Pension Reform Initiatives Would Save Billions

Marcia Fritz's picture
President of the California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility

The California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility filed with the Attorney General’s office two pension and retiree health care initiatives that would save state and local government agencies hundreds of billions of dollars in retiree benefit costs. Either measure would end the expensive abuses which have increased costs and run up huge deficits for public defined benefit pension plans.

The initiatives are identical except for the voter requirement that allows agencies to increase benefits for new workers. We plan to poll voters to determine which version they prefer.

With more than $200 billion in retirement debts and skyrocketing costs crowding out the investments we need in education, health care, transportation, public safety and the environment, it is time for a statewide solution to our retirement benefits crisis. By requiring all new non-safety public employees at all levels of government to work until their Social Security retirement age for full benefits and ending the politicians’ raids and abuses of public pension funds, California public agencies can offer secure retirement benefits that are fair for taxpayers and their employees.

The Public Employee Benefits Reform Initiative would apply its benefits cap to the defined benefit plans offered to all new state, local government, school district, university and special district employees beginning July 1, 2011.

California’s huge legacy retirement costs have been aggravated by pension benefit enhancements granted to public employees over the last 10 years combined with average pay increases of 50% to 70% both at the state level and among local agencies. Actuaries did not anticipate wage hikes of this magnitude, nor did they expect the market losses that have seriously reduced the value of pension assets set aside to pay for pension benefits.

On top of this, workers are retiring earlier because many can receive more in retirement than while working. Defined benefit plans are viable tools if they are not abused. But generous guaranteed retirement benefits plus high wages have overburdened our public pension systems and ultimately our taxpayers. Sound fiscal policy, simple budget planning and retirement benefits that ensure a dignified and secure retirement after a full career of public service are all possible. This initiative will help lead the way for all levels of California government.

Preliminary estimates show the initiative would save more than $1 billion the first year, and $500 billion over 30 years as new workers replace those who retire by raising their full retirement ages and limiting guaranteed benefit formulas to 75% replacement income in retirement for a full career’s work. Agencies may continue to offer supplemental defined contribution plans to their employees. Significant additional savings would come from requiring new employees to wait until they reach MediCare eligibility age before supplemental retiree health benefits begin.

The “10 Commandments” that form the basis of both versions of the initiative include:

  • Honor all pension contracts
  • Death and disability benefits shall not be changed
  • Pension benefits must be fair and adequate
  • Pension benefits must be guaranteed
  • Pension spiking abuse must be discouraged
  • Future generations should not pay retirement costs for today’s workers
  • Retiree health funds must not be diverted to any other purpose
  • Retirement benefit costs must be sustainable
  • Local agency voters shall retain the right to change benefits
  • Bankruptcies must be avoided

For more information about the California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility and the Public Employee Benefits Reform Initiative, go to CaliforniaPensionReform.com.

The hate emanating from

The hate emanating from commenter "Visitor" illustrates what's wrong with this proposal. Instead of dragging public employees down, we should be building private-sector employees up. If public employees have good pensions, that strengthens the hand of private employees to go to their employers and negotiate good pensions for themselves as well. If you destroy good pensions for public employees, you are pushing private employees even further away from such benefits. The only people who benefit from trashing public employee pensions are the very rich, who will never need any kind of pension. This is the wrong way to balance the budget.

