Washington High Court Hears Arguments On Whether State Law Requires Religious Accommodation

Washington High Court Hears Arguments On Whether State Law Requires Religious Accommodation


The Washington state Supreme Court yesterday heard oral arguments (summary and video of full arguments) in Kumar v. Gate Gourmet, Inc. At issue is whether the Washington Law Against Discrimination requires employers to accommodate employees' religious practices. The suit was brought by four employees of a company that prepares meals for airline passengers. Plaintiffs, including a Hindu, Muslim and Orthodox Christian, claim that the lunch options served to them violate their religious beliefs because the company sometimes puts meat products in the vegetarian dish or pork in the meat dish offered to workers. Employees for security reasons cannot bring their own lunches or go off-site for food.

That Thing in the Room

That Thing in the Room


Film: Elephant
Format: DVD from personal collection on laptop.
Im not sure what I should do about Elephant in terms of a spoiler. To talk about it the way I need to, Im going to have to spoil it, so consider the rest of this review as being under a spoiler tag. I have an unfortunate personal connection to this film, and theres no way for me to talk about it without bringing that up. If you havent seen this, I think its probably a good idea to skip this review until you have seen it, because I think some of the power of Elephant is lost if you know whats coming. Since we get a good indicator of what is going to happen about 20 minutes in, I suppose its not much of a spoiler either way. Because of that, Im not going to discuss anything regarding the plot until after the jump. Youve been warned; if youd rather get 20 minutes into Elephant to see the reveal, you should turn away now. If not, come along for spoilers. Elephant takes place at what looks like a fairly normal high school in Oregon. We follow a series of students as they wander around their school. They check in, eat lunch, go to class, and then everything goes to hell. The entire point behind Elephant is that this is a normal day at a normal high school when everything is destroyed by a pair of students entering the school an arsenal and killing everyone they see. Many of what we assume or have confirmed as the victims of the two are those students we spend the first hour or so of the film with. And again, thats the point. Like them or hate them, were supposed to understand that none of them deserve this fate. Ive mentioned before that I use the Wikipedia page of a given film when writing the review as a way to make sure I get names right and the order of events correct. In the case of Elephant, the Wikipedia entry is indicative of what is either the biggest strength or the biggest problem with the film. The second paragraph of the films plot summary contains events that happen more than an hour into an 80-minute film. Thats because not much happens in the first hour. The first hour is a series of tracking shots of the various people we follow, and we frequently see the same event from different angles at different times during the film. This is not the sort of thing that people like talking about. My immediate impression was that the title, Elephant, refers to “the elephant in the room,” that thing that everyone sees and knows about but that no one wants to discuss. Evidently, Van Sant thought something different about his title, but it seemed obvious to me. The difficulty of broaching the topic doesnt excuse some real problems here. The first is Van Sants direction. From what I can tell, the entire point of the film is to get us to see these kids in various states during their day. Its supposed to come across as just another day in just another high school, nothing out of the ordinary. It also happens to be astonishingly dull. We get long tracking shots of people walking and sometimes talking about nothing in particular. Then we switch to another tracking shot of people walking and talking about nothing else in particular. A part of me thinks that Van Sant shouldve held his hand back and not given us as much of the two shooters—it might have had more of an impact if it had suddenly happened without our knowing it—another elephant in the room being the slowly building and seething rage of the two gunmen who act without evident provocation. And yet, had he done that, it would have been difficult to make it through the first 30 minutes without falling asleep. Another problem is this high school itself. It is apparently run by people who have no idea of how to run a school. Students wander around at random. There are entire major sections of the school that are apparently unused and where students can just go walk around and hang out. The time throughout doesnt seem to make any sense. I cant tell if all of this is taking place at the start of a school day (since students seem to be arriving constantly) or in the middle of the day (since students are at lunch). It doesnt make any sense to me. The biggest issue I have with Elephant is that its pretentious. Id like to think that Gus Van Sant was going for pathos and reality and simply missed the mark, but I cant be certain. The film seems to know that its a message film of some sort, although it never really explicitly states the message (a fact I rather appreciate). Because its an important message film, though, its filmed in a way to suggest that it is so important. Were supposed to know with the long, artistic tracking shots that Gus Van Sant is Genuinely Very Serious. It falls flat not because its serious, but because its the sort of film that says if you dont appreciate the message and have a thought-provoking discussion after seeing it, youre probably a bad person. The town I live in has survived a school shooting. On Valentines Day in 2008, a former student showed up at Northern Illinois University and gunned down five people, injured another couple of dozen, and then turned the gun on himself. Two years before that incident, I had an office that overlooked the building where the shooting took place. I had a daughter in daycare two or three blocks away. It was a bad day to live in DeKalb. We tend to get forgotten in the list of school shootings sickeningly enough because of the relatively low body count. That says more about the problem and our media than Elephant ever could. Where Van Sant gets things right is that it was an otherwise normal day. There was nothing really special about the day until it was suddenly and tragically terrible. But for as much as he gets that right, he errs far too far on the side of art instead of on the side of human tragedy where this story belongs. Why to watch Elephant: A serious topic that we need to deal with no matter how much we wish we didnt.
Why not to watch: Gus Van Sant aims for pathos and hits pretension instead.

