Governor Deval Patrick fails to understand the meaning of the word " illegal " - Big surprise...

It seems that the Governor of Massachusetts needs some basic education - Let's help him out. The word he needs to understand better is " illegal "

il·le·gal [ih-lee-guhl]
–adjective
1. forbidden by law or statute.
2. contrary to or forbidden by official rules, regulations, etc.: The referee ruled that it was an illegal forward pass.

Synonyms
1. unlawful; illegitimate; illicit; unlicensed. Illegal, unlawful, illegitimate, illicit, criminal can all describe actions not in accord with law. Illegal refers most specifically to violations of statutes. Unlawful means not sanctioned by or according to law: an unlawful claim to the inheritance; to take unlawful advantage of the trading situation. Illegitimate means lacking legal or traditional right or rights: an illegitimate child; illegitimate use of privileged knowledge.

Once again, Governor " Spend-it-all " Deval Patrick has not figured out that the citizens of Massachusetts DO NOT want to subsidize the illegal immigrants who have violated the laws of the State of Massachusetts. By definition, that would amount to " aiding & abetting" known criminals.

It is par for the course for him and his best buddy, the other "empty suit in residence" at the White House as neither of them cares about their sworn duties to UPHOLD the laws of the state & country where they serve.

We need to make sure that this pair of pathetic fools gets sent packing as soon as possible as they both do nothing but make a mockery of the will of the citizens they are supposed to serve. They would rather put the needs of illegal immigrants ahead of the wishes of the taxpayers and voters. At a time where everything is about fiscal concerns, taxpayers should not be forced to finance the wish lists of these two feckless politicians.


Patrick backs illegal immigrants on tuition
Urges approval of in-state level
By Maria Sacchetti - Boston Globe
Globe Staff / July 21, 2011

Governor Deval Patrick, just weeks after defying federal immigration officials over their controversial Secure Communities program, unexpectedly appeared at a packed State House hearing yesterday to urge lawmakers to let illegal immigrants pay the reduced resident rate at state colleges and universities.

The surprise visit appeared to signal an aggressive new stance by the Patrick administration on illegal immigration and a sharp departure from the governor’s first term, when he shied from incendiary issues such as tuition and driver’s licenses for unauthorized immigrants.

Patrick’s appearance yesterday could inject new life into a bill that has languished in the Legislature for years. Only hours before he arrived, hopes had seemed dim for legislation that passed the Senate in 2005 but failed in the House and has not budged since, with little visible support from leadership in either chamber.

“I know they’re going to hear the arguments on both sides,’’ he said after he addressed the Joint Committee on Higher Education about two bills that would allow students here illegally to pay in-state tuition. “But they should keep in mind we’re talking about real people - individuals, students, and families - whose ambitions are caught up in the only community in most cases that they know.’’

Massachusetts has been a focal point in the debate over illegal immigrant students, drawing national attention last year when Harvard student Eric Balderas was arrested for being here illegally, then allowed to stay.

Harvard’s president and others have endorsed federal legislation known as the Dream Act that would allow such students to apply for legal residency, but that, too, has been stalled for years.

In the absence of federal action giving illegal students a path to residency, advocates for immigrants have lobbied states to make public colleges more affordable for illegal immigrants, many of whom have lived here since they were children. Advocates seize on what they call a discrepancy in federal law: A 1982 US Supreme Court decision guarantees undocumented students a K-12 education, but they are not entitled to go to college and they are barred from receiving government financial aid.

Twelve states, including Connecticut this year, allow such students to pay resident tuition, according to the National Immigration Law Center.

In Massachusetts, illegal immigrants pay the nonresident rate, which is double or triple the price paid by residents, depending on the school. The University of Massachusetts Amherst cost nonresidents $23,630 last year in tuition and fees, compared with $11,734 for state residents.

“We understand that the lawmakers cannot fix the federal situation, but they can fix Massachusetts law,’’ said Eva Millona, executive director of the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition.

The House and Senate bills would allow students to pay in-state tuition if they meet certain criteria, such as attending high school in Massachusetts for at least three years and promising to apply for legal residency as soon as the government allows it.

Yesterday, the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation estimated that passing the legislation would boost the state’s revenues by about $2 million in the first year, if 315 to 365 students enrolled, and up to $7.4 million by the fourth year, when the enrollment could more than double.

The foundation’s president, Michael Widmer, estimated that Massachusetts is home to more than 14,000 illegal immigrants under age 18, nearly 2 percent of enrollment in public schools statewide. Since such students are not eligible for state or federal financial aid, Widmer said the cost to the state would be minimal.

During his first race for governor, in 2006, Patrick was a vocal supporter of in-state tuition for illegal immigrants. But he did not make it a priority during his first term. Since being reelected Patrick has taken a bolder stance on several personnel and policy issues. Last year Patrick said he thought the state could not grant in-state tuition to illegal immigrants without changes in federal law, but yesterday he did not mention that concern.

House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo voted against in-state tuition in 2006, when it failed in the House, but yesterday he would not comment because the bill is still in committee, said his spokesman, Seth Gitell. Senate President Therese Murray could not be reached for comment last night, but last year the Senate approved a measure to bar illegal immigrants from higher education benefits, though it did not become law.

Yesterday a State House hearing room was filled with supporters of the bills.

Conrado, a 23-year-old who graduated from Somerville High four years ago, said he still has a drawer filled with his hopes from high school: his yearbook, containing pictures of friends who have already graduated from college; his SAT scores; and a state scholarship for high MCAS scores, which he could not claim because he has been here illegally from Brazil since he was 13.

“It shouldn’t be this way, and it doesn’t have to be,’’ he told the panel yesterday, declining to give his last name for fear of deportation. “We know this bill makes sense for the Commonwealth.’’

Isabel Vargas of Methuen, a 19-year-old student here illegally from the Dominican Republic since she was 8 years old, said she had no control over her parents’ decision to come to the United States, but that she wants to contribute to this country. She drew laughter when she waved a receipt from the US government showing that she paid her federal income taxes this year, $476.08, to prove that illegal immigrants pay taxes.

The Internal Revenue Service allows illegal immigrants to file tax returns using a taxpayer identification number and does not report them to federal immigration officials.

