Wisconsin governor gives Democrats ultimatum

i've been asking my friends the last couple of days how many years a retiree pulls from the "pension fund" before they die and we have come to a 15 year time frame. and these people pay into said fund their whole career say 30 years or so. can someone explain to me how is it that this model does not work? maybe we need to audit the fund to find out where that money has gone? and that, i say, will go a long way toward solving the problem. the same can be applied to social security maybe we should audit the i.r.s. to see where the money went.

majora$$hole said:

i've been asking my friends the last couple of days how many years a retiree pulls from the "pension fund" before they die and we have come to a 15 year time frame. and these people pay into said fund their whole career say 30 years or so. can someone explain to me how is it that this model does not work? maybe we need to audit the fund to find out where that money has gone? and that, i say, will go a long way toward solving the problem. the same can be applied to social security maybe we should audit the i.r.s. to see where the money went.

Click to expand...

Don't ask your friends, ask an actuary. ;-)

Public sector pensions quite often provide full benefits to retirees starting at 55....especially in teachers' unions. In fact, they are often incentivized (at least in Illinois) to retire early. Also in the case of Illinois (and Wisconsin, I believe, so probably other states where collective bargaining for wages and bennies is allowed) their healthcare costs, as they existed when they retired, are paid for by taxpayers....with teachers only picking up the increases....all the way to age 65.

In the case of Wisconsin, teachers were paying into the retirement system less money than you and I pay into Social Security, and because their pensions specify a "defined benefit" rather than a "defined contribution" (as does the Social Security System and almost all private sector pensions) it's not too hard to do the math in one's head that a $30,000 pension is costing taxpayeres an arm-and-leg-anda'-half.

The state had $12.1 billion in outstanding debt at the end of FY 2010. About half of that debt was in the form of general obligation bonds ($6.0 billion) and $9.373 billion was paid for with general resources. The proposed refunding only covers a small portion of the state's debt.

The total debt can be found at: ftp://doaftp04.doa.state.wi.us/doadocs/2010CAFR_Linked.pdf (pp.229-230). Unfortunately, aside from the aggregate figures, details concerning the structure of the debt are not provided.

donsutherland1 said:

The state had $12.1 billion in outstanding debt at the end of FY 2010. About half of that debt was in the form of general obligation bonds ($6.0 billion) and $9.373 billion was paid for with general resources. The proposed refunding only covers a small portion of the state's debt.

The total debt can be found at: ftp://doaftp04.doa.state.wi.us/doadocs/2010CAFR_Linked.pdf (pp.229-230). Unfortunately, aside from the aggregate figures, details concerning the structure of the debt are not provided.

Click to expand...

As i'm sure you know and you imply, the state is not looking to refinance the entire debt - and there could be good reasons why they are looking at this specific portion. So, the numbers you provided are fairly meaningless.

It sounds like you have no idea how much WI is attempting to refinance. Additionally, you have no idea what percentage of that has to be completed by 03/16 to help cover the deficit (it could be 100.0% for all you seem to know). So, basically, pretty much everything you provided prior, while interesting, is fairly meaningless to the debate.

The non-partisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau office says the deadline is 03/16, absent further information (beyond just your opinion) that is the date that seems most likely.

You could actually be right, but unless you find some actual facts, we may never know.

buck said:

As i'm sure you know and you imply, the state is not looking to refinance the entire debt - and there could be good reasons why they are looking at this specific portion. So, the numbers you provided are fairly meaningless.

Click to expand...

My point has been all along that some refinancing was taking place and that the opportunity to refinance will not end. The state is seeking to finance the debt that is coming due on May 1. It is seeking to refinance the current portion of its debt.

It sounds like you have no idea how much WI is attempting to refinance.

Click to expand...

I had assumed that you had read the LBF's document, but was incorrect.

The portion of debt subject to the March 16 deadline is the $165 million that is coming due. Total debt being issued would to $474 million ($309 million new debt + $165 million debt being refinanced).

Additionally, you have no idea what percentage of that has to be completed by 03/16 to help cover the deficit (it could be 100.0% for all you seem to know). So, basically, pretty much everything you provided prior, while interesting, is fairly meaningless to the debate.

Click to expand...

Completely wrong. Again, had you read the Fiscal Bureau's document the answer would be clear: $165 million. That's about 1.8% of the state's GPR-supported debt. It's a tiny slice. So, even if refinancing on that tiny slice were passed up (and it need not be passed up), the overall impact would be very small.

