SES OFFICES? "PEOPLE IN GLASS HOUSES SHOULDN"T THROW STONES"!
This time it is spreading misinformation and errors of omission about the serious public pension problem. It does not help one iota in the effort to educate — or collaborate — on complex public policy issues. Instead, it just sounds like a bunch of grumpy, or outright angry, ideologues.
No one denies that we need to tackle pension reform — that’s old news. Stockton may file for bankruptcy — something that has been anticipated for years, largely because of the city’s overly ambitious growth strategy (which imploded when the housing bubble burst and tax receipts dried up). If anything that should be the cautionary tale — just as in the City of Lincoln, which faces its own financial challenges because of unbridled growth.
And in Southern California, the City of Bell’s financial mismanagement — almost laughable — also is well documented.
But the good (and recent) news is that many governments are taking steps to address public pension reform — and they are collaborating:
•In fact, our Democratic Governor Jerry Brown has called for public pension reform, with support from Republicans. Both sides are working together to get a measure on the November ballot for voters to approve. “GOP backs Jerry Brown’s plan on pensions” in the Sacramento Bee is here.
•Our local governments — in Grass Valley, Nevada City and the county — have all been working to reduce their pension obligations. They also are negotiating cost cutting plans with their public unions. Nevada City, where a SES Foundation supporter is the ex-City Treasurer, has adopted a two-tiered benefit program for medical insurances and pensions.
But “Rebane’s Ruminations” (AKA, “Rebane’s Rant”) missed all of this in it’s “old-saw” report this morning on pension reform. None of the positive developments were mentioned — it was all negative. (Creepy, anonymous personal attacks by George’s like-minded friends occur regularly on his blog too — further undermining its credibility for rational dialogue).
In his post, Rebane quoted from the group’s alarmist report “Unfunded liabilities — our community’s fiscal time bombs,” which I’ve brought up before.
“The County of Nevada’s pension plan is underfunded by approximately $48.137 million (as of June 30, 2006),” the report said. “The cities of Grass Valley and Nevada City have an undisclosed debt of over $4 million and $677.000, respectively.”
But in an article in The Union in 2008, public officials suggested the report left out some key points:
“Deputy County Executive Officer Joe Christoffel said McDaniel’s figure of $48.1 million represents what the county would be short if it had to pay off all its pension liabilities immediately.
“The county actually has $188 million in market value assets in its CalPERS pension fund and pays its required contributions to CalPERS every year, Christoffel said.
“I envision it will continue to be met, and things are stable at this point,” Christoffel said. He added that county employees can only go through CalPERs for a savings program at work.
After throwing the county officials under the bus, Rebane concedes (in parenthesis) toward the bottom of his report that it is a “very well run county.” So what’s the point then?
“Sierra Economics and Science Foundation was created to bring reason and clarity to the issues facing Nevada County,” according to its website.
The Board members are:
George Rebane, PhD, Director of Research
Mike McDaniel, AAMS, Director of Public Relations
Russ Steele, Lt Col USAF (Ret), Executive Director and Director of Information
Ronald Knaus, PhD, Director of Environmental Research
Barry Pruett, Esq, Director of Legal Research,
Gil Mathew, Director of Economic Research
Memo to SES Foundation: “People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.”
The group’s status has been listed as “delinquent” with the state Attorney General’s office because its accounting dates were wrong for five years — an elementary mistake.
Instead of bashing government with broad brush strokes, let’s continue to work together to address the pension crisis.
Filed under: Uncategorized
Pension reform is a serious issue and needs to be addressed…all the more reason to address it rationally and support the steps being advanced on a bi-partisan basis… rather than using it as a political football to try to diminish the role of government in our society, which is what these guys are really after.
They are using pension reform as a stalking horse for their anti-union, anti-government, ‘drown government in the bathtub’ agenda.
You are right…Tis all this is about! Like the destruction of the postal service, putting billions aside for pensions 75 years from now for those not yet born.
Same thing looks to play out at local level.
Republicans are just great at destroying anything but BREAKS for the Rich and WIN at any cost, destroy everything in your path, thus nothing left to govern.
Schools and what is taught in them are already targets for revisionist. In one State the Right is trying to remove any reference to slavery; just did not happen. Wonder if that is on the agenda next in NORCAL after they move from the Pension Reform???
