything forward.==

==His position was thoroughly rejected==

This.

The anti-public employee, anti-public employee pension crowd would do well to take the advice of stop talking about the same things over and over because they aren’t happening. And it would also do them well to recognize the fact that their ideas were rejected in the last election. They are still suffering from the Bruce Rauner guide to governing. Ignore reality and keep pouting because you can’t get what you want.

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:15 pm
Red herring. Can’t / won’t happen. Like it or not J.B. has the correct approach.

Comment by Stones Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:18 pm
===Also, the gubernatorial candidate who hated public unions received 38.8 percent of the vote last month. His position was thoroughly rejected. ===
Rich, don’t you understand that his position was not rejected. Rauner would have won but his message was not understood correctly because of the unfair and Madigan controlled media.

Comment by don the legend Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:18 pm
Agree with the reality here. This is still a union state. In spite of the fact that it was the Democrats who allowed this financial debacle to develop. But the voters are still supporting them so let’s see how they fix this. If they raise taxes too much for the union minority the other, non-union citizenry will eventually wise up and “throw the rascals out.” Just don’t plan on this happening in the next two years.

Comment by NeverPoliticallyCorrect Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:19 pm
Hoping for a miracle is not a plan. You need a super majority of the GA for an Constitutional Amendment. Not going to happen. Then you need the majority of voters. This is more likely but still not likely. Then you need to get it past the courts. Why do these people want to put all of their eggs in a politically impossible and likely legally impossible solution?

Comment by Perrid Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:20 pm
===In other words, the anti-pension chattering class needs to come up with another idea. Right now, they’re simply shouting into the wind. They may prefer that role, but it doesn’t move anything forward.

Also, the gubernatorial candidate who hated public unions received 38.8 percent of the vote last month. His position was thoroughly rejected.===

The politics alone, there’s no stomach to do it…

Think on this…

There’s no stomach to do what’s been rejected at the ballot box, and trying to gin up support right now is futile.

74/40… governor… that’s where the Dems sit, who, with the help of labor, defeated a right to work incumbent governor.

44/19… there are more House Dems then all GA Republicans.

This is noise. This isn’t an answer.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:20 pm
Do Arizona teachers give up their right to social security? Because one big hurdle any Constitutional amendment would have to clear is potentially impoverishing thousands upon thousands of little old ladies who devoted their lives to teaching children, who have no social security to fall back on.

And the pensions are contractual pay for services already rendered. I don’t see the Trib advocating to throw contracts overboard in many other situations — usually they’re all about the sanctity of contracts even if that contract screws the consumer.

Comment by Suburban Mom Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:20 pm
Changing benefits going forward is the only way out. It won’t happen, but it’s the only way to save the state. JB can pontificate all he wants, but the manner in which his family business has been run suggests he is being inconsistent.

The state will be significantly weakened by the unwillingness to address go forward benefits. I’m not suggesting at all what has been earned up to and including the date of a constitutional amendment should be paid in full.

The already high taxpayer burden will be significantly increased due to decades of negligence and malfeasance by legislative leaders. There will be a continued exodus of people who do not want to get stuck with the bill for the endless can kicking. Businesses will follow the residents. The long decline will continue. The classic part is that the pensioners will lead the exodus to more hospitable climates.

Tell me I’m wrong.

Comment by SSL Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:22 pm
There is a difference between a constitutional amendment and a full blown convention…

Comment by Difference Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:24 pm
I hope the Dem’s do indeed walk away from a change for the pension clause and stick to just changing the constitution to allow for a graduated income tax. Then, as someone says, they own it. Their only solution is for more money out of everyones wallet. Zero cost-saving reforms.

Governors own.

Comment by Flat Bed Ford Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:27 pm
SSL, you’re wrong. Simply put, going forward benefits have already been addressed. See Tier 2.

Comment by Fixer Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:28 pm
SSL, if you change the benefits going forward, that does not erase the $133B debt that already exists. So how again is that the “only way to save the state?”

Paying our bills and providing a steady governmental climate is the only way to save the state.

Comment by Jibba Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:29 pm
It’s interesting that going to progressive income tax is in the cards but changing public pensions isn’t. You can’t say taxes aren’t going much higher in Illinois. Those suburban school district superintendents need that 6 figure pension more than the taxpayers paying the bill.

Comment by Steve Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:32 pm
Illinois constitution: pensions are “an enforceable contractual relationship.”

Article 1, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution. Have fun with that.

Comment by Nick Name Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:33 pm
===I hope the Dem’s do indeed walk away from a change for the pension clause and stick to just changing the constitution to allow for a graduated income tax. Then, as someone says, they own it. Their only solution is for more money out of everyones wallet. Zero cost-saving reforms.

