November 17, 2011
Pension Reform Bill on its Way to Passing Passes
According to members of the RI press corps providing blow-by-blow coverage of the pension reform bill floor debates via Twitter (Ted Nesi, Ian Donnis, Bill Rappleye), save for an initial amendment backed by leadership that doesn't seem to make any major changes, debate on amendments in the RI House of Representatives has closed with no other amendments being passed, and the Senate has already passed the final bill with the same amendment that was added in the House, and no other amendments formally considered.
UPDATE:
And just as I post the above item, Ted Nesi tweets...
Amdmt that passed from leaders includes 5.5% tax on state contractors as labor wanted. Earhardt says that will be a problem.So I guess it's still accurate to say there were no major changes to the actual pension plan, just the addition of a new tax.
UPDATE II:
The House has passed the pension reform bill, by a vote of 57-15. The 15 Reps who voted against were...
Carnevale, DaSilva, DeSimone, Dickinson, Fellela, Guthrie, Hull, Jacquard, Johnston, Lima, Medina, Menard, Messier, Palumbo, San Bento
UPDATE III:
Rhode Island General Treasurer Gina Raimondo has made her public statement celebrating the passage of the pension reform bill...
This legislation represents the culmination of 11 months of thoughtful analysis and input from all stakeholders. It is affordable, sustainable and secure.The legislation will:
- Save taxpayers approximately $4 billion over the next 24 years.
- Keep costs steady and predictable for taxpayers for decades to come, while sharing the risk fairly among all groups – state employees, teachers, municipal employees and taxpayers.
- Provide retirement security to all of our public employees.
- Immediately reduce the unfunded liability by about $3 billion.
- Bring the funding status of the state-administered pension system from 48 percent funded to over 60 percent funded and put it on a healthy path.
Why are "taxpayers" always the last stakeholders mentioned?
Posted by: Bucket Chick at November 17, 2011 8:24 PMJust like that, eh?
Folks, the fix was in. Unfortunately, most Rhode Islanders will have forgotten the debate by the time the real detrimental effects are truly felt. The interim test will be how many of the great majorities of legislators who voted for this face the unions' wrath. My bet is that not very many find their voted held against them.
Posted by: Justin Katz at November 17, 2011 8:26 PMI'm waiting for the quid pro quo. Nothing is free. Will we see binding arbitration passed as an appeasement for these pension votes?
Posted by: Bucket Chick at November 17, 2011 8:44 PM"Bring the funding status of the state-administered pension system from 48 percent funded to over 60 percent funded"
Less than a quarter of the shortfall covered Year One??? And many years, if ever, before this reform gets the pension system even 80% funded.
Hey, Justin, how much in interest is the taxpayer picking up because our officials chose to re-amortize such a large amount?
Labor should be kissing Gina Raimondo's feet. Fortunately, they won't -- they'll sue. Bring on that court injunction - a budget anarchist's best friend.
Posted by: Monique at November 17, 2011 9:36 PM$1.8 billion. Properly speaking, though, that's.not money paid in interest, but money that won't be earned in returns.
Posted by: Justin Katz at November 17, 2011 11:53 PM Very interesting - I don't see many liberals among those who opposed the bill.
Personally, since Gina has promised to support legislators who approved the bill in contested races, I can't wait to see her stumping for Bob Watson and Dan Gordon next year.
It is interesting that of the Dems who opposed the bill,some are on the conservative end of the spectrum.
Posted by: joe bernstein at November 18, 2011 8:32 AMIt's also interesting that neither Pichardo nor Diaz voted-I guess if it doesn't benefit illegal aliens they could sh*t care less.
Posted by: joe bernstein at November 18, 2011 8:34 AM"Labor should be kissing Gina Raimondo's feet. Fortunately, they won't -- they'll sue."
I thought Trillo brought up an interesting amendment. Use money from the pension fund to defend the lawsuits. So basically the unions are paying for the attorneys on both sides. It was defeated 65-3.
Posted by: Patrick at November 18, 2011 8:51 AMReally Joe? Who in that list of 15 do you consider conservative? Don't make me throw up by saying Palumbo. His stance on illegals does not make him a conservative.
Posted by: Don Botts at November 18, 2011 11:15 AMHull and Jacquard aren't exactly flaming liberals.
Menard isn't that liberal either.
As far as Palumbo goes,he's a social conservative,but apparently not a fiscal conservative.
Additionally,the three active duty police officers in the GA probably voted no because of the perceived inequity they can see coming between state and local law enforcement.
Hull and Johnston and one of the others are still working as active police officers.