Posted on 05/04/2010 7:43:39 AM PDT by ConjunctionJunction
In February, the White House released its “Annual Report on the Middle Class” containing new regulations favored by Big Labor including a bailout of critically underfunded union pension plans through “retirement security” options.
The radical solution most favored by Big Labor is the seizure of private 401(k) plans for government disbursement -- which lets them off the hook for their collapsing retirement scheme. And, of course, the Obama administration is eager to accommodate their buddies.
Vice President Joe Biden floated the idea, called “Guaranteed Retirement Accounts” (GRAs), in the February “Middle Class” report.
In conjunction with the report’s release, the Obama administration jointly issued through the Departments of Labor and Treasury a “Request for Information” regarding the “annuitization” of 401(k) plans through “Lifetime Income Options” in the form of a notice to the public of proposed issuance of rules and regulations. (pdf)
House Republican Leader John Boehner (Ohio) and a group of House Republicans are mounting an effort to fight back.
The American people have become painfully aware over the past year that elections sometimes have calamitous consequences. Republicans lack the votes (for now) to reign in the Obama administration’s myriad nationalization plans for everything from health care to the automobile industry.
Now the backdoor bulls-eye is on your 401(k) plan and the trillions of dollars the government would control through seizure, regulation and federal disbursement of mandatory retirement accounts.
Boehner and the group are sounding the alarm, warning bureaucrats to keep their hands off of America’s private retirement plans.
Just when you thought it was safe to come up for air after the government takeover of health care.
The entirety of the House GOP Savings Recovery Group letter outling the issue that was sent last night to the Labor and Treasury secretaries:
The Honorable Hilda L. Solis Secretary U.S. Department of Labor 200 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20210
The Honorable Timothy Geithner Secretary U.S. Department of the Treasury 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20210
Dear Secretaries Solis and Geithner:
As members of the Republican Savings Solutions Group, we write today to express our strong opposition to any proposal to eliminate or federalize private-sector defined contribution pension plans, such as 401(k)s, or impose burdensome new requirements upon the businesses, large and small, who choose to offer these plans to their employees.
In the Annual Report of the White House Task Force on the Middle Class, Vice President Biden discussed at length the creation of so-called “Guaranteed Retirement Accounts, (GRAs)” which would provide for protection from “inflation and market risk” and potentially “guarantee a specified real return above the rate of inflation” -- presumably at taxpayer expense. In the Report, the Vice President recommended “further study of these issues.”
The Vice President’s comments are troubling, insofar as they come on the heels of testimony before Congress from supporters of GRAs proposing to eliminate the favorable tax treatment currently afforded to 401(k) plans, and instead use those dollars to fund government-invested GRAs into which all employees would be required to contribute a portion of their salary -- again, with a government subsidy. These advocates would, essentially, dismantle the present private-sector 401(k) system, replacing it instead with a government-run investment plan, the size and scope of which remain to be seen. This despite data showing that 90 percent of households have a favorable opinion of the existing 401(k)/IRA system.
In light of these facts, we write today to express our opposition in the strongest terms to any effort to “nationalize” the private 401(k) system, or any proposal that would dismantle or disfavor the private 401(k) system in favor of a government-run retirement security regime.
Similarly, and more recently, the Departments of Labor and Treasury have jointly issued a “Request for Information” regarding the “annuitization” of 401(k) plans through “Lifetime Income Options.” While we appreciate the Departments’ seeking guidance and information from all parties and stakeholders in advance of regulatory activity, we strongly urge that the Departments not proceed with any regulation in this area before they have carefully and thoroughly considered all of the information received.