Governors own.===

So much to unpack…

“I hope the Dem’s do indeed walk away from a change for the pension clause”

There’s no 60 or 30. This is like Rauner not fully grasping… these are Dems, you want them to hurt labor, then there will be a need to raise revenue, so they can do that too. There’s no stomach or political will, in their makeup to do it, so they’re not walking away, it was never something they walked to.

“…and stick to just changing the constitution to allow for a graduated income tax.”

Some ran on that. That how politics works. They will wavt to own this, especially after Rauner webtvtwomyears withiutva budget, hurting the neediest if this state, purposely.

“Then, as someone says, they own it.”

Again, they ran on it, lol

“Their only solution is for more money out of everyones wallet. Zero cost-saving reforms.”

We’ve shown here, Rich has too, there have been reforms, just not the reforms you demand, lol. That’s the difference.

“Governors own.”

Pritzker gets the progressive income tax done, you don’t think he’ll run on it?

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:34 pm
I’m no genius, but here goes.

Who pays the marginal income tax rate? Be it a private 401k or IRA, all those contributions are deducted from one’s gross income. Assuming traditional state pension and private pension folks live the same lives (same tax credits, other deductions) the only people who will be paying more in income tax are the “shut up and pay already” crowd.

In short, state pensioners contributed their share and are contributing again (at a higher rate) as taxpayers to make up the state’s share.

Comment by Downstater Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:36 pm
I actually agree that the state should follow-through on the benefits that have already been promised to Illinois employees. Drastic changes are needed as we move forward into the future.

I am not sure why people are concerned about the IL GOP at this point. The Democrats should do what they feel is necessary and move forward.

Comment by JakeCP Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:38 pm
I spent a 36 year teaching career, wit an end goa of retirement. I paid into the system, and was promised my benefits. Do you folks really think that it is fair to all the retirees to say “lets have a do over”? I worked my entire life knowing what my benefits would be. The fact that those in Springfield who wanted to rob the system for their personal gain, does not mean anything to those of us who are retired. We earned it, we want it, and will not stand for our benefits being reduced.

Comment by Retired Educator Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:42 pm
As late Mayor Koch said : the people have voted and now it is time to be punished. Bills have to be paid. Promises have to be kept. Illinois government workers make more than many in the private sector. There’s 30,000 Six-Figure Illinois Educators That Cost Taxpayers $3.7 Billion.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2018/06/04/the-exclusive-100000-club-meet-30000-members-at-the-illinois-teachers-retirement-system-trs/#10ec3e766129

Comment by Steve Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:42 pm
Fixer

Going forward with tier 2 is for new employees

They want to change going forward for tier 1 employees

Comment by Nick Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:49 pm
Maybe a bankruptcy judge and the US Supreme Court will resolve this someday

Comment by Tony Anon Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:50 pm
–Right now, they’re simply shouting into the wind. They may prefer that role, but it doesn’t move anything forward.–

I think they’re okay with that. This is the crew that endorsed the Libertarian for president last time out, with the full knowledge that it was a pointless act.

Dorm-room-debate-club types aren’t cut out for tough, reality-based decisions. Or governing, as the IPI FUBAR revealed.

Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:51 pm
=Reworking that amendment and giving elected officials the ability to adjust pension benefits going forward is the only transformative solution for Illinois.=

And that is the precise reason the pension protection clause was put in the constitution the way it was, to protect workers from having their compensation stolen when it was politically advantageous.

Way couldn’t stop the scapegoating demagoguery, but we did protect our compensation.

=It is the most pro-growth, pro-taxpayer, pro-jobs pathway the state’s leaders could embrace. But it will require them to stand up to public employee unions.=

It is the exact opposite.

=Those suburban school district superintendents need that 6 figure pension more than the taxpayers paying the bill.=

Since you are the expert, maybe you can shed some light on the typical compensation for a CEO level executive who’s occupation requires a degree above a masters or a doctorate?

Are you a market economy guy? Because the market is insane right now. Almost 20% of the superintendent jobs are filled by interims do to the lack of qualified applicants. That is 20% every year.

I suppose you were ok when we bailed out Wallstreet and the insurance industry to the tune of $800 billion plus? A nice chunk f that went to executive compensation and bonuses for the guys who tanked the economy. Taxpayer money. If you put the amount of executive bonuses paid from taxpayer bailouts next to superintendent pensions it would look like an ant standing next to LeBron James. But complain about public servants.

Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:53 pm
It’s notable that Rauner never took the constitutional amendment stance, himself. It may have played well for him in DuPage and Lake.

Comment by supplied_demand Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:56 pm
==In spite of the fact that it was the Democrats who allowed this financial debacle to develop.==

*cough*Edgar’s pension ramp*cough*

Comment by The little lion Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:57 pm
Tony Anon…if your fever dream of bankruptcy comes about, the bond holders better be prepared to be wiped out first, before the pensioners. Recovering from that might take longer and cost more than actually paying the debt off. You can’t pick and choose which debt is wiped out first. That’s the way it happened in Detroit.

