2018 Democrats thread

[The Beast]

4 hours ago, StrangeSox said:

Nobody has a real plan for the pension problem from what I've seen. Gov. Quinn and the state Congress did pass a bill that basically said "lol sorry we're not going to ever pay what we promised," but the Illinois Supreme Court found it unconstitutional. The Illinois constitution has iron-clad protections for pension benefits. They can and have changed the system for pensioners going forward (TRS Tier 2 started in 2011 I think?), but there's a gigantic funding hole because both the state Congress and various Governors didn't come close to properly funding for decades. Pritzker wants to find a way to pay for the pension obligations but doesn't really say how, and Rauner wants a constitutional amendment to allow the state to renege on the promised and earned pension benefits.

Rauner's single driving goal as Governor seems to be "break unions." It's a big part of why he refused to sign a budget for years, which cost the state billions and caused unnecessary harm to thousands. Republicans eventually had to work with Democrats to override Rauner's vetoes, and they did it under the threat that Rauner would spend millions funding challengers to any Republican who didn't follow his line.

As for the 403(b), check out the options and their expenses/fees in it. My wife is also a teacher, and the options available to her in her 403(b) plan were a bunch of garbage high-cost annuities, and her district doesn't offer any sort of contribution match (I don't know that any public school district does). She pays into an IRA account instead where she can still get the tax benefits but can also choose low-cost index funds.

I would like the amendment to come into play so we can adjust pensions; however, I would want comprehensive pension reform where new teachers pay something into the pension system but put in some to a 403(b). Retirees would get benefits but they would not get a cost of living increase like they do now. Those about to retire would get their pension, but those who are in the system would pay less. The remainder of funding would come from the state, with the requirement being that pensions eventually will be phased out. I also don’t think an administrator necessarily needs $150,000+ when they hit retirement since they should be cutting back like others have to. There has to be some solution to the problem.

Thanks for the heads up - I will have to look up what the 403(b) includes in my wife’s district.

[Dam8610]

15 hours ago, Reddy said:

how do they vote against that without voting against the funding of the govt?

Amend the bill to take out the increase in military spending.

13 hours ago, Reddy said:

It's 2018 and you can volunteer remotely for literally any candidate you want. I can happily get you on a remote phone bank! (So can everyone else. I know a bunch of folks calling for Beto)

Let me know who you want to volunteer for and I'll hook you up! 

Sure, how about Ocasio-Cortez?

[StrangeSox]

this is why the left finds it hard to take calls for unity from centrist dems seriously

and

 

Edited September 20, 2018 by StrangeSox

[Dam8610]

36 minutes ago, StrangeSox said:

this is why the left finds it hard to take calls for unity from centrist dems seriously

and

 

@Reddy, you can get me the info for these two, as well.

[Reddy]

2 hours ago, Dam8610 said:

Amend the bill to take out the increase in military spending.

Sure, how about Ocasio-Cortez?

She doesn't need it. Why not Beto? Why not Pressley? Why not Jealous? Bryce? You have so many options. Pick one. Do it.

[Reddy]

1 hour ago, StrangeSox said:

this is why the left finds it hard to take calls for unity from centrist dems seriously

and

 

Same thing is happening here in Iowa. Stacey Walker, a friend and awesome progressive, won his primary for Supervisor and his primary challenger re-registered as No Party to challenge him again in the general.

I think that shit's ridiculous.
 

[Dam8610]

1 hour ago, Reddy said:

She doesn't need it. Why not Beto? Why not Pressley? Why not Jealous? Bryce? You have so many options. Pick one. Do it.

Who are you to judge that? IMO, AOC needs my support more than any candidate as she's the one who most closely articulates the platform I believe in.

Besides, I gave you two other options. I'll help either of the progressives that won their primaries and are having sore loser campaigns run by the Centrist Democrat that was in the race that StrangeSox cited earlier. Andrea Harrington or Rachel Rollins, either will work.

I have no interest in helping "Democrats" who are looking out for corporations moreso than constituents. If I did, I'd help Donnelly or Visclosky.

[Reddy]

1 hour ago, Dam8610 said:

Who are you to judge that? IMO, AOC needs my support more than any candidate as she's the one who most closely articulates the platform I believe in.

