Do Illinois’ Candidates For Governor Need A Pension “Reality Check”?

Pat Quinn

Pensions are one of many issues taking a prominent hold in the race for the Illinois governorship.

Both candidates, Pat Quinn and Bruce Rauner, recently sat down in front of the Chicago Tribune’s editorial board for an informal debate on, among other issues, how they would each handle the state’s pension crisis.

One member of the Chicago Tribune’s editorial board, Eric Zorn, listened to both sides. Now he says both Quinn and Rauner need to stop living in their “pension fantasies”.

On Quinn, Zorn writes:

Gov. Pat Quinn says he doesn’t need a “Plan B” to address the problem because he believes the Illinois Supreme Court will uphold the pension reform law he signed in December.

[…]

Quinn’s faith in the Illinois Supreme Court is farfetched. In July, the court issued a thumping 6-1 ruling striking down a previous legislative effort to cut health care subsidies to state retirees and employing language that seemed to serve as a funeral oration for the pension reform law.

Addressing the state’s “but we can’t afford to provide the benefits we promised!” argument, the majority wrote that the unequivocal pension protection clause in the Illinois Constitution “was aimed at protecting the right to receive the promised retirement benefits, not the adequacy of the funding to pay for them.”

Even if Quinn genuinely has hope that the court will gymnastically OK the pending law nevertheless, he still owes it to us to reveal what he proposes to do when — I mean if — those hopes are dashed.

Zorn then shifts to Rauner and his plan to shift Illinois workers into a 401(k)-style system:

Rauner owes it to us to explain why his ideas — he admits they’ve yet to rise to the level of a plan — are any more likely to survive court challenges than the bipartisan reform law, which he strenuously opposed.

…When I asked if joining such a plan would be mandatory, spokesman Mike Schrimpf echoed word-for-word the dodge Rauner employed in his Tribune candidate questionnaire: “We need to wait to see the parameters of what the Supreme Court says in order to carefully craft a plan that will pass constitutional muster.”

Mandatory enrollment of current public employees into 401(k)-style accounts by which they will ultimately fund their own retirements would likely not pass that muster. They’re generally not as lucrative for employees as plans that guarantee monthly pension payments.

Rauner knows this. It’s why he’s promised to allow police officers and firefighters to keep their “special retirement” that includes a standard pension, and why he projects “billions” in savings.

Zorn also decried the administrative costs associated with 401(k) plans. You can read his full editorial here (subscription required).

Photo by Chris Eaves via Flickr CC License

Chicago’s Emanuel Raises Retiree Health Premiums By 40 Percent

Rahm Emanuel Oval Office Barack Obama

In July, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that subsidized health care premiums for state retirees were protected under the Illinois Constitution.

But Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel challenged that ruling Friday when he increased health insurance premiums for city retirees by 40 percent. The move is part of an ongoing effort to decrease the numerous retirement-related costs that weigh heavily on Chicago’s finances.

Reported by the Chicago Sun-Times:

Mayor Rahm Emanuel on Friday dropped another financial bombshell on Chicago’s 25,000 retired city workers and their dependents: their monthly health insurance premiums will be going up by a whopping 40 percent — in spite of a pending lawsuit and a precedent-setting Illinois Supreme Court ruling.

Last year, Emanuel announced plans to save $108.7 million a year by phasing out the city’s 55 percent subsidy for retiree health care and forcing retirees to make the switch to Obamacare.

For the city, the Year One savings was $25 million. For retirees, that translated into an increase in monthly health insurance premiums in the 20 percent and 30 percent-range.

On Friday, city retirees and their dependents got hit again — only this time, even harder. The city notified them of a 30-percent to 40-percent increase that will cost most of the retirees between another $300 to $400 a month.

Retirees and other observers expressed genuine surprise at the move, especially because it comes on the heels of a court ruling that appeared to protect against such policy actions. From the Sun-Times:

The [40 percent] increase stunned Clinton Krislov, an attorney representing retirees in a marathon legal battle against the city and not only because health care costs appear to be “flattening,” as he put it.

What’s even more surprising is the fact that Emanuel is forging full-speed ahead with his phase-out of the 55 percent city subsidy, in spite of a July court ruling that could tip the scales against the city.