Alan, an 18-year-old student from Waltham, wept as he described having been abused as a child in Mexico, then coming to the United States illegally and thriving in school. He has been accepted to a private college, but doubts he can afford the tuition.

“I was 5 years old,’’ he told the committee about coming to this country, “and every day I’m paying for my father’s mistakes.’’

But critics said illegal immigrant students should not benefit from their parents’ decision to break the law. Though proponents of the bill say it would help the economy, critics have said it would offer benefits to illegal immigrants that US citizens from other states cannot claim.

“They’re still here illegally,’’ said Christen Varley, president of the Greater Boston Tea Party, which vowed to fight the bills, though she could not attend the hearing. “If you’re not a legal resident of the state, you’re not entitled to in-state tuition. That’s as simple as it is.’’

Steve Kropper, cochairman of Massachusetts Citizens for Immigration Reform, which advocates tougher immigration laws, criticized the governor for championing the tuition issue when the state’s economy is still hurting.

The bills are sponsored by Senator Sonia Chang-Diaz of Boston, Representative Alice Wolf of Cambridge, and Representative Denise Provost of Somerville, all Democrats.

"Where did his primary loyalty lie?" - To HIMSELF....How a State Employee held down two high risk jobs at the same time and endangered the public

The Boston Globe does a good job at investigating issues like the one in the story enclosed here.

The story ask the basic question, " Why did Massport, EMS let a public safety employee work 2 jobs simultaneously almost nonstop? "

There are three simple reasons:

1. POOR MANAGEMENT - No one at Massport and/or Boston’s Emergency Medical Services Department was doing the job we PAY them for - Managing the resources properly and ensuring that NO ONE is ginning up the system like this paramedic did....We pay the Directors/Managers/Supervisors at these agencies well above the average pay and bennies for life...You would expect (expect) a better ROI from them but we all know how these things work....STATE & MUNICIPAL employees were asleep at the switch...shocker. I say we need to look at firing a group of Managers that allowed this to occur and did nothing.

2. UNETHICAL CONDUCT IS THE NORM - The way things operate within the halls of the State Government and Municipal offices, "skinning the system" is a rite of passage...Cops, Firefighters, Town Managers....all do important work and all want to whatever they can do to crank up the $$$ and feather their retirements. We wind up having to write laws to stop all the loopholes they devise because no one sat down and tried to imagine how an employee would try to gin up the system. It takes away from all those who don't do so but "it is what it is" and the culture is based on fleecing the taxpayers, plain & simple.

3. GREED - " GREED IS GOOD "should be the motto for the State Government and Municipal employees and their unions. There is no care of how the money grab effects the taxpayers, who gets deprived of needed services because so much of the budget gets devoted to perks, etc. All that matters in the end, is " I GOT MINE". If you live in the belief that this is not so, I hate to burst your bubble but the Unions and their members have been laughing at you all the way to the bank for decades.

Like anything else, we are reaching a tipping point. The budget crisis is exposing the games and will bring them to an end. The only issue will be " How was this allowed to go on for so long??" - It comes down to we overpaid for poor management and a system that rewarded too many of the worst people in the positions we where we (the taxpayers) needed the best people.

It is to weep.....


One man, two jobs, and a question
Why did Massport, EMS let public safety employee work almost nonstop?
By Rachel Kossman and Walter V. Robinson
Boston Globe Correspondents

Last year, on April 27, Lieutenant Richard G. Covino was paid for working an 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. shift with the Massachusetts Port Authority Fire Department. All in all, an ordinary work day.

But starting at 3 p.m. the same day, Covino was also being paid for an eight-hour shift at his other full-time public safety job, as a paramedic for the city of Boston’s Emergency Medical Services Department, where he has worked since 1984.

It is one of several instances in which Covino was paid for working for both agencies at the same time.

For at least 11 years, Covino has juggled two full-time public safety jobs, his longtime position in Boston and successive jobs as a firefighter in Cohasset, Gloucester, and, since 2006, at Massport. In the last four years, Covino has been paid an average of $200,000 a year, including substantial overtime pay.

The overlapping shifts aside, Covino’s nearly 100-hour weeks confront two of Greater Boston’s most elite public safety agencies with an embarrassing question: Why would each allow Covino to hold two high-stress public safety jobs in which alertness and clear-headed judgment might spell the difference between life and death?

On at least five days last year, Covino was credited with starting work in Boston between one and three hours before he had purportedly finished his shift at Massport, according to a Globe examination of his attendance records over a recent 18-month period. On numerous other occasions, there was no more than five minutes, and sometimes less, between the time he officially finished work at one agency and started a tour at the other.

And the records show something else: Covino, who is 50, often worked long stretches with virtually no time off, sometimes 40 hours or more at a stretch, and much of that behind the wheel of a Boston ambulance speeding through the city on life-saving missions. In the last four years, he worked nearly 90 days of overtime a year at the two agencies, for which he earned close to $140,000.

On April 14, after an inquiry from the Globe triggered an internal review, Massport Fire Chief Robert Donahue suspended Covino without pay pending completion of a full investigation. Late on Friday, EMS spokeswoman Jennifer Mehigan said EMS was placing Covino on administrative leave with pay after an initial inquiry also uncovered problems.

Covino declined requests for an interview.

Why Massport and EMS permitted the arrangement is not altogether clear. Donahue, for instance, said he assumed when he hired Covino in 2006 that he was quitting the Boston job, and only found out months later that he had not. Mehigan said EMS officials knew only “anecdotally’’ about the Massport job. EMS has no restrictions on outside employment.

Massport has moved swiftly to make changes. Donahue suspended Covino and sharply curtailed the practice that allows firefighters to swap shifts with one another. This practice was critical to Covino’s juggling act. He routinely asked others to fill in for him so he could leave Massport halfway through a normal day shift to work his standard 3 to 11 p.m. EMS shift. He would repay the hours to them at another time.

Massport last week also changed its policy for new hires in any job: None will be permitted to keep a second full-time position.

EMS, which just launched its inquiry, has not said whether its policies might change.

