“…Rauner promises a spate of Koch’s money and right wing influence… Quinn represents the worst kind of politician…” by John Dillon

“…As for pensions for workers?  Rauner is nothing if not constantly vacillating.  Yet, if pensions fall under the aegis of security for those who worked their lives in hope of a somewhat comfortable and independent end, knowing the Rauner in 2012 provided another nearly $1/2 million to the Cato Institute, the Club for Growth, and Americans for Prosperity should clarify his position on pensions and Social Security and Medicare.  Each of these Koch-supported groups have strongly worked behind the scenes on the federal and local level to eradicate Social Security and Medicare as overly costly entitlements given to working class people…   

 “In education, ironically, Rauner and at least one of the Democrats on the gubernatorial ticket can agree: on their perception of what’s best for education.  Vallas and Rauner are clearly on the same page when it comes to supporting/promoting the privatization of public education, one of the last cash cows abruptly under the long, narrow eye of Wall Street investors interested in managing all that public money.  In this arena, Rauner’s beneficence is mammoth indeed:  Noble Network of Charter Schools received $2 million on 2012; Stand for Children, $600,000; Teach for American Chicago, $1,100,000 (and Payton Prep, $200,000)… 

“Just as hedge fund manager Bruce Rauner considers these chosen targets of his wealth and fiscal favoritism good business sense – they will if successful return money to him as and if they can change the nature of the business environment – so too do they consider Rauner and other politicians investments to get this done.  Quid pro quo. 

 “Now, Illinois’ public unions and educational groups inflict self-injury and bitterness by urging members of one organization to support Quinn, unlike the other group and ludicrously laud Quinn for positions inconceivable to anyone remotely aware of what the current Governor has done in his ‘earthly’ tenure.

 “Endorsements like ‘Gov. Quinn supports a continuation of our defined benefits pension plan that guarantees benefits for life’ is so off-the-mark that its use to dissuade a reluctance to vote this year is dissembling and manipulative  (IEA-R letter urging vote for Quinn).

 “Honesty would have forced a poignant and perhaps more uncomfortable rationale:  ‘While current Gov. Quinn has not been an ally nor an advocate for public workers’ defined pension benefits, our union name here encourages our members to vote for Quinn rather than Bruce Rauner, and then become active in the efforts to make significant changes in the leaderships in Springfield to assure the respect given to those who toiled for the State and seek some sense of security –as promised – in their later years.’

 “A winning Rauner promises a spate of Koch’s money and right wing influence in my state of Illinois that I cannot accept: I will vote to defeat him.  On the other hand, Quinn represents the worst kind of politician, a populist who plays to the people but who has no regard for the Illinois Constitution he swore to uphold and the promises to the workers in Article XIII, Section 5.  After November 4^th, I will work to find an alternative to him and those who would knowingly accept or compromise with his duplicity.” 

from Bruce Rauner: An Argument "A Fortiori" by John Dillon

 

Excerpts from the Illinois Public Employee Relations Report: Illinois Public Pension Reform... by Eric M. Madiar, Chief Legal Counsel to Illinois Senate President John J. Cullerton and Parliamentarian of the Illinois Senate

The following quotations are from the report:

Madiar chronicles the “history of public pension funding in Illinois to give proper context to the Illinois Constitution's Pension Clause, the General Assembly's recent legislation, and the pending legal challenges to that legislation...”

Madiar also recounts the “aggressive lobbying efforts by Illinois’ business community, principally the Commercial Club of Chicago (the ‘Club’) to cut the benefits of current and retired employees…; public employees and retirees’… different perspective and view [of] Public Act 98-0599 [Senate Bill 1]…; Illinois’ long history of underfunding public pensions…; [that] chronic underfunding continued after the Pension Clause’s adoption in 1970…; [that] pension underfunding was further aggravated during Governor Thompson’s tenure…; the 1995 Funding Plan by design increased unfunded pension liabilities…; [and] the lack of proper pension funding stemmed from a flawed fiscal system…

“[T]he Plaintiff’s claim that Public Act 98-0599 violates three provisions of the Illinois Constitution: the Pension Clause, the Contract Clause, and the Takings Clause… The Pension Clause claim is the main argument against Public Act 98-0599 with the Contract and Takings Clause claims pled as alternative legal theories as to why the legislation’s benefit changes improperly interfere with plaintiffs’ contract or property rights…

“[T]he ‘We Are One’ and SUAA plaintiffs also assert a Taking Clause claim that the State’s failure to properly fund the State’s pension systems has resulted in a taking of private property… [T]wo State employee groups assert that the legislation violates the Illinois Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause by not applying the benefit reductions to current and retired judges…

“[T]he notion that the Pension Clause is subject to a police powers exception has already been rejected by Illinois courts on two occasions… [T]he State’s police power is not superior to the Pension Clause; rather it yields to the Clause, just as it yields to other specific constitutional prohibitions and positive mandates.

“Also, the Pension Clause cannot be equated with the Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution as inherently containing or being subject to exceptions based on notions of necessity… The Pension Clause, in contrast, does not have such a history or intent to accommodate exceptions based on claims of necessity…

“[T]he likelihood of a police power defense succeeding to vindicate Public Act 98-0599 should be at best an extremely remote outcome, especially because of the Clause’s plain language, drafting history, and purpose, and because of Illinois’ long-standing and conscious failure to fund the pension systems…

“‘Let it not be said, however great disasters may befall us, however much we may be impoverished, how heavy the burden imposed upon us may be, we will, for relief, destroy the constitution, or disregard its requirements. Our safety, in the midst of perils, is in a strict observance of the constitution—this is the bulwark to shield us from aggressions. Trifling with it, treating it lightly, dispensing with this or that provision of it, is the sure precursor of the direst calamity which can befall the people, the end of which cannot fail to be, anarchy and ruin’ (1861 Illinois Laws at 208)…’”

To read the complete 43-page report, Click Here.