Comment by Jibba Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:57 pm
To do anything except ramping up pension payments (or offering consideration for those willing to accept it) is simply a waste of time and resources.

Comment by Stones Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:57 pm
-Maybe a bankruptcy judge and the US Supreme Court will resolve this someday.-

Maybe you’ll get a purple flying unicorn for Christmas.

Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:58 pm
@Retired Educator

“I worked my entire life knowing what my benefits would be.”

I am 34 and will be working my whole life with no idea what my social security benefits will be. As things stand, I will see 75% of promised benefits when I reach retirement-age. Changing the annual compound growth from 3% to 2.5% just means your pension takes 29 years to double instead of 24 years

Comment by supplied_demand Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 12:59 pm
=== Right now, they’re simply shouting into the wind. ===

I would have been tempted to slightly modify the phrase, but then again Rich is trying to make us a kinder, gentler commenter group.

Comment by Norseman Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 1:00 pm
@NeverPoliticallyCorrect. Illinois is not so much a “union state” as it is a state that honors its contractual obligations, a concept that is enshrined in the Illinois Constitution and given effect by the Illinois Supreme Court. It’s time for those who think that the General Assembly can legally reduce the pensions of retirees and current employees who have earned them to move on and accept reality.

Comment by Bourbon Street Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 1:03 pm
==Illinois government workers make more than many in the private sector. ==

So we’re going back to that argument are we? That’s a nice talking point from the IPI and our current Governor who lost re-election by historic margins. Again, these arguments were rejected. Soundly.

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 1:04 pm
Exactly Shanks
It is saying to
our most loyal- stateworkers who still chose to serve the people of this state during Rauner.
our most dedicated- despite the wage theft of Steps, despite not having our medical providers paid, despite Janus, despite walking away from the table, despite bleeding our union in every way possible, despite flirting with forcing us out on strike,
despite everything you are saying to our
unionized public servants
you don’t matter

Comment by Honeybear Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 1:07 pm
Why don’t we also reduce everyone’s social security too.

Comment by Just saying Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 1:08 pm
==. Illinois government workers make more than many in the private sector.==

Most state jobs are full time. Many state jobs require advanced degrees. If you are going to do a comparison do it right. You can’t compare these jobs to jobs at McDonald’s.

Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 1:12 pm
=In spite of the fact that it was the Democrats who allowed this financial debacle to develop. =

Whoever “allowed [it] to develop”, it wasn’t the employees. And it shouldn’t be solved on their backs.

Comment by JoanP Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 1:16 pm
Oops—should have said “current employees who are entitled to them”, not “earned them”.

Comment by Bourbon Street Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 1:17 pm
Edgar’s ramp didn’t cause the pension crisis. Before 1995- the legislature put in anything they wanted. The ramp at least forced the State to pay something. For those with short empties- the ramp arose only after the State got sued for underfunding the plans. The State lost at the appellate court(Anne Burkewrote the decision) but the Sureme court reversed her. The ramp is better then what was there before which was nothing

Comment by Sue Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 1:17 pm
Let’s put binding pension reform and minimum wage on the ballot and see what happens.

Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 1:22 pm
She
Who sued the state over not paying

Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 1:22 pm
== there is no other choice — the pension funds will just have to go bankrupt ==

See the 1975 IFT decision. “Pensions must be paid when due.”

If the pension funds go broke, the State will have to pay the pensions out of GRF / current revenue.

Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 1:27 pm
=I am 34 and will be working my whole life with no idea what my social security benefits will be.=

SSI is not a pension. SSI was intended to be an income supplement, not the entire income as pensions are.

By the way, my tax dollars will help supplement your SSI.

I am expecting a Christmas card from you.

Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 1:31 pm
RNUG - If the pension funds go bankrupt, there won’t be enough funds in the general funds to run the state and pay pensions. The whole thing will be a historic collapse if that occurs, and the pensions will end up being lowered anyway. Mathematical reality is going to win.

Comment by No way Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 1:46 pm
This is playing out like an Illinois version of Atlas Shrugged. Everyone is a “leecher” - first the unions, then the crony capitalists, then they try to get the super-richy to pay for it all, but they leave (with Indiana and Texas substituting for Colorado). Personally I’m all for shared pain and doing both, but I’m fascinated to see if JB’s no-specifics talk of progressive taxation was real or kabuki on behalf of his 1%er friends. “Gee whiz, I really wanted to do it, but there’s these handful of Dems who won’t vote for it and I need 60% of the legislature so…”

Comment by lake county democrat Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 1:47 pm
Sue -
Edgar’s ramp is “too” gradual and “too” backloaded.

