Pension Foes Allied Against Constitutional Amendment

Pension-related amendment to state constitution on Nov. 6 ballot is confusing, catastrophic and fake reform, say foes and legal experts. What you need to know before you vote.

By Jayette Bolinski, Illinois Watchdog


 Groups opposed to the amendment are numerous and come from all walks of life. It’s no surprise that public-employee unions are opposed to the amendment, which requires a three-fifths majority vote before any public body can approve a pension benefit increase.




Pension Shortfall of $85 Billion to $200 Billion






Groups that support the amendment are difficult to find.  Others have found numerous reasons to object.


This is what voters will see on the ballot:



Explanation of Amendment


John Bambenek, a Republican candidate for state senate in the 52nd District, earlier this month joined a lawsuit filed in Champaign County against the Illinois State Board of Elections seeking to invalidate the ballot question, saying it’s deceptive and inaccurate.


No Need to Put This in Constitution








Certain to Inspire Lawsuits






Illinois Watchdog covers the Illinois General Assembly and state government and is sponsored by the Franklin Center for Government & Public Integrity. Contact Jayette Bolinski at jayette.bolinski@franklincenterhq.org. Find Illinois Watchdog on Facebook and follow its journalism on Twitter @ilwatchdog.

This post is published on all Patches in the suburban Chicago network. Have an opinion on this constitutional amendment? Share your views with readers throughout the Chicago area.

Jack November 02, 2012 at 04:52 PM
Jeff: I am not trying to say that all teachers are always powerless in the face of union leadership. I am trying to explain that college grads who enter into a teaching career have no clue what it is all about. Also, as far as the NEA and the IEA (national teacher union and IL teacher union respectively) regular every-day teachers have virtually no influence or effective way to effect decisions of these unions. Trust me, I am in NO WAY defending these large scale national or state entities. 95% of a teacher's union dues go to these unions with or without the teacher's consent. In terms of electing union officials: Its is a joke. There is a big difference between a local teachers' union and these large powerful unions. I recognize that many conservative minded people don't believe that public employees should be allowed to collectively bargain. I also recognize that many people don't believe that unions should exist at all. I will not try to change anyone's opinions on that matter at this time. I'm also not trying to cast teachers as plaster saints; but making teachers out to be parasites and villians is irresponsible and misleading.I fully understand how angry and helpless people can feel when they see the amount of taxes they pay in property, IL income, Federal income, SS, and Medicare. But remember: we pay that stuff too. (except SS) And I'm NOT trying to say that TRS and SS are anywhere near the same. I recognize that TRS has far higher payouts, I'm not naive.
Juvenal November 02, 2012 at 05:07 PM
The actual SS contribution for a private worker is 10.4 % (and is usually 12.4% exept the last two years) because the employer is required to pay another 6.2% of your salary that you never see. Local school districts pay less than 1% into TRS for their employees, so these dumbass school boards can overpay their teachers without feeling the costs of the pensions -- trying to fix this doomed pension reform earlier this year because of course property taxes will go up when schools have to behave like every other employer. No one blames teachers but the teachers unions are so unyielding when it comes to any solution to the pension crisis (other than "raise taxes so we get ours") that they make the tea party look as accomodating as neville Chamberlain. Their solution will never work, you could never raise IL taxes enough to pay all these pensions because as the business climate here worsens and taxes skyrocket all the jobs and people will flee to other states, so the tax base will shrink so fast you could never make it up with higher rates and fees, which only promote more flight, etc....
Jack November 02, 2012 at 06:23 PM
Jeff: An interesting way of looking at the issue of local property taxes. I see the logic of your argument, but I still don't see what we are really arguing. At the end of the day, do you oppose just the current teacher pension system? Or do you oppose current teacher pay as well? I want to be clear on this. (some of the following facts are from the top of my head so correct me if anyone sees something out of line): The TRS system as it was designed in the 1970's was that teachers pay a certain percentage (approx. 9.2% today) from their check to the pension. In return, the state government would match the amount that teachers pay with a like amount from IL income tax. Teachers would then earn somewhere in the neighborhood of 80% of their salary once they retire. (No one can doubt that this is a very attractive pension plan!) Lots of questions arise from this. Why would the state government back in the 1970's do this? More importantly, why didn't more people react with outrage back then? Is this pension policy truly unacceptable? Or is the conservative attack on teacher pensions more of a symptom of the recent econmic recession? The "pension crisis" that everyone is talking about right now has arisen because the state government for years DID NOT contribute its required amount. Instead, they chose to ignore these payments in order to make up for budget shortfalls in other areas. I'll go on later, first I need to know if we disagree on this.
Paul L. November 02, 2012 at 06:34 PM
Here's a link....enjoy! http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/02/14881090-teachers-unions-in-ohio-try-to-get-educators-elected-to-state-offices?lite
DG Guy November 02, 2012 at 09:51 PM
I don't think it's fair calling this a "conservative attack on teacher pensions". The system has blown up and in Illinois liberals and conservatives are coming to the same conclusions. You're right that the state did not contribute for several years. They took a "pension holiday". The unions. for some reason, signed off on this. Even if they had not taken that holiday, there would be a problem (albeit a smaller one.) The contributions that both parties paid into the system over the past 40 years were not sufficient to fund payouts. Actuaries typically decide how much needs to be contributed to a pension to keep it going. Instead of letting actuaries decide in Illinois, politicians just dreamed up a percentage to contribute. It was not nearly enough.


More »
Note Article
See more »