“A statewide pension system would involve consolidating various municipal pension systems into one pension system. Under the mayor’s [reported] proposal, not only would the plan be to consolidate it but the state would become responsible for funding various pensions plans,” said Carol Spain, director of U.S. Public Finance at S&P Global.

“[The system] would relieve the local government from needing to levy property taxes or other local taxes to pay for their pension plan,” she said.

But not everybody’s on board. Gov. J.B. Pritzker said Monday at an event celebrating Illinois’ new capital program that the state’s near-junk status would prohibit it from taking on Chicago’s pension woes.

“There are not liabilities that can be adopted by the state that would not drive us into junk status,” he said.

Spain and Daniel Hertz, research director at the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability, join us in discussion.

Too often, major policy initiatives get framed as "either-or" propositions. This is understandable, given how politically driven the legislative process is. Portraying a potential reform as a stark choice between doing what's right, or supporting an alternative that's wrong, is a great way to instill party discipline and gain political advantage. It also ignores the reality that in most complex policy areas, following best practices usually incorporates more of a "both-and" approach, than the politically favored "either-or." A tax systems should incorporate revenue sources that promote both: tax fairness, by responding to ability to pay; and fiscal stability, by ensuring revenues don't fall too precipitously during poor economic cycles.  This isn't a cause of "either-or," but rather "both-and."