Comment by Smitty Irving Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 1:47 pm
JS Mill The idea that Superintendent vacancies isn’t a valid argument. Like many things such as teacher shortages is an issue created by ISBE. For someone who has been in public ed and private. You tell me a Superintendent can’t have an easier road to certification? Someone who has a 75 they can’t pass an equivalency exam? The scam is the ISBE, Colleges, IASBO etc and Unions are in bed together to keep the system. Where else can you get 2 pensions? You are correct about much. But, shortages. Nope.

Comment by BenFolds5 Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 1:52 pm
== I doubt there’s even a super-strong majority of legislative Republicans who would be for it ==

So true. It has been forgotten that a strong majority of House Republicans voted against SB 1 in 2013. A handful took the always convenient “it-does-it-go-far-enough” excuse in voting “no,” but it wasn’t really close. House Republicans overwhelmingly voted against the pension reform plan the Trib loved and the IPI has now embraced:

http://ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory/98/house/09800SB0001_12032013_006000R.pdf

Comment by Roman Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 1:52 pm
@Just saying

“Why don’t we also reduce everyone’s social security too.”

Ummm, we have. https://www.ssa.gov/planners/retire/background.html

Comment by supplied_demand Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 1:57 pm
No Way- For the win. I have 20 years in the TRS system. I have had my check debited every payday. My expectation, I get what I put in at best. My 403 B is the worst case I started my first check. I think people need to really see what a Ponzi scheme is. The tipping point is long past. There is no making this kind of deficit up now. If Puerto Rico gets the Super Bankruptcy, Illinois has the only path to there. Local districts paying 6 figure retirements but the state pays? Can you imagine when the tier 2 folks realize they pay the same and get half the benefits? That’s about 10 years in I found teachers realize they have a pension.

Comment by BenFolds5 Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 1:58 pm
Supplied; The retirement income I receive was paid for over a long career. When I started I knew what they would be. I am not asking for anything extra. I only want the benefits I earned under the agreement I lived with. If this is a difficult concept for you to understand, I am sorry. How will you feel when you get to my age, and they say “Sorry we changed the rules, and you will get a lot less then promised”? I am pretty sure you would feel the same way I do. What is owed, is owed. Excuses and silly reasoning don’t work. They made this mess, and it is up to them to fix the problem. However; they can’t fix it on the back of retirees. We earned it, and we are entitled to it. End of discussion.

Comment by Retired Educator Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:00 pm
This site is an echo chamber for greedy, out of touch public union stiffs who cannot accept reality or don’t see it at all. Once the pension funds run out of money (the next recession for sure)the federal government will have to step in and allow states (not just Illinois) to go bankrupt due to pension costs. They can easily pass legislation to allow that when states are collapsing. They often only act when things get dire, and boy will they.

The general fund in Illinois will never be used to pay pensions because the state would cease to run at that point anyway. There simply is not enough money for all that, and never will be. Taxes can only go so high, and services can only be cut so much. Sorry, but math and reality always win, and that means the pensions in Illinois lose.

Comment by No way Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:01 pm
JS Mill - you do know the difference between RSDI and SSI?

RSDI comes from your FICA taxes. The recipients most certainly do pay in, and we pay quite a bit.

Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:01 pm
Retired… I hope they solve it without touching those that are in the system. But, they need a way to reduce people like me NOW. Not next year. Because ” I paid in” doesn’t matter when nothing is there. The music will stop for someone. That’s math.

Comment by BenFolds5 Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:03 pm
Social Security was meant to be a supplement—I said supplement to your retirement savings. Teachers, for example do not receive social security even if they earn it. It’s called the Government Offset Provision. Look it up. So teachers give away most of their SSI earnings to the pot for everyone else’s benefit. Their pension was–was–is–intended to be what they live on, given the low wages they earn while employed, comparitively speaking. So comparing a supplemental bonus to your retirement savings is not the same thing as a pension intended for your livlihood in old age. Most public servants never made enough in wages to have 401Ks (403bs actually if publicly employed), IRAs, an investment portfolio, etc. I understand many people look at the screaming outrage the Trib engages in, picking out a few large salaries or pensions. You are uneducated and foolish to believe this is the average worker/retiree. But it is convenient for the rage, understandably.

Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:04 pm
–there is no other choice — the pension funds will just have to go bankrupt–

Obviously, you’ve done the math.

When will that happen while the state is still making its annual contributions?

Please dazzle with your cipherin’.

Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:06 pm
Anon- a group of annuitants sued. lol 5 Systdms

Comment by Sue Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:08 pm
== RNUG - If the pension funds go bankrupt, there won’t be enough funds in the general funds to run the state and pay pensions ==

Current law says the bonds and pensions have to be paid first. Guess the State will have to shut down other things or raise taxes.

Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:10 pm
No Way- but I thought the economy is the best it’s ever been and everything will be rainbows and puppies forever now that America is great again?

Or am I not understanding your party’s current chief correctly?

Comment by Fixer Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:16 pm
“Illinois government workers make more than many in the private sector”….. you can reverse that statement and it would still be true. Good try though

Comment by theq Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:24 pm
We are in a bizarre situation where we have two views of the pension debt. One is pile the problem onto the backs of retirees, present and future, and the other view is raise taxes on everyone except retirees.

So why not raise taxes on retirees. I am one of those six-figure retiree guys, and believe that retirees should be taxed in the interest of fairness.

Comment by OldIllini Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:26 pm
==greedy==

What is greedy about expecting to be paid what you were promised? Is that sort of like the same nonsensical argument we heard yesterday about public employees being extortionists?

You must be of the Bruce Rauner School of Finance where not paying debts owed is the way to go.

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:26 pm
“But, they need a way to reduce people like me NOW”

Lol, yeah, okay, concern troll.

That kind of thinking backfired spectacularly, as we can see with the last election. Workers aren’t going to cut themselves, especially to spare the wealthy from paying a higher state income tax. Even Judas Janus wouldn’t do that, opting instead to leave state employment.

Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:27 pm
–Why don’t we also reduce everyone’s social security too.–
Crickets.

Comment by DeseDemDose Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:31 pm
At this point, you think the Tribune and IPI would start with “Stiff the bondholders (exclamation point)” because the ISC made the position clear.

Let me know how that one goes over with their paymasters.

Comment by Jocko Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:33 pm
- DeseDemDose - Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:31 pm:

–Why don’t we also reduce everyone’s social security too.–
Crickets.

Um.. do teachers retire at 55 with 35 years in for Tier 1 ? Or do they stay til 67 no matter what? Does the tier 1 still compound? The Feds will step in when we can’t provide basic services due to pension indebtedness. Puerto Rico will be the first, then it’s easy.

Comment by BenFolds5 Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:34 pm
Used to be
Being responsible and paying your debt was what was the tight thing to do and filing bankruptcy and skipping out on contracts was taboo and an embarrassment

Amazing how that way of thinking has changed

Comment by Anon Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:36 pm
(1) 60 and 30 matters under Rauner, even if he won’t admit it, and they’ll matter under Pritzker, even if the Trib won’t admit it.

(2) Didn’t Pritzker decline to meet with the Trib editorial board? And he won anyway? Handily? So who’s drifting towards irrelevance here?

Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:36 pm
People have funny ideas about greed. When one delivers a lifetime of work and pays into their retirement fund over that lifetime, how is it greedy that the contract to deliver that payment be honored? Just like people get all huffy about the social security they pay into. People just have to get over this mistaken concept that every public retiree is living a luxury life on money directly out of your wallet (as if they never paid taxes out of their income/wallet to pay for things you benefitted from?) The level of immaturity is astounding. It’s as immature as believing that every employee who works for private industry is earning Bill Gates money. That stupidity is what public employees/retirees think of those outraged about luxury pensions.

Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:38 pm
==retire at 55 with 35 years==

Is that a problem? How long should someone have to work?

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:41 pm
If one thinks that working in public sector is soo great
Go apply for a job in public sector

Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:44 pm
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:41 pm:

==retire at 55 with 35 years==

Is that a problem? How long should someone have to work? If that public employee lives 30 more years with the salary compounding. How many years will the state afford services? Education 10 months a year is far too hard like everyone else retiring at 65 plus. I have done both. Education is rewarding and pay’s fairly. Also has a tremendous pension we including me who can receive it, can’t afford to continue. Math.Not feelings.

Comment by BenFolds5 Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:46 pm
–The Feds will step in when we can’t provide basic services due to pension indebtedness. Puerto Rico will be the first, then it’s easy.–

That’s some crystal ball you have.

Were you tripping when you saw in it that the feds give a hoot about ensuring basic services are provided in Puerto Rico?

Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:46 pm
==people like RNUG only care about themselves==

Really? Providing factual information translates into only caring about yourself? And, who else are you supposed to care about when speaking of one’s retirement? You seem to be a bitter person who is unhappy with their lot in life.

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:46 pm
==everyone else retiring at 65 plus==

Who cares what everyone else is doing?

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:47 pm
“==retire at 55 with 35 years==” I’ve known 40-year-olds who were retired from the military and working full-time. Are you against that too?

Comment by Skeptic Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:49 pm
Demoralized - Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:47 pm:

==everyone else retiring at 65 plus==

Who cares what everyone else is doing?

