Are You Aware of the Corporate Bait-and-Switch of Public Pensions in Illinois and Elsewhere?
“…The goals of the plot against pensions are
both straightforward and deceptive. On the surface, the primary objective is to
convert traditional defined-benefit pension funds that guarantee retirement income
into riskier, costlier schemes that reduce benefits and income guarantees, and
subject taxpayers and millions of workers’ retirement funds to Enron’s
casino-style economics. At the same time, waging a high-profile fight for such an
objective also simultaneously helps achieve the conservative movement’s larger
goal of protecting profligate corporate subsidies.
“The bait-and-switch at work is simple: The
plot forwards the illusion that state budget problems are driven by pension
benefits rather than by the far more expensive and wasteful corporate subsidies
that states have been doling out for years. That ends up 1) focusing state
budget debates on benefit-slashing proposals and therefore 2) downplaying
proposals that would raise revenue to shore up existing retirement systems. The
result is that the Pew-Arnold initiative at once helps the right’s ideological
crusade against traditional pensions and helps billionaires and the business
lobby preserve corporations’ huge state tax subsidies…
“In bequeathing its brand to an
Enron billionaire and embracing this campaign, Pew is being steered back toward
its ultraconservative roots. In the process, the retirement security of
millions of Americans is being jeopardized…
“The National Association of State Retirement
Administrators says, ‘The idea of imminent (public pension) insolvency is a
gross distortion.’ It is also why the head of the Milken Institute’s Center for
Emerging Domestic Markets concludes that the manageable pension problem ‘in
this moment is revenue’ – not allegedly unaffordable retirement benefits. And
it is why the attempt to create the perception of a ‘crisis’ as a means to
slash guaranteed retirement income –
rather than raise public revenue – is so deceptive.
“In repeatedly refusing to devote the money
needed to fulfill states’ negotiated obligations to public pension funds,
lawmakers for years have effectively raided their workers’ retirement benefits
to finance subsidies to already wealthy corporations – many of which are
undoubtedly those lawmakers’ major campaign donors.
“When the housing crisis hit,
the stock market’s subsequent crash should have prompted legislators to slash
corporate subsidies, close tax loopholes and return more of the raided money to
pensioners. After
all, as The
Washington Post’s Ezra Klein points out, ‘Republicans
and some Democrats and business interests passed (the) massive unfunded tax
cuts that turned pension programs into ticking time bombs.’ Those tax cuts
could have just as easily been repealed when the stock market dropped…
“Instead, though, those business
interests that want their subsidies and tax breaks preserved have convinced
politicians to blame public workers’ alleged greed and cite the pension
shortfalls as reason to radically change the pension system for the long haul…”
For this Complete 32-page Report
(with footnotes), Click Here.
I have read it. Please READ IT too.
This is a partisan issue with both sides having money at risk. IMHO it would be best to take from both parties.
ReplyDelete