– Ken Previti is a retired Illinois teacher now living in Florida. He blogs at Reclaim Reform.
The teachers in Illinois, and elsewhere, are facing a FUD moment. (FUD is the acronym for Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. This is the vile marketing-propaganda strategy for causing confusion and harm to competitors.) When two or three identical products or candidates use FUD to damage competitors and people in general, issues become nearly impossible to ascertain.
Billionaire Tea Party Republican gubernatorial candidate, Bruce Rauner, is opposed in the primary by the recent chairman of ALEC, Kirk Dillard. Their ads blame each other for not being severe enough in ideology.
The IEA has attempted to show leadership in one way or another. They chose to endorse and fund Dillard – for now. Why?
The Democratic candidate and incumbent, Gov. Pat Quinn, signed the pension cuts and other assorted anti-teacher, anti-union, anti-public education bills. He will probably be endorsed and funded by these same unions during the November elections. Why?
Adolph Reed Jr. in March’s edition of Harper’s magazine explains the process precisely.
“Each election now becomes a moment of life-or-death urgency that precludes dissent or even reflection. For liberals (*such as teachers who expect their deferred compensation, pensions, to be honored as required by the state constitution), there is only one option in an election year and that is to to elect. at whatever cost, whichever Democrat is running. This modus operandi has tethered what remains of the left to a Democratic Party that has long since renounced its commitment to any sort of redistributive vision and imposes a willed amnesia on political debate. True, the last Democrat was really unsatisfying, but this one is better; true, the last Republican didn’t bring destruction of the universe, but this one certainly will.” * My addition. Read the full article, “Nothing Left,” HERE.
Identical products sold as separate incomparable products is familiar to anyone who purchased a Ford Ranger – Mazda B Series automobile. The three way gubernatorial analogy is the GMC Yukon – Chevrolet Tahoe – Cadillac Estralade.
The Illinois gubernatorial non-choices are Kirk Dillard – Pat Quinn – Bruce Rauner.
All three are serving the interests of the corporations in the Civic Committee of the private Commercial Club of Chicago and the billionaires who control it.
Why is the IEA endorsing and funding any of these candidates?
REALITY: The teachers and all Illinois voters have been effectively disenfranchised from the gubernatorial election. The choices they are given are meaningless to their interests.
REALITY: The IEA and other union leaders, present and recently past leaders, has/had not sought, created or funded pro-labor candidates when it was possible. Leaders such as Cinda Klickna are not willing to admit they displayed no leadership when it counted.
REALITY: Without a meaningful choice available, disenfranchised voters need to realize that their only true voting booth choice for governor is NONE OF THE ABOVE – blank. No choice means no choice. Why keep the money wasting charade going?
REALITY: All IEA money should be spent on local candidates who are pro-teacher and pro-union.
REALITY: The posturing by IEA and other union leaders at this point merely makes them FUD accomplices as they seek to maintain their own jobs and social positions. The IEA is actively destroying its own credibility with its non-transparent decision processes and ineffective byzantine political game-playing.
Reality as stark as this is very difficult to face.
Fred Klonsky 
Wouldn’t I like to see a type A personality as the IEA president. The lack of IEA leadership has cost us dearly. Impeach, resign, something before we give away the farm. If I can see the damage she is doing, why can’t she?
Yes! We can do much like many democrats did in 2000 when they voted for Ralph Nader because they did not like Gore. George Bush won the election. And how did THAT work out for the country?!!? (I’ve also always felt that the Hippies in Grant Park, because they did not like LBJ, helped Nixon beat Humphrey in ’68. Now how did THAT turn out?!!?) STOP RAUNER NOW!!!!!! Show the power of ALL unions and the working class!!!!!! Put some respect and even fear of the working class into politicians, and then four years from now be able to endorse a true friend of labor!!!!
I had the opportunity to talk with Senator Bill Cunningham and Representative Kelly Burke at a town hall meeting here on the south suburbs this morning. I wanted to ask them about their position on possible future cuts to the pension system, given that all of the corporate special interests have stated that complete elimination of the pension systems is what is necessary if Illinois is to survive. I also wanted to ask them about the system of corporate welfare in the state and what they are specifically doing to push for a progressive tax in Illinois. Mind you, both of these are Democrats that are routinely endorsed by the IEA.
