PERA’s low returns call for changes to the system
Starting now, we can begin to move the investment risk back where it lies for the rest of us: to the employee.
Starting now, we can begin to move the investment risk back where it lies for the rest of us: to the employee.
Whether or not the game of hide-the-pea satisfied the courts, it violated the spirit and purpose of constitutional provisions designed to prevent the legislature from indebting citizens into a long-term fiscal bind.
The benefits of choice in many areas of life are evident all around us. That begs the question why the state’s public pension system fighting to keep its members from having that choice.
Is Jefferson County School District about to take on $80,000,000 in unsecured debt without asking its taxpayers? That’s what would happen under a proposal to fund new school buildings.
By failing to lay out clear rules for what is permissible and what isn’t with respect to existing benefits, the Court’s ruling in Justus, celebrated for helping PERA’s finances right now, may end up making such a bleak scenario more likely in the future.
If PERA hadn’t taken the money in the first place, then the taxpayers and the government workers could have bought stocks and bonds themselves. Instead of having to give money to PERA, state government workers ought to be allowed to keep their own pension savings (like private sector employees can do in an IRA).
By encouraging people to work until 60, and then retire soon thereafter, PERA deprives the government and the taxpayer of some of its most experienced employees’ services.
From an actuarial point of view, there is almost no single change that can make as big a difference to the benefits security as adding a couple of years to an employee’s working life.
Like it or not, your tax money is invested in CFHC, the state’s government-run health exchange designed to implement Obamacare.
It is fundamentally unfair to ask the average taxpayer to work for an extra decade to fund the early retirements of their civil servants.
So basically, properly calculated, instead of having the unfunded liability of just over $24 billion that PERA admits to, it’s actually in the hole for about $47 billion, or about $23,500 per household.
It is telling that each of these changes – every last one – has been opposed by PERA and its allies in the public employees unions here in Colorado.
By Mike Rosen
In late December, Congress passed stopgap legislation to avert a government shutdown. Of course this is hyperbole, the government doesn’t really shut down. The vast majority of government spending continues to flow, including Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, interest on the national debt, additional spending for disasters and farmers, along with the armed forces, FBI, CIA, and Secret Service still on the job. True, “non-essential government employees” are sent home for a deferred-pay vacation and the Washington Monument is closed to tourists.
A prior pork-loaded stopgap measure was opposed by Republicans, forcing a compromise with spendthrift Democrats that dropped the number of pages from 1,547 to 118. But Democrats refused to budge on a measure supported by Republicans and Trump to suspend the debt ceiling for two years. So, we’ll go through this same charade again when the stopgap agreement expires in March.
If it feels like we’ve seen this show before, you’re right. It dates back to 1917 when Congress passed a law raising the national debt ceiling in order to issue Liberty Bonds to fund World War I. It made sense then. Since then, Congress has raised the ceiling 78 more times, most recently in 2023, for a total winning streak of 79-0.
Following the showmanship of grandstanders from both parties’ extremes, demanding provisions that can’t possibly be passed, a compromise will be made and the debt ceiling will be raised, and the winning streak will surely be extended to 80-0.
It’s time to end this farce and eliminate the statutory debt ceiling altogether. Not because I support limitless spending and a spiraling national debt, but because it doesn’t work. It’s become nothing more than a ceremonial formality, preceded by political theater. The time to reign in runaway spending is at the beginning of the annual budget and appropriations process, not after the money has already been spent or committed. That’s like gorging yourself at a high-priced steak house and refusing to pay the check.
The debt ceiling must always be raised because our government is on a perpetual trajectory of deficit spending, with less money coming into the Treasury than going out. Failure to raise the debt ceiling would cause the U.S. to default on the payment of principal and interest on Treasury bonds as they come due. This would undermine the “full faith and credit” of the United States and bring on an international financial crisis that could lead to a worldwide depression. That’s not a realistic option.
The root of this problem is that federal spending is totally out of control. We’ve had budget deficits in 47 of the last 51 years and they’re now baked in forever. Hiking tax rates would not produce the hoped for revenues and would more likely tank the economy. Besides which, federal spending has exceeded the economy’s tax capacity for decades. Progressive socialists who would “soak the rich” along with corporations and investors would destroy our free market economy, the stated goal of those who proclaim they hate capitalism. In the process, it would drive down our standard of living. But Democrats have no limiting principle when it comes to spending. The rise in government redistribution of income and our cornucopia of social welfare programs have caused the number of net tax receivers to now exceed the number of net taxpayers, and the tidal wave of illegal immigrants has made that imbalance even worse.
Our nation’s 36 trillion-dollar national debt is the cumulative total of historical federal spending in excess of revenues. In 1980, our gross national debt was 31% of GDP. Today, it’s 120% of GDP. That’s higher than it was in World War II when defense spending was 90% of the budget. Today, only 12% goes for defense, while what the government calls “payments for individuals” (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and countless other “entitlement” programs) consumes 70% of the budget. It’s politically impossible to “slash” those programs but somehow, they must be at least restrained and the budget brought into balance. If not, we are on a trajectory to fiscal insolvency.
When Greece went into bankruptcy a decade ago the EU and IMF bailed her out. but no one has the means to bail out the United States.
For the 3rd year in a row, Colorado lawmakers have introduced new pro-nuclear legislation with bipartisan support. Will the 3rd time be the charm? PowerGab Hosts Jake Fogleman and Amy Cooke discuss the bill and how that would affect Colorado.
Show Notes:
Link to the bill: https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb25-1040
I2I’s testimony and coverage the last few times it was introduced
–https://i2i.org/colorado-lawmakers-to-consider-pro-nuclear-bill/
What’s it like going into the state legislature as a newbie representative walking right into GOP dysfunction in a brewing progressive civil war? Well, Jarvis Caldwell is about to find out.
You can now view our aggregated content from Page One AND read our original reporting and commentary from Page Two in one place!