Tag Archives: Compensation

Commentary

Are public sector unions to blame for state and local deficits?

1 Comment

ECM sent me this post from the Manhattan Institute.

Full text:

The economists over at the e21 blog take on the argument being made by some pro-labor groups that public sector compensation (pay and the cost of benefits) is not a significant part of current state and municipal budget woes. In an editorial, e21 notes that state and local spending as a percentage of U.S. GDP has doubled in the last 50 years even as investment by local governments in traditional areas like building roads and bridges has been flat. Where has the money gone? Primarily to Medicaid and to public sector compensation.The editorial notes, for instance, that pension costs alone have increased in California from $2.4 billion per year to $4.8 billion from 2003 to 2009, while  New York City’s pension obligations have tripled over the same period.

The Manhattan Institute’s Nicole Gelinas has illustrated how those costs have worked on New York City. Amidst the controversy over the poor snow-cleaning job done by the city’s sanitation department after the Dec. 26 snowstorm, Nicole pointed out that although the department has been shrinking, its personnel costs have been rising rapidly. The average cost of employing a single sanit worker in NYC is now $144,000 annually, up from $79,000 a decade ago. The big driver of costs is sharply rising pension contributions, up from $10 million a decade ago to $200 million today.

The editorial at e21 concludes by comparing public sector pensions with private pensions, using California’s formula for public workers as an example. For a state employee in California earning almost $83,000 at retirement after 25 years of service, e21 estimates that a similar private sector employee with a defined contribution plan would have to put away 23 percent of his pre-tax income every year to amass enough of a pot of money to purchase an annuity that would give him the same kind of retirement benefits.

“Put simply, it is difficult to conceive a way to address the current – and projected – state fiscal crisis without dramatic reductions in state and local employee benefits,’ the editorial concludes.

Somebody has to pay for all this mess.

News

Republicans want bonuses for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac CEOs canceled

3 Comments
Rep. Michele Bachmann

Story here from CNS News.

Excerpt:

Seventy Republican members of Congress want Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner to cancel up to $6 million in bonuses and deferred compensation — approved before  Christmas 2009 — for the chief executive officers of the failed mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

“(T)here’s a letter that’s going to Sec. Geithner from a number of us calling for a rescission of those bonuses,” Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) told CNSNews.com Wednesday.

On Christmas Eve, at the same time the Obama administration announced that it was removing any cap on the amount of taxpayer aid to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the failed mortgage giants announced that they had received approval from their financial regulator to pay $42 million in compensation packages to 12 top executives for 2009.

The compensation packages included up to $6 million each to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac chief executives. For the CEOs, annual compensation consists of a base salary of $900,000, $3.1 million in deferred compensation and incentive pay of as much as $2 million. Public disclosure that the retention bonuses were being copnsidered first surfaced in the Spring.

And naturally my favorite member of Congress was involved:

“(We are pushing) for an ending — an unwinding, if you will — of the U.S. owning Fannie and Freddie. We want out of this sinking business as quickly as we possibly can, and we want to pull the plug on an unlimited taxpayer bailout of Freddie and Fannie,” Bachmann said.

[…]“When Sec. Geithner said that there’d be unlimited taxpayer funding continuing to go into this sinking ship, and then bonuses they’re given?,” she said. “On what basis?  What did they do?  What was the criteria that they could possibly be given a bonus?  The fact that they got unlimited taxpayer money?”

Bachman was referring to Treasury’s announcement that it would send unlimited tax money to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, thereby eliminating the current $400 billion cap on emergency aid that Treasury can give without having to come back to Congress for authorization.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are closely tied to Democrats.

Consider this Fox News story.

Excerpt:

Freddie and Fannie used huge lobbying budgets and political contributions to keep regulators off their backs.

A group called the Center for Responsive Politics keeps track of which politicians get Fannie and Freddie political contributions. The top three U.S. senators getting big Fannie and Freddie political bucks were Democrats and No. 2 is Sen. Barack Obama.

Now remember, he’s only been in the Senate four years, but he still managed to grab the No. 2 spot ahead of John Kerry — decades in the Senate — and Chris Dodd, who is chairman of the Senate Banking Committee.

Fannie and Freddie have been creations of the congressional Democrats and the Clinton White House, designed to make mortgages available to more people and, as it turns out, some people who couldn’t afford them.

Fannie and Freddie have also been places for big Washington Democrats to go to work in the semi-private sector and pocket millions. The Clinton administration’s White House Budget Director Franklin Raines ran Fannie and collected $50 million. Jamie Gorelick — Clinton Justice Department official — worked for Fannie and took home $26 million. Big Democrat Jim Johnson, recently on Obama’s VP search committee, has hauled in millions from his Fannie Mae CEO job.

More here about how the Democrats caused the recession.