Senator Cunningham, said to me that he will carefully consider proposals to reform the pensions of City of Chicago workers.
“Don’t you have members of your family that are teachers in Chicago?” I asked him.
“Yes,” he said.
“You would vote to cut their pension?” I asked.
“I will be taking a close look at the bill.” he replied.
He also indicated that while the believes that the Senate supports a progressive income tax, the House is far from supporting the idea.
Representative Burke, was adamant about the fact that projections she has been studying with respect to a progressive income tax indicate that there would be no new significant revenue generated with a progressive income tax.
“Haven’t you looked at Ralph Matire’s framework?” I asked her.
“His projections are way too optimistic.” she stated.
“Then how do you propose to fix Illinois fiscal condition? I asked
She then stated that the legislature is requesting to see other models from different groups. I took this to mean that she was not in favor of a progressive tax at this time. And then she explain to me the merits of “shared sacrifice” and that I have come to her with pre-conceived notions of what the problems are with Illinois fiscal condition. I was truly shocked by her ability to talk through me and I cannot begin to express how angry I was when she spoke to me this way.
This sent my train of thought way off mark and I wish I would have been smarter to respond back to her. Instead, I held back for fear I would say something to her far from respectful in tone.
Why is she endorsed by IEA? What work has IPACE done to be convince that she deserves our support?
In general, I walked away with these impressions:
1. There will not be a progressive tax in Illinois for a very long time if the attitude in Springfield in anyway reflects the beliefs of these two so-called Democrats.
2. Additional reforms to our pension benefits are fair game. A court decision that favors Senate Bill 1 will open the door, wide-open, to additional cuts to our benefits.
3. Nobody in Springfield thinks for themselves. These two are perfect examples. They are waiting to be told by great forces, whoever those forces may be (Madigan, Cullerton, special interests) to put a bill in front of them so they can choose to vote yes or no.
Jerry,
The only thing I would add to your impressions is that even if the courts overturn SB1 (which I believe thy will) the General Assembly will not address the revenue issue. They will come at us again, perhaps with something like SB2404. No matter which way the courts go, they will be back at us again, or for more.
I agree with Jerry. I had a similar telephone conversation with Rep. Al Riley last year during the pension debate. He asked that I email him my ideas on how to solve the pension crisis and call him back in a couple of weeks. When I did call him back I got the typical runaround. The conversation started off cordial at first, then he became defensive and hostile. He mentioned, “Do you know how many emails I get? I can’t possibly read every one!” “There aren’t any solutions to the pension problem I haven’t heard…yours wouldn’t be new!” “Let me tell about the reality and the political reality of Springfield.” After his long diatribe of almost 10 minutes I finally interrupted him. He exploded at me, telling me to stop yelling at him (I never even raised my voice…I just dared to pose a question.) and not question his judgment. He quickly ended the conversation with, “Thanks for your call. I have things to do.”
I believe we get these types of legislators because of gerrymandering. It’s a rigged game. If someone else does run against “the forces of Madigan” their petitions are challenged by a legal office in Springfield. I know this by checking out many of the candidates at the election website. This happened to the young man who was going to challenge Riley in my district.
I agree that all election ballots should include “None of the above.” I wrote an article over 15 years ago stating this. In order for a candidate to be elected they must receive 50.1% of the vote. If they don’t, they are no longer eligible to run for that office. And the process starts again.
The bottom line is that the election process has been so corrupted by the money-power structure that it’s damaged irrepairably. It’s no longer government, “By the people, of the people, and for the people.”
I talked to Representative Andrade (40th) during the last Lobby Day in February. I told him that he had voted to cut my wife’s pension and that the word on the street was that he was getting ready to gut my pension next. I wanted to know how this could be moral. I think I used the word justice. Andrade ignored that part of my question. He said that the courts might throw the legislation out, but if that happened “We will simply go back in the light of the Supreme Court decision and craft new legislation to reduce the pension obligation.” He said they would repeat that process as many times as it would take.
I was astonished at his bluntness. We simply didn’t matter. I think the Democrats are confident we have no choice but to roll over and vote for them. We have only ourselves to blame. We let this situation build. We should have made it our business to ensure there would always be a political alternative on the ballot.