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 20, 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 a 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 be controlled
as easily as the General Assembly, would be a 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.
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.
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.
Rich Miller also publishes Capitol Fax, a daily
political newsletter, and thecapitolfaxblog.com.
This article appears in Oct 9-15, 2008.