Neither agency had a policy prohibiting its employees from having another public safety job, or even a requirement that managers be notified about other positions. Indeed, EMS Chief James Hooley, in an interview Thursday, said it is possible that Covino may not be the only one of his 350 EMTs and paramedics working for another public safety agency.

“I don’t know if I could say no to someone having another public safety job,’’ Hooley said.

Samuel R. Tyler, the president of the Boston Municipal Research Bureau, a business-supported watchdog agency that focuses on city finances and management, said he was astonished to learn that either agency would countenance such an arrangement.

“To allow one person to hold two high-stress public safety jobs is inconceivable. It makes no sense,’’ Tyler said. “It should be common sense — you cannot permit someone to have two jobs, each one stressful, that require quick decisions that affect the safety and lives of the public.’’

Tyler said that such arrangements may “cheat the taxpayers out of the services they should expect,’’ and could leave the city vulnerable to substantial legal damages for any serious misstep by an exhausted paramedic.

Hooley said that Covino has been “one of our better performers,’’ with no hint that his Massport job had affected his work as a paramedic. In 1992, when he had just the one job, Covino was awarded the department’s highest honor, the Medal of Honor, for leading people to safety from a Mattapan house fire before firefighters arrived, Hooley said.

Jay Weaver, an EMS partner and friend of Covino’s, had nothing but praise for his colleague. “Rick is an exceptionally skilled and knowledgeable paramedic, among the finest I’ve ever worked with,’’ Weaver said in an e-mail exchange from Afghanistan, where he is serving a tour as an Army lawyer. “He is an extremely hard worker.’’

Donahue, the Massport chief, would say only that Covino was suspended “for possible violations of department policies and procedures.’’

Friday evening, Mehigan released a statement that said Covino had just been placed on leave “while questions raised by his dual employment with Boston EMS and another agency are being reviewed.’’ It said the Boston Public Health Commission, which oversees EMS, “is committed to ensuring that Boston residents have the utmost confidence in its employees and services.’’

The EMS, with 50 ambulances, responded to emergency calls 110,000 times in 2010. The Massport Fire Department, with 85 firefighters, responds to about 3,000 calls a year, almost all at Logan. Its principal firefighting training involves aircraft fire and rescue operations.

Donahue said that by the time he learned Covino had kept his EMS job, his new hire was fulfilling his work requirements and the agency had no policy barring second jobs. “Obviously, in the future, based on this case, we’d do it differently,’’ Donahue said in an interview. “Safety is our highest priority.’’

At EMS, Hooley said that because of concerns about on-the-job fatigue, EMTs and paramedics can work no more than 18 hours at a stretch. “We would never approve anything more than that,’’ he said.

But serving two masters, Covino regularly violated the spirit of Hooley’s restrictions, according to a Globe review of his work records.

Starting last March 13, for example, Covino was off for less than two hours in a 50-hour stretch. That day, a Saturday, he clocked in to Massport at 5:52 in the morning, then left there at 10:21 p.m. for his Boston job, which started at 11 p.m. and ended at 7 a.m. on Sunday. After an hour’s break, Covino worked another shift at EMS, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. After a quick commute, he was back on duty at Massport at 4:17 p.m. Sunday for an overnight shift that ended at 8:10 a.m. on Monday.

After that marathon effort, Covino was off for part of Monday, until he went back to EMS for a 3 to 11 p.m. shift.

Such extraordinary work patterns appear again and again during the 18 months of attendance records from the two agencies that the Globe was able to compare. Prior to August 2009, the Massport records do not contain the start and stop times for firefighters’ shifts.

The Massport job allowed for some sleep, typically between midnight and 5 a.m., but only if there were no calls, according to Donahue.

Until the Globe made its public records request in February, neither agency was aware of Covino’s specific work schedule at the other, a scheduled that still allowed for extensive overtime.

Dr. Charles A. Czeisler, director of the Division of Sleep Medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and one of the country’s leading authorities on sleep deprivation, said in an interview that physicians and first responders like paramedics and firefighters have a much higher risk of making errors when they go long periods without sleep. Someone who has gone without sleep for 24 hours, he said, has impaired judgment similar to a person who is legally drunk. In such cases, he said, people are more likely to make bad decisions and have short-term memory problems.

Neither EMS nor Massport has evidence of fatigue-related mistakes by Covino.

Covino’s dual positions raise another issue as well: Which hat would Covino don if there were a major terrorist episode at Logan that required both agencies to call in all available personnel? Donahue said that he believes Covino’s first responsibility would be to Massport. Said Hooley: “He understands that Boston EMS is his principal employer. That’s where his primary loyalty lies.’’

This article was prepared for an investigative reporting course at Northeastern University. It was overseen by Walter V. Robinson, who is distinguished professor of journalism and a former editor of the Globe Spotlight Team. Robinson can be reached at w.robinson@neu.edu. Confidential messages can be left at 617-929-3334.

Massachusetts angling to deprive citizens of their 2012 Primary Vote ....more crappola from Obama's Buddy Deval "Spend-it-all" Patrick

The budget is now being used as justification for elimination of the 2012 Primaries??

This coming out of Massachusetts (with Obama's Buddy Governor "Spend-it-all Deval Patrick).....Funny how the OBOTS are backing the UNIONS but want to take away the citizens right to vote.

We have enough money to give the retiring Chief of Massport a $450K payment of Unused Sicktime and a $200K a year pension but we can't pay for the Presidential Primary??

This is how the DEMS show people that their vote doesn't count because they will gin up a "crisis" and use that as a reason to deprive people of their Constitutional Right to VOTE.....and people wonder why we didn't want to re-elect the fool that resides in our State House??


Not enough money for a 2012 primary?
A handful of states, including Massachusetts, are considering abolishing their presidential primaries — mainly because there's not enough money in the budget:
Politico Blog - Ben Smith

Massachusetts Secretary of State Bill Galvin says there’s not enough money to run a primary in March 2012, according to Gov. Deval Patrick’s budget for the next fiscal year.