In sum:

1) Today is not a drop dead date. 3/16 is the date for refinancing ~1.8% of the state's GPR-supported debt (fraction coming due on May 1, 2011).
2) 3/16 only closes the window on debt maturing May 1, 2011. The overwhelming share of GPR-supported debt (>98%) could be refinanced later.
3) Considering that the overwhelming share of the state's GPR-supported debt is not bound by the March 16, 2011 date, refinancing opportunities will not disappear if the March 16 deadline passes. Only a small slice of debt is subject to that deadline.
4) The maturity schedule would only be useful for knowing the statutory deadlines--latest date--applicable to other tranches of debt e.g., portion due on May 1, 2012, etc. As more than 98% of the GPR-supported debt is due later than May 1, 2011, substantial refinancing opportunities would exist were the state to pursue that strategy after adopting a credible budget.
5) If the governor truly wants to refinance 1.8% of the GPR-supported debt, he can always strip that provision from this larger package and allow for stand-alone legislation. My guess is that he won't. He's seeking any leverage he can obtain for his larger political battle. However, in the whole scheme of things, given that more than 98% of the debt would not be subject to the March 16 date, that leverage is actually very small.

The non-partisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau office says the deadline is 03/16, absent further information (beyond just your opinion) that is the date that seems most likely.

Click to expand...

I've already covered that issue. The March 16 date applies only to the portion of debt that is expiring on May 1, 2011 ($165 million).

You could actually be right, but unless you find some actual facts, we may never know.

Click to expand...

That issue was covered in multiple posts. This post brings everything together so that there is no question whatsoever on the issue.

donsutherland1 said:

I've already covered that issue. The March 16 date applies only to the portion of debt that is expiring on May 1, 2011 ($165 million).



That issue was covered in multiple posts. This post brings everything together so that there is no question whatsoever on the issue.

Click to expand...

I don't have time right now to read the whole post as well as I should, but you are right. I knew it was 165 total looking to be refinanced - and assumed you did too. That piece of the post was just poorly worded on my part. So, out of that 165 mil, are we in agreement that 100.0% of that has to be refinanced by 03/16 in order to close the budget deficit in the current fiscal period?

2) 3/16 only closes the window on debt maturing May 1, 2011. The overwhelming share of GPR-supported debt (>98%) could be refinanced later.

Click to expand...

Apparently, that won't be in time to close the deficit from the current fiscal period. So, that doesn't really help them.

5) If the governor truly wants to refinance 1.8% of the GPR-supported debt, he can always strip that provision from this larger package and allow for stand-alone legislation. My guess is that he won't. He's seeking any leverage he can obtain for his larger political battle. However, in the whole scheme of things, given that more than 98% of the debt would not be subject to the March 16 date, that leverage is actually very small.

Click to expand...

You are wrong here, since it afffects the budget, he needs a quarum. To deny that, is the reason democrats have fled to Il.

majora$$hole said:

i've been asking my friends the last couple of days how many years a retiree pulls from the "pension fund" before they die and we have come to a 15 year time frame. and these people pay into said fund their whole career say 30 years or so. can someone explain to me how is it that this model does not work? maybe we need to audit the fund to find out where that money has gone? and that, i say, will go a long way toward solving the problem. the same can be applied to social security maybe we should audit the i.r.s. to see where the money went.

Click to expand...

We need to do that, anyway.

haymarket said:

Oh brother. Yet again



That was the US Supreme Court. We all can have an opinion of what the Constitution means. Theirs counts.

Click to expand...

That's fine, and no one is taking away their free speech or any other constitutional rights. The Supreme Court shouldn't be making law.

j-mac

Chappy said:

The whole world is watching.

Click to expand...

Hopefully Walker does not chicken out.

buck said:

So, out of that 165 mil, are we in agreement that 100.0% of that has to be refinanced by 03/16 in order to close the budget deficit in the current fiscal period?

Click to expand...

Yes.

Apparently, that won't be in time to close the deficit from the current fiscal period. So, that doesn't really help them.

Click to expand...

Longer-term, it will need to be addressed.

You are wrong here, since it afffects the budget, he needs a quarum. To deny that, is the reason democrats have fled to Il.

Click to expand...

The way things have been handled, the refinancing provision would probably need to be part of separate legislation and the democrats would need to be guaranteed that they would not be compelled into providing a quorum for the other legislation. Currently, the small share of debt refinancing is being used as leverage to try to bring them back to overcome the lack of quorum. I fully understand why it is being handled as it is, but I don't believe that leverage is sufficiently great to produce the outcome of allowing for a quorum.

Ultimately, some deal needs to be reached to overcome the impasse resulting in a lack of quorum e.g., perhaps the collective bargaining provision could dropped, but only in exchange for a commitment from Democrats to allow for a quorum on legislation that would actually bring about substantial pension and/or health benefit restructuring that would contribute to eliminating Wisconsin's long-term fiscal imbalances. Fundamental reform in either area would constitute a big step forward. The state is on a fiscally unsustainable path.

A worst-case scenario where the state waits until after the next election cycle to address its urgent fiscal challenges would be very damaging.

I have scanned the various post of this thread, some I agree with some I do not.

This Republican Governor of Wisconsin and I'm going out on a limb here and saying during his campaign speech he promised better education opurtunities in Wisconsin, yet now he's going back on an agreement that may cost a lot of good teachers their jobs and a lot of young people the right teacher to work with.