Commenter "David" is saying

Commenter "David" is saying that the majority of public retiree pensions are modest. That may be true in average dollar payout, but includes the many retiree that do not work for full careers, and the low pensions of the many partime workers, councilmen, legislators, etc., that participate in these plans. When a CORRECT comparison of "similarly situated" (meaning the SAME pay, the SAME years of service, and the SAME retirement age) Public VS Private Sector workers is made, the TRUTH comes out.... non-safety workers (police & firemen) get a retirement package with a value upon retirement worth 2-4 times that of the similarly situated Private Sector worker, with this multiple rising to 4-6 times for policemen & Firemen. And, this relationship exists at ALL pay levels. Civil Servants (such as "David") use all sorts of diversionary and distortion tactics to hide the enormous value of their pension & benefit packages. They DO NOT want change. It is WAY PAST time for Private Sector TAXPAYERS to rise up and say ENOUGH ... and demand reductions to pensions & benefits for CURRENT as well as NEW employees. This proposal for changes only for NEW employees is spineless .... and ignors TAXPAYER obligations that will GROW larger if benefit accruals for future years of service for CURRENT employees are not ended NOW. Why must we CONTINUE to grant MORE pension benefits based on Plan formulas everyone agrees are too generous and unsustainable? A

Public Sector Pensions are TOO Generous

Commenter "David" is saying that the majority of public retiree pensions are modest. That may be true in average dollar payout, but includes the many retiree that do not work for full careers, and the low pensions of the many partime workers, councilmen, legislators, etc., that participate in these plans. When a CORRECT comparison of "similarly situated" (meaning the SAME pay, the SAME years of service, and the SAME retirement age) Public VS Private Sector workers is made, the TRUTH comes out.... non-safety workers (police & firemen) get a retirement package with a value upon retirement worth 2-4 times that of the similarly situated Private Sector worker, with this multiple rising to 4-6 times for policemen & Firemen. And, this relationship exists at ALL pay levels. Civil Servants (such as "David") use all sorts of diversionary and distortion tactics to hide the enormous value of their pension & benefit packages. They DO NOT want change. It is WAY PAST time for Private Sector TAXPAYERS to rise up and say ENOUGH ... and demand reductions to pensions & benefits for CURRENT as well as NEW employees. This proposal for changes only for NEW employees is spineless .... and ignors TAXPAYER obligations that will GROW larger if benefit accruals for future years of service for CURRENT employees are not ended NOW. Why must we CONTINUE to grant MORE pension benefits based on Plan formulas everyone agrees are too generous and unsustainable?

This Reform is a Sham

A proposed pension reform initiative, the Public Employees Benefits Reform Act (PEBRA), should die an early death and never see the ballot box. PEBRA gives state workers pension guarantees superior to private sector workers. It does nothing to fix the current pension mess. PEBRA does little to reform the generous “3 at 50″ retirement benefit that is bankrupting the state. It leaves the door open for taxpayers to pay state worker health and pensions costs in full. PEBRA isn’t the reform California needs – eliminating pension guarantees completely. http://orangejuiceblog.com/2009/11/pension-reform-sham/

Stop demonizing public employees.

The average annual pension for CalPERS retirees is $25,212. Seventy-eight percent of PERS retirees receive $36,000 per year or less. (Source: Cal PERS website, "Facts at a Glance"). The vast majority of public employees receive very modest pensions, even after working 30 years or more. They do not deserve to be lumped with a tiny handful of top earners who make very large pensions. If Ms. Fritz and Mr. Richman were genuinely interested in balancing the budget in a fair way, they would be talking about an oil severance tax (a tax which even Texas, allegedly a right-wing heaven for business interests, has). And they would be talking about making the tax system more progressive. Currently, people making as little as $47,500 per year pay the same state income tax rate as people making up to $999,000. If you think it's fair making more than 20 times as much money to pay the same income tax rate, you must be a right-wing Republican. But instead of addressing those fundamental unfairnesses, Ms. Fritz and Mr. Richman spend their time demonizing public employees, the vast majority of whom do NOT receive the large pensions talked about by the right-wing noise machine. If you want to stop the handful of massive pensions, then stop them: you do not need to trash all public employees in the process.



Please note, statements and opinions expressed on the Fox&Hounds Blog are solely those of their respective authors and may not represent the views of Fox&Hounds Daily or its employees thereof. Fox&Hounds Daily is not responsible for the accuracy of any of the information supplied by the site's bloggers.