By the way, are you following the fascinating story coming out from some Secretaries of State that they are opposing the planning closing of post offices because it will affect mail in voting in the Presidential election and disenfranchise rural voters? Unintended consequences…
RE: Unintended consequences…
GIVING THE TRACK RECORD RECENTLY ON THIS ISSUE, I WOULD THINK IT IS THE EXACT INTENDED CONSEQUENCE.
BEING TOTALLY DISABLED GIVES ME THREE HOURS A DAY WHILE I AM STILL KICKIN’ TO LISTEN TO THOM HARTMANN. SENATOR BERNIE SANDERS IS ALL OVER THIS. SEE Bernie.org for some real truths, as well as his official Senate site.
THE ONLY GOOD THING IS THE FAR RIGHT APPEARS TO BE IMPLODING NATIONALLY. FOLKS GOTTA KEEP BOTH EYES ON THE LOCAL STUFF AS THAT APPEARS TO BE THE DEVIL’S PLAYGROUND OF THE RIGHT, NOW.
I totally agree, Steve, and would go even farther in the absolute determination of the hard right, backed by the numerous billionaires in their corner, to destroy the, not just weaken, the labor movement, including public employees bargaining rights. They’ve had a number of sucesses so far this year, which hopefully will be reversed soon. I agree that pension spiking needs to be fixed, although I never got close enough in years in Calstrs to even become aware of that practice. The year 2004 was only my 10th year in the retirement system, the previous 4 years of teaching I was still paying into Social Security, unaware that we would be penalized once we entered the teacher’s retirement system, losing 60% of estimated SS payments, even though all were earned before entering CalStrs.
As I’ve said before, most of my teaching time was spent with gang kids and others that were ‘reluctant students’ whom were unwanted in traditional schools.
As I see it, a major focus of the attack on public employee unions–here in CA–is against the teachers and correctional officers (prison guards). So many people attacking all the bad teachers and their pay and benefits w/o having a clue to what they really do. Or knowing the amount of education needed; I had to have a couple more years of classes to meet CA’s requirements to enter the teaching program at X amount of dollars and was about 40 when I started. Then, when teaching, even though I got along well with 95% of the gang kids, I was still assaulted a number of times, the last time by a big Samoan , probably on PCP, whom had been nothing but polite before that incident. One father of four gang members whom were all students of mine at one time, tried to run me over with his SUV. Several students were shot and killed; others survived, showing off their scars like medals of valor. Vietnamese gang kids loved me, because as they said: “You kill VC”. Another Mexican gang kid, when we were alone, was crying on my shoulder, as we talked about some problem.
And prison guards: I’ve never been in prison but know enough people who have been. And, of course, TV cameras take one inside regularly on shows like Lockup. Are those men and women paid too much @ $65,000 a year for dealing with La Em–the Mexican Mafia–and Aryan Nation types and the jailed Crips and Bloods. Feces thrown in their faces, lifers who don’t give a Sh__ about anything. etc. And that’s rule number one, never mess with someone who doesn’t give a S___. One friend who was doing time at San Quentin, bought my book and passed it around. So many inmates loved it, that they signed it and gave it to him to give to me. Plus, he gained lots of points. (Of course, I included gang kids in the book).
But these two groups are easy targets; teachers because like that guy who told me the Union was a liberal rag sheet and anybody could be a teacher; most people have no idea what’s involved in teaching in public schools. Fifty percent of teaching classes were devoted to classroom management, another word for trying to keep discipline in the classroom. Respect for authority, or even the possibility that an elder might pocess some wisdom greater than the youngster is at an all time low. And Bush’s disasterous No Child Left Behind nonsense, just made teaching harder and more meaninless.
Maybe some timely adjustments must be made, but no one was complaining before the Bush administration, a time when the full effects of out sourcing of jobs to Asia, the quite predictable collapse of the U.S. automotive industry–after the early eighties oil shortage and economic woes–we were soon back producing bigger and hungrier trucks and monster cars. These republicans think like 11th century monastics, or the feudal lords living hh=igh atop a moutain top in a moated castle. No middle ground any more; no middle class.
This is more about breaking unions up than honest reform. Sorry for the rant but lets not get sucked into a debate that hurts workers even more while the real issues and laws remain in place.
