Everyone needs to donate!
Keep Free Republic Alive with YOUR Donations!
Make a difference.
PLEASE Contribute Today!
Posted on 05/09/2015 10:34:51 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner (R) has yet another challenge on his hands when it comes to righting the state’s precarious financial situation. As is so often the case in the Land of Lincoln, the problem is their bloated, underfunded public workers union pension system. The programs are facing billions of dollars in shortfalls with no relief in sight, and a recent effort to remedy the situation just went down in flames. A 2013 law which sought to reform the system by eliminating automatic increases, reducing future benefits and generally curbing the growth of the debt has been rejected by the state’s Supreme Court. (From the Chicago Tribune)
The Illinois Supreme Court on Friday unanimously ruled unconstitutional a landmark state pension law that aimed to scale back government worker benefits to erase a massive $105 billion retirement system debt, sending lawmakers and the new governor back to the negotiating table to try to solve the pressing financial issue.
The ruling also reverberated at City Hall, imperiling a similar law Mayor Rahm Emanuel pushed through to shore up two of the four city worker retirement funds and making it more difficult for him to find fixes for police, fire and teacher pension funds that are short billions of dollars.
At issue was a December 2013 state law signed by then-Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn that stopped automatic, compounded yearly cost-of-living increases for retirees, extended retirement ages for current state workers and limited the amount of salary used to calculate pension benefits…
The major culprit here is one which regular readers should already be familiar with. There is a 1970 provision in the state constitution – put in place through the efforts of union supporters – which essentially makes union pensions a constitutional right and forbids the legislature from ever touching them once they are put in place. This has allowed the unions to get up to all sorts of hijinks and forced the courts to back them up. While examples are plentiful, one of the worst was when a union lobbyist was able to work just one day as a substitute teacher and then sue the government for a lifetime pension. No matter how obvious the indecency and corruption in such a scenario, the union boss’s attorney was able to go into court, cite the constitutional provision, and claim that since the pension had been assigned to the “teacher” once it could never be removed or reduced in amount.
This is one of the platform items that Rauner ran on during his campaign. When this decision was handed down, the Governor took the opportunity to renew the call for reform.
Rauner, who argued during last year’s campaign that the law was unconstitutional and didn’t go far enough to reduce the pension debt, said the court ruling only reinforces his approach of getting voters to approve a constitutional amendment that “would allow the state to move forward on common-sense pension reforms.”
The governor has proposed allowing veteran state workers to keep the current benefits they’ve earned through a certain date, then move them into a lower-paying benefit plan created for newer state workers. To try to make that approach pass legal muster, he wants lawmakers to put on the ballot a proposed constitutional amendment to clarify that future retirement benefits could be changed.
Not only will the Governor face some tough sledding against the powerful state Democrat machine in seeking such an amendment, he will find few friends in the courts as well. If you click through to the Trib article and read the court decision, the justices are not throwing up their hands and showing any sense of exasperation with the amendment. To the contrary, they are lecturing the legislature on the importance of honoring the state’s debts once they have been promised and essentially saying, the economy gets better or worse at times. You should have planned ahead.
That’s a wonderful sentiment if you’re a union lawyer, but it’s been a long time since their economy has done much in the getting better department. The total amount of red ink for the state is now over $100B. The only answer that the Democrats have is to jack up their taxes even further (what else?) at a time when they are already driving businesses and workers out of the state. Bruce Rauner has his hands full and I don’t envy him the battle ahead. This state may be too far gone to save.
It will be the Black Robe Thugs who will stop any attempt to end or defund the IRS, EPA, Obamacare....add your favorite department.
The black robes doing the bidding of their political masters.
Who writes the checks under Illinois law? Who writes the budget? Is there any constitutional provision that permits a judge to compel a particular budget item, or increase the budget for that item?
Next, they an put on the 2016 (primary day) ballot a proposed constitutional amendment to eliminate the stupid existing pension and benefits protection racket contained in the state constitution since the 1970s.
Next, sharp reductions in public spending and major layoffs of state employees to help pay for this state constitutional protection racket. Then try and reduce existing and prospective pensions, retiree medical benefits and other corrupt perks not enjoyed by most taxpayers.
Finally, pursue Rauner's federal lawsuit to declare mandatory union membership to be a violation of the First Amendment Freedom of Association (which includes a right NOT to associate).
Huh? It wasn’t the IL SC that did this, it was the idiots who put in their constitution all those pension rights. Their SC is just interpreting what the IL constitution says, which is that the legislature can’t really do much to fix the problem, unless they amend their constitution.
RE: Their SC is just interpreting what the IL constitution says,which is that the legislature can’t really do much to fix the problem, unless they amend their constitution.
Well Illinois has the following choices:
1) There is absolutely NO WAY to meet the pension obligations without some form of spending cuts, tax increase or going into debt ( or all three combined ).
2) Continue what they have always been doing and wait for the inevitable laws of economics to catch up
3) Change that part of the constitution
It's a matter of time before it fully runs it course.
The State of Illinois should author a self-help book entitled "Sinking Yourself Financially"
“Illinois Supreme Court basically kills and buries pension reform Illinois “
No wrong! It was the state legislature who wrote the 1970 law. In this instance, the “robes” were only reading exactly what the law requires. But good luck to Illinois trying to fix the problem. My bet is that the state will go broke before anything is done to actually fix the problem. Union members don’t give a $hit for anyone but themselves!