“The number that was submitted by the governor despite the fact that he suggested, or his administration suggested, that it would be a 2 percent cut, in fact is a far more drastic cut. My budget will go down anyways for the coming fiscal year in the elections area because we have one fewer election in the upcoming fiscal year than we did in the last. But nevertheless, it’s a problem to run this March 6, 2012 event based upon the numbers they’ve submitted,” Galvin told WBZ.

The result of a state abolishing its presidential primary would likely be a state-party funded caucus system — but those state parties could also choose a different nomination method

Wisconsin Gov. Walker to Greedy Unions, " We don’t have anything to give. Like every other state in the country, we’re broke...it’s time to pay up."

LOOKS LIKE WE ARE REACHING ANOTHER "TIPPING POINT...and none too soon.

To wit: The "Tipping Point" is an idea outlined by that name by Malcolm Gladwell. According to Gladwell, ideas change society by behaving like viruses....the moment of critical mass, the threshold, the boiling point; the point when everyday things reach epidemic proportions.

It looks like we have started to reach that point in our States.

After the impressive progress of Gov. Chris Christie in New Jersey, the Gov. of Wisconsin is my newest hero.....taking a stand against the greedy state hacks who don't care that the economy is in the crapper, they just want their $$$ and life-long entitlements....regardless of who it hurts or what it does to the rest of the state. The biggest issue is that these greedy hacks usually pull up stakes and move somewhere else once they retire on their benefits for life.....

Look, I don't want to see anyone do without BUT there is no way that we can honor golden ticket promises made by "pie-in-the sky" pension managers from 30 years ago. The market has turned south and no one should expect to be immune from change. To do so shows a level of selfishness that is the Hallmark of unions and their leaders.

I salute the honorable Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin !!! He is taking on the problem head on.....Go get'em Sir !! Do what is best for your citizens, not just the well connected state hacks!!



Wisconsin May Take an Ax to State Workers’ Benefits and Their Unions
By MONICA DAVEY and STEVEN GREENHOUSE
Published: February 11, 2011

Citing Wisconsin’s gaping budget shortfall for this year and even larger ones expected in the years ahead, Gov. Scott Walker proposed a sweeping plan on Friday to cut benefits for public employees in the state and to take away most of their unions’ ability to bargain.

The proposal by Mr. Walker, a Republican who was elected in November after pledging that he would get public workers’ compensation “into line” with everyone else’s, is expected to receive support next week in the State Legislature, where Republicans also won control of both chambers in the fall.

The prospect left union leaders, state and local employees and some Democrats stunned over the plan’s scope and what it might signal for public-sector unions in the state. Union leaders began planning rallies in Madison and contacting lawmakers, pressing them to reject the idea.

Mr. Walker said Wisconsin was prepared for any fallout, noting in an interview that the National Guard was ready to step in to handle state duties, if need be.

“I’m just trying to balance my budget,” Mr. Walker said. “To those who say why didn’t I negotiate on this? I don’t have anything to negotiate with. We don’t have anything to give. Like practically every other state in the country, we’re broke. And it’s time to pay up.”

State leaders across the country have talked about solving budget woes with actions that in other climates might have been politically impossible: cutting the salaries and pensions of government workers and limiting the power of labor unions.

But the plan in Wisconsin, which faces a $137 million shortfall in the current budget and a gap in the billions for the coming cycle, is among the most far-reaching of such proposals to be delivered to lawmakers. Mr. Walker expects swift approval.

Among key provisions of Mr. Walker’s plan: limiting collective bargaining for most state and local government employees to the issue of wages (instead of an array of issues, like health coverage or vacations); requiring government workers to contribute 5.8 percent of their pay to their pensions, much more than now; and requiring state employees to pay at least 12.6 percent of health care premiums (most pay about 6 percent now).

Mike Imbrogno, a cook at the University of Wisconsin in Madison who belongs to a union and said he earns $28,000 a year, described the move as an “attack” on working people.

“He’s basically trying to smash the last remaining organized upward pressure on wages and benefits in Wisconsin,” Mr. Imbrogno said. Governor Walker’s proposal would specifically remove the right of the university’s faculty and staff to bargain collectively.

Mr. Walker made several proposals that will weaken not just unions’ ability to bargain contracts, but also their finances and political clout.

His proposal would make it harder for unions to collect dues because the state would stop collecting the money from employee paychecks.

He would further weaken union treasuries by giving members of public-sector unions the right not to pay dues. In an unusual move, he would require secret-ballot votes each year at every public-sector union to determine whether a majority of workers still want to be unionized.

He would require public-employee unions to negotiate new contracts every year, an often lengthy process. And he would limit the raises of state employees and teachers to the consumer price index, unless the public approves higher raises through a referendum. Exempted from those changes would be firefighters and law enforcement personnel.

“We think that the proposal that’s put forward, it just goes too far,” said Phil Neuenfeldt, president of the Wisconsin A.F.L.-C.I.O. “The right to negotiate wages and benefits for a union is a fundamental underpinning of the American middle class.”

But Mr. Walker and Republican leaders said disassembling unions was not the point at all. The intent, Mr. Walker said, was to avoid balancing the budget some other way: by laying off some 6,000 state workers, and taking away Medicaid coverage for hundreds of thousands of children.

Wisconsin officials say Mr. Walker’s plan would save the state $30 million in the current budget, and $300 million in the next budget. “In these tough times, I think people are going to feel that this is not that much to ask,” said Jeff Fitzgerald, the Republican speaker of the State Assembly. “Everyone is going to have to pitch in.”

Public Pension Hygiene Act - Making the Pols come clean on how deep the $$$$$ hole is in regards to unfunded public pensions

The State Governments have not been 100% honest with the taxpayers, and that has allowed them to dig a very, very deep hole that they will look for the Feds to fill in for them. This hole is $3.5 TRILLION Dollars deep.... That "hole" is the pensions promised to all the State Hacks who have retired early, double dipped, and set themselves up for a nice comfy retirement (backed by the Unions) even while the taxpayers have seen their retirements dry up like a puddle on a hot July afternoon.

While I don't want to see anyone deprived of their pensions, I don't see the equity in insulating Public Sector retirees from losses while we ignored millions of private sector employees who had the rug pulled out from under them. Just because you worked for the Town or the State shouldn't set you up for some "Divine Right" that the average Joe wouldn't have.....after all, the "average Joe" has been footing the bill all along.


Public Pension Hygiene Act
The first reform step is exposing the true size of the funding hole
Opinion - Wall Street Journal - 01/22/11

We're so accustomed to misnamed legislation like the Employee Free Choice Act (card check) that it's hard to believe that a welcome proposal called the Public Employee Pension Transparency Act describes what it actually purports to do. To wit, prohibit public pension bailouts by the federal government and expose the $3.5 trillion of unfunded public pension liabilities that local and state governments have obscured.

Most state and local governments currently use their own estimated rate of return on their investments to discount their liabilities. By projecting unrealistically high rates of return, states minimize their unfunded liabilities, at least on paper. Lower unfunded liabilities in turn allow them to reduce how much they and public employees must contribute to their pension funds. Inflated investment assumptions are one reason that public pension funds are unfunded to the tune of $3.5 trillion.

Public pensions typically assume an 8% annual return on average, but over the past five years state pension funds with more than $5 billion in assets have earned only 4.5%. Taxpayers must make up the difference between what the funds earn and what they need to pay retirees. For Californians that is roughly $5 billion this year.

Local taxpayers are already seeing their services whacked and taxes raised to fill these pension holes. University of California students will have to pony up 8% more next year for tuition to offset an expected $500 million in state budget cuts. Illinois residents will soon pay 67% more in income taxes, but taxpayers won't feel the full brunt for another decade when the funds begin running out of money. When Chicago's pension fund goes dry around 2019, over half of the city's revenue will be dedicated to pensions.

In the 1950s and 1960s, many private employers obscured their liabilities the way governments are doing today, though they didn't have a public backstop. Many funds went broke. In 1974 Congress established minimum funding requirements and penalized companies that underfunded pensions. The law also required companies to report and discount their liabilities using a more conservative rate of return.

These changes exploded liabilities and prompted many companies to switch from defined-benefit plans to defined-contribution plans like 401(k)s. While a majority of private workers now have defined-contribution plans, defined-benefit plans remain the norm in government.

Enter the Public Employee Pension Transparency Act, which is sponsored by House Republicans Devin Nunes and Darrell Issa of California and Wisconsin's Paul Ryan. Their bill would encourage governments to switch to defined-contribution plans by revealing the true magnitude of their unfunded liabilities. States and municipalities would have to report their liabilities to the U.S. Treasury using their own rosy investment forecasts as well as a more realistic Treasury bond rate (to be determined by a formula).

This data would make clear how much taxpayers potentially owe and increase pressure on lawmakers to fix their plans. For instance, Illinois estimated in 2009 that it had a roughly $85 billion unfunded liability. Using a Treasury discount rate, that unfunded liability balloons to $167 billion.

Out of respect for state sovereignty, the federal government shouldn't and can't tell local governments how to run or fund their pensions. But the bill doesn't do so and it also doesn't force states to fund their plans using a lower discount rate. States don't even have to comply with the law, though they would forego their ability to sell federally subsidized, tax-exempt bonds if they don't.

The bill may not persuade states like Illinois and California to revamp their pensions, but it will reveal how broken they are—and that's a start

NJ Governor - "Sick leave is for when you're sick- It's not supposed to be a second taxpayer-funded retirement payment."

Our man in New Jersey strikes again at the rigged systems that reward the feckless hacks that are on the state employment rolls - Limiting how they can rig the system in their favor and cutting the WASTE that has been allowed for far too long....

NOW, if we can only get someone like him into the Massachusetts State House....we tried but POTUS' Buddy SPEND-IT-ALL Deval Patrick got reelected by the DEMS and Unions....The economic crisis might force Deval's hand but he is a "tool" for the unions so we will keep paying idiot hacks in Massachusetts, even when they don't deserve the extra pay they will help themselves to.....Greedy Bastards.


NJ gov. signs law capping pay through arbitration
By David Porter
Associated Press / December 21, 2010

WAYNE, N.J.—Gov. Chris Christie signed a bill Tuesday that caps increases to police and firefighter pay awarded through arbitration, a measure he called the most important of the proposals in his so-called toolkit to help towns control costs.

Tweet Be the first to Tweet this!Yahoo! Buzz ShareThis With Democratic Senate President Stephen Sweeney looking on, Christie hailed the passage of the bill as a testament to bipartisan cooperation.

"We've proven over the last year that Republicans and Democrats can get things done together," he said. "Mayors have been yelling and screaming for these kinds of reforms for years."

The bill caps salary awards, including longevity pay and automatic step increases, for police and firefighters at 2 percent when their unions engage arbitrators to settle contracts.

It also fast-tracks the arbitration process by giving arbitrators a 45-day window to rule on disputes and limiting the appeal process to 30 days. In addition, arbitrators' pay will be capped at $1,000 per day or $7,500 per case, whichever sum is lower.

Christie said Tuesday that some cases in arbitration have dragged on for years, and that fear of excessive arbitration awards has hampered some towns' ability to conduct effective contract negotiations.

"Arbitration works when it's balanced," said Sweeney, who is an organizer for the International Association of Ironworkers. "But the system has gotten out of whack over the last 20 years."

Pension and health care costs are not included in the cap. Christie said the cap will lapse in April 2014, at which time lawmakers will review its effects and consider modifications.

"This is the most significant individual bill in the toolkit," Christie said.

Municipalities have been clamoring for tools to help them control costs since the Legislature approved -- and Christie signed -- a 2 percent cap on annual property tax increases that goes into effect Jan. 1.

Christie said residents could see a difference in their tax bills by August, but that the effect likely won't be seen until the end of 2011 or beginning of 2012.

"It's one of the major issues we're dealing with," Hoboken Mayor Dawn Zimmer said after the signing. "This gives us the tools going forward to make sure it's fair for the residents of the city of Hoboken and of New Jersey."

The governor said another primary target is sick leave policies for public employees, some of whom routinely get tens of thousands of dollars in unused sick time when they retire. Christie noted a case in Parsippany in which four police officers reportedly were due a total of $900,000 upon retirement.

Christie signed a bill this year that limits state employees to receiving $15,000, and he said Tuesday a similar measure in the Legislature for school, government and public safety workers needs to be toughened.

"Sick leave is for when you're sick," he said. "It's not supposed to be a second taxpayer-funded retirement payment."

Walking the walk: NJ Gov. Chris Christie to cut 1,200 public sector jobs

Governor Chris Christie is the kind of new Politician who we need more of in our Capitals...He is a no nonsense guy who calls out those who have been gouging the Taxpayers for years...Of course that makes him a target for Unions and their Public Employee membership....

As far as I'm concerned, all I can say is, YOU GO GOVERNOR ! I don't live in New Jersey but you are my kind of Politician and maybe, just maybe, you can be an example how others can change the landscape so the rest of us can stop getting gouged by state & local employees who have set themselves up as a privileged class.

Now some of them can get an idea what the rest of us have been dealing with for the past few years...a little perspective is a good thing.

He will also be on Meet the Press this Sunday 11/07/10...

Walking the walk: NJ Gov. Chris Christie to cut 1,200 public sector jobs
By: Mark Hemingway
Washington Examiner Commentary Staff Writer
11/04/10

Since assuming office, Chris Christie has been relentlessly hammering home the message that New Jersey’s state government, which is badly in the red, must live within its means. But he’s also not afraid to make the tough decisions either. Whereas the previous governor, Jon Corzine, struck a deal to prevent layoffs in the public sector at a time when private sector workers were unemployed in record numbers, here comes Christie taking on the public sector unions:

State government is on track to shed at least 1,200 jobs in January, Gov. Chris Christie said today.
“Whether it will grow beyond that, I don’t know,” he said at a Statehouse press conference. “That’s very much going to be dependent on what the revenue outlook looks like for the state.”

The job cuts include layoffs and attrition, spokesman Michael Drewniak said.

How much do you think unions are going to spend to take Christie out when he runs for reelection? Sky’s the limit, I bet.

All Politics is local.....That Goes Double for Middleboro, MA - TIME FOR MARSHA TO GO.....

The Great Tip O'Neill, who was a legend in local politics in Massachusetts was famous for saying, " All politics is local." - no truer statement could ever be made about this issue or how Politics is viewed by those who live in Massachusetts.

My hometown of Middleboro, MA is no exception. We have had our share of donnybrooks and struggles over how the town is run, who runs the town and what the Town should/should not allow. Google " Casino" and Middleboro will pop right up. Not the first time it has happened in town, nor will it be the last time.

There is not only a local, but also a national dissatisfaction with the incumbents in office due to the way things have been done and the less than stellar results of Government on Local, State & Federal level. The Taxpayers are fed up and have had enough. Those who are in the position of being " Public Servants" have instead placed themselves as the "Lords of the Manor" and are using their positions of being politically connected to alter how things should be.

Example number one this week is Marsha Brunelle, Chairman of the Board of Selectmen. She has instituted a new set of rules for weekly Selectmen Meetings that effectively stifles all public dissent from occurring. The new rules are so restrictive that it would be near impossible for a town citizen to appear to speak unless they have full approval from the Board.

This is not only counter to what the purpose of the Selectmen's Weekly Meeting is for, it is against the long standing tradition of being able to show up, listen to the deliberations of the board and contribute in a respectful manner to the discussion.

Marsha Brunelle has had a series of ethics issues, mainly due to her inability to proper handle the responsiblity of her position, and being married to the Director of IT for the town, Roger Brunelle, another person who has had a long standing history of ethical issues. The two of them act like they can do whatever they please and there is no one who can hold them accountable.

Marsha wants to cut off all dissenting opinions which is further evidence that she should not be in the position of deciding town matters as her use of the "rules" to limit challenge to her position is a sign of her lack of ethical behavior. No person should see themselves as above reproach. All of those who work in public service should be willing to have all their actions subject to review and comment from the public. If you are unwilling to do so, then STEP DOWN.

There is no gray area in this issue - it is purely black & white. You should allow the public to contribute in an open and traditional manner as you were elected to manage the town's affair as a representative of the people's will. If you put in place restrictive rules stifling dissent, you have become a dictictorial Hypocrite who is unworthy of the position.

Enclosed is a copy of the editorial from this week's Middleboro Gazette.....Time to go MARSHA....take your less than ethical bag of troubles with you, and retire with your HACK husband to somewhere you won't deprive others of their right to challenge town leadership. You'll be living off the taxpayers for the rest of your life, not caring who has to pay the bill.

The disgusting abuses of the municipal pay & retirement system is rife in our town and others across the country. The self-serving people who were trusted with the public well-being have instead turned the rules around to satisfy their own needs. It is a total betrayal of the public's trust and a perversion of what was established as a way of providing a retirement.

Alllowing Muncipal Governments to get out of control and become unresponsive to the avergae citizen is something we and our children will regret for the rest of our lives.




A spirited discussion may be shaping up here
August 12, 2010 11:07 AM
Jane Lopes - Middleboro Gazette

I had a dream last night that was more like a premonition. I dreamed that I saw Vic Sylvia, Paul Stiga and Larry Carver marching on Town Hall.

Well, it might have been a dream but there's no doubt in my mind that if it's possible for people who have passed on to make a return appearance, this trio will be at the next selectmen's meeting.

Vic, Paul and Larry no doubt have better things to do now, but surely they glanced down Monday night as they heard the selectmen talking about a proposal drafted by Chairman Marsha Brunelle that would, as one onlooker put it, severely restrict if not stifle the public's ability to participate in meetings of the Board of Selectmen.

After a majority of the selectmen twice rejected a proposal that they adopt Robert's Rules of Order as their guidelines for conducting meetings, the board received a letter from former selectman Adam Bond suggesting that they need some sort of rules to run meetings by, and offering guidelines adopted by other communities as examples. Ms. Brunelle instead came up with a six-page document that goes well beyond providing a structure for the board's weekly meetings. In terms of the meetings themselves, the document — which was not voted upon Monday night — Ms. Brunelle is calling for "all matters to be placed on the agenda" to be submitted by noon on Wednesday prior to a Monday night meeting. And that goes for anything that a resident might want to bring up during the "public comment period" that Ms. Brunelle reluctantly retained when she took over again as chairman from former selectman Pat Rogers earlier this year.

