A Q&A with Paul Froehlich
Q. Why are you running for this office? Is there a particular issue that motivates you, and if so, what? What will be your main priority?
Paul Froehlich: I have 18 years experience in state and local government, which allows me to be effective in working with other officials and in getting things done. I understand how the system works and know who to talk to. I also have a constituent-friendly local office that works hard to resolve individual problems.
Q. Incumbent, describe your main contributions and the important initiatives you've led. Challenger, tell us what contributions you would make.
Froehlich: Promoting traffic safety is one of my priorities, and I've gotten bills passed in recent years to permit photo-radar speed enforcement in highway construction zones, to prohibit teen drivers from using cell phones, and to limit the number of court supervisions for moving violations to two per year (previously unlimited), among other safety measures. This year I was the chief sponsor of bills that passed to amend the Racial Profiling law to permit police management to use the data gathered to perform internal reviews (HB 335); to create a Men's Health section in the Department of Public Health (HB 204); and to change the form on candidate statements of economic interest to comply with my law last year that ended the mandate to inform officials when someone inspected their statements (HB 3487). I also helped create the Justice Study Committee (SJR9) to review all non-capital wrongful conviction cases.
Q. The 2007 session showed again how heavily legislative action relies on consensus by the governor and legislative leaders. Should rank-and-file legislators play a larger role? If not, why? If so, how can that change be made?
Froehlich: State government has become dysfunctional and legislator frustration has grown accordingly. Legislators should not passively stand by and wait for leadership to work together. Instead, rank-and-file members should form a caucus within each party caucus to insist their leaders work together; I am already discussing this option with several members of my caucus.
Q. Illinois residents will vote in 2008 on whether the state should call a constitutional convention. Do you favor a convention? Why or why not? If yes, what constitutional revisions do you favor?
Froehlich: I was a chief co-sponsor of HR 25, which narrowly passed the House in June to support Con-Con. Illinoisans get only one chance every 20 years to bypass Springfield gridlock to address issues the legislature has refused to. Among the issues that should be addressed at the next Con-Con are these: Reform of school funding to reduce our over-reliance on property taxes; merit selection of judges, at least in the county of Cook; recall power for voters when it comes to state elected officials; open primary where voters do not publicly declare a party; a prohibition on pay-to-play for state contracts; limits on campaign spending.
Q. Do Illinois' ongoing budget problems have their roots in too much spending or too little revenue? Or in some combination of both? Please explain.
Froehlich: Illinois has a structural budget deficit in that the cost of just maintaining our current commitments grows faster than our revenues. The creation of new programs without new revenues aggravates the problem. Our three biggest state responsibilities are education, health care and pensions. The growth in pension obligations alone (due to the huge un-funded liability -- biggest in the nation) consumes almost all of the revenue growth.
Q. Do you favor any changes in the state's funding of schools? If yes, what changes? If you favor no changes, please explain why.
Froehlich: Illinois spends less on education than the EFAB recommendation, which is considered the minimum spending per pupil necessary to fund an adequate education. Because of our over-reliance on property taxes, Illinois has the second largest spending disparity between rich and poor districts of any state. The state's share of education spending reached a record low last year. I support reform of how we fund public education. The key components of reform are the following: A permanent reduction in property taxes, and; an increase in state taxes, and; accountability measures to better assure school districts are financially responsible, and; targeting new funding for programs proven to boost achievement.
Q. Do you favor or oppose putting new state employees on defined-contribution instead of defined-benefit retirement plans? Either way, explain why.
Froehlich: I oppose putting new state employees in a defined-contribution program because it would not save the state money but it would provide fewer benefits for the employees. Defined contribution programs make financial sense in the private sector due to tax laws and portability. An analysis of the public sector, however, by the Center for Tax & Budget Accountability (May 2007) finds that defined contribution systems have significantly higher administrative costs than fully funded defined benefit systems, and that when Nebraska changed to a d-c system, the average benefit was only $11,230 per year compared to $16,797 under the defined benefit system. Lower benefits result in part because individual workers are less skillful investors than the pension system's professionals. Our state's pension problem is caused by chronic under-funding over many decades, not by exorbitant benefits.
Q. Does Illinois currently taxes businesses too heavily, too lightly or the right amount? Please explain and tell us what changes you would favor.
Froehlich: State taxes on business are generally about right. The business climate is less hospitable in Illinois than many other states due to our worker's comp and unemployment comp systems, as well as our liability laws and local taxes. High property taxes on business in Cook County, for example, is a deterrent to business growth.
Q. Should the state lease or sell some assets such as its tollways and the lottery? Why or why not?
Froehlich: The state should move cautiously -- if it moves at all -- in selling or leasing state assets. I oppose selling or leasing the tollway system since it is used -- and paid for -- primarily by people in one part of the state, but the benefits would be distributed statewide. I also oppose selling the lottery since a private business would want to use aggressive marketing techniques to expand sales, despite the social costs.
Q. What issue or issues specific to your legislative district and its residents do you plan to address in Springfield?
Froehlich: Traffic congestion is a major issue in my district. That's a reason I serve on the House Mass Transit Committee and have consistently supported more funding coupled with reform of the RTA system. A healthy and growing mass transit system is good for commuters. In addition, my district will benefit from the proposed STAR rail expansion, which will extend the Blue Line to Schaumburg and Hoffman Estates and then south in an arc to Joliet.
state house, 56th district
One, 2-year term
Paul Froehlich, 57, Schaumburg Democrat. Full-time Illinois state legislator.
Politics: First elected to Legislature in 2002.
Community: Member, Schaumburg Police Pension Board 1997-2003; Chairman, Standby Local Draft Board 1981-2001; Chairman, Schaumburg Village Scholarship Committee 1994-present; member, DuPage Railroad Safety Council 1995-present; advisory board, Illinois State Crime Commission 1997-present.
Family: Wife, Marilyn; children Leanne, 25, Kristin, 23 and Laura, 17.