I'm
a member of a union. My father was a proud union member. His father was a union
member and, for a time, a union organizer. I own a business. My maternal
grandparents, whom I cherished more than anyone else when I was a kid, were
farmers. My mother was a public school teacher for several years. Both of my
parents are now retired and rely heavily on their government pensions.
What
the heck does any of that have to do with anything?
Well,
unions, business groups, the Illinois Farm Bureau and, most of all, groups
representing retired public employees and retirees are all up in arms about the
upcoming state constitutional convention referendum.
Every
twenty years, Illinois voters are given the right to call for a constitutional
convention. And all those groups want you to vote "No" next month for
various reasons.
I'm
on the other side. I want you to vote "Yes," but because of my
personal history, I'm often a bit puzzled to find myself on the other side of
this issue.
The
union people are worried about the introduction of s right to work provision,
or other erosions of their hard-fought gains in this state.
Business
groups fret that a constitutional convention could come up with crazy liberal
ideas, or mess with the way income taxes can be levied on businesses.
The
Farm Bureau sees reason for concern in the very nature of Illinois politics.
The convention, they warn, would be "stacked in favor of urban
areas." Farmers' property taxes are lower than residential rates, for
instance, and that might go out the window.
Public
employee and teachers unions and associated retiree groups are probably the
most intense in their opposition, however. That's probably because their
members may have the most to lose.
Two
years ago, Gov. Rod Blagojevich attempted to reduce pension benefits for future
state and local public employees and teachers. Senate President Emil Jones, his
only real ally, backed him up. House Speaker Michael Madigan, who doesn't get
along with Blagojevich, announced his keen interest in the governor's
plan. The unions freaked, and it
took a huge effort to defeat the proposal.
The
unions and retirees figured that if "friendly" politicians who had
accepted millions of dollars in campaign contributions from them had turned
against their interests so quickly, then a constitutional convention, which
can't possibly be controlled as easily as the General Assembly, would be an
absolute nightmare.
They're
right. The state's underfunded pension systems are draining the state budget at
an alarming rate, causing outcries of reform from numerous corners. And then
there are those who regularly whip up public resentment by pointing to the
average Joe taxpayer who has no guaranteed pension benefits for life. A
constitutional convention may very well address this issue.
However,
some of the retirees have unfortunately resorted to distortions, brazen fear
tactics and outright lies to frighten pensioners into voting "No."
Let
me clear up a few things.
No
matter what happens at the constitutional convention, state and local
governments cannot legally reduce pension payments to current retirees. A
convention cannot legally take away pension payment benefits already earned by
current employees. The chances are nil that the delegates would do anything
weird like force the combination of the Chicago teachers pension fund and the
Downstate teachers pension fund.
And,
of course, everything decided at the constitutional convention would have to
then be approved by the voters in a statewide referendum.
A
convention could, however, change a few words in the current constitution that
would allow the General Assembly to eventually make changes, like reduce future
pension benefits, including health care benefits, for current workers or
workers yet to be hired. But it's highly improbable that the convention
delegates themselves would micromanage pension funding proposals.
Personally,
I wouldn't blame public employees and teachers for voting "No" on the
constitutional convention question. On the other hand, I think most, maybe not
all, of those other groups mentioned above are probably overstating their case.
But,
for me, there are just too many other issues - like the power hoarded by the
very few at the expense of the many - which so desperately need addressing in
this state to pass on this once in a generation opportunity. The people need to
take back their constitution for themselves. So, please, vote "Yes"
on the constitutional convention. Thanks.
Rich
Miller also publishes Capitol Fax, a daily political newsletter, and
thecapitolfaxblog.com.