"If a resident desires to make an inquiry or comment during the public comment portion of the meeting, notice to do so must be given to the Board's secretary by the deadline stated above (Wednesday noon). This allows time for appropriate research if required," the proposed rule reads.

Resident Allin Frawley, who regularly takes advantage of the "public comment period" opportunity, read this paragraph and rightly envisioned, well, a muzzle. After the meeting, Ms. Brunelle allowed that she is aiming to limit what she views as obstructive chatter from the audience. And the alleged obstructionists are not limited to the audience, since the proposal to require board members to get on the agenda in order to speak is also designed to limit discussion — say, like the proposals to adopt Robert's Rules, which came up under "Other." "Other," an agenda item designed for board members to raise issues, is to be as circumscribed as the "public comment period."

Mr. Frawley's consternation would surely be echoed by the aforementioned Vic, Paul and Larry were they available for comment Monday night. Because Allin Frawley and the others who regulary participate in selectmen's meetings come from a long and honorable tradition in Middleboro, one that has been fiercely defended by Vic, Paul, Larry and others like them over the years. Two of the three men, Vic and Larry, served as selectmen at different times, but for most of their public lives they, like Paul Stiga, made their contributions from the audience in the selectmen's room at Town Hall on Monday nights.

The chairman of the board suggests that other government bodies do not provide for the public input that Middleboro residents enjoy. Well, Ms. Brunelle, we live in Middleboro, and in Middleboro we speak our piece. As chairman you have the right to cut off someone who is disrespectful, who has long since made his or her point, who is holding forth on the subject of apples while the board's discussion involved oranges. It's up to the chairman to ensure that meetings run effectively and adjourn in a timely manner unless there's pressing business that dictates otherwise. But the tradition in Middleboro is that the selectmen's meetings on Monday night are the place where people can get their questions answered and make their opinions known, albeit certainly within reason.

There was little comment Monday night about the proposed guidelines, and it was indicated that there will be discussion at the next meeting. Since Ms. Brunelle seems to have already adopted her own recommendations, given the lack of input allowed from the floor Monday night, the discussion may be limited to the board members themselves. The proposed guidelines are available on the town web site with the Aug. 9 selectmen's agenda items for those who want to read for themselves.

So far the Town Hall has been investigated for paranormal activity and spirit beings with limited results — mostly a ghostly voice or mysterious light source here or there. The investigators might want to stop by for the next selectmen's meeting. I'd be surprised if some folks weren't there in spirit. Certainly someone needs to be present to object to the those physically present in the audience being seen, but not heard.

“The New Deal is demographically obsolete. You can’t fund the dream of the 1960s on the economy of 2010.”

This was an issue that I brought to the attention of many people when I was on the Town of Middleboro Personnel Board.....Not that anyone in local government gave a damn because they knew they were " in" the system, and had no worries about getting benefits for life.... The HACKS always took care of themselves first with an " I got mine" attitude and "don't give a damn who it hurts" outlook on anyone else.....

We are unable to sustain the amount of funds promised to people 20-30 years ago.....The choice that we will need to make is do we devote a majority of our funds to providing a very comfortable retirement for the privileged few who are "in" the system OR do we ensure that our governments is sustained to serve the need of the majority of our citizens ??? And there in lies the rub......
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Battle Looms Over Huge Costs of Public Pensions
By RON LIEBER
Published: August 6, 2010 - NY TIMES

There’s a class war coming to the world of government pensions.
Who should pay for the trillion-dollar pension gap?

The haves are retirees who were once state or municipal workers. Their seemingly guaranteed and ever-escalating monthly pension benefits are breaking budgets nationwide.

The have-nots are taxpayers who don’t have generous pensions. Their

401(k)s or individual retirement accounts have taken a real beating in recent years and are not guaranteed. And soon, many of those people will be paying higher taxes or getting fewer state services as their states put more money aside to cover those pension checks.

At stake is at least $1 trillion. That’s trillion, with a “t,” as in titanic and terrifying.

The figure comes from

a study by the Pew Center on the States that came out in February. Pew estimated a $1 trillion gap as of fiscal 2008 between what states had promised workers in the way of retiree pension, health care and other benefits and the money they currently had to pay for it all. And some economists say that Pew is too conservative and the problem is two or three times as large.

So a question of extraordinary financial, political, legal and moral complexity emerges, something that every one of us will be taking into town meetings and voting booths for years to come: Given how wrong past pension projections were, who should pay to fill the 13-figure financing gap?
Consider what’s going on in Colorado — and what is likely to unfold in other states and municipalities around the country.

Earlier this year, in an act of rare political courage, a bipartisan coalition of state legislators passed a

pension overhaul bill. Among other things, the bill reduced the raise that people who are already retired get in their pension checks each year.

This sort of thing just isn’t done. States have asked current workers to contribute more, tweaked the formula for future hires or banned them from the pension plan altogether. But this was apparently the first time that state legislators had forced current retirees to share the pain.

Sharing the burden seems to be the obvious solution so we don’t continue to kick the problem into the future. “We have to take this on, if there is any way of bringing fiscal sanity to our children,” said former Gov. Richard Lamm of Colorado, a Democrat. “The New Deal is demographically obsolete. You can’t fund the dream of the 1960s on the economy of 2010.”

But in Colorado, some retirees and those eligible to retire still want to live that dream. So they sued the state to keep all of the annual cost-of-living increases they thought they would be getting in perpetuity.

The state’s case turns, in part, on whether it is an “actuarial necessity” for the Legislature to make a change. To Meredith Williams, executive director of the Public Employees’ Retirement Association, the state’s pension fund, the answer is pretty simple. “If something didn’t change, we would have run out of money in the foreseeable future,” he said. “So no one would have been paid anything.”

Meanwhile,

Gary R. Justus, a former teacher who is one of the lead plaintiffs in the case against the state, asks taxpayers in Colorado and elsewhere to consider an ethical question: Why is the state so quick to break its promises?

