Posted on 12/28/2006 6:54:07 PM PST by NormsRevenge
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Thursday he will appoint a bipartisan commission to study the growing cost of funding state public pensions and retiree health benefits.
The governor said the mounting costs, mostly due to health care, "remain one of the biggest problems facing governments everywhere" and threaten to take money away from education, public safety, environmental protection and health care for the poor.
Over time, the state will have to come up with between $40 and $70 billion to pay for the health benefits promised to retired state workers, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office. To do that, the LAO says the state should set aside an extra $6 billion a year.
The alternative is cutting benefits, but that is politically explosive. Public employees derailed a proposal Schwarzenegger supported in 2005 to privatize the state retirement system for new employees and can be expected to resist any attempt to cut back on health benefits.
This time, the governor is going much more slowly and trying to gain the cooperation of Democrats. The 12-member commission - half of whom will be appointed by the governor, the other half by Democratic leaders - has a year to ponder the problem.
"I think this approach is better," said Yvonne Walker, a vice president for SEIU Local 1000, which represents 87,000 state workers. "This is such a huge problem. It's not something you're going to be able to solve easily."
She added that she expects her union will have a seat on the commission.
Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, said the question of how to pay for retiree benefits "merits careful study" and pleaded for patience while the commission does its work.
Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, D-Los Angeles, issued a statement supporting the commission but opposing privatization of the state retirement system.
California's two main public retirement systems have unfunded pension liabilities, partly because their investment portfolios fell when the dot-com bubble burst. More problematic is the rising cost of health benefits for current and future retirees. The state has not set aside funds to pay for them.
New accounting rules require public agencies to look at the future cost of health benefits and report them starting in 2008. The amounts are expected to be staggering. Nationwide, unfunded liabilities could be as high as $600 billion to $1.3 trillion, according to JP Morgan Chase & Co.
When he's done, he can come to New Jersey to find out where our tax money is going and to whom for what service. There's double/triple/etc. retirement dipping here. Hnnnh?
Whenever the words "a bipartisan commission to study" are found together, the true meaning is "I want to kick problem X down the road, but look as if I'm doing something."
Here we go again, the "sellout commission" to the liberal agenda.
Now, for all the retiree's who the rest of the taxpayers will be forced to support, i.e., pure socialism....for the "common good"
In fact I doubt any government in history has been able to balance its budget on the backs of the retirees.
What you have to do is control expenses as you go forward. All Schwarzenegger and his little friends want to do is find a new source of existing state resources to divert to some project they wish to do. His successors will attempt to do the same.
Look, when people signed on for the jobs they were doing the retirement package was part of the deal. Only a cowardly thief would want to stiff the elderly out of their earned benefits.
Absolutely. However, if their "contract" for employment included retirement health insurance benefits, they are entitled to them.
Where there were restrictions or no benefit guarantees, I (as a taxpayer), do not want to pay the premiums for those who do not have coverage. I already am paying premiums for those on Medicaid, and to add socialized medicine taxes to my income for the benefit of others is PURE socialism (aka, wealth re-distribution)
Don't blame me, I voted for McClintock.
Health benefits for retirees have been part of the picture in most large corporations and governments since WWII. There would be a diminishingly small number of California retirees who didn't have health benefits as part of their retirement.
Health benefits for retirees have been part of the picture in most large corporations and governments since WWII. There would be a diminishingly small number of California retirees who didn't have health benefits as part of their retirement.
You can see the hand writing on the wall here. GM, Ford and now CA all want to get rid of their health care responsibilities. Solution will be to give it to Uncle Sugar.
Either that or they will float a new $50 Billion bond issue to fund it..with future tax dollars.
All of us are having our health care premiums rise and coverage shrink. Contract or no.
I don't think that retirement benefits are the issue here. The issue is socialized medicine, where those who have NO health care benefits, due to personal non-purchase and/or jobs that don't include benefits, getting health care benfits from a socialized state (where taxpayers are forced to fund medical coverage for others).
The illegal aliens, for example, pay nothing for medical insurance, and just show up at the emergency rooms and the non-paying service is recovered through increased medical insurance premiums to OTHERS to offset the cost, and/or through TAXPAYERS who will be subsidizing services to non-payers in a socialized medicine scheme.
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.