Corbett, Wolf dance around pension reform
Why can't Pa. solve basic fiscal problems?
Watching the last Gov. Tom Corbett vs Tom Wolf campaign debate, reader Rick Dreyfuss writes from Hummelstown: "I find it bizarre how Tom Wolf defends this financially-flawed pension reform plan (Act 120, which trimmed future state pension eligibility without addressing the multibillion-dollar pension funding deficit), then proceeds to criticize the Governor on the resulting successive (Pennsylvania state) credit downgrades -- which are due in large part to the persistent and chronic pension underfunding abetted by this same Act.
"Gov. Corbett then correctly attacks Act 120 as being a poor bill -- but touts his accomplishments in contributing the Act 120 (staggered state-funded pension payment) rates over the past four years. Further, he and other (Republicans) support the hybrid plan concept, which would not address underfunding." Dreyfuss, a self-employed actuary, is former director of compensation at Hershey Co., senior fellow at the conservative Commonwealth Foundation and adjunct fellow at the Manhattan institute.
Separately, the Stanford pension scholar Ann Headley sent me a note complaining Pennsylvania doesn't seem serious about either raising pension funding or cutting pension payouts. She says a Harvard lawyer helping with her project says the state-controlled school board's attempt to suspend Philadelphia's public school teacher union contract is a shocking sign of how tough this fall's political campaign has gotten, and it's no wonder pension reform is getting "little traction."
I agreed with both and told 'em, "Given the repugnance to raising taxes here, plus the difficulty of cutting benefts under Pennsylvania law and political resistance by public workers, the politicians' approach of kick-the-can-down-the-road-and-hope-the-problem-goes-away is not an irrational policy. Just an irresponsible one."