More specifically, we urge that the Departments take no action to mandate that plan sponsors -- often, small businesses -- include a “lifetime income” or “annuitization” option if they choose to offer a 401(k) plan to their employees, or that beneficiaries take some or all of their retirement savings in such an option. Data shows that 70 percent of Americans oppose the concept of a mandated annuity or government payout of their 401(k) plan. On a more fundamental level, Congress should not be in the business of choosing “winners” and “losers” among retirement security stakeholders. Instead, we urge the Departments to make it easier for employers to include retirement income solutions in their savings plans and to help workers learn more about the value of their retirement savings as a source of retirement income. Finally, to the extent new mandates and bureaucratic red tape from Washington push small employers out of the business of offering these plans to their employees, we would submit such an effort weakens, rather than strengthens retirement security.
We appreciate your consideration of our views in these important matters and stand ready to work with you and the Administration to promote secure and adequate retirement savings for all Americans.
Sincerely,
House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) Rep. John Kline (R-MN) Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI) Rep. Sam Johnson (R-TX) Rep. Dean Heller (R-NV) Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-KY) Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) Rep. Pat Tiberi (R-OH) Rep. Bob Latta (R-OH) Rep. Erik Paulsen (R-MN) Rep. Lynn Jenkins (R-KS) Rep. Ed Royce (R-CA) Rep. Buck McKeon (R-CA)
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/bio/userletter/?letter_id=4537853451
The above is a letter from a Republican senator from MO. which he wrote to the governor in Jan. of this year. In the letter, the senator references one of the links I have in my comment about the Governors Council and he also quotes a poster from Free Republic!
After reading the letter, my understanding is that the Feds now have the right under declared martial law to command the national guard - if there is a “catastrophic event”. This right was obtained through legislation passed by Congress under Bush. Obama inherited that power and he has expanded it by executive order the bottom line of which is he now has the ability to declare martial law without a catastrophic event requirement.
With regard to the National Guard therefore, it looks like Obama thinks he can command them directly if martial law is declared but the power to command them is still also with the Governor. If the Governor does not agree with Obama and countermands his orders to the Guard, I guess it would ultimately be up to the guard itself to decide who has the superior authority. I believe the guard would stand with the Governor.
I'm sure you're aware that, in these politically correct days, Truth is not permitted. Displays of anger are not permitted. Any example of patriotism is not permitted.
You are not permitted to comment on that class of your skinhead, bloused boot, black gloved overlords that wander around ripped on 'roids, itching to get a chance to use their newly issued M-4 automatic weapons on "civilians."
You have to wonder what will happen when Iraqi/Afghani tactics come back Home...
Thank you for that link! Greisheimer is my state rep. He’s always been considered a rino but I have to say, I’m impressed that he was on this. Yes, this was initiated under Bush in case of a ‘catostrophic event’. The fact that they were so secretive about it and would not allow the order to be reviewed is disturbing, but jmo...I do not believe or will ever believe that Pres Bush’s intentions were nefarious. It probably resulted in the thinking post Katrina whereby the gov of LA refused to act and Bush somehow got the blame. Whatever the reason though what started out as most likely a logical thought got hijacked (as with all laws) and further expanded for insidious reasons.
All that said, the Guard is effectively nationalized now. I truly hope you are right that the Guard will follow the Governors should a ‘conflict’ in orders happens. Our gov is on the council of governors and a democrat; I have little hope he will do anything to shore up our rights as a state or even attempt to call up the Guard to protect us from a major domestic conflict with the federal government.
Connecting the dots on what is going on is not hard to do and imo there is preparation being made against us. There are things going on in my own town, which I won’t address here..but things that have caught my attention.
Thanks again NB. May God intervene in this situation and free us from what is coming.
(that is terrific about the FReeper being quoted! There are some extremely impressive members here)
I didn’t mean it personally, and re-reading my post, accept my apology, as it was coarse.
Background: Non-military, but primary care physician who has a 35% patient population who is Tricare Prime/Standard (and their dependents). Thus, when a vet wants me to write a letter to the VA stating that his hemorrhoids are due to Agent Orange, so he can boost that “service connected” disability, he is a part of that 10% you speak of. I think it is probably closer to 20%, but don’t estimate myself as more knowledgeable than you.
