Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar


Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives


Previous Post: Live coverage
Next Post: Open thread

Isabel’s morning briefing

Posted in:

Here you go!…

posted by Isabel Miller
Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 7:30 am

Comments

  1. One can calculate to the penny what a participants lifetime benefit will be, unfortunately when the investment returns or actuarial liabilities are problematic - the fingers start getting pointed as to how is on the hook for the costs …

    “Andrew Bodewes, a spokesman with TRS…We have sort of a weird bifurcated definition of an employer where it is sometimes kind of the state and sometimes the school district when we are talking about employment security,” Bodewes said. “That’s why I do not want to give you an ironclad promise on that.”

    Comment by Donnie Elgin Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 8:22 am

  2. The NPR story is nutty. Outlawing “entertainment that appeals to a prurient interest.” I suppose we could outlaw Country concerts and Hip Hop. Perhaps we should also outlaw High School sports, especially football and volleyball.

    And then there is the whole “bar scene” thingy. I suppose most movie theaters will need to shut down, as well as internet television (since people are constantly watching their phones in public).

    I cannot wait for Victoria Secret ads to disappear, as well as almost all advertising, generally.

    Thank God for Illinois.

    Comment by H-W Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 8:29 am

  3. “Pritzker, a billionaire, said as part of promoting the city’s bid, he was among those making upfront guarantees to the DNC that the party would lose no money if Chicago snagged the convention.”

    There are other ways to phrase this but why get on the bad side of a billionaire governor, right?

    Comment by Torco Sign Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 8:39 am

  4. = He introduced a bill in his state that defines a drag performance as when “a performer exhibits a gender identity that is different than the performer’s gender assigned at birth.” =

    Well, there goes Shakespeare.

    Comment by JoanP Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 8:46 am

  5. == It was first reported by [Isabel] Miller of Capitol Fax.==
    Congrats Isabel!

    Comment by Nuke The Whales Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 9:09 am

  6. =”If we wait until 100,000 of those 144,000 [retired teachers] are coming screaming at our doors saying, ‘hey, I want my money,’” Reick said. “If it all falls on local school districts, our property taxes are going to go straight to Mars.”=

    Simple simon saying the sky is falling. How long have we been hearing that?

    =unfortunately when the investment returns or actuarial liabilities are problematic=

    And yet, the pension system is funded at a higher percentage (assets to liabilities) than it was in 1970.

    It has been clear that, by statute, the “employer” share falls to the state as it has since at least 1970.

    Comment by JS Mill Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 9:29 am

  7. Well there goes the Chicago Bar Association’s Christmas Spirit’s Show.

    Comment by Back to the Future Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 9:32 am

  8. The Freedom Party is at it again, with pushes to ban drag shows in multiple state legislatures. Abortion bans, book bans, teaching bans. So much freedom. This is what certain political interests want Illinois to become. Never has there been less incentive to be like a GOP-led state.

    Comment by Grandson of Man Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 9:47 am

  9. This showed up in my inbox yesterday. What is it with shortcuts on weapons with the Police Training Board?

    https://www.illinoistimes.com/springfield/no-badge-no-problem/Content?oid=16402124&gt

    Comment by ddp76 Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 9:59 am

  10. @GOM, as always just plain old spot on.

    So much freedom, and government out of your life from the right.

    Comment by JS Mill Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 9:59 am

  11. It looks like the Tenn statute targets the actual performers. So I guess it is still cool to show films like The Crying Game or Boys Don’t Cry on the big screen, just don’t provide any live performances of those on stage.

    Comment by Henry Francis Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 10:18 am

  12. If a kicker and a punter can be elected to the NFL Hall of Fame, then Hester belongs there as well.

    Comment by Henry Francis Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 10:33 am

  13. @JS Mill: My “100,000″ comment was specifically to the point that as it now stands, Tier 2 benefits fall short of what the retiree would receive from Social Security had the retiree been enrolled there instead of Tier 2. That being the case, that shortfall will have to be made up by someone, and both Andrew and I are of the opinion that this shortfall could fall upon the local district rather than the State, though we’ve never seen a definitive answer. This was not made plain in the Center Square article. I hope this clarifies the matter. Very truly yours, S. Simon

    Comment by Steve Reick Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 11:06 am

  14. If you are a ridiculous person still wanting a pension crisis to diminish what the ILSC has said can’t be diminished… or a phony want to say the fiscal math is “all but ready to implode”…

    You are not a serious person to the situation now, to looking for answers to better things, and for sure likely dishonest to the fact that no payment to retirees has been missed… and that governments can’t go bankrupt.

    You’re as phony as bond rating agencies that refuse to look at constitutional language as it applies to debt.

    Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 11:11 am

  15. Oh…

    Any single legislator that bemoans the pension/benefit issues to funding or the collapse of any part of either…

    … and supports Gillespie’s Bears Bailout Bill…

    Then that legislator is wholly dishonest to any aspect of looking for “fiscal responsibility”

    I’ll keep a list

    Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 11:15 am

  16. @Steve Reick

    Those pensions are guaranteed. So what would you like to do? They can’t be cut. That’s where I’m lost with you. What do you want done?

    Comment by Demoralized Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 11:20 am

  17. == At least 9 GOP-led state legislatures want to restrict or criminalize drag shows:==

    Brought to you by the party who is constantly saying that the government needs to stay out of everyone’s business . . . except when they want it to be in our business. It amazes me how far into our personal lives Republicans want to go. If you don’t like drag shows then don’t go. Problem solved. Get out of everyone’s personal lives Republcans.