Why people would change the constitution if given the chance. The next recession hits, let’s see how it goes. Those in Administration like myself got beat on like you could not believe. That’s the problem with this. People in the middle of the system like myself aren’t speaking up. They believe falsely, that because it’s there now, it will be in 15 years. Doubtful at best.

Comment by BenFolds5 Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:51 pm
Military isn’t education. Not even the same breath. Nice straw man though…

Comment by BenFolds5 Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:52 pm
Rant over. I am simply saying. I hope they find a way to reduce me while I can earn still. And NEVER touch those already retired. The reality is, they need to do real change soon.

Comment by BenFolds5 Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:55 pm
Rauner and the IPI got creamed in Illinois. The voters don’t want harsh cuts to workers and anti-unionism. The voters want a progressive income tax.

Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 2:55 pm
The federal government does care that Illinois provides basic services to its citizens. Once Illinois cannot raise taxes anymore, which is happen, and it cannot provide basic services anymore, which will happen, the federal government will step in.

Comment by Guess what? Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 3:01 pm
==the federal government will step in.==

So that’s your pension plan. The feds will step in. You can wish in one hand and do you know what in the other and see which fills up first.

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 3:10 pm
“Military isn’t education.” I didn’t say it was. You seem to be upset that people can retire at 55. I was merely pointing out that it’s common for people to retire at 45 yet you see to be okay with that. No straw there, merely pointing our your inconsistency.

Comment by Skeptic Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 3:15 pm
It isn’t a plan, it is reality. Taxes can only go so high, and basic services must be met by the state, period. Pensions will not be allowed to take an entire state down, and it is insane to try and even argue that.

Comment by Guess what???? Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 3:15 pm
Somebody may want to check what Rahm is now saying: Amendment.

Comment by driveby Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 3:17 pm
BenFolds5 -
“retire at 55 with 35 years” - So, you want 67 year old police officers and firefighters?

Comment by Smitty Irving Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 3:19 pm
If you think the feds are going to step in you live in fantasy land. That is the insane argument here. As Rich said, the anti-pension chattering class need to come up with real ideas. Relying on the feds isn’t a real idea. It’s a farce.

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 3:19 pm
Lots of emotion on the old pension topic today. Guaranteed to hit 100 comments.

Time will tell, and that makes people nervous. I completely understand those that paid into the system for 35 years and played by the rules. They are owed what they are owed and that should stand. The can kicking by the legislative leaders did so much damage that it may very well be too late to solve the problem. The Illinois Supreme Court, which has skin in this game in terms of their own pensions, ruled that current benefits are contracted for the term of one’s employment. So there’s that, which means a 30 year old Tier 1 state employee can earn those egregious benefits for the next 30 years, and then get paid for life. I agree the $133B shortfall is a gigantic problem, but that is only going to grow leaps and bounds until every Tier 1 is retired. The difficulty for many taxpayers to reconcile is that private industry was forced to deal with the realities of pensions over the last 25 years, and those benefits did stop as they were unsustainable. The fact that governments lived in denial is no surprise. And here we are.

There will be some tipping point which will cause all heck to break loose once and for all. Perhaps a recession, or continued mass exodus.I believe the state has more than 70,000 employees earning over $100,000. And another 23,000 retirees already pulling a six figure pension. As others have said the math isn’t pretty.

It actually isn’t all that difficult to pick up and leave the state.

Comment by SSL Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 3:19 pm
==I believe the state has more than 70,000 employees earning over $100,000==

What “state” are you talking about. The state itself doesn’t have that many employees total.

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 3:21 pm
My plan will be to move if things don’t change soon. I don’t think where I work will be sticking around for much longer if things get all that much worse. I won’t live here anymore, and then I can watch the feds step in from Iowa, Indiana, Minnesota, or from whatever other better state I live in by then.

Comment by Guess what?! Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 3:22 pm
The people who are pushing the anger over early retirement of government employees represent right wing billionaires and multimillionaires, and that’s why they failed here. Rauner grossed $279 million in just two years. He can afford to retire thousands of times over, compared for example with the average state employee pension recipient. Imagine how much more Ken Griffin can retire, being a multimillionaire, or the Koch brothers.

Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 3:26 pm
=This site is an echo chamber for greedy, out of touch public union stiffs who cannot accept reality or don’t see it at all. Once the pension funds run out of money (the next recession for sure)the federal government will have to step in a=

The pensions system survived the Great Depression. It also survived the Great Recession and the funding as a percentage of liabilities hardly changed a full percentage poiint. So what else do you have?

SSI? The SSI trust has had multiple large taxpayer bailouts already.

=JS Mill The idea that Superintendent vacancies isn’t a valid argument. Like many things such as teacher shortages is an issue created by ISBE. For someone who has been in public ed and private. You tell me a Superintendent can’t have an easier road to certification? Someone who has a 75 they can’t pass an equivalency exam? The scam is the ISBE, Colleges, IASBO etc and Unions are in bed together to keep the system. Where else can you get 2 pensions? You are correct about much. But, shortages. Nope=

Wowzers professor BFF5, that is some real research based, fact supported mumbo jumbo you are spewing.