The Illinois Supreme Court ruled then that subsidized health care premiums for state employees are protected under the Illinois Constitution and that the General Assembly was “precluded from diminishing or impairing that benefit.”

City retirees have a similar lawsuit pending that Krislov expects to result in a similar outcome.

“Restraint might have been called for until the case is over, but restraint doesn’t seem to be the plan here. The plan is to wean retirees off the city subsidy and have them off entirely by Jan. 1, 2017,” Krislov said late Friday.

The city released a statement Friday, saying the increased premiums would help to “right the city’s financial ship.”

Emanuel has promised to avoid raising taxes, particularly property taxes, before this year’s election.

 

Photo: Pete Souza [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

Moody’s: Illinois Pension Debt Is Worst In Country

Pat Quinn

Moody’s released a report last weekend measuring the pension liabilities of all states relative to state revenue. By that measure, Illinois has the worst pension debt in the country, according to the report. From the Sun-Times:

Illinois’ pension liability as a percentage of state revenue is far and away the nation’s highest, according to a new report from a major credit-rating agency.

The state’s three-year average liability over revenue is 258 percent, Moody’s Investors Service says.

The next closest? Connecticut, at about 200 percent.

The Moody’s report averaged the Illinois percentage from 2010 through 2012. In 2012 alone, the state’s rate was 318 percent.

The state has a $100 billion deficit in the amount of money that should be invested in the portfolios of five state-employee pension accounts.

[…]

In the latest report, Moody’s sets [the median] level at 51 percent.

Several larger states, similar to Illinois, are well below the median and rank in the 10 lowest percentages of adjusted net pension liability, including Ohio, Florida and New York. The group also includes Illinois neighbors Iowa and Wisconsin — the latter having the lowest level next to Nebraska.

Only three others states — New Jersey, Hawaii and Louisiana — have rates higher than 120 percent.

The report acknowledged the state’s pending pension reform, which currently sits in court. From the Sun-Times:

Lawmakers adopted an overhaul plan last fall that cuts benefits and increases worker contributions to significantly cut that debt.

But the law has been challenged in court. A Sangamon County judge indicated last week he wants the case moved swiftly to appellate courts, suggesting the Illinois Supreme Court’s rejection in July of a law affecting retiree health insurance could prove a model for the pension challenge.

Moody’s points out that even if the pension overhaul gets constitutional approval from the state’s high court, it still will take decades for Illinois government to dig out of its financial hole.

 

Photo by Chris Eaves via Flickr CC License

Judge Hints Illinois Pension Case Could Be Fast-Tracked

gavel

It’s been a foregone conclusion that the lawsuit against Illinois’ pension reform law would eventually be heard in the halls of the Supreme Court. The question has always been how long it would take to get there.

But a judge indicated this week that he’d like to fast track the case through the lower courts and get it to the Supreme Court as quickly as possible. Reported by the Herald-Review:

Sangamon County Judge John Belz said Thursday that an earlier court decision that blocked changes to retiree health insurance premiums could provide a roadmap for how the pension case will be handled in the coming months.

In July, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that a law requiring retirees to pay more for health insurance was unconstitutional, triggering speculation that the pension changes also would be tossed out.

Belz told attorneys gathered for a hearing Thursday that the court’s decision in the health insurance case was like “an elephant in the room.”

“I can’t stick my head in sand and act like it isn’t there,” Belz said.

When Belz and attorneys were initially laying out a schedule for the case, it was not expected to be resolved at the lower court level until sometime in 2015.

Now, with the health insurance case providing a path, Belz said he’d like to move the case to the Supreme Court quickly.

“As fast as we can move it along within reason the better,” Belz said.

“This can be wrapped up by the end of this year,” said attorney John Fitzgerald, who represents a group of retired teachers.

A speedy judgment would make both sides happy. But there was bad news for the state mixed into yesterday’s hearing; the judge indicated he’d heavily weigh July’s ruling on retiree health insurance when crafting his judgment on the pension reform law. The July ruling declared an increase in retirees’ health premiums unconstitutional.

Pension Limbo Leaves Illinois Schools, Creditors Uncertain

Illinois Supreme Court

The Illinois Supreme Court will soon rule on the constitutionality of the state’s sweeping pension reforms. But no one knows what the decision will ultimately look like—or when it will happen.