    Comment by Demoralized Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 11:23 am

  18. @OW: At yesterday’s meeting, it was pointed out that the Tier 2 normal cost allocation is pretty much paying for itself, and that the “ramp” is to make up for prior underfunding. I get that. However, it doesn’t solve the problem of such a large percentage of general revenue being diverted to pay for that underfunding and will continue to grow until 2045. You can hide behind the Constitution all you want, but that problem isn’t going to go away. Had you watched the committee hearing, you’d have heard me say that I’m ready to talk about a grand bargain for enhancing revenue in exchange for substantive pension reform. What form that bargain takes I don’t know, but your implication that I’m a “ridiculous person”, a “phony” or “not a serious person” does not advance the conversation.

    Comment by Steve Reick Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 11:28 am

  19. ==You can hide behind the Constitution ==

    And you can try all you want to get around the Constitution but you are going to fail.

    ==substantive pension reform==

    And what is your constitutional solution? You must have some idea. You brought it up after all.

    Comment by Demoralized Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 11:32 am

  20. ===However, it doesn’t solve the problem of such a large percentage of general revenue being diverted to pay for that underfunding and will continue to grow until 2045.===

    The thing is, the state can’t and won’t go bankrupt, there would need to be a raising of taxes or revenues and/or a refinancing of the debt or have legislators use that pesky constitution to “explain” to bond agencies their interpretation of how debt is managed isn’t at all real to the constitutionality of Illinois.

    ===your implication that I’m a “ridiculous person”, a “phony” or “not a serious person” does not advance the conversation.===

    I don’t recall saying your name, sir.

    I stand by my comment, every sentence, word, syllable.

    If you take it as an affront on you, where do you stand on the Gillespie Bears Bailout Bill?

    Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 11:33 am

  21. ==not a serious person==

    And, by the way, anyone still talking about “pension reform” isn’t a serious person because you just can’t accept what the Supreme Court has said. Tier II was the reform. But that’s not good enough for you. You and those like you won’t be happy until you take something away from those currently in the Tier I system. Go ahead and try but you are going to lose.

    Comment by Demoralized Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 11:34 am

  22. ===in exchange for substantive pension reform===

    Representative, not even the Civic Committee is on board with that any longer.

    Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 11:35 am

  23. @Demoralized & @OW: A grand bargain might not necessarily entail a constitutional change. I do take your comment for what it implied, and as to Gillespie’s bill, the Bears’ balance sheet is a lot stronger than the State’s. If Kronke can privately finance SoFi Stadium, so can the McCaskeys or whoever buys the team in the future.

    Comment by Steve Reick Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 11:46 am

  24. ==A grand bargain might not necessarily entail a constitutional change==

    What? So you want to work on a change that you know will be unconstitutional? The court has laid out your options. You can give employees something in exchange for making changes or you can fund the pensions. Those are your options. We already have some programs in place that offer employees something if they will give up something. You’re wasting your time if you continue to talk about “pension reform” unless you want to follow the court’s guidance. Accept it instead of wasting everyone’s time.

    Comment by Demoralized Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 11:50 am

  25. Representative, I appreciate your No on the Bears Bailout Bill, and as you take my comment as an affront towards you, individually, I’ve looked at any thought of a “pension reform” discussion as its intended to be discussed, a diminishing or trying to put what the ILSC says can’t be “put”

    Others, and other groups have backed away from a pension reform prong for any of a number of reasons, likely too because of 60/30, 71/36… as Rauner himself learned holding a state hostage for his own unpopular reforms.

    If there were even 60/71 and 30/36, any reform trying to skirt the constitution and the ILSC is phony to the honest discussion and a real discussion to solutions.

    Appreciate your responses, Representative, I hope you understand mine.

    OW

    Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 11:53 am

  26. I’ll throw this out for consideration and then go do other things: 1) An agreement among all stakeholders for a buyout of the 3% compounded COLA; 2) A revenue stream or tax increase limited to funding that buyout with a non-negotiable sunset once that’s paid for; and 3) A Constitutional amendment of whatever form necessary to accomplish the above. Have a nice weekend.

    Comment by Steve Reick Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 12:07 pm

  27. ==An agreement among all stakeholders for a buyout of the 3% compounded COLA==

    That would have to be an individual offer made to each employee. Pensions are an individual contract so you couldn’t do a blanket change.

    And changing the constitution still isn’t going to get you around the limitations placed on making changes for current members of the system. It will help you for the future by current members would still be covered under the contracts clause in the constitution.

    Comment by Demoralized Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 12:09 pm

  28. Have a good weekend, Representative, I also concur with - Demoralized - on the assessment

    Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 12:13 pm

  29. Representative Reick: I appreciate hearing ideas, although I am skeptical about the specific ones you mention. In addition to Demoralized’s critique, offering buyouts to individual members probably will not save as much as planned. The most likely to take such a bad deal (other than those who are math-challenged) are those whose life expectancy will be lower than average, and those are folks you want to stay in the system.

    Comment by Jibba Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 12:24 pm

  30. agree with Nuke the Whales, go Isabel (oops, almost typed the banned…..)

    Comment by Amalia Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 12:53 pm

  31. Meanwhile, in Urbana and from the “Yea, You Called Attention to it All Right” department:

    ==https://www.news-gazette.com/news/man-allegedly-started-fire-at-a-house-to-bring-attention-to-the-homeless/article_ba553ab0-a644-5c4a-b480-4b317ae07b85.html==

    Comment by Stuck in Celliniland Friday, Feb 10, 23 @ 12:56 pm

Add a comment

Sorry, comments are closed at this time.

Previous Post: Live coverage
Next Post: Open thread


Last 10 posts:

more Posts (Archives)

WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.

powered by WordPress.