Prayer and or Action

Prayer and or Action


I think one of the major frustrations many people have is the prayer but no action scenario. I've heard many people (Christian and non alike) complain about it. Which has got me thinking.
Two biggest characters in the New Testament; Jesus and Paul.
Jesus - "I only do what I see my Father do." From which I shall take a small leap to suggest He prayed a fair amount because He did rather a lot of stuff (you fill in the blanks... ).
Paul - "I pray more than the rest of you." Says the man who wrote two thirds of the new testament and did more to shape Christianities theology than any other human sans God in flesh. And I think he found time to work and make himself useful when he wasn't starting riots.
Now I suspect that both of these characters had a pretty decent balance of prayer and action. In much the same way faith without deeds is useless I imagine that for many people prayer without action is useless too.
Now obviously there are caveats to this. If you are in prison or unable to walk or suffer from various things that make going and doing things problematic / impossible then I wholeheartedly understand that prayer is probably your action. But sadly I suspect the majority of us don't fall into that camp.
If we were to think of prayer as being in relationship with God, then we probably should do a bit more of the second greatest commandment - love your neighbour as ourself. Which I think would solve the prayer versus action debate which so frustrates so many.
Maybe I am being too simplistic but I really don't think the gospel, Jesus, life is supposed to be as complicated as we so often make it.
Shall save the who is my neighbour debate for another time.
Lord teach me to pray. Lord teach me to act.

Messrs. Hole and Co., Newark

Messrs. Hole and Co., Newark


Time for some more stuff about Newark. For no reason other than that I feel like doing it. That's the great thing about writing for a blog: you get paid about as much as for professional writing (bugger all), but there's no effing editor to mess up your words or make you write about something that bores you.


I worked here. I was in that malt loft.

Remember me saying that I reckoned Warwicks Richardsons were larger than Holes? I think I might have found some evidence to confirm that. Lucky me, eh?

The 1890's were boom time for British breweries. And many were tempted to become limited companies. The brewing industry lagged well behind most of the rest of British industry in the organisation of its businesses. Even the largest firms remained partnerships or single ownership until the late 1880's. Two forces combined at this period which transformed the brewing industry. But we'll be getting to that later.
"Messrs. Hole and Co., Newark.
—We hear that the well-known firm of Messrs. James Hole and Co., Castle Brewery, Newark, hare registered themselves Limited Company. The nominal capital is £200,000, of which the present issue is £150,000 divided into £75,000 of Ordinary Shares, and £75,000 of Cumulative Preference Shares. The whole of the ordinary shares are being held by the present members of the firm, together with Viscount Newark, M.P., Mr. Arthur Gilstrap Soames, of Grimsby, and the firm's head brewer, Mr. Johnstone Smith. We understand, however, that the Company will prepared consider applications for a limited amount of the preference stock which will be issued in £10 shares, bearing interest at the rate of 5 per cent, per annum, free of income tax. The preference shares will rank in priority both as dividend and capital. The bankers are Messrs. Samuel Smith and Co., of Newark, from whom forms of application may be obtained. The managing directors of the new company will Mr. James Hole, Mr. S. K. Marsland and Mr. Arthur Gilstrap Soames."
Nottingham Evening Post - Wednesday 19 March 1890, page 4.

