-- Connecting the dots between our economy, government and business --
Summary and audio linked here.
Chicago’s political leadership is floating a pension buyout program as evidence it is seriously addressing the city’s thirty-six-billion-dollar unfunded pension liability, but Mark Glennon, founder of the Illinois policy research organization Wirepoints, said that the proposal moves debt from one column to another rather than reducing it, and that the broader fiscal picture facing the city continues to deteriorate across every measurable dimension. Audio here.
Expect no retraction or apology. This what they do.
The state’s existing buyout program for its own pensions is the precedent for Chicago, which should be a warning: Look out for similar exaggerated claims and shoddy analysis.
Full interview and summary linked here.
SIGN UP HERE FOR OUR FREE WIREPOINTS DAILY NEWSLETTER
Elaborate Pokerino. I wonder about Evanston. It’s like they’re trying to win the race to the looney bin with Oak Park.
What the hell is in the drinking water in Evanston??
One vote for each registered Evanston voter who votes. The proposal is illegal and should stay that way.
I assume those who initiated the discussion want to avoid the cost of the run-off election. Then they came-up with presumptive ideas about how the same set of voters in the primary would vote in a run-off election. They should have called pretending what it is and discarded the ideas.
When reading the article I fell-off the cliff when the Ralph Nader example from 2000 was reported. But, there sure are other places to fall-off.
How is this even remotely legal?
There should be no political party affiliation when voting. Vote for the most qualified and any reference made to a political party while campaigning would immediately disqualify a candidate. That would shake things up.
Completely agree. Why pull separate ballots, make it all one and done, its ridiculous (especially in IL, of course).