Posted on 04/07/2005 1:00:20 PM PDT by SmithL
SACRAMENTO - In a major reversal, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger today withdrew his support of a pension reform initiative that ignited stiff opposition from police officers and firefighters concerned about losing death benefits.
At a morning press conference, the Republican governor said he would focus on crafting legislation palatable to public safety employees and their unions. Also, Schwarzenegger said he will rewrite the measure, aiming for the June 2006 ballot if he cannot forge a legislative compromise.
``There should be no doubt they will be protected,'' the governor said of police and firefighters. Dropping his current proposal ``will spark a whole new fresh start in the Legislature.''
The dramatic change in direction comes after Schwarzenegger spent days meeting with public safety groups that have assailed the plan with emotional ads featuring tearful widows of cops and others killed in the line of duty.
Unions pointed to Attorney General Bill Lockyer's assessment that the measure, which would move all non-federal government employees to a 401(k)-style pension system in July 2007, would eliminate death and disability benefits. The governor and his aides have said Lockyer's analysis is wrong.
Overhauling the public pension system is one of four pieces of Schwarzenegger's ``reform'' agenda this year. The others are to factor merit in how teachers are paid, redraw legislative districts, and restrict state spending with across-the-board cuts and other measures.
Schwarzenegger has threatened to call a special election this year and take the measures directly to voters, if the Legislature doesn't approve them.
As criticism of the governor's measures mounted, Schwarzenegger's popularity has fallen. A new survey released today said Californians are now evenly split on the governor's performance.
The poll, conducted by San Jose State University's Survey and Policy Research Institute, said the governor's approval rating among voters has dropped to 49 percent. Among all adults questioned about Schwarzenegger, 43 percent approve of his job and 43 percent disapprove, the survey said.
What a man.
Good news! It was a lousy initiative, as devised. It would have cost the state more, despite requiring greater contributions from employees. I hope he has the backbone to pursue a real reform, although his choice of selecting a toothless spending cap tells me he won't.
Now that all his Wall Street contributors won't make a bundle off of a defined contribution system, I wonder if he'll have to give a rebate to his donors.
I might know the answer if I could figure out the question. :-)
What Would Tom McClintock Do?
Thanks! I never would have figured that out. lol.
Get a grip. Do you know anything at all about the CalPers retirement system for public safety officers? Public safety employees can retire at age 50 with 90% pay after 30 years service. That's fifty with a fhe...
The only people facing bankruptcy are the cities and counties who's politicians were greedy enough to make a deal with the devil for police and firefighter union support. The pay off was the heightened exposure to contractual debt. Now they are watching as their general fund obligations for public safety retirement go through the roof and crowds out other needed services.
Spend some time on the issue and then see if you want to lay in with your Little Granny Fieldmouse analogies, 'kay?
Wrong, it would have only applied to new workers. Why can't government workers get by on 402k,s like the taxpayers who pay their salaries?
Only one thing comes to my mind: GIRLY MAN.
Arnold sells out.
That's simply bullsh*t. No public employee who is currently enrolled in the CalPers system would have their pensions or pension accrual methods changed in any way. Public employees hired after 1/2007 would go to a 401k system much like any other employee. The current CalPers system is gauranteed to all current employees and is a contractual obligation. No court is going to allow any 'canceling' of current employee benefits.
The CalPers board of directors is dominated by union officers and politicians beholding to unions. You can google up any number of stories about the ongoing malfeasance of the CalPers board.
As for transfer costs, you can either pay them up front and have them out of the way or amortize them over say, a ten year period. It doesn't matter because these are more or less fixed costs and not ongoing obligations.
I say let's do it...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.