Back to my broken record Public Financing of Campaigns would stop these huge overt attacks on labor.
Breaking unions was and still is about drying up the funding of the Democratic Party. 1980 before PATCO got the ball rolling on union breaking in the US we had a private sector that was roughly 30% unionized. Today it is 6%. Public sector unions have had steady pay increases to go along with inflation since 1980 while the private sector workers has seen their wages remain the same or even drop along with their benefits disappearing. Now CEO pay since 1980 has gone from 30/40 to 1 over their lowest paid employee to 500 to 1 and in the financial sector over 5,000 to 1 over their employees.
As private sector pays less with fewer benefits our national debt has skyrocketed, why? The government has been taking on all the external costs of employees of the private sector while the huge amounts of wealth has been accumulated to literally buy the leadership of both the democratic and republican parties.
As union numbers diminished so did their ability to fund the Democratic Party. In the 1980′s Democratic Leadership Council or the corporate administrator friendly democrats. What a surprise as soon as the democrats switched to the DLC or third way all of a sudden we see a pro NAFTA Clinton administration, low and behold the republicans take control of the house of reps for the first time in four decades. Clinton then proceeds to sign law in 1999 that eliminates Glass Steagall and signs another law in 2000 that allows banks to make commodities out of just about anything along with cutting them up and making derivatives out of them.
Now we have this same kind of attack on the US Post Office with having them to account for future liabilities for 75 years and it is bankrupting the post office, why? The US Post Office is the largest unionized workforce in America and second largest employer behind Walmart in the US.
Unfortunately the Obama administration supports corporate administrator friendly policies because he is a third way DLC democrat and the democratic leadership in congress has followed. Three new free trade deals, extending tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires, not reinstating Glass Steagall, or not making derivatives illegal. What brought down the economy wasn’t the housing bubble but the $900 trillion derivative market that was created with the housing bubble.
BEN, Correct on all accounts, like normal.
I got a great suggestion about pension reform, and I write as someone vested in CALPERS, albeit not yet old enough to retire.
How about all of us who have government pensions–including those already retired with pensions from the military, defense contractors, and so forth, all take a haircut on our pensions? All of us together, not just those not yet hired. My understanding is that the board of directors of SESF includes several such people–perhaps they could propose a formula in which they could share some of this pain?
Tony (B.S., M.S., Ph.D, etc)
Tony, guess I don’t understand the haircut reference. I do know that most of my rather small teacher’s pension and larger military disability compensenation is poured right back into the economy–whatever that effect is called. Hated economic at Univ. of Ill. Two brilliant guy or gals with interpret the same data and come up with entirely opposite conclusions. Much to murky for me.
Hi Ed:
I guess that I was too brief. Anyway, I find it ironic that people who have pensions as Air Force officers (like Russ Steele), and from defense contractors (Like George Rebane) should be so critical of those of government workers who are working through the system now. They have government funded pensions too.
Having said that, I do think that there are some parts of the public pension systems that could stand reform. “Spiking” by upper management is an obvious example. So is the opportunity to buy “air time.” Public safety pensions which pay 3% of final salary per year of service after age 50, irrespective of disability are also expensive for local governments.
My own pension will max out at 2.5% times years of service when I get to 63. It is a decent pension, particularly since I will have about 23 years of service in by then (meaning my final pension will be about 60% of final salary), and I will also be eligible for social security. If others who are similarly fortunate (like presumably Steele and Rebane) were willing to sacrifice to preserve the integrity of the system for younger workers, I would be willing to do so too. That’s basically what I meant to say.
Tony
Gottcha. I think situations have to be analysed in sub-groups, since there can be large differences from the pension due a 20 year military retiree and a thirty year guy. And, I’ve even been told by military people–don’t know if this extreme is true–that the military will, if it wants, not allow some to re-up just short of the 20 year pension minimum. I do know a Marine, after ten years service I think, with a wife and three kids, whom I ‘adopted for Christmas’ while living in Oceanside, was denied re-enlistment, according to him, because of a knee injury incurred while on duty. It was rather sad, as he was from some back country town in Florida’s panhandle, and pardon my being judgemental, neither he nor his wife seemed particularly equipped to compete for a decent, well paying job in the competitive free-market. Plus, they had a little girl with clearly perceivable special needs, which she was getting, paid for by the USMC.
