Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Policy

California Deals with State Pension Crisis by Expanding it to Private Employees

Opponents worry it will be used to prop up ailing state employees' programs

Scott Shackford | 10.1.2012 1:15 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Trust California to make what might seem at first glance to be a good idea – setting up an easy way for private workers to contribute to a retirement fund if their employers don't offer it – and turn it into what has the potential to be yet another disaster.

Gov. Jerry Brown signed into law Friday SB1234, which will create the California Secure Choice Retirement Program, allowing private workers to contribute up to 3 percent of their wages into a retirement fund that will be operated by the state.

Oh, my apologies. I worded that poorly. I forgot about the Nanny State twist: Actually, workers will have the money deducted without their permission unless they opt out. And they'll have to keep opting out every couple of years or else they'll be shoved into it. Judy Lin at the Associated Press provides some details:

The program directs employers to withhold 3 percent of their workers' pay unless the employee opts out of the savings program, which can be done every two years. It would be administered by a seven-member board chaired by the state treasurer. The board would select a professional fund manager, which could be a private investment firm or the state's public pension system, to maintain the money.

State Sen. Kevin De Leon, D-Los Angeles, introduced the bill earlier this year in response to what he called the "looming retirement tsunami" as millions of lower-wage workers face financial hardship in their retirement years. He said the program will act as a supplement to Social Security by offering private-sector workers a portable savings plan with a guaranteed return.

"Guaranteed Return." If pension fund economics were a slasher movie (and who says they aren't?) those words would be the equivalent of "The call came from inside the house, ma'am." Those words tell you exactly how much trouble you're in. I looked through the legislation and couldn't find exactly what sort of guaranteed rate of return the fund is supposed to offer, but then like most financial legislation, half of it reads like another language anyway. But as a reminder, the rate of return target for CalPERS, the state's pension fund for government workers, was 1 percent last year. Its target is 7.5 percent. The state and municipalities are obligated to help fund the gap, thus the pension crisis.

State Senator Mimi Walters, R-33, wrote a lengthy takedown of the bill on the blog Fox & Hounds, not that it mattered:

Quite possibly the worst bill to make its way out of the legislature this year is Senate Bill 1234 (Kevin De Leon, D-Los Angeles). This bill would allow the state government to enter the private pension business under the pretense of "sharing the wealth" of California's public employee pension systems.

But California has amassed a terrible track record when it comes to maintaining its public pension systems; the systems are currently a combined $240-$500 billion in debt.  And because those public employees are obligated to be paid first from the pool of investment dollars, SB 1234 looks like nothing more than a cynical effort to prop up the floundering public employee pension debt with new funds from private investors, sent in by employers who are forced to participate under penalty of law.

According to the AP report, the program will not be implemented unless the savings program is projected to be self-sustaining. That would be a relief, except the same limitation was placed on high-speed rail construction and yet the state is moving forward despite evidence that the train will need significant subsidies to operate.

On the plus side, Brown vetoed efforts to resurrect redevelopment agencies through changes to Infrastructure Financing Districts.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Abuse Victim: School Was a Haven for Predators

Scott Shackford is a policy research editor at Reason Foundation.

PolicyPension CrisisNanny StateEconomicsPensionsCaliforniaJerry BrownRetirement Benefits
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (50)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. John   13 years ago

    Any bets on how long before this money is stolen to pay for the California budget deficit?

    This is pathetic. They can't pay for public employee pensions and people are rightly pissed at the slugs getting this huge pensions. So the solution is to offer an unaffordable pension to everyone.

    There really is no hope for California. And probably not for the nation.

    1. Restoras   13 years ago

      Stealing the money is the point of the exercise. Just cloak it in legalise and compulsion first.

    2. Spartacus   13 years ago

      Any bets on how long before this money is stolen to pay for the California budget deficit?

      I'm going with "until the next budget is passed."

      According to the AP report, the program will not be implemented unless the savings program is projected to be self-sustaining.

      No problem. Just assume 14% annual returns.

    3. 16th amendment   13 years ago

      I'm waiting to hear the excuses for slashing the pensions of private employees (will happen when these private employees retire, which could be 30 years from now). Oh, CA is broke, so you have to make a sacrifice and take out much less than you put in (but CA state employees will get everything promised). Oh no, you illegally spiked your pension by working long hours in your last year, and social security is based on the average of the last 35 years of work (adjusted for inflation, which a cap each year). Oh no, you've moved out of state. The communist party only looks out for itself. It's a rule of life.

  2. Joe M   13 years ago

    Oh my god. Could this be any more transparently obvious? There will be no "retirement fund". This is just a disguised money grab. Somewhere down the line, the funds will be put to use to plug gaps in the budget, and the opt-out will be removed, making it a de facto tax.

  3. Paul.   13 years ago

    . I forgot about the Nanny State twist: Actually, workers will have the money deducted without their permission unless they opt out.

    What. The. Deuce?

    How is this not extortion, theft, or both?

    1. sarcasmic   13 years ago

      "Fuck you, that's how."

      1. heller   13 years ago

        Fuck you, that's my line!

        1. sarcasmic   13 years ago

          "Ha ha"
          /muntz

      2. Brett L   13 years ago

        I'll just leave this in every thread that contains California government and "fuck you, that's why/how".

    2. heller   13 years ago

      Fuck you! That's how!

      1. Lord Humungus   13 years ago

        *head explodes*

      2. Paul.   13 years ago

        There's been a rift in the space time continuum!

    3. Restoras   13 years ago

      I like this part...

      Oh, my apologies. I worded that poorly.

      Reminded me immediate of Jules...
      "Oh, I'm sorry, did I break your concentration?"

    4. ant1sthenes   13 years ago

      In the same way that taxes are not?

  4. Paul.   13 years ago

    On the plus side, Brown vetoed efforts to resurrect redevelopment agencies through changes to Infrastructure Financing Districts.

    A lot of good people lost jobs when they shut those RDAs down.

    1. Hugh Akston   13 years ago

      Well, a lot of people did anyway.

    2. Restoras   13 years ago

      A lot of good people lost jobs taxpayer funded sinecures when they shut those RDAs down.

      Fixed.

  5. T   13 years ago

    Somebody in the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation is watching this with bated breath, trust me.

    1. Raston Bot   13 years ago

      Guarantee the most populous state's defined benefit pensions to its private sector. Oh man I wish I was at PBGC to see their reaction when this was first introduced.

      Also, obviously depending on the promised benefits, 3% for a defined pension could be the death knell for many smaller companies' plans.

  6. sarcasmic   13 years ago

    Private people have the option of opting out of paying into a system that by law must pay government employees first?

    What a deal!

    1. Paul.   13 years ago

      What a country!

  7. kinnath   13 years ago

    Fuck California

  8. sarcasmic   13 years ago


    I am Governor Jerry Brown
    My aura smiles
    And never frowns
    Soon I will be president...

    Carter Power will soon go away
    I will be Fuhrer one day
    I will command all of you
    Your kids will meditate in school
    Your kids will meditate in school!

    [Chorus:]
    California Uber Alles
    California Uber Alles
    Uber Alles California
    Uber Alles California

    Zen fascists will control you
    100% natural
    You will jog for the master race
    And always wear the happy face

    Close your eyes, can't happen here
    Big Bro' on white horse is near
    The hippies won't come back you say
    Mellow out or you will pay
    Mellow out or you will pay!

    [Chorus]

    Now it is 1984
    Knock-knock at your front door
    It's the suede/denim secret police
    They have come for your uncool niece

    Come quietly to the camp
    You'd look nice as a drawstring lamp
    Don't you worry, it's only a shower
    For your clothes here's a pretty flower.

    DIE on organic poison gas
    Serpent's egg's already hatched
    You will croak, you little clown
    When you mess with President Brown
    When you mess with President Brown

  9. Sudden   13 years ago

    And yet when my fellow Californians snort derisively at the ignorance and backwardness of southerