No one runs for office to work on pension issues
Pensions are real deal work in state capitals nationwide
The Seattle PI’s discussion of this issue here raises, once again, a long standing tension in state government.
This frightening opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal, by an author who advocates against public employee unions, also raises the very serious issue.
And this article from former California Speaker Willie Brown calls out for a second look:
“If we as a state want to make a New Year’s resolution, I suggest taking a good look at the California we have created. From our out-of-sync tax system to our out-of-control civil service, it’s time for politicians to begin an honest dialogue about what we’ve become.
Take the civil service.
The system was set up so politicians like me couldn’t come in and fire the people (relatives) hired by the guy they beat and replace them with their own friends and relatives.
Over the years, however, the civil service system has changed from one that protects jobs to one that runs the show.
The deal used to be that civil servants were paid less than private sector workers in exchange for an understanding that they had job security for life.
But we politicians, pushed by our friends in labor, gradually expanded pay and benefits to private-sector levels while keeping the job protections and layering on incredibly generous retirement packages that pay ex-workers almost as much as current workers.
Talking about this is politically unpopular and potentially even career suicide for most officeholders. But at some point, someone is going to have to get honest about the fact that 80 percent of the state, county and city budget deficits are due to employee costs.”
(End of Brown quote and article)
My predecessor in the House, Rep. Helen Sommers, knew every inch of state pension policy like her Magnolia neighborhood. And she led efforts to ensure our state has among the strongest systems in the nation. I wouldn’t and couldn’t become a similar expert if I stayed in Olympia for a generation. Yet it is simply no longer possible for us as a state to hold back from the deeper dialogue about both our pension obligations and the structural costs we realize.
In order to truly and genuinely embrace the opportunity of this economic crisis, we need to put everything on the table. Everything.
Your partner in service,
Reuven.
Hey Reuven,
Thanks for writing this and so many other thoughtful posts. I notice this one doesn’t have any comments and was likely never going to get any. Even the PI piece only generated comments along the lines “it’s an entitlement for failure” and “i’m entitled to the entitlement”.
I think that augurs poorly for the future handling of this issue. As you know, Washington is one of only two Western states on downgrade watch and recent activities of the legislature has not shown the kind of willingness for gut-wrenching change that this problem entails.
This could reasonably be argued to be THE PROBLEM overshadowing every other in the State. Ten years from now? Five? Credit Default Swap prices put California’s bankruptcy at better than 50% likely in the next ten years (depending on recovery assumptions you use) and it would be interesting to know what Washington’s underlying default liklihood is as judge by the open marketplace.
Regardless, I wonder if a committee is it at work planning for what seems increasingly a possible endgame to this issue: default by the State of Washington. After all, our political processes are not made to cope with this kind of problem, and, in many ways, those very processes reinforce the problem. I think it would be helpful to the legislature and the Governor if some thoughtful people had made plans for how the State could handle this dire but increasingly likely outcome. Maybe they already are.
Well, given our relative state of health, not the worst, not the best, at least we won’t be alone.
Small comfort.