The relevant State Constitutional provision
“ARTICLE XIII SECTION 5. PENSION AND RETIREMENT RIGHTS
Membership in any pension or retirement system of the
State, any unit of local government or school district, or
any agency or instrumentality thereof, shall be an
enforceable contractual relationship, the benefits of which
shall not be diminished or impaired.”
If were on the court I would have pulled a John Roberts out of my *ss interpretation and upheld the law.
Illinois is at the bottom of a swimming pool filled with p*ss and that provision is a millstone around it’s neck.
Bingo!
Saved me the trouble!
Effectively the court is saying “ hey, don’t throw this “damned if we do and damned if we don’t hot potato in our lap! If you low life politicians are looking for an easy way out, there ain’t one, ammend the state constitution or YOU (not us) suffer the consequences”.
And, basically the Supreme Court is saying to The People of Illinois, if you guys don’t vote to amend the constitution then you guys get to pay the confiscatory taxes that go along with being UNIONISTS!
LIV’s that they are, they will finally get the message when monthly taxes on their houses are more than their mortgage payment!
The SCOTIL had no choice. The Illinois Constitution is crystal clear. It’s the fault of well over 40 years of politicians failing to live up to their responsibility. The crash here is going to be epic and I for one can’t wait for it.
L
Rauner to ILSC: “You upheld it fellas, now YOU pay for it.”
Just as a trivia point, to pay for $100,000,000,000 in IL for just this ONE thing would require every man, woman, child and “?” to pay $8,000 a pop.
Yes, I suppose, since "their political master" is upholding the Illinois State Constitution and that's what their job requires. I wish the black robes on the federal level would follow suit and follow the US Constitiuon as written, instead of behaving as judicial activists and making up their own "rights" out of thin air.
>> It was the state legislature who wrote the 1970 law. In this instance, the “robes” were only reading exactly what the law requires <<
Shhh. Logic and facts have no place on this thread! How DARE judges charged with upholding constitutional law actually do their jobs! They should just behave like the Obama administration and ignore the parts of the Constitution they don't agree with.
>> The SCOTIL had no choice. The Illinois Constitution is crystal clear. It’s the fault of well over 40 years of politicians failing to live up to their responsibility. The crash here is going to be epic and I for one can’t wait for it. <<
Agreed. I'm surprised how many FReepers (especially Illinois FReepers who SHOULD know better!) are siding with Madgian & Co. and their phony unconstitutional 2013 pension "reform" plan that simply put a band-aid on a fatal wound and kicked the can down the road for a few years. The bill was universally scorned at the time it was passed by an overwhelmingly RAT majority + a handful of RINOs so the legislature could claim they "reformed" the pension crisis before the election and save their necks. Now FReepers are defending that joke bill and bashing the Ilinois SC for calling it out for what it was?
If Rauner, Madigan, Cullerton and the other Springfield show ponies want some rare credibility, they should respond by establishing a policy of two tiers of state employment: the existing one that the State Supremes have imposed (probably with every legal justification) in which existing employee pension accounts and benefits cannot be constitutionally reduced for EXISTING or past employees and the other for each and every new hire after the effective day of the act. Next, they an put on the 2016 (primary day) ballot a proposed constitutional amendment to eliminate the stupid existing pension and benefits protection racket contained in the state constitution since the 1970s. Next, sharp reductions in public spending and major layoffs of state employees to help pay for this state constitutional protection racket. Then try and reduce existing and prospective pensions, retiree medical benefits and other corrupt perks not enjoyed by most taxpayers. <<
Again, excellent points and examples of what the government would do is they were serious about real reforms. But facts and logic have no place on this thread, apparently.
>> Gov. Rauner has previously proposed some cuts, and the howls of dismay have been something to behold. We “ain’t seen nothing yet”. <<
Interestingly enough, Rauner seems to insist we have to make "painful cuts" everywhere EXCEPT for the thousands of cushy state government jobs. I haven't seen him threaten to dismantle any of those posts because "we can't afford such luxuries at this time" In fact, he's created numerous NEW posts since then and is happy to pay them a comfortable salary with taxpayers money. Funny how he magically has money to pay his pals.
>> Interestingly, Rauner has commented in support of the court decision. He must be a real masochist. <<
As someone who despises RINO Rauner, didn't vote for him, and his proud of that fact, let be the first to say... he's right on the IL SC decision. And I HATE having to agree with him.
You think they made this decision based on careful consideration of the law.
I think they made this decision based on the fact that it appears to benefit Democrat voters.
You understand that some federal Supreme Court Justices base their votes on political considerations, but you don’t think the Justices of the Illinois Supreme Court do it.
Well, you have more faith in lawyers than I do.
The state constitution is pretty damn clear, unfortunately. Terrible provision. As I said I would have upheld the law because the state constitution is not a suicide pact and I’m the kinda guy that is passed giving a damn about niceties like the rule of the law.
Madigan must have known the law would get tossed, it was just passed to make it look they were doing something, try and help Quinn get reelected. Did they even want it to be upheld?
Do you think that the legislature should propose a pension amendment for the state constitution and put it on the ballot, for the Nov. 2016 ballot? If so, would it pass?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.