Besides, I gave you two other options. I'll help either of the progressives that won their primaries and are having sore loser campaigns run by the Centrist Democrat that was in the race that StrangeSox cited earlier. Andrea Harrington or Rachel Rollins, either will work.

I have no interest in helping "Democrats" who are looking out for corporations moreso than constituents. If I did, I'd help Donnelly or Visclosky.

You're telling me those Bernie-endorsed candidates I listed don't meet your standards? Seriously?

[Reddy]

Anyway. All I'm seeing here is someone who'd rather whine than do something to create the change he wants. #shrug

[southsider2k5]

#gaslighting

[Dam8610]

3 hours ago, Reddy said:

Anyway. All I'm seeing here is someone who'd rather whine than do something to create the change he wants. #shrug

You sound very establishment Democrat here. "Volunteer for who I tell you to, OR ELSE!"

[Reddy]

I don't fucking care who you volunteer for - volunteer for someone.

I listed people who are supported by Bernie/DSA/OR because I thought they'd appeal to you. Clearly, I didn't understand just how specific your brand of politician is if none of them fit the bill.

End of the day you're making excuses for not doing the work that actually makes a difference. Spin it for yourself however you want.

[southsider2k5]

10 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

#gaslighting

 

[The Beast]

https://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/ward-room/nbc-5-governor-debate-rauner-pritzker-493878531.html

Why is it so hard to find a candidate that is level headed, likeable and electable? It’s either Rauner or Pritzker but damn do they need to focus more on the issues to engage Illinois voters.

Edited September 21, 2018 by The Beast

[StrangeSox]

10 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

#gaslighting

I'm not a fan of Reddy's approach but I can't agree that that's what is happening here. He's not trying to convince anyone of some false reality, and he did list some actual progressive candidates, and AOC tally doesn't need outside help when closer races at all levels could use it.

[StrangeSox]

18 minutes ago, The Beast said:

https://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/ward-room/nbc-5-governor-debate-rauner-pritzker-493878531.html

Why is it so hard to find a candidate that is level headed, likeable and electable? It’s either Rauner or Pritzker but damn do they need to focus more on the issues to engage Illinois voters.

They are both extremely wealthy men who were able to buy their spot in the ballot.

[Dam8610]

5 hours ago, Reddy said:

I don't fucking care who you volunteer for - volunteer for someone.

I listed people who are supported by Bernie/DSA/OR because I thought they'd appeal to you. Clearly, I didn't understand just how specific your brand of politician is if none of them fit the bill.

End of the day you're making excuses for not doing the work that actually makes a difference. Spin it for yourself however you want.

Actually, yeah, Bryce, get me his information. We've literally argued about Pressley before and while I've donated to Beto (because fuck Cruz), my time is more valuable than my money to me, and Beto doesn't actually reflect my values, he's just "not Ted Cruz". I'll give money (and a vote if I had it) to that cause, but not time. Bryce is actually pretty close to what I want as a rep, and turning Paul Ryan's seat would be great. He's not quite as aggressive on raising taxes on the wealthy as I'd like, but no candidate is perfect.

[StrangeSox]

https://secure.randybryceforcongress.com/page/s/volunteer

 

Beto was in a band with Cedric Bixler-Zavala, and that's good enough to get my vote!

[Brian]

All these Texas polls show it being so close that it's gonna be such a downer when Beto loses.

[southsider2k5]

2 hours ago, StrangeSox said:

I'm not a fan of Reddy's approach but I can't agree that that's what is happening here. He's not trying to convince anyone of some false reality, and he did list some actual progressive candidates, and AOC tally doesn't need outside help when closer races at all levels could use it.

The false reality is that somehow he can be invalidated for not following what Reddy thinks is the only way to be.  He doesn't need to follow his artificial construct to be valid.  That is 100% not true.

 

[GoSox05]

She's running!

[Dam8610]

10 hours ago, GoSox05 said:

She's running!

Do they really want to lose again?

[Two-Gun Pete]

On 9/19/2018 at 8:51 PM, The Beast said:

Madigan is 76 years old and eventually will have to step down or pass away. One of my concerns is that if Pritzker gets elected, he will draw a challenger in Jeanne Ives the next time the election is held. I would not want Ives as governor, we already have someone like her in our federal government (Pence).

