Public Statement on the MA Legislature’s Blanket Pension Giveaway

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on
LinkedIn
+

Beacon Hill just put on full display what happens when it is awash in money.

On its face, House Bill 2808, otherwise called “An Act relative to providing a COVID-19 retirement credit to essential public workers,” sounds reasonable. It calls for adding three years of additional retirement credit to state “employees who have volunteered to work or have been required to work at their respective worksites or any other worksite outside of their personal residences during the COVID-19 state of emergency…”

But upon reading the brief bill, it quickly becomes clear that this legislation is irresponsible in the extreme.

Stop the Blanket Pension Giveaway

Get updates from us on this issue.

Written so broadly, which public employees aren’t entitled to the benefit?

A closer look shows that the bill defines “employee” as “a person employed by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts” including “its political subdivisions…” As such it also applies to employees of Massachusetts’ municipalities.  H.2808 would be a massive unfunded mandate for cities and towns.

And it doesn’t apply just to state and municipal workers who had to actually go into work during the pandemic; they must only have “volunteered to work… at their respective worksites or any worksite outside of their personal residence.”  Employees who went in for a single day would also qualify.  So do employees who worked from home but one day when the internet was down went to a family member’s home to work.  (They meet the provision that you did your job from a “worksite outside of [your] personal residence.”)

Administrators, accountants, techies, teachers, finance officers, grant writers, trash collectors and all those paid with public dollars are potentially in line for the benefit.  As currently written, state legislators are eligible to take advantage of the bill.  More than half of the Legislature has signed on to H.2808. Support spans the political spectrum.  The bill may provide a jump in pension benefits for those employed during the pandemic who have already retired.

How much will it cost?

At a recent hearing before the Legislature’s Joint Committee on Public Service, the committee’s co-chair, Rep. Ken Gordon, asked H.2808’s House sponsor, Rep. Jonathan Zlotnick of Gardner, whether any analysis had been done on the bill’s fiscal impact.  Astonishingly, Zlotnick responded: “The short answer is we don’t have a final number as we sit here today.”

To get a sense of the bill’s impact, Pioneer Institute did an analysis of its effect on a single state employee – UMass President Marty Meehan.  Assuming Meehan retires at the end of his current contract in 2025, we project that his annual pension would rise from $287,720 to $335,673 – a $47,953 increase – if H.2808 becomes law.  According to actuarial tables, Meehan’s lifetime pension benefit would increase by $790,750.

Pioneer estimates that the bill’s cost would be in the billions of dollars. As of this May, the state pension fund, state Teachers’ Retirement System and the Boston Teachers Retirement system were underfunded by a combined $44 billion.  Annual payments to the systems are scheduled to rise from the current $3.1 billion to nearly $12.4 billion over the next 15 years, and would be even higher under H.2808.  The bill would also further burden over 100 local pension funds in the Commonwealth, many of which are already woefully underfunded.

What’s next?

The Commonwealth is currently sitting on nearly $10 billion in state surplus and federal COVID relief money. Few would object to using some of that money to benefit state employees who truly put themselves in harm’s way during the pandemic.

The Legislature should demonstrate responsibility and use part of the money to shore up pension funds so the state can fully cover existing commitments to its employees, and pay down what is the highest per capita debt of any state. Such debt reduction could free up hundreds of millions of the over $3.5 billion Massachusetts currently spends each year for debt service.

There are other worthy investments that we should be making, including serious consideration of Governor Baker’s proposals to increase home ownership in economically disadvantaged areas of the state.

H.2808, unfortunately, takes us in exactly the opposite direction.  It is absurdly overbroad and solely focused on the public sector. Remember that the public sector did not see employment decrease in any manner similar to the private sector during the pandemic. As such, it is a slap in the face of the tens of thousands of private sector employees who put themselves in harm’s way — or often saw their lives turned upside down by government restrictions, some of which were reasonable, others of which were not at all based in science.

H.2808 is also an abject lesson to taxpayers: This is what happens when the Legislature has access to billions of dollars in excess tax revenue and emergency funds.

Get Updates on Our Pioneer Public Initiatives!