That uncertainty is weighing heavily on institutions that won’t know exactly what their fiscal future looks like until a court ruling comes down. From WUIS:

Tucked into the flurry of reports issued by credit rating agencies, one phrase has been appearing again and again, undercutting the financial outlook for many public schools and community colleges across Illinois. Under headings such as “Challenges” or “What could make the rating go down,” there’s often a warning along the lines of “increased budgetary pressures due to a shift in pension costs from the state.”

Tom Aaron, with Moody’s Public Finance Group in Chicago, says that’s because of “the likelihood that the state may have to search for additional pension answers.”

Despite prognostications by Quinn and others, Aaron says it’s not certain whether last year’s pension overhauls will be upheld by the Supreme Court.

“So in the event they are not, there is a risk that the state is going to have to go back to the drawing board in terms of trying to solve its pension issues,” he said.

And that could include a shift in pension costs from the state onto individual school districts, colleges and universities.

If the court overturns the state’s reform law, lawmakers will be sent back to the drawing board to draft a different set of solutions for cutting pension costs.

One proposal that gas gained steam in the past—and likely would be among the first policies proposed—is to shift pension costs from the state onto schools, colleges and universities. WUIS reports:

The cost-shift was once a key component of pension proposals. House Speaker Michael Madigan decried the “free lunch,” in which school boards set employee pay without worrying about future pension costs, since those would be borne by the state.

Even as recently as March 2014, Senate President John Cullerton mentioned it in a speech at the Union League Club of Chicago:

“We’ve suggested to the suburban and downstate areas, ‘You’ve got to start paying a little bit of your employers’ portion of the pensions.’ It’s called a cost-shift. … It’s important. This makes good public policy,” Cullerton said.

Moody’s doesn’t think schools can afford to wait. Moody’s Public Finance Vice President Rachel Cortez says the agency asks whether districts are bracing themselves for the possibility of a cost-shift:

“The stronger credits, the stronger management teams tend to be aware that that could be coming, and are preparing for it, making contingency plans,” she added.

The cost-shift would be particularly heavy fiscal burden on schools because state funding to schools has been chipped away in recent years.

With pension lawsuits on horizon, Illinois Supreme Court justices take contributions from players in reform

It’s been less than a month since Illinois Governor Pat Quinn signed into law the state’s massive pension overhaul. There have already been lawsuits filed against the legislation, and many more are expected in the near future.

If any of those lawsuits should end up in the Supreme Court of Illinois, the subsequent judgment would have lasting, important effects on pension politics in Illinois and beyond.

But can the Supreme Court justices be trusted to judge the case impartially? A new investigation into the justice’s campaign donations raises doubts.

The Chicago-Sun Times explains:

All told, state records show six of seven justices have taken close to a combined $3 million in campaign contributions tied to those with a stake in the pension debate: labor unions, business groups and a political committee controlled by House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, who last month said the legislation could not have passed without his muscle.

The largest beneficiary of pension-related money is Democratic Justice Thomas Kilbride, a former chief justice of the court who in 2010 was immersed in the nation’s most expensive judicial retention battle in nearly a quarter century.

During that fight, Kilbride took in $1.47 million from the Democratic Party of Illinois, which is controlled by Madigan, the state party chairman. That fund chipped in another $688,000 in 2000, when Kilbride was first elected as a justice, assuring another decade-plus of Democratic control of the state’s highest court.

In his 2010 retention battle, Kilbride accepted another $467,360 from the Illinois Federation of Teachers, $100,300 from AFSCME Council 31 and $16,000 from the Illinois AFL-CIO, all of which fought aggressively against the pension legislation Quinn signed.

For observers following Illinois’ pension reform, some of those organizations should sound familiar. The Illinois Federation of Teachers, for one, plans to file suit against the pension overhaul early in 2014. The Illinois AFL-CIO is part of the union coalition We Are One Illinois, a group that plans to file suit against the state’s pension law soon, as well.

There is one justice who appears to be clean: Justice Bob Thomas, according to the Sun-Times, is the only member of Illinois’ highest court not to have taken money from any players in the pension reform game.


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /home/mhuddelson/public_html/pension360.org/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 3712