Public pension reform bill inked

September 12, 2012

Gov. Jerry Brown

Gov. Jerry Brown Tuesday called the state’s public pension system “a big ship” which is slowly being turned in the right direction by reform legislation he’s set to sign. (Sacramento Bee)

But faced with complaints that the pension reduction bill did not go far enough, the governor said it is “the most that could be gotten” at this time. Republicans joined in supporting the measure but added to the chorus for more significant changes.

Under provision of the new law, employees will pay at least half the cost of their pensions. Unions will five years to incorporate the increase as contracts are renegotiated.

“Is it enough? No,” Brown told Bay Area editorial writers.

When participants suggested that the new bill doesn’t go far enough toward meaningful reform, Brown said, “Let’s get real here, folks. You’re sitting around this table writing stories or thinking thoughts. I am in Sacramento. I’ve got to get things done. I didn’t say this was the end” (of any effort to reduce pension costs).

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I tried to, but could not, find details of this bill signed by Jerry. Can anyone help me, or has anyone really looked at the nitty, gritty details.

More power to anyone that can really get the public pension system under control is to be appaulded, but

I am very concerned that much of the ‘so-called’ reforms are words only. For example:

1. Does this apply to current retirees?

2. Does this apply to public employees that are currently employed?

3.. Or does it apply ONLY to new employees that have not yet started employement?

And is it only applicable to state public employees? How about educational institutions? How about cities?

I also would wager a decent bet that no matter what the written rules are – there will be many organizations, institutions, cities, etc. that will figure ways to get around to new rules. Such as : just increase salaries more (make up for the added benefits that employees would have to make).

The proof is always in the pudding. I would like to see and know that these reforms will have a true

impact. Reducing pension benefits, while increasing salariers or other means, will have no real impact\

of the exceedingly high overall compensation payout.

Too little, too late…

This affliction is plaguing most states and none want to face the facts. Unfunded or underfunded pensions for public employes was stupid to begin with and today we face that stupidity head on…

Simply put: kill the private sector and your pensions suffer. Heck, your very job and pseudo-careers will suffer. Eventually (fed can only digitize so much debt before even liberal progressives figure it out).

Ironically, most public pension funds are tied directly to the very entity most public agencies are destroying: the private sector.

Wasn’t CALPERS and other CA pension funds heavily invested in COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE? I suppose when your “career” is limiting, harassing, and out-right destroying the private sector – and the private sector begins to “go away” (flee the state) then the pension funds suffer. We all suffer.

The old saying of “spitting in the plate you eat from” comes to mind regarding the public sector’s view of the private sector. In California, we’ve been so indoctrinated to hate, distrust, and shun anything corporate or private business that it’s just ingrained into our society.

Silly question but do the people who vote at the top receive public pensions? Just seems rational that public pensions are public pensions regardless of which pocket they come from.

The irony of liberalism is that they often believe in the “one pie” theory of wealth when they desire wealth distribution or “taxing the rich” etc. But when it comes to PUBLIC spending, somehow there are now many pies, each being earmarked for various fiefdoms.

“Politics is the art of the possible.”, Otto von Bismarck.

Why not just suck it up and do it right the first time. Get the pain over with…..

Because politics is the art of C ON T R O L.