This practice, particularly if true of dening reenlistment to a 17 year person, is IMO, despicable.
But the last facility I worked at, an Independent study assignment in San Clemente, had as the site leader exactly what you are talking about. A fiery little gal, with an explosive temper, and as right wing as they come. In Independent study, students have certain times of the week to show up and bring in their work and meet with the teacher, although, we allowed students to come in and work whenever they wanted. She’d always rant and rave about the evils of liberals and even play Rush’s radio program during school hours. I know for sure she’ll do whatever she can to spike her pension, as she’s now about 60, with 30 years in. Her husband, another far right guy and 20 year Marine, joined the Long Beach police force, now on the SWAT team. When being interviewed for this very coveted position, I think being a Marine was the deciding factor. Although, in the last interview, one on one with her–w/o the pricipal whom I was very friendly with and worked with at the school in Santa Ana with 90% hard core gang kids–she ambushed by asking a VERBOTEN question; “I hope you’re not one of those Clinton lovers”. I was tactful in my answer, but could have caused plenty of problems over that question and future things. But here were two people, hating all Democratic politicians, loving their guns, totally opposed to public financing of elections, etc., you know the type–would fit in nicely with the R P J trio up here (Rocket Propelled Jibberish)–living, very nicely from the public trough and both collecting nice salaries due to the hard and dangerous struggles of their predecessors in the often fatal battles of the labor movement.
And my going away party–as an early retirement package was being offered while I was on medical leave being treated for my B-Cell lymphoma, then a near fatal reaction to one of the drugs in R-CHOP, culminated by the doc telling me he was sure I had cancer across the back of my tongue, confirmed by an MRI. Waiting for the doc to appear with the results of the biopsy, meditating and rubbing the Buddha hanging from my neck, must have been the right thing to do because the bx was negative–was held at a house on the cliffs of S.C. overlooking the beach, just north of cotton Point, where Nixon had his abode. The house was owned by a teacher assistant and her son, one of the honcho’s of A.I.G., before their role in the derivitive scandal and all the rest of the creative, almost impossible to understand, financial prestidigitation brought this country to its knees. So, while I was only 57 with 10 years in Calstrs and told by the hematoligist the lymphoma was likely to recur, I said hell with it, sold my house very close to the beach for an obscene amount and paid an obscene amount of cash for a place up here–which of course, along with everybody else–is now worth about 40% what I paid in 2005.
Thus my passion for opposing the likes of RPJ, Inc. and their efforts to squeeze the life out of the middle class, one benefit at a time. And I must say, being a 20 year man in the Air Force and only making it to a light Col. suggests mediocracy. Hell, my old man, was a Captain in the army, fighting in the Italian campaign, in only three years, and offered promotion to major to re-up. Also received five decrations for bravery–for what, I haven’t a clue–he never talked about it.
Sorry for the long post; one of my faults . . .
BTW, despite the gloom and doom in the far-right blogosphere, some analysts are calling a bottom in the housing market:
http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=538487
Lust as a point of possible interest, I read a short blurb yesterday in the Bee where Warren Buffet admitted in his annual meeting or newsletter/report that he was “dead wrong” about the housing rebounding by now. Although he still says it will, as it’s a basic human need, but then I think we could all make that vague prediction. BTW, that last statement wasn’t meant in a derogatory way.
Note to Brad G.: Don’t ever use the “s” word here, even in passing. Otherwise, we’ll have to wash your mouth out with soap and moderate you. Thanks.
You mean “santorum”?
Hmmmm, you just made the case for Unions.
Be it Government or Private Industry, good wages by union workers normally raise the rate paid by non-union employers. Win for All, workers and Employers (they would not be paying the wage they do if it did not make good business sense).
Rather than trash the good pay, benefits and retirement of unions, perhaps the problem is that non-union jobs need to improve their pay/benefits, not rip the union, which is nothing more than a democracy in the workplace.