£150,000 is quite a modest sum to raise. About the same as Aitken of Falkirk and far less than the £1 million raised bt McEwan of Edinburgh. And less than a brewery with a capacity of 100,000 barrels (like Warwicks Richardsons) would have raised.

Gilstrap, if you can't remember me saying this before, was one of the big maltsters in Newark. The Holes, too, had started out as maltsters.

The launch seems to have gone pretty well:"Messrs. James Hole and Company, Limited. —In reference to the issue Five per Cent. Preference Shares in Messrs. James Hole and Company, Limited, Castle Brewery, Newark, are informed that letters of allotment and regret were posted last night. We hear that the capital has been subscribed for more than twice over."
Nottingham Evening Post - Saturday 29 March 1890, page 2.

In the 1890's - well, early in the decade, at least - it was typical for brewery launches to be massively over-subscribed. The reason? There were a couple -McEwan and Guinness, for example, where investors did very well indeed in the initial years, with big dividends and a big increase in the value of their shares.

Is it any coincidence that just after going public, Holes had some pubs to let? I don't think so.
"TO be LET, the THREE HORSE SHOES INN, Brant Broughton.—Apply, James Hole AND Co., Limited, Castle Brewery, Newark-on-Trent.

TO be LET, a SLAUGHTER-HOUSE, situate at the back of the Black Bull Inn, Cartergate, Newark. —Apply Jambs Hole and Co., Ld., Newark-on-Trent.

TO be LET, with immediate possession, the MALT SHOVEL INN, Newark.—Apply, James Hole and Co., Limited, Castle Brewery, Newark.

TO be LET, the BLACK SWAN, Full Licensed House, situate in St. Mark's Lane, Newark-on- Trent.—Apply, Jambs Hole and Co., Limited, Castle Brewery, Newark."
Grantham Journal - Saturday 21 June 1890, page 5.

Let's get back to those two forces at work in the 1890's. One the one hand, you had councils not just refusing to issue new pub licences, but actively trying to close existing ones. Bastard temperance twats. To safeguard their outlets, breweries began to buy up pubs as quickly as possible. How did they do that? Using the money raised from their flotation. The combination of these two factors forced up the price of pubs dramatically and considerably reduced the number of free houses.

Looks to me like this is exactly what has happened here.

Of those pubs, only the Malt Shovel seems to be still open. My friends in Newark usually call it the Shit Shovel. They're a witty lot. In 1968, when Courage bought Holes, it was valued at just £8,500. While others were valued at £80,000 or £90,000.

ILFORD HOSPITAL CHAPEL HARVEST 2013 FOOD BANKS, BANKERS, HUNGRY KIDS

ILFORD HOSPITAL CHAPEL HARVEST 2013 FOOD BANKS, BANKERS, HUNGRY KIDS



Today we celebrated Harvest at the Thursday Mass at Ilford Hospital Chapel at which we collected items as well as cash for the local Food Bank. In my sermon I pointed out that usually we would be supporting one of the agencies like Christian Aid, Save the Children, Send a Cow, or CAFOD etc. but people in our local community were going hungry and depending more and more on Food Banks so that the amount they had available was quickly decreasing. Celebrations at the Hospital Chapel will continue on Sunday when there is a "Harvest Songs of Praise" which the Chapel is organising on behalf of the Ilford Council of Churches. The service is at 4.00 p.m. all are very welcome. It seems to me to be a national disgrace that in the 21st Century we have people, including children in our country, who are going hungry. The irony for me is that today the papers are reporting that George Osborne, Chancellor of the Exchequer, is taking the EEC to court as they intend to limit Bankers Bonuses and he wishes them to continue as in the past. The British taxpayer are funding this legal procedure. Many of the economic problems we have faced and continue to face during the recession have been caused by greedy bankers with their noses in the troughs. It is a great pity, a national shame, a national disgrace, that British children are suffering hunger whilst bankers count the earnings in millions and politicians do nothing to alleviate the problem.