That's kinda odd, or you might say a coincedence.
Cause the new Governor of Michigan promised more oppurtunities in education, yet 9 programs, and 17 degrees are being cut from Lansing Community College.

Recently I changed my voting regester from Democrat to Independant, because we ask Obama for change I don;t see any.

These Governors promised better education I don't see any.

Just because I'm an Independant voter does not mean I don't watch.
I think a lot of Independants in Wisconsin and Michigan are watching.

Obama promised change he failed, come election time he should start looking for another zip code.
The Governor of Michigan promised better education ,more oppurtunities he failed, come election he can look for another zip code.

As for Wisconsin well, that is up tothe people of Wisconsin.

I leave the people of Wisconsin with this, if this governor don't back the state's agreement with the teachers what makes you think he'll back the state of Wisconsin in other agreements?

The Governor and the GOP are getting trounced in the arena of public opinion, most people siding 2-1 with the workers over the government. Governmor walker is coming across like a dictator and will fail miserably.

disneydude said:

The Governor and the GOP are getting trounced in the arena of public opinion, most people siding 2-1 with the workers over the government. Governmor walker is coming across like a dictator and will fail miserably.

Click to expand...

He's got four years to worry about it.... until then, either the fleebaggers come home or the pink slips go out.

disneydude said:

The Governor and the GOP are getting trounced in the arena of public opinion, most people siding 2-1 with the workers over the government. Governmor walker is coming across like a dictator and will fail miserably.

Click to expand...

anybody living in the midwest would disagree. I'm in northwestern Illinois, but I can see Wisconsin from my backyard. I sense a majority that sides with the governor.

disneydude said:

The Governor and the GOP are getting trounced in the arena of public opinion, most people siding 2-1 with the workers over the government. Governmor walker is coming across like a dictator and will fail miserably.

Click to expand...

I would never tell the people of Wisconsin what to do while living in Michigan.

However I can agree that the people of Wisconsin are wise in this decision.

donsutherland1 said:

Yes.



Longer-term, it will need to be addressed.

Click to expand...

So to summarize, to close the current fiscal period's deficit, they need to refinance the debt by 03/16. It takes 2-3 weeks to do this, so the drop dead date to have this completed is today'ish. While the rest of the debt could be refinanced sometime in the future, it won't be in time to close the current deficit.

I don't beleive this is what you were saying at the beginning of all of this. Who knows, I could be wrong. You were making some long posts there, and I couldn't always read entire things.

Now, do they need some longer term solutions? Absolutely. Walker is unveiling his budget today, I think. So, they'll be plenty more for you to yell about shortly.

Ockham said:

He's got four years to worry about it.... until then, either the fleebaggers come home or the pink slips go out.

Click to expand...

He can be recalled after one year. I'd be surprized if he sticks around that long. I look for him to take the Sara Palin way out.

ARealConservative said:

anybody living in the midwest would disagree. I'm in northwestern Illinois, but I can see Wisconsin from my backyard. I sense a majority that sides with the governor.

Click to expand...

most every poll that has come out....has it 60% or more in favor of the workers over the government. Only 30% of the population sides with the government.

ARealConservative said:

anybody living in the midwest would disagree. I'm in northwestern Illinois, but I can see Wisconsin from my backyard. I sense a majority that sides with the governor.

Click to expand...

Wisconsin is also a neighbor to Michigan they are not the kind of people to lay down that includes teachers and friends and family of teachers.

disneydude said:

He can be recalled after one year. I'd be surprized if he sticks around that long. I look for him to take the Sara Palin way out.

Click to expand...

you gettign this opinion from daily kos, because if you had boots on the ground in Wisconsin, you wouldn't be so arrogant.

The government has opened a sleeping giant.....the ramifications of Walker's refusal to negotiate and to dictatorally push this corporatist agenda is going to be widespread.

disneydude said:

He can be recalled after one year. I'd be surprized if he sticks around that long. I look for him to take the Sara Palin way out.

Click to expand...

as much as i would want to agree with you i have to recognize that the public's memory is not very long
this will be a forgotten footnote by the time a recall campaign could begin

justabubba said:

as much as i would want to agree with you i have to recognize that the public's memory is not very long
this will be a forgotten footnote by the time a recall campaign could begin

Click to expand...

Like I said...he won't stick around that long. He'll be given a million dollar contract to become a goon of FoxNews and he'll jump ship. He's wounded...and he knows it.

He barely won the election...and now he's lost support of the police and firefighters. He's screwed himself.

presluc said:

Wisconsin is also a neighbor to Michigan there are not the kind of people to lay down that includes teachers and friends and family of teachers.

Click to expand...

we are all friends and familly of teachers, but that doesn't make us support the monopoly status of public unions in Wisconsin.

ARealConservative said:

we are all friends and familly of teachers, but that doesn't make us support the monopoly status of public unions in Wisconsin.

Click to expand...

monopoly status?...that's a good one. What you are really saying is that government should have complete control and the workers should have no representation.
So much for that small government you guys love to claim you love.