Curtis, you should read some of the work of Richard Florida’s new work. His new thing is improving the wages of the service economy by tapping into social and cognitive skills.
http://bigthink.com/ideas/18241
R.L. Crabb apparently doesn’t understand the difference between Nate Beason and Sue McGuire (both Republicans) or Richard Anderson and Amy Goodman (both Democrats),
When Beason and Anderson are elected handily to the BOS, then R.L might finally understand what it means to be in the middle politically, not more extreme.
http://www.rlcrabb.com/uncategorized/the-middle-of-nowhere/#comments
Speaking of Amy Goodman and changing the subject if that’s OK, I’m just wondering if you or anyone subscribing to Truthout can explain to me why the nasty campain against Thomas Friedman. I read his book, many years ago, I think called To Beirut and Back, just one of many books I’ve read on the ancient and modern mideast and thought it quite good. If I remember correctly, he was the NYT correspondent for that area for about ten years. On my book shelves, yet to be read, are two other of his books about the world be flat, crowded, both highly recommended by my older brother who often sees Friedman in Aspen.
And the reader’s comments were about as viscous agaist Friedman as those I read from the right wing sovereign people type–but with more sophisticated verbiage. Perhaps the hard left, as I feel Goodman is close to being philosophically, feels he has sold out, but I reall don’t know. But a continuing problem, IMO, is that purists believe compromise is selling out, but as we all know the Constituion was forged amidst seemingly unsolvable, contentious and divisive diverences, by the hammer and anvil of compromise.
Just as I see Obama as not having been able to deliver on all that he said he would–who ever does?–I never expect such results from an elected oficial. It’s far from a perfect world and the powers aligned against Obama are staggering.
Just curious, if anybody has time to educate me on this squabble.
I did not know there was still a conflict going on between Amy Goodman and Thomas Friedman, but as this 2006 interview indicates, it is not new, and appears to be over pretty substantial differences of opinion about foreign policy.
http://www.democracynow.org/2006/6/7/thomas_friedman_on_petropolitics_iraq_israel
Thanks. Haven’t read the story yet, but I will. I wasn’t aware of a squabble between Goodman and Friedman, but clearly, IMO, Truthout would be solidly behind Goodman in any dispute. I don’t see her as an op/ed writer at all; rather a reporter of facts, with no flair to her writing. Committed to justice, etc., for all I have no doubt, by like Narcissus, In think her idealized perfect world will always be just out of reach.
The middle is the new left.
Certainly to the left of R.L Crabb, George Rebane and his like-minded friends. But please visit R.L.’s blog. He needs you support or he would’t have vilified moi.
Well said. Nowadays that’s spot on!
Yes, and be sure to scroll down to the post ” Is the party over?” for some balance. As for the McGuire/Beason race, I don’t have a dog in that fight. All I’m saying is you’re pretty biased for a reporter in “the middle”.
No, I can distinguish between moderates and extremists. That’s been my theme all along. I hope that writing about me boosts your traffic! LOL.
As I recall, your two heaviest traffic days last year were when we locked horns. You OWE me, Jeff!
All’s fair in love and war…I love the blogs!
No, it was for straightforward reporting of the elections on March 15 of last year. Good luck with your blog!
I have always liked Nate, but his actions concerning the issue of developer Bill Litchfield and his plans to build 100 apartment at the former HEW site are of great concern to my neighborhood association.
At a recent BOS meeting where my neighborhood group protested the development and, most importantly, the removal of the 2.5 million dollar bond that would have insured that the property be cleaned by a profession hazard waste removal company.
When we stated that, with the removal of the bond (which no one saw coming) any individual or even a group would have purchased the property, our own district Supervisor practically called us liars.
Mr. Beason lost credibility and stature in my eyes that evening.
I would like him to know that I would have been interested in that property myself, and put a couple of nice houses on it, except for the onerous performance bond.
So, now I am only interested in supporting the candidate who saves our historic neighborhood from this rapacious and potentially disastrous development.
I don’t know Sue McGuire yet, but I like her mother.
Bonnie and I are long overdue for lunch and a chat. Perhaps Sue might like to join us.
And that’s how our county gets purple.
You might bring it up at Nate Beason’s Town Hall meeting this week:
http://yubanet.com/regional/Nate-Beason-to-hold-District-1-Town-Hall-Meeting-on-March-1.php#.T0uicRzDYeU
Dang, that’s the first I’ve heard of the performance bond being dropped. Was that reported by our local media? Kinda sweetens the deal for Litchfield….even more.
Typo, strike the “where” in my second sentence.