Exit Interviews Brooklynian's whynot_31

Exit Interviews Brooklynian's whynot_31


(This is the second in a series of Exit Interviews that ILFA is soliciting. The first can be foundhere.)Sonja Sharp over at DNAInfo dida very kind piece about ILFA wrapping upon Tuesday (my own "exit interview" of sorts) and it encouraged me to get back on the horse with this whole "wrap-up" thing. One of the great joys of writing ILFA over the past several years has been the conversations that spilt out across the local blogosphere, from this blog to local sites includingNostrand Park,Epichorus, andBrooklyn Born,and from there into the posts and comment threads ofbigger sites likeBrownstoner,Curbed,DNAInfo, andGothamist. I've enjoyed cross-postings, links, and back-and-forth banter with all of these sites (and others), but in terms of consistency, longevity, and similarity of focus on northwestern Crown Heights, I've most frequently found myself in conversation with the good people ofBrooklynian's Crown Heights and Prospect Lefferts Gardens Forum.Brooklynian's forum is a message board, of course, and thus isn't the product of a single writer or editorial vision. Nonetheless, since March of 2006,whynot_31has provided an impressive measure of their content. ILFA's proud to average 4 or 5 posts a week, but whynot has posted over 18,000 times. For those scoring at home, that's north of six postings per day, or more than one post every three hours (if they were posted at regular intervals), for the past seven and a half years. Now that, folks, is commitment. Whynot's dog serves as his avatar, but is also an important content generator, as a good portion of whynot's reporting on the neighborhood is researched while they're out for walks. ILFA and whynot (who also holds the title of most-frequent-ILFA-commentor as MikeF) have just enough in common - not-so-new-ish arrivals with experience in non-profits and city services and more than a passing interest in the dynamics of neighborhood change - to engage in robust debate on everything fromcensus statisticstodocumentaries. We certainly don't always agree, and we differ significantly in our general tone and style, but one of the things I enjoy about inhabiting the local blogsophere, as opposed to the giant comment threads full of trolls and ranters, is that these debates are suffused with a measure of mutual (if occasionally grudging, eye-rolling, there-you-go-again) respect. While there are plenty of people who like to shoot it out online (and we certainly do), whynot and ILFA have also conversed and collaborated in the real world, most recently on the CHCA Town Halls last spring. Thus, it was only appropriate, as I wind this thing down, to sit down and chat with whynot about the past, present, and future of Brooklynian and his take on the ongoing reinvention of Franklin Avenue.
Brooklynian started out as a blog,Daily Heights, in 2003. The readership, cultivated by the founder at Soda, Mooney's (now Sharlene's) and other local watering holes, was centered in North Park Slope and Prospect Heights, comprised of folks in their late 20s and early 30s who were, at that time, renting at the edge of gentrifying Brooklyn in the vicinity of Vanderbilt Avenue. Franklin was a similar place when ILFA started up in 2008, and whynot thinks it was comparable to Kingston Avenue today, ten years on and a mile and a half to the east.As Daily Heights evolved into the Brooklynian message board, it acquired a loyal following of regulars who plotted frequent happy hours on its pages. The boards also attracted local businesses: by whynot's estimate, close to 1/3 of the business owners along Vanderbilt were regular readers and commentors by 2007. "They were as nervous as we were" he recalls, and wanted to know "did we make a good decision moving here?"Whynot_31 wrote the first of his 18,000 postings in March of 2006, after finding $400 down the block from where someone had been shot. He asked if anyone knew what had happened to the victim; if he had died, whynot felt the money should go toward funeral expenses (the victim lived). The replies he received include personal messages from those with a professional stake in the matter. The exchange captures one element of the Brooklynian message boards that's remained constant over the past decade: discussion about crime, often watched rather carefully by law enforcement professionals (some of whom werealso regulars). As whynot remembers, the 77th Precinct (which stretched, until recently, from Flatbush to Ralph Avenue) "had more important things to do" further east in Crown Heights, and "we received no police protection." This didn't so much bother the Brooklynians as galvanize them, and some regular posters served as a sort of informal neighborhood watch. As whynot remembers, "we made it easy for the police to do their job." He recounted some of these efforts recentlyin this thread, as what had once beena deli known for attracting violence and police raidsbecameGladys, on the corner of Lincoln and