No Winner |
Forecasts by IRTA Leadership
October 12, 2016
At a meeting of the WLSU of the IRTA in Countryside this
morning, leaders of the Illinois Retired Teachers Association predicted we
might prepare ourselves for much of the same in Springfield’s political stalemate
as we move forward(?) after elections.
That’s not the good news, they agreed.
Described by IRTA President David Davison as a “political
junkie,” Executive Director Jim Bachman was quick to describe his observations
of the political scene on the national level as not so very fascinating as
something quite else. In addition, Mr.
Bachman reminded us that what occurs on the national level has drifted downward
on our own state level – an environment where discourse and compromise are sadly
missing elements.
The IRTA has now a membership of nearly 37,000 retired
educators.
The Mission Statement incudes the following: “The
Association serves the needs and interests of its members through advocacy,
education, cooperation and socialization in a flexible organizational
structure.”
Part of that “serves the needs and interests” was evidenced
in the Association’s hiring of the law firm of Gino DeVito to argue against the
Madigan-supported SB1 in the Illinois Supreme Court, and the eventual unanimous
decision striking down the attempted pension theft on May 8, 2015.
Although discourse in the capitol may be polemic, Bachman
believed both sides of the aisle have finally had the time to digest or
acquiesce to the undisputed decision by the ILSC that precludes their coming
after retirees’ pension benefits.
In his mind, this includes benefits like TRIP or TRAIL
(health insurance plans) – also protected in earlier Supreme Court
deliberations (Kanerva v. Weems).
Contradictorily, he believes the next battle will occur
between WeAreOne and the General Assembly regarding whether current workers’
benefits are covered upon entering the work force or at the end of their
profession. He believes that they are
covered and points to the recent decision of May 8, 2015:
¶46…”The protections afforded to such benefits by article XIII,
section 5 attach once an individual first embarks upon employment in a position
covered by a public retirement system, not when the employee ultimately
retires.”
Jim Bachman - Executive Director IRTA |
Additional language in the section echoes in even more
concrete terms.
When asked about what key players are currently involved in
the latest iteration of a “consideration” offering, as in Senate President
Cullerton’s earlier SB2404, Bachman replied it was probably too early to
tell. He reminded us all that it may
well depend on whether one powerful Speaker will release the votes for such a
bill. He expected that another committee
like the one that hammered together the unconstitutional SB1 might come about
as the willing and interested members of General Assembly moved from November
through December.
What might such a bill look like? Bachman offered a possibility:
Active Tier One teachers can elect to keep their 3%
compounded Cost of Living and receive no further raises in the computation of
the final annuity benefit OR Tier One active teachers can elect to drop their
3% compounded COLA and include their annual raises as part of the final annuity
settlement (in essence, become a Tier Two recipient).
Because the attack would be on active educators, WeAreOne
would be the organization to muster a legal defense against the next attempt to
curtail benefits. Here again, Bachman
believed that there was quite enough in earlier precedent to thwart such an
assault.
Currently, the IRTA has $130,000 in its Emergency Legal
Fund. Before the legal battle in 2015
over SB1, my records indicate the IRTA had nearly $350,000 reserved for the
upcoming litigation. Let’s hope we need
not gird for another confrontation, but it is one good reason to continue
sending a donation to our legal defense fund.
The six-month interim budget allowed by Rauner will end
soon, and our state is now awash in debt.
In fact, this is how we now do business in Illinois – by not paying our
bills. And each dollar we owe become one
with a late charge and interest attached.
This is no longer a change by the governor. This has become his history, his way of
operating a state.
Bachman suggests that the legislators are becoming slightly
more open to other ideas for revenue.
Perforce. We can expect
discussion this time around about taxation on services, or even taxation on
retirement income. But in each of these
cases, there are diminishing returns and possible reactions which might lead to
lessening income.
Game of Thrones 2.0 |
Ralph Martire’s (Director of the Center for Tax and Budget
Accountability) often recommended re-amortization of the pension payments –
away from the balloon mortgage of the 1995 payment schedule for the money owed
– is gaining interest. On the other
hand, according to legislators I have talked to, the first years’ payments of
such a readjustment prevent it being taken seriously. Too much is owed to provide for a greater
payment the next two years in order to find a stable amount. And think about Rauner’s backlog of bills
since. Not likely at all. Not likely ever.
People in the audience also asked about a graduated income
tax, but Bachman reminded them the issue is constitutional as it states in
Article IX: “A tax on or measured by income shall be
at a non-graduated rate.” Once again,
not a likely scenario yet; not until the General Assembly has found no more
road down which to kick a can.