Regardless, 50% of my patients are Medicare. Thus, 85% of my pay comes from the government. I work very hard for it, and sometimes several times a year, the reimbursement for my services are cut off or lowered until congress votes on stop-gap measures.
Effectively, I am also a government check receiver. With the war(s) and Barry’s centralization, a majority of us who work (and who do not!) are now dependent upon the FedGov teet - and we rate that as a necessity and will fight accordingly. We talk broadly, but we vote our paycheck (especially if family is involved). We are thus statists, reinforcing this malignant (and ultimately, terminal) relationship. You have no more right or authority to claim disability monies that I do Social Security - both transactions we invested towards with a promise of return. I also sign a Medicare and Tricare contract every two years.
The problem is that there hasn’t been enough wealth to pay for those promises for quite some time. FedGov knows this, and it is hardly concealed from the voting public. Since every politicians first-most and greatest desire is to remain in office (and ALSO RECEIVE TAXPAYER BENEFITS), the easiest and obvious short-term strategy is to let us continue to believe our “cut” is the top most priority. It isn’t, but as long as you and I continue to fight over it, we exchange security for fear and anger, and they receive the security.
It is wrong, and it has got to stop. Going further, I would say we must stop it, or it will stop on its own accord (scarcity, once the future variable is exploited, will render it unsustainable) and hurt us ALL much worst than if we changed it on our own.
The country of our Grandfathers would have fixed this; that was a time when many would have walked away from Social Security or Medicare Disability - out of pride and altruism, “give it to someone who needs it,” and depended more heavily upon family, church and community. Now, you and I both would think that someone who turned down the tentacles of a FedGov benefit would be insane.
This is no longer the country we like to wax nostalgic over.
With the current borders and population composition, it won’t be again.
Mike
“Some people believe that armed citizens don’t stand a chance against an army, especially one as powerful as USA. This is the BS lie all governments around the world want you to believe, but the reality is very different.
If every block in the country, USA for example, has a dozen men with fire arms, the one that doesn’t stand a chance is the military force. It’s the perfect guerrilla setup, and a general’s worst nightmare.
You can’t nuke or level every block. You can’t arrest the entire country. The “fighters” are already armed, fed, spread out, integrated and infiltrated into the military and government branches. It’s impossible to win."
Fernando Ferfal Aguirre (SURVIVING THE ECONOMIC COLLAPSE )
I just read that last night as a matter of fact. He’s a member on here. He has a blog that I intended on visiting because he is speaking from experience and sounds very knowledgeable.
You are right, we must all start thinking about these issues now. Did you hear that a refinery is on fire in San Antonio? 18 wheeler blew up... I do not believe in coincidences. There was also a small explosion at the Bush Airport yesterday.
Lest we forget, God Bless those who really need this help and will never have what could be considered a normal life again.
The author’s screen name is FerFAL308. Travis McGee told me. We both think it is the best “survival” book you can buy.
One poster on the 18 wheeler thread made this list:
Then you have the attempts at NYC, Philadelphia, and the exploding bag just this week...
Thank you for that list. I was digging through my ‘self comments’ today because I have that list but couldn’t locate it. I think a separate thread with these incidents should be started. I’ll do that later after church, if someone else hasn’t by then. No, I don’t think it is the fickle fate of finger either; clearly there is something happening.
I will be getting that book too but right now hopefully his blog has some highlights on it.
They'll take 401K money from those who saved and give it to those who were too lazy, impatient, or greedy to put aside some money for the future. Yeah, that'll work...
No, I just like getting out from under debt. The Founders had some choice words about debt.
I would like to point out that, as a Senator, he did not have the authority to call out the Guard, since he is not Governor. :) It was likely just a PR stunt for the election year.
I agree. If it was a stunt to curry favor with voters, he should have asked the Governor not Washington.
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.