So the argument isn’t valid because…you say so? Pass.

How ever it was created there is a shortage. It has continued to worsen over the past decade and as programs dry up the pipeline is nonexistant at some of our schools.

Here is some data for you- 2012-2013 53,000 to the licensure exams. 2016-2017 13,500 took the same exams.

The ISBE’s rules are as a result f legislation mandating the requirements for licensure.

Your incoherent ranting on what licensure could or should be aside…the fact remains that the requirements are what they are. BTW- there is no “Type 75″ anymore.

Also, you cannot get “2 pensions” through TRS. And the comparison someone made with the military is spot on. 25 years and a pension and then go get another job, often as a teacher for anther pension. Not a strawman at all, it is an example of how military retirees double dip.

=JS Mill - you do know the difference between RSDI and SSI?

RSDI comes from your FICA taxes. The recipients most certainly do pay in, and we pay quite a bit.=

Yeah, I know the difference. So what. I paid the max into SSI for several years before I left to change careers. That money is gone for me. It subsidizes your SSI. I also pay into TRS, TRIP, and THIS. Funding my retirement and my health care.

The trolls are out heavy on this one.

Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 3:33 pm
Rich Miller loves hovering over this board and deleting comments he finds too true. Keep on deleting Rich!

Comment by Guess what Rich? Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 3:33 pm
The pensions were majorly damaged during the last recession, and they won’t be able to survive another one. You know its true deep down, but keep on sticking that head in the sand.

Comment by No way? Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 3:35 pm
What is amazing to me about this shout to cut pensions is really how little cuts in pension funding would impact the state budget. $38.5 billion in general state tax collections… add in federal money and other income and the total budget comes to about $80.2 billion.TRS got 4.4 billion…5%….cut pension funding in half only saves 2.5%. Pension funding is bankrupting the state? Nah,lack of a pit is.

Comment by wondering Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 3:39 pm
===then I can watch the feds step in===

Obama didn’t step in, and I can’t see how Trump does.

Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 3:40 pm
Lots of new folks commenting from the loath the state worker side. What is getting you fired up? A Governor elect winning by a record and who actually supports a workable plan that solves the actual funding problem over the long term. Me thinks that is what your problem is.

Comment by Just A Dude Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 3:42 pm
Sorry Demoralized, that should have read public employees. I think the total number of public employees within the state is north of 250,000, with more than 60,000 employed by the state. I get it, you’re angry. All I’m saying is this is a huge problem, it isn’t going away, it is bordering on unfixable, and you can’t make other people stay here to pay for it.

Grandson, I respect your passion, but I don’t think everyone in the state voted to increase taxes. It was a vote against Rauner for sure, but don’t confuse that as a vote in favor of paying more. If you target the evil 1% to be the only ones to fix this issue, that’s a fallacy. They are capable of avoiding taxes with the best of them. Or they simply move away. If it helps you sleep better, that’s fine, but it isn’t going to happen.

Comment by SSL Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 3:43 pm
Rich, Obama obviously wasn’t forced to do what will have to happen in a few years to the pension funds in Illinois and other states. They won’t have a choice but to.

Comment by Let me put it this way Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 3:49 pm
===They won’t have a choice but to.===

By that logic, we shouldn’t do anything.

Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 3:52 pm
===Somebody may want to check what Rahm is now saying: Amendment.===

Can he get 71 and 36 and 60% of those voting on the question?

Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 3:52 pm
For those who think this will somehow end well for taxpayers or pensioners, go check the actual performance of the funds over the last 30 years. Count how many 10 year periods they met their goal.

Comment by CivilSpk Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 3:57 pm
Let’s talk some numbers. Roughly 50% of the current pension payments is TRS. About 24% is SURS, SERS is about 24%, with GARS and JRS making up about 2%.

Push comes to shove, the State could dump current TRS payments on the local school districts. The State could also dump SURS payments on the universities and community colleges. Now the State only has to pay for 1/4 of the current pension fund payment level. Of course, local property taxes would have to go up or the districts would have to stop their practice of employee pension payment pickup. And colleges would have to increase tuitonnor cut administrativr boalt.

Doesn’t erase the existing pension debt, but those moves would free up $1.2B - $1.5B in current pension fund payments that could be redirected to paying off the debt.

That’s one example of how pension money could be found without increasing taxes at the State level … but local taxes would most likely go up.

Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 4:09 pm
“private industry was forced to deal with the realities[…], and those benefits did stop as they were unsustainable.”
1) The public sector is not the private sector. “Maintaining profitibility” is not a thing.
2) “Pensions did stop” translates to “the retirees got stiffed.” Is that the model you’re wanting to perpetuate?