I like the progressive tax Pritzker proposes and I would like the state to legalize marijuana and tax the crap out of it. I worry that he will work with Madigan and the financial issues won’t get fixed. My wife is a teacher and I know she’s worried she won’t get anything to retire on, she would have to contribute to her 403b to guarantee she would get something for retirement.  And like I said, I’m worried about property taxes increasing as a new homeowner as a result of the impacts of Illinois’ financial state.

I don’t particularly care for either Rauner or Pritzker and I think Pritzker is likely to win. I’d like to vote for someone I like, but for me it comes down to my money and property taxes, at least locally. 

 

OK, here's where I lose your train of thought:

The dems have a supermajority in the House. Therefore, EVEN if Madigan is gone from the speakership tomorrow, there is a fucking snowball's chance in hell that another Speaker will be nominated by the dems, and then allow himself/herself to be led around by the noots by Rauner. Especially after Rauner did jack and shit, other than to talk shit about Madigan for four years.

 

So again, why would you vote for 4 more years of the same? This is where I lose your reasoning for voting against your wife's own financial self-interests. And worrying about the NEXT election before we get through THIS election seems odd. Four more years of inertia will be bad, particularly when we as a nation are overdue for another recession, which WILL come, irrespective of who is in power. But having a bad budget is better than having NO budget, because the moronic chief executive won't execute.

 

Full disclosure: I'm NOT a fan of inexperienced, obscenely rich assholes taking over executive branch roles. [See Trump and Rauner as examples, and Pritzker as a potential future example.] However, voting for four more years of the same thing is insanity, IMO. I'm also no fan of Madigan, but to pretend that he's going to turn the other cheek is fucking moronic. Better to find ways to live in reality, and work with people who have different political views than your own, but Rauner has done jack and shit instead. YMMV.

Edited September 22, 2018 by Two-Gun Pete

[ptatc]

On 9/20/2018 at 1:12 PM, The Beast said:

I would like the amendment to come into play so we can adjust pensions; however, I would want comprehensive pension reform where new teachers pay something into the pension system but put in some to a 403(b). Retirees would get benefits but they would not get a cost of living increase like they do now. Those about to retire would get their pension, but those who are in the system would pay less. The remainder of funding would come from the state, with the requirement being that pensions eventually will be phased out. I also don’t think an administrator necessarily needs $150,000+ when they hit retirement since they should be cutting back like others have to. There has to be some solution to the problem.

Thanks for the heads up - I will have to look up what the 403(b) includes in my wife’s district.

They created this type of pension system in the last budget,  part pension and part 403b. The issue is no one can quite agree on how to implement it align with the current tier 1 and tier 2 systems.

The problems always comes down to the lack of state funding. They haven't paid their share in the past so even if it's a defined contribution system what makes you think they will pay their portion of it in the future.

Also, be careful about wanting the constitutional amendment. Look at what happened to one that passed in Arizona. They changed it to the hybrid you discussed. They capped new hires pensions at 100,000. If the plan doesn't meet growth expectations, new hires are responsible for paying 50% of the shortfall. Now, are you taking a job in the environment?

[The Beast]

4 hours ago, ptatc said:

They created this type of pension system in the last budget,  part pension and part 403b. The issue is no one can quite agree on how to implement it align with the current tier 1 and tier 2 systems.

The problems always comes down to the lack of state funding. They haven't paid their share in the past so even if it's a defined contribution system what makes you think they will pay their portion of it in the future.

Also, be careful about wanting the constitutional amendment. Look at what happened to one that passed in Arizona. They changed it to the hybrid you discussed. They capped new hires pensions at 100,000. If the plan doesn't meet growth expectations, new hires are responsible for paying 50% of the shortfall. Now, are you taking a job in the environment?

I didn’t know the last budget was that way but I also don’t like how the constitution is written. I don’t think people need to be taken advantage of, but I also don’t think people need to live on such high salaries in retirement since they should be cutting back. 

I’m not saying the solutions I am proposing are perfect, but eventually we will not have a choice and will need solutions instead of just partisan bickering.