ONLINE EDITOR :: METRO EDITOR :: STATE EDITOR

Printable Version

Pensions' appetite worries lawmakers

State retirement plans took more funding this year but next year's slice of the budget pie likely bigger

Advertisement

Monday, September 10, 2007

SPRINGFIELD - When Illinois lawmakers finally approved a new state budget last month, supporters kept repeating two key phrases.

The new spending plan gave education its biggest funding increase ever. And the state's pension programs were fully funded.

But some critics contend that the pension spending came only at the expense of underfunding other state services. And even lawmakers acknowledge that the problem of finding money to pay state pensions hasn't been solved. Paying for pensions will take an even bigger chunk of state revenues over the next two years, leaving less money for education, health care and other services.

"The fact it was fully funded (in the budget) is encouraging, but there is still a lot of work to be done," said Rep. John Bradley, D-Marion, who chaired a daylong Illinois House session on pensions in July. "It just keeps ramping up unless you put a big infusion of money in there some way."

When lawmakers talk about fully funding the five state-backed pension systems - for downstate teachers, state employees, judges, university workers and lawmakers - they don't mean they wiped out the $40 billion debt owed to the plans. They mean only that the current budget includes all of the money required under an installment plan that is supposed to result in the pension systems being 90 percent funded by 2045.

That was a far cry from the previous two budgets, for budget years 2006 and 2007, in which a total of $2.3 billion was diverted from scheduled pension payments to cover other state expenses.

"That caused a great amount of concern among annuitants," said Rep. Gary Hannig, D-Litchfield, a top budget negotiator for the House Democrats. "We needed to reassure people that '06 and '07 was a slight deviation, not a permanent loss. That was something both parties and both chambers wanted to do. It calmed people down."

However, devoting an additional $641 million in state money into pension systems puts a strain on the rest of the budget.

Ralph Martire of the Center for Budget and Tax Accountability said the idea of fully funding the pensions is an illusion. The budget is balanced - and pensions fully funded - only because the state underfunds Medicaid payments and other costs, he said.

"Our base estimate is this budget has $2.5 billion to $3 billion in deficit spending," Martire said. "It is financed off the backs of health care providers and human services."

Martire's group has pushed for an income tax increase to pay for more school funding, pensions and property tax relief.

The pension funding problem will only get worse over the next two years. If lawmakers stick to the payment schedule, they will have to find an additional $721 million for pensions when they work on a new state budget next spring. The year after, the increase for pensions is expected to be $759 million.

After that, however, the increases required by the payment schedule moderate significantly, ranging from $143 million to $181 million.

Hannig said it is fair to say that meeting pension obligations will eat up almost all of the natural revenue growth the state can expect, and it will "hamstring any effort to do anything beyond paying the pensions."

"If we use up all of the available revenues on the pension plan, it doesn't help us move up on (education spending) and health care and other things," Hannig said. "It becomes the sole thing we address."

"You are going to have so many problems the next two or three years," said Rep. Mark Beaubien, R-Barrington Hills, Hannig's counterpart among House Republicans. "The increased revenue will just barely cover the cost of the additional pension payment."

Earlier this year, Gov. Rod Blagojevich proposed leasing the state lottery and using those receipts to pay down pension debts. Lawmakers rejected that approach.

"The most overriding problem you had with the whole idea of selling the lottery and putting it into the pension system was just the lack of trust of the administration ... that there wouldn't be some huge amount of money skimmed off of it," Bradley said.

In a written statement, Blagojevich Deputy Chief of Staff Becky Carroll said the administration has made "tremendous progress" in reducing state pension debt.

"However, costs will continue to escalate in the future and threaten the state's ability to make new investments in education and health care, which is why we need to take significant steps to further reduce long-term liability," Carroll said.

The Civic Federation, an influential group of Chicago-area business leaders, did support part of Blagojevich's plan to lease the lottery. However, the group also called for a series of pension reforms to control costs, including requiring public employees to pay 1 percent more toward their pensions, raising the retirement age and controlling retiree health costs.

Federation president Laurence Msall said the group still believes those reforms are necessary.

"It is hard to imagine a tax increase large enough to sustain the runaway health care and pension costs of the state of Illinois right now," Msall said.

Doug Finke can be reached at (217) 788-1527 or doug.finke@sj-r.com.


Have a thought on this issue? Share it by leaving a message at (309) 687-8439 or e-mailing youpage@pjstar.com. Comments may appear in the Journal Star’s YOUPage on Friday.

Receive 4 weekends of the Journal Star home delivered absolutely FREE!

There are 7 comments
Kay
September 10, 2007 - 09:52
Subject:

"requiring public employees to pay 1 percent more toward their pensions, raising the retirement age and controlling retiree health costs."