Related Posts

Public Statement on Implementation of the Charitable Giving Deduction

Despite being awash in cash, the state Legislature just overrode Gov. Charlie Baker’s veto of a provision to delay by yet another year a tax deduction for charitable donations. Rep. Mark Cusack, House chair of the Joint Committee on Revenue, said “it doesn’t mean no, just not now.” If not now, when?

Public Statement on the MA Legislature’s Blanket Pension Giveaway

Beacon Hill just put on full display what happens when it is awash in money. House Bill 2808 is entitled, “An Act relative to providing a COVID-19 retirement credit to essential public workers.”  It calls for adding three years of additional retirement credit to state “employees who have volunteered to work or have been required to work at their respective worksites or any other worksite outside of their personal residences during the COVID-19 state of emergency…” But upon reading the brief bill, it quickly becomes clear that this legislation is irresponsible in the extreme.

Study: Massachusetts Should Retain Additional Healthcare System Flexibility Granted During Pandemic

Massachusetts’ emergency declaration for COVID-19 ends on June 15, and with it some enhanced flexibility that has been allowed in the healthcare system.  Some of the added flexibility highlighted barriers that make the system more expensive, harder to access and less patient-centered, and the Commonwealth should consider permanently removing these barriers, according to a new study published by Pioneer Institute.

Open Letter: Extend the Term of the MBTA’s Fiscal and Management Control Board

Read Pioneer Institute's Open Letter urging policymakers to extend the term of the MBTA’s Fiscal and Management Control Board (FMCB), which is currently scheduled to sunset at the end of June.  The Letter also calls for the Control Board to continue to be made up of transit experts rather than political appointees, and recommends that an independent audit office be created that reports directly to the FMCB.

Study Calls for Better Reporting on Impact of COVID-19 in Eldercare Facilities

Over time, the Massachusetts Executive Office of Health and Human Services and Department of Public Health (DPH) have improved reporting about cases and deaths from COVID-19 in state-regulated eldercare facilities, but flaws and omissions remain and should be corrected, according to a new study published by Pioneer Institute.

Study Shows the Adverse Effects of Graduated Income Tax Proposal on Small Businesses

The state constitutional amendment promoted by the Massachusetts Teachers Association and the Service Employees International Union to add a 4 percent surtax to all annual income above $1 million will adversely impact a significant number of pass-through businesses, ultimately slowing the Commonwealth’s economic recovery from COVID-19, according to a new study published by Pioneer Institute.

Poll Finds Mixed Views About Schools’ Pandemic Performance

A year into the COVID-19 pandemic, Massachusetts residents have mixed opinions about how K-12 education has functioned, but they tend to view the performance of individual teachers more favorably than that of institutions like school districts and teachers’ unions, according to a poll of 1,500 residents commissioned by Pioneer Institute.

Report Contrasts State Government and Private Sector Employment Changes During Pandemic

Massachusetts state government employment has been virtually flat during COVID-19 even as employment in the state’s private sector workforce remains nearly 10 percent below pre-pandemic levels, according to a new study published by Pioneer Institute. The study, “Public vs. Private Employment in Massachusetts: A Tale of Two Pandemics,” questions whether it makes sense to shield public agencies from last year’s recession at the expense of taxpayers.

Pioneer Institute Statement on MBTA Service Cuts

Even as MBTA ridership and revenue have been gutted by the COVID-19 pandemic, the system remains a lifeline for so many residents in the Greater Boston area, especially those working in essential services like health care or in industries most impacted by the pandemic such as the restaurant sector.  Facing a crisis of this magnitude, T leadership must first do its all to rethink how it delivers services before reflexively making cuts.

Pioneer Checklist Includes Steps for Policy Makers, Business Owners to Revitalize Hardest-Hit Industries

Combining the recommendations of studies published earlier this year, Pioneer Institute has released “A Checklist for How to Revitalize the Industries Hit Hardest by COVID-19.” The recommendations for policy makers are organized in three sections: Immediate Relief, Tax Policy Changes and Permanent Reforms.  Business owner recommendations are split into COVID-19 Health and Safety Protocols, Expanded Services and Steps to Improve Cash Flow.