Franklin.Through the years, Brooklynian's readership has moved east with gentrification, providing both constant novelty (there's always a new bar opening somewhere) and a certain sort of consistency. When I spun one of the questions I often get (what's the role of a blog, anyway?) off to whynot, he noted that first-time readers and posters on Brooklynian are, for the most part, "starving and scared." Insofar as the Brooklynians have a role, they "make the scared feel safe" (sometimes with heavy doses of get-real sarcasm). They also provide something of a sounding board for local businesses: as whynot put it, "we tell people if they suck, but we'll give them a chance to improve" Unlike Yelpers, whynot and company often pair their online reviews with in-person chats, in an effort to express a measure of sincerity about their comments, and their willingness to come back to a place if it does, indeed, improve.Whynot will admit that regular Brooklynians have "a bit of an edge" that puts some folks off and has led toplenty of accusations of hard-heartedness and schadenfreude,particularly when neighborhood changes have upset people. The moderators (unlike ILFA, Brooklynian moderates comments) don't tolerate too much racism or nastiness, but if the site's regulars have an angle, it's a pro-change one, for the most part. While they're not surprised that this offends some people, and while they certainly welcome posts from people with rival opinions, they're aggressive in their defense of their right to exercise their preferences as they see fit.In terms of readership, whynot reports that Brooklynian peaked during 2007 and 2008, amassing around 500 unique visits a day and as many as 50 people actively on the boards at any one time. Today, those numbers have dropped to closer to 150 unique visits with 4 or 5 folks patrolling the comment threads. Some of this can be attributed to longtime, frequent posters moving away or otherwise disengaging, and some to the glut of new coverage of Crown Heights, which has, at this point, been thoroughly discovered by the major blogs and news outlets. It's also part of a generational shift away from the independent world of internet message boards and toward discussions on platforms like Facebook and Twitter. While Brooklynian has no plans to shut down, and whynot has no plans to stop posting, the decline prompted me to ask for a pre-emptive postmortem of sorts. What, if anything, could be learned from 18,000+ posts on Brooklynian, about the message board and about the neighborhood?While whynot is firmly in the camp that changes in Crown Heights are not particularly special or unique (any more so than the gentrification of the Lower East Side or Williamsburg were and are) he did note that Brooklynian had been a regular reminder of the value of "interpersonal capital." The boards have attracted lots of people with particular expertise - lawyers (ADAs and public defenders alike), cops, building inspectors, council members' staff, and others - and the forum has provided an opportunity to share that knowledge and, in certain cases, to make use of it in specific ways. With respect to gentrification at large, whynot note that it's not just the individual class position of the newly-arrived that drives change, but their ability to act collectively, whether to acquire property, demand an impact zone, or support a local business. While he'd agree that some changes are a product of the relative wealth of newcomers and the choices they make as individuals, their access to education (and similar socializing experiences) confers the ability to navigate and negotiate everything from jointly-held leases to the mazes that are municipal agencies. This kind of middle-class collective action affects not just local businesses, but also city policies and service delivery.This, incidentally, is a point that ILFA and whynot agree on: newcomers often wield great power, not just in the way they move through gentrifying spaces but on account of their ability to leverage education and expertise collectively. Where we differ, as I noted above, has been on the question of style. Both in his local work and his writing, whynot eschews moral questions beyond what is and isn't legal. He'll happily offer guides to paths he knows, and he'll direct people to those who have similar expertise, but what people do with that, or with their own knowledge, is entirely up to them. As any ILFA reader knows, I'm much more the bully-pulpit type; I've got an idea of justice that's, in a way, all my own (though I could go on about where I'm getting it from), and I've used this blog to articulate it and push for it.
Despite these differences (or perhaps because of them), whynot and ILFA have always had plenty to talk about. One place we'll be doing some of that talking is at the9th Annual Brooklynian Festivus gathering, which takes place on December 15th. If you'd like to meet some of the characters that haunt your browsers in the flesh, it's as good a place as any.

