Four Issues of Free Speech

I had blogs set to go on some news of the day – two of which are getting massive media coverage while the other two barely return a blip on bing searches – but decided to conflate the four since they are somewhat related on one issue and I have only brief comments on each.

New Jersey Pension Reform

The Wall Street Journal provided some token coverage of the pension crisis in New Jersey (full story at bottom) where the driving force behind reform admitted:

“We’re broke. Just throwing tax dollars at it isn’t going to fix it.”

Yes, New Jersey is broke but more importantly many of its citizens are broke. $150 billion in tax dollars will definitely fix the pension problem but that is not available and Sweeney is delusional if he believes this new set of otiose ‘reforms’ will accomplish anything. Why isn’t anyone telling him?

Multiemployer Hiatus

Both applications for Benefit Suspension and the multiemployer bailout committee have been quiet recently. It will be the midterm elections that determine if benefit cuts continue (Republicans win) or a bailout comes (Democrats win). When Studebaker went bust in 1964 the government worked to fix the system to assure that pensions would be protected and this would never happen again. It happened again and the government is now working to put in place a methodology to steal from its citizens (either retirees promised benefits or taxpayers who never committed to paying those benefits). Where is the outrage?

Nike/Kaepernick Ad

Here it is:
.

.
I am confused somewhat about the dream-crazy message (what about doing your best with what you have and seeing where you get – dreaming unrealistically yields 10 million kids working to dunk a basketball for no good reason) but even more so about how limiting free speech became an American value.

Trump Resistance

Odds are it’s Mike Pence but, even if it’s Javanka, why can’t this critical discussion be had without anonymity? Because, to answer my own question, the resisters would be fired and that is a sad reflection on what has befallen freedom of speech in the “land of the free”.

.
.
.

WSJ Pension story:

New Jersey Senate President Steve Sweeney is once again pushing to cut pension costs, setting up another standoff with the state’s public-employee unions.

He must also sell his pension-overhaul plan to the public and Gov. Phil Murphy, a Democrat who campaigned on protecting the middle class.

Mr. Sweeney, the top Democrat in the state Senate, said in an interview there is no time to waste. Pension and health-care costs will eat up nearly a quarter of the state’s $45 billion budget by fiscal year 2023, fueling a $3 billion deficit, according to a recent report from a fiscal task force established by the state Legislature.

“We’re broke,” said Mr. Sweeney, who supported a 2011 pension overhaul under former Republican Gov. Chris Christie that infuriated public employees. “Just throwing tax dollars at it isn’t going to fix it.”

One of the task force’s proposals, which Mr. Sweeney is endorsing, would shift new state employees and those with less than five years of service to a hybrid pension and 401(k)-style plan. Another would move public employees to less-expensive health-care plans and require future retirees to pay more for health care.

A spokeswoman for Mr. Murphy said he would review Mr. Sweeney’s proposals. “The governor’s guiding principle is always whether a proposal strengthens New Jersey’s middle class and working families,” she said.

New Jersey has a pension liability of $115 billion and only 55.8% of that is funded, according to the fiscal panel’s report. Lawmakers put aside $3.21 billion to pay for pensions for the current fiscal year. That figure is expected to rise to $6.63 billion by 2023.

The fiscal panel’s cost-trimming proposals together could save $3 billion annually, Mr. Sweeney said. The task force included lawmakers, academics and financial experts but had no public-sector union representatives.

Critics of the overhaul plan note that this estimate hasn’t been verified by actuaries. Mr. Sweeney said that is in the works.

“All the solutions seemed to be pointed at the back of public employees,” said Marie Blistan, president of the New Jersey Education Association, which represents teachers and backed Mr. Murphy’s candidacy in 2017. The NJEA spent $5 million during the 2017 election trying to unseat Mr. Sweeney.

A senior official in the Murphy administration said the pension proposal wasn’t a serious solution. The recommendations for health benefits seek more money from current employees and retirees instead of cutting the cost of care, which Mr. Murphy would prefer, the official said.

Mr. Murphy has called for ramping up payments to the pension system over the next five years to address the system’s unfunded liabilities. That plan relies in part on raising taxes on New Jersey’s millionaires.

Messrs. Murphy and Sweeney clashed during this summer’s prolonged budget fight over tax increases. Mr. Murphy had sought a sales-tax increase and wanted to raise taxes on millionaires. Mr. Sweeney, who previously supported a millionaire’s tax, fought both, saying the new federal tax law added to New Jersey residents’ tax burden.

The final budget agreement ended up raising taxes on families earning more than $5 million and began a four-year surcharge on businesses earning more than $1 million. Messrs. Murphy and Sweeney also negotiated a school-funding deal.

Mr. Sweeney said the education negotiations could provide a blueprint for a pension and health-care deal.

“This is the 800-pound gorilla,” Mr. Sweeney said, referring to New Jersey’s growing pension and health-care costs. “I know the governor is not excited about this stuff.”

Hetty Rosenstein, the New Jersey director of the Communications Workers of America, which represents some state workers, said it is unfair to cut health benefits for workers to fix pension problems created by the state. Mr. Sweeney’s pension proposals also won’t solve the system’s unfunded-pension-liability problem, she said.