After all, he and others like him served their neighbors dutifully for decades. And along the way, state employees made big decisions (and built lifelong financial plans) based on retiring with a full pension that was promised to them in a contract that they say has the force of the state and federal constitutions standing behind it. To them it is deferred compensation, and taking it away is akin to not paying a contractor for paving state highways.

And actuarial necessity or not, Mr. Justus said he didn’t believe he should be responsible for past pension underfunding and the foolish risks that pension managers made with his money long after he retired in 2003.

The changes the Legislature made don’t seem like much: there’s currently a 2 percent cap in retirees’ cost-of-living adjustment for their pension checks instead of the 3.5 percent raise that many of them received before.

But

Stephen Pincus, a lawyer for the retirees who have filed suit, estimates that the change will cost pensioners with 30 years of service an average of $165,000 each over the next 20 years.
Mr. Justus, 62, who taught math for 29 years in the Denver public schools, says he thinks it could cost him half a million dollars if he lives another 30 years. He also notes that just about all state workers in Colorado do not (and cannot) pay into Social Security, so the pension is all retirees have to live on unless they have other savings.

No one disputes these figures. Instead, they apologize. “All I can say is that I am sorry,” said Brandon Shaffer, a Democrat, the president of the Colorado State Senate, who helped lead the bipartisan coalition that pushed through the changes. (He also had to break the news to his mom, a retired teacher.) “I am tremendously sympathetic. But as a steward of the public trust, this is what we had to do to preserve the

retirement fund.”

Taxpayers, whose payments are also helping to restock Colorado’s pension fund, may not be as sympathetic, though. The average retiree in the fund stopped working at the sprightly age of 58 and deposits a check for $2,883 each month. Many of them also got a 3.5 percent annual raise, no matter what inflation was, until the rules changed this year.

Private sector retirees who want their own monthly $2,883 check for life, complete with inflation adjustments, would need an immediate fixed annuity if they don’t have a pension. A 58-year-old male shopping for one from an A-rated

insurance company would have to hand over a minimum of $860,000, according to Craig Hemke of Buyapension.com. A woman would need at least $928,000, because of her longer life expectancy.

Who among aspiring retirees has a nest egg that size, let alone people with the same moderate earning history as many state employees? And who wants to pay to top off someone else’s pile of money via increased income taxes or a radical decline in state services?

If you find the argument of Colorado’s retirees wanting, let your local legislator know that you don’t want to be responsible for every last dollar necessary to cover pension guarantees gone horribly awry. After all, many government employee unions will be taking contrary positions and doing so rather loudly.

If you work for a state or local government, start saving money outside of the pension plan if you haven’t already, because that plan may not last for as long as you need it.

And if you’re a government retiree or getting close to the end of your career? Consider what it means to be a citizen in a community. And what it means to be civil instead of litigious, coming to the table and making a compromise before politicians shove it down your throat and you feel compelled to challenge them to a courthouse brawl.

“We have to do what unions call givebacks,” said Mr. Lamm, the former Colorado governor. “That’s the only way to sanity. Any other alternative, therein lies dragons.”

State & Local Government HACKS facing deep cuts....long overdue

State & Local governments have been rife with "HACKS", i.e. public servants who are dead-wood but once they get in a job there, are all but guaranteed employment & benefits for life, all on the taxpayer's dime....They are the same as "Welfare Queens" only they are on the dole because once they are employed, it is virtually impossible for them to be fired....short of committing a crime. The cost to the tax-payers for this ineffective model of employment is high and has been welded in place by the unions. The cost that these HACKS will bring for their "life-time everything" is a major reason why we are in such dire financial straits in our towns, cities and states...

Well it seems as even the HACKS are becoming victims of the new economy....the WAPO reports that the cuts are coming and they are reaching even those who thought that because they worked for the town and/or state, they were set for life......guess again, fat-arse public servant....

From the WAPO;

" Local governments across the country are facing an intensifying fiscal crisis that is forcing them to make deep cuts in personnel and services just as more hard-pressed residents are seeking their help, according to a report released Tuesday.

These cities and counties -- which have cut jobs significantly since the start of the downturn -- could slash as many as 500,000 more jobs over the current and coming fiscal years. The cuts would affect schools, public safety, libraries, trash collection and social services, according to survey released jointly by the National League of Cities, the National Association of Counties and U.S. Conference of Mayors.

Combined with the fiscal stress confronting state governments -- which face a combined budget deficit of $89 billion this year -- the crisis faced by counties and cities hampers the struggling economic recovery, analysts have said. "

It seems that the people are finally on par with Howard Beale from the 1976 movie "Network" and finally making "real change" to those who have been taking a ride-for-life on the taxpayer's dime for too long....To quote Mr. Beale and his famous words of outrage:

Howard Beale: I don't have to tell you things are bad. Everybody knows things are bad. It's a depression. Everybody's out of work or scared of losing their job. The dollar buys a nickel's work, banks are going bust, shopkeepers keep a gun under the counter. Punks are running wild in the street and there's nobody anywhere who seems to know what to do, and there's no end to it. We know the air is unfit to breathe and our food is unfit to eat, and we sit watching our TV's while some local newscaster tells us that today we had fifteen homicides and sixty-three violent crimes, as if that's the way it's supposed to be.

We know things are bad - worse than bad. They're crazy. It's like everything everywhere is going crazy, so we don't go out anymore. We sit in the house, and slowly the world we are living in is getting smaller, and all we say is, 'Please, at least leave us alone in our living rooms. Let me have my toaster and my TV and my steel-belted radials and I won't say anything. Just leave us alone.' Well, I'm not gonna leave you alone. I want you to get mad! I don't want you to protest. I don't want you to riot - I don't want you to write to your congressman because I wouldn't know what to tell you to write. I don't know what to do about the depression and the inflation and the Russians and the crime in the street. All I know is that first you've got to get mad.

[shouting] You've got to say, 'I'm a HUMAN BEING, Goddamnit! My life has VALUE!' So I want you to get up now. I want all of you to get up out of your chairs. I want you to get up right now and go to the window. Open it, and stick your head out, and yell,

[shouting] 'I'M AS MAD AS HELL, AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE THIS ANYMORE!'

Time to clean house, end life-time rides for the HACKS and bring back sanity to our State & Local Government.