« Obama, Pelosi to fundraise for DCCC at Alonzo Mourning's Miami manse | Main | Flip-O-Meter examines Charlie Crist past stances on Cuba, etc. »

Pension reform is back, and so is the opposition

As promised, Sen. Wilton Simpson, R-Trilby, filed legislation this week that will overhaul Florida’s $132 billion pension system.

And already, the obstacles ahead are mounting.

Filed as a bill by the Senate’s Community Affairs Committee, which he chairs, SPB  7046 prohibits most state workers from enrolling in the state’s pension plan after July 1, 2015, forcing them instead to enroll in 401 (k)-style investment, which doesn't have a guaranteed return, or cash balance plans, which have lower guaranteed returns.

Yet the same bill allows “special risk” employees -- firefighters, police, deputies -- to continue to have the option of enrolling in the state’s pension plan, of which more than 600,000 current state, county and local employees contribute to for their retirements.

That “carving out” of special risk employees is a sop to the Senate, which last year defeated Florida House Speaker Will Weatherford’s effort to close out the pension to all future employees by a 22-18 vote. The theory goes that without the opposition from police and fire unions, at least two senators who voted against it last time, Greg Evers and Charlie Dean, might be swayed this time.

Weatherford told the Times/Herald last week that this carving out provision is intended to make it more palatable for senators.

But it’s not clear if that will be enough, at least for all of the pension reform legislation Simpson filed Monday. One of his bills, SPB 7040, which creates a trust fund to finance the cash balance plan, needs 24 of 40 votes to pass. Without it, can Simpson actually accomplish the pension reform simply by getting his SPB 7046 approved?

Yes, according to Simpson’s office. Simpson’s chief legislative assistant, Rachel Perrin, said that if the new trust fund isn’t approved, payments to those enrolled in the cash balance plan will be simply paid from the existing pension fund.

“It just means that, administratively, it will be more difficult (without the cash balance trust fund),” Perrin said.

Already, Simpson’s plan is drawing opposition from the Florida Education Association. On Tuesday, its vice president, Joanne McCall, said the move to exempt police and fire from the proposed pension reform smacks of gender bias.

“If it’s good for one set of employees, it should be good for all employees,” McCall told reporters. “I hate to say that 70 percent of those that are in (Florida’s) retirement system are female, so I’m kind of concerned about why we’re carving out police and firefighters. Is there a gender equity gap there?”

McCall pointed to a survey of 800 registered voters between Dec. 16 and Dec. 22 that showed 68 percent of respondents said they agreed with the following (and leading) statement: “We need to keep the state funded retirement system for teachers because they have such low salaries in the state.” Only 16 percent agreed with the statement: “We need to eliminate the state funded retirement system for teachers because it costs taxpayers $500 million per year.”


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Ed Jenkins

The taxpayers greatly appreciate this belated move into the modern era well behind many companies that earlier realized the dangers promising fixed payments for large numbers of years to people no longer on the payroll. The citizens do not have the ability to pay 2 and maybe 3 people (1 to 2 of which are retired) to do each government job and they certainly do not want to guaranty payments anymore to those not even working from money that can only be confiscated from them. Many businesses were forced into bankruptcy and in the end those who believed these lifetime payments were promised to them realized that it was not economically possible by an age too late for them to find other sources of income, it is better for these people to find out now and begin to save for their retirement like other responsible citizens, wise businesses learned and changed from these events and it is past time for governments to do the same.


Republicans simply want to shift public money into their friend's hands. The pension system is not broken, it is not a burden on taxpayers. The Republican plan will not cost any less, but it will put a lot of money into the hands of the private financial management companies. It is sad that people like Ed Jenkins want to do away with FRS because they don't have access to the same benefit in the private sector. Misery loves company.

Get Real

These businesses that were "forced into bankruptcy" did it because it was the only way to offload their promises onto others via PBGC. They are all doing quite well now and are no longer concerned with living up to their obligations. Dumping pensions wasn't necessary, but it sure was profitable.

Robert Carter

Then they'll have to pay teachers a salary that they can save for retirement.

The comments to this entry are closed.