Charleston SC security officer shot at nightclub privateofficer.com

Charleston SC security officer shot at nightclub privateofficer.com


NORTH CHARLESTONSC Nov 30 2013
Police are investigating a shooting at North Charleston night club early Friday morning.
North Charleston police tells ustwo people were shot at Blue Magic night club around 2am Friday morning.
The club is located between Dorchester Road and Ashley Phosphate.
Asecurity guardat the night cluband a female were shot.
One victim was shot in the leg and the otherin the hip.
Both have non-life threatening injuries.
No word on any possible suspects.
We will bring you the latest on the investigation as soon as we get more details.
WCSC

A Response to Today's Chicago Tribune Editorial about So-called Pension Reform

A Response to Today's Chicago Tribune Editorial about So-called Pension Reform





Normal
0




false
false
false

EN-US
X-NONE
X-NONE












































































































































































































































































































































































































/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:8.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
line-height:107%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}"Illinois' four legislative leaders have been meeting
privately in an effort to carve out a pension reform deal. Only top staffers
have been allowed in the room with them. No news conferences. No comment.
Members of the General Assembly have been told to clear their calendars for
Dec. 3 and 4. That's the firmest signal yet that the four leaders — Senate
President John Cullerton, House Speaker Michael Madigan, Senate Minority Leader
Christine Radogno and House Minority Leader Jim Durkin — are getting close to a
deal. The four are scheduled to meet again this week and the day before
Thanksgiving, location top-secret."Given all the failures in the past, is there any reason
to think this time will be different? Probably not, but here's a likely reason
for the timing: By 5 p.m. Dec. 2, the members of the House and Senate will know
if they face primary opponents in the 2014 election or if they have clear
sailing. That's the deadline for candidates to file petitions to get on the
ballot…"The leaders are talking about freezing COLA increases
in certain years, increasing retirement ages and capping pensionable income.
Also on the table is a voluntary 401(k)-style plan. Public pension plans should
make the switch to fixed-contribution retirement plans, as many companies have
done. A voluntary plan at least would give public workers an opportunity to
direct their own retirement accounts…"The problem cannot be solved with a modest fix.
Consider: the largest of the state pension funds, the Teachers' Retirement System,
posted impressive investment returns of 12.8 percent for the fiscal year that
ended June 30. Even so, the unfunded liability of that system rose during the
same period by $3.6 billion. We cannot
invest our way out of this debt."The legislature during its fall veto session passed
pension changes for the Chicago Park District. That plan would require workers
to pay more toward their retirements and retire at a later age. It would limit
COLA increases, even freeze them for three years. And even at that, the Park
District would have to borrow big money — potentially up to $50 million — to
stabilize that pension system. We
cannot borrow our way out of this debt."The state's pension system faces that unfunded
liability nearing $100 billion. That has prompted 13 credit downgrades just
since 2009. That liability grows by $5 million every day. We cannot tax our way out of this
debt…" (Editorial: A December vote on pension reform?). Commentary: Solutions for Pension Ramp and State RevenueThe current
Pension Ramp does not work for the five public pension systems. The Ramp
entails larger payments today as a result
of the 1995 funding law – Public Act 88-0593 – to pay the pensions systems what
the state owes. There needs to be
a required annual payment from the state to the pension systems; the debt needs
to be amortized for a longer frame of time (a flat payment) just like a home
loan that is amortized; though the initial payment will be more in the
beginning, over the long term it will become a reduced cost and a smaller
percentage of the overall Illinois budget as it is paid off throughout the
years. So-called Pension Reform will not solve the problem.According to the
Center for Tax and Budget Accountability: “Since it passed, Illinois funded the
Pension Ramp as required every year, except FY2006 through 2007. However, the
annual increases in the required contribution under the intended Pension Ramp
vastly outpace natural growth in the state's tax revenue. This reality, coupled
with the constitutional requirement that Illinois balance the budget, meant the
state would have to cut spending significantly on services to fund the Pension
Ramp, particularly in out years. The net result, Illinois' fiscal system
simply could not accommodate the significant contribution increases
contemplated under the Pension Ramp. The first major threat to the Pension
Ramp was averted with the sale of $10 billion of pension obligation bonds.
Then, reverting to past poor fiscal practices, the state significantly
underfunded pensions in FY2006 and FY2007, to maintain, and in some cases
expand, services.“There were years
like 2006 and 2007 in which lawmakers passed legislation that lowered the
contributions for those years to an amount that was below the pension ramp
(those amounts were already less than the employers ARC). In addition to a revenue problem, the pension
ramp was designed in such a way that its unfeasible. Even if Illinois revenue
issue was addressed, the pension ramp would still likely be an issue” (The Unfunded
Pension Liability (and the “Pension Ramp”) from Center for Tax and Budget
Accountability).


