Sen. Daniel Biss (D-Evanston) speaks on the floor of the Illinois Senate as both the House and Senate consider a pension reform bill at the State Capitol in Springfield.
By Ray Long and Monique GarciaClout Street
5:12 p.m. CST, December 3, 2013
SPRINGFIELD --- The Illinois General Assembly today narrowly approved a major overhaul of the state government worker pension system following hours of debate on the controversial plan strongly opposed by employee unions.
The House voted 62-53 to approve a measure that aims to wipe out a worst-in-the-nation $100 billion pension debt by reducing and skipping cost-of-living increases, requiring workers to retire later and creating a 401(k) option for a limited number of employees. The measure needed a minimum of 60 votes to pass the House. (See how House members voted HERE.)
Moments earlier, the Senate voted for the measure 30-24. The bill needed at least 30 votes. (See how the Senate voted HERE.) The measure now goes to Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn, who has said he'll sign it.
The vote is a major victory for Quinn as he heads into a re-election bid next year.
“Today, we have won. The people of Illinois have won. This landmark legislation is a bipartisan solution that squarely addresses the most difficult fiscal issue Illinois has ever confronted," Quinn said in a statement. “This bill will ensure retirement security for those who have faithfully contributed to the pension systems, end the squeeze on critical education and healthcare services, and support economic growth."
A coalition of union groups blasted the vote and threatened legal action if Quinn signs it.
"This is no victory for Illinois, but a dark day for its citizens and public servants," the statement read. “Teachers, caregivers, police, and others stand to lose huge portions of their life savings because politicians chose to threaten their retirement security."
Mayor Rahm Emanuel issued a statement reminding lawmakers the city of Chicago's pension problems have yet to be fixed.
"The work is far from finished. The pension crisis is not truly solved until relief is brought to Chicago and all of the other local governments across our state that are standing on the brink of a fiscal cliff because of our pension liabilities. Without providing the same relief to local governments, we know that taxpayers, employees, and the future of our state and local economies will remain at risk," Emanuel said in a statement.
During debate, sponsoring Sen. Kwame Raoul urged colleagues to vote in favor. "We cannot continue to be the embarrassment of the nation," said Raoul, D-Chicago.  Sen. Kyle McCarter, R-Lebanon, questioned the promised savings. "I would be much more inclined to support this bill if this bucket didn't have so many holes in it," he said.
Democratic Sen. Linda Holmes of Aurora dismissed House Speaker Michael Madigan’s assertion earlier in the day that pension benefits are “too rich.”
“I believe this was actually more caused by the fact that we as a state did not make our pension payments as we should have even though the employees worked and their full payments were made,” said Holmes, the only member of the special two-chamber special committee that did not sign the legislation that emerged. “So I think a lot of this problem stems from the fact that we actually didn’t do what we were obligated and should have done.”
Despite the opposition, the Senate approved the bill.
In the House, a vote was expected to soon follow. Madigan presented the measure and found himself in the rare position of answering question after question from numerous rank-and-file lawmakers. The key, the long-serving speaker said, is to fix a retirement system for government workers that is broken.
“Something’s got to be done. Something’s got to be done,” said Madigan, D-Chicago.
Rep. Jeanne Ives, R-Wheaton, said the plan falls short and is “short-sighted.”
Citing the bankruptcy crisis unfolding in Detroit, Ives maintained the Illinois needs pension reform immediately but “not just any pension reform.”
Lawmakers on both sides of the issue agreed the issue almost surely will end up in the courts. Unions have threatened to sue, saying the state constitution prohibits reducing pension benefits once they’ve been granted.
Rep. Mike Zalewski, D-Riverside, called the legislation “the meaningful middle” between protecting retiree benefits and the state’s finances. “It’s one of the most important votes we’ll take in this body,” said Zalewski, who sat on a bipartisan House-Senate panel that built a framework for the final deal.
Earlier, a special legislative conference committee advanced the bill. Lawmakers came back into session and quickly headed into closed-door party meetings in each chamber to discuss the controversial cost-cutting pension legislation. The House and Senate are now debating the measure at the same time.