The public sector pension issue is not necessarily a partisan one. As I've written before, even though the Democratic Party in this state is a wholly owned subsidiary of the public-sector unions, the Republicans helped create the pension crisis by increasing pensions for police and firefighters. And now we see that Rhode Island, with an even more overwhelming Democratic majority than California, has promoted pension reform. Such reform is a non-starter here. This is from my weekend column: "Time magazine called Rhode Island 'The Little State That Could.'
By contrast, California is 'The Big State That Can't.' Or maybe the
right word is 'won't,' given that there is no real reason that
California leaders can't adopt similar reforms if they had the desire to
do so." The piece focused on a state Supreme Court decision declaring that non-vested benefits might actually be vested after all.
No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://www.publicsectorinc.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/603
Related Entries:
- Ezra Klein helps to explain why pension reform is, or should be, bipartisan
- RI bill seeks to bind schools to costly arbitration
- A single-payer approach for public pensions?
- 'Disabled' cops collect disability, go back to work
- A handy guide to pension fixes, true and false
- State pols know Mickelson won't be last to flee
- Robert Citron, 1925-2013
- Red states need pension reform, too. What of it?
- Gas masks, helmets for state alcohol-control agents
- RI pension case goes to court
- Signs muscular guards union losing its edge
- Los Angeles Pension Reform Effort Withers on the Vine
- How bad (or good) are new state pension plans?
- How many other states are insolvent?
- The union steamroller in California
Join the conversation