Furthermore, what is needed
to solve the budget problems in Illinois is a better revenue base to pay the
statesself-induced debts. What is easier to do is to evade serious
problem solving of the budget issue and to incriminate the states public employees.


The issue at hand is the states regressive tax rate that no one wants to
confront. The public lacks awareness and understanding about the main causes of
the states budget deficits. Legislators, the Civic Committee, Chicago Tribune,
et al. have capitalized on the public's ignorance of the essential causes of
the state's financial debacle by calling for budget cuts and radical pension
reform as the solutions. They are diversionary, scapegoating tactics that will
bring intentional, financial harm to public employees and allow legislators to
escape legal and ethical responsibility.

“At the core of the budget crisis facing [Illinois] is [its] regressive state
tax structure… that is, low-and-middle-income families pay a greater share of
their income in taxes than the wealthy… [A regressive tax] disproportionately
impacts low-income people because, unlike the wealthy, [low-income people] are
forced to spend a majority of their income purchasing basic needs that are
subject to sales taxes” (United for a Fair Economy).

Instead of reformingthe state'stax system, legislators (and their
wealthy subsidizers like the Civic Committee) have focused on radical
pension reform and severe budget cuts to services that the rest of us need.
What do the wealthy and their puppet legislators propose? They propose
sweeping, radical pension reform that will destroy the public employees
defined-benefit pension plans, even though they knowcurrent unfunded
liabilities will not be resolved by pension reform.

Why cant the State of Illinois provide a fair and sound tax system (Illinois
is one of seven states with a regressive flat-rate tax), one that is “efficient
with minimal impact on the economic decisions that taxpayers have to make”
(CTBA), one that captures increased revenues in times of economic growth, one
that maintains revenue collections during poor economic times, one that is
simple and not liable to inconspicuous error, one that is transparent and
builds trust with the states government officials (CTBA), and one that helps
99 percent of the states population?

The answer is most legislators in the State of Illinois prefer the easy way out
of a difficult and challenging situation that they have created. Illinois
legislators will notaddress the most important causes ofthe
state'sbudget deficits: the state's pension debt and
flat-ratetaxation because of their own self-interests and the wealthy one
percent that bankrolls them (from IEA Wants
You to Sign a Petition for a Graduated Income Tax).