Comment by Skeptic Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 4:09 pm
Skeptic, retirees did not get stiffed. They no longer accrued pension benefits as before. Their earned benefit was intact. You suggest companies should ignore the realities that people are living longer and pensions were unsustainable. Maintaining profitability may not be a thing in government, but living within a budget should be. Otherwise you end up with Illinois.

The problem with socialism is sooner or later you run out of other people’s money. Margaret Thatcher said that I think. Smart lady.

Comment by SSL Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 4:24 pm
The first thing should be to go to 401k for all new employees. Our course with any ponzi scheme you need to kick in to make up for the loss of the new hires contributions. Even Tier 2 is a problem since the funds never meet the targeted returns. If you think COLA adjustments increase shortfalls in the fund just calculate 20% under performance compounded over 60 years.
Local governments are stuck with what Springfield mandates.

Comment by CivilSpk Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 4:24 pm
== The first thing should be to go to 401k for all new employees. ==

Please read up on Tier 2 and get back to us. A 401K with any of employer match will cost more than the 2011 Tier 2 pension reforms.

Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 4:31 pm
My guess is that most of the folks clamoring to pull pensions, even the less than stellar tier 2 ones, have not read up a whole lot on of the pension system works beyond what IPI tells them.

Comment by Fixer Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 4:43 pm
Thank you so much RNUG for being so knowledgeable about pensions. I so appreciate it.

Comment by Honeybear Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 4:44 pm
I think anytime Rich gets bored he throws a pension post out here to entertain everyone. It Did pull a few new meatballs out of the ether today. Kudos Rich.

Comment by Han’s Solo Cup Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 4:51 pm
BenFolds5, I don’t know of too many teachers retiring at 55 with 35 years service mainly because the math just doesn’t work. Last time I checked people graduated from college at 22, not 20.

Comment by MyTwoCents Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 5:21 pm
-RNUG-

I agree if you assume the 401k match. Whether the Tier 2 employee pays the 2% towards tier 1 or the employer it comes from the same taxpayer. It is usually washed out in negotiations towards salaries. It is easier to budget with fixed costs based on total comp costs instead of potential future liabilities. Even the much celebrated IMRF has the employer/taxpayer paying 12% (used to be much lower) while the employee pays 4.5%.

Comment by CivilSpk Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 5:22 pm
You want a little education on the private sector and its abuse of pensions. Read, the book Retirement Heist .

Comment by Norseman Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 5:54 pm
My Two Cents-

Graduate from college at 21. Accruing 170 sick days equals 1 year of service time (340 = 2). Retiring at 55 with 35 years of service, while not common, is quite possible.

Comment by Tornadothor Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 6:01 pm
=The pensions were majorly damaged during the last recession, and they won’t be able to survive another one. You know its true deep down, but keep on sticking that head in the sand.=

So your argument is (read as someone yelling full blast) “I believe what I believe even though the entire body of evidence says the exact opposite.”

Yeah, you are someone that we can have a discussion with.

Maybe check the numbers yourself.

=the State could dump current TRS payments on the local school districts.=

Something I have agreed with for a long time as it s the only guarantee that the money goes where it should.

As it stands now schools levy (tax) for IMRF and SSI. So I assume they would be able to do so for TRS. why should that be any different. At the very least we should have the option, some might not do it.

Either way, RNUG is the calm voice of reason and fact in this CapFax pension storm. Many thanks.

Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 6:08 pm
Even if a constitutional amendment changed the pension clause, it would not affect constitutional rights under the US Constitution. Anyone in the pension system is safe. End of story.

Comment by Reality Checker Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 7:00 pm
Rich, Can we have a discussion about why Illinois can’t cut back on aid to foreigners living in Illinois?

Comment by Harold58 Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 7:20 pm
Who are these foreigners and what aid are you referring to?

I would think Donald Trump has better things to do than follow Cap Fax

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 8:28 pm
Reality checker has it correct. You cannot go back in time to change the rules; ex post facto issues would strike down any changes to Tier 1 . The issue really is debt and how to pay for that debt. For possible answers see the ideas of the CBTA

Comment by Supreme fan Tuesday, Dec 11, 18 @ 9:01 pm
There are state/public employees in the Illinois pension systems who are not part of a union. I tried looking up the percentage but couldn’t find it. Maybe Rich can help me out on this? I know of one entire agency that is not union. Just sayin’ I don’t think a lot of people realize this.

Comment by Point of Fact Wednesday, Dec 12, 18 @ 9:36 am
Rahm & the Tribies are keeping their dream alive.

Comment by James Knell Wednesday, Dec 12, 18 @ 11:05 am