I'm not a state employee but isn't that a bunch of bull. It's like the federal government, they took from Social Security--TWICE, because, my goodness, all that money sitting there doing nothing. And then cried in their beer when there was no money when the baby boomers started to retire. All those years all of the baby boomers feed into SS and our government used the money and now the federal government wants to get rid of SS--that way they don't have to pay the money back.
You bet their pension are safe though.
So, guys and gals, more taxes are coming.
As I said yesterday, sin taxes should be illegal but they are here to cover our goverments sins.

And, I'm posting it again, even though I'm not a smoker, just because I HATE BEING LIED TO.

THE AIR, ACCORDING TO OSHA
CALCULATING THE NON-EXISTENT RISKS OF ETS
"We have taken the substances for which measurements have actually been obtained--very few, of course, because it's difficult to even find these chemicals in diffuse and diluted ETS.
"We posit a sealed, unventilated enclosure that is 20 feet square with a 9 foot ceiling clearance.
"Taking the figures for ETS yields per cigarette directly from the EPA, we calculated the number of cigarettes that would be required to reach the lowest published "danger" threshold for each of these substances. The results are actually quite amusing. In fact, it is difficult to imagine a situation where these threshold limits could be realized.
"Our chart (Table 1) illustrates each of these substances, but let me report some notable examples.
"For Benzo[a]pyrene, 222,000 cigarettes would be required to reach the lowest published "danger" threshold.
"For Acetone, 118,000 cigarettes would be required.
"Toluene would require 50,000 packs of simultaneously smoldering cigarettes.
"At the lower end of the scale-- in the case of Acetaldehyde or Hydrazine, more than 14,000 smokers would need to light up simultaneously in our little room to reach the threshold at which they might begin to pose a danger.
"For Hydroquinone, "only" 1250 cigarettes are required. Perhaps we could post a notice limiting this 20-foot square room to 300 rather tightly-packed people smoking no more than 62 packs per hour?
"Of course the moment we introduce real world factors to the room -- a door, an open window or two, or a healthy level of mechanical air exchange (remember, the room we've been talking about is sealed) achieving these levels becomes even more implausible.
"It becomes increasingly clear to us that ETS is a political, rather than scientific, scapegoat."

Eric Lee
September 10, 2007 - 09:09
Subject: Pensions

I am a firefighter, and participate in the downstate firefighters fund. I can tell you, with 100% certainty that I have never missed a pension contribution. I have done my part to ensure that my pension is funded appropriatly. The fault here lies with the government agencies who do not fulfill their obligations. These are the same governmental agencies who cry that the pension obligations are hampering their ability to operate. When I was hired, both the city I work in and myself knew that in 20 years, I would be eligible for retirement at 50% of my last year's salary. It is not a suprise that these expenses are coming. It is a failure of the towns to anticipate and properly manage their obligations.

Jack Bolly
September 10, 2007 - 09:06
Subject: ???

The state could do a lot to close the pension gap by simply making the max payout for these public employees similiar to what the largest private companies in IL have, e.g., Cat's max payout is 50% of final pay. If the state simply did that it would close the funding gap dramatically. The gravey train has to end for these public employee unions or the state will go BK.

Reply to Jack Bolly
Eric Lee
September 10, 2007 - 09:12
Subject:

They already do that. My plan is 50% of my last year's salary at 20 years and 50 years of age. The maximum is 75% of the salary at 30 years. This isn't a gravy train by any definition. I pay my part, and do it gladly. In return the government should do the same, as they have already promised they will.

Reply to Jack Bolly
Jack Bolly
September 10, 2007 - 09:45
Subject:

Dude,

Cat is 50% at 35 yrs, as are most large companies in IL which still have a pension plan. Your plan is breaking the state.

Ned Sheppard
September 10, 2007 - 08:06
Subject: Pensions?

In this age of 401k's and Roth IRA's where most private business DOES NOT offer a pension. I fail to see why the tax payer has to fund pensions for anyone. This includes elected officials as well. Why cant police, fire, teachers, state reps, senators and all the rest who suck off the public teet pay for their own retirement?

Elmer B. Fuddled
September 10, 2007 - 07:43
Subject: Who's to Blame?

Once again, the pension system is screwed up because the legislature/Governor haven't fully funded it for most of the last decade+. Now not all are iffy, the Legislator/Judge/Elected Officials plans are A-OK. It's the average worker facing pension reneges. I've been paying 8% of my paycheck as long as I've worked for the state, but they haven't invested their 8%. And despite rumors/lies, I pay hundreds per year for single health ins, family people pay thousands in premiums, plus my prescription costs have quadrupled over the past 5 yrs. We have a great ins plan, but we don't get it for free as many claim. It's not our fault that those in control took care of themselves & left us out to the elements. Yet no one is being asked to sacrifice but us.

Leave a Comment




?
?

Online specials

© 2007 PEORIA JOURNAL STAR, INC. :: SOME RIGHTS RESERVED
1 News Plaza, Peoria, IL 61643 :: 1-309-686-3000
Original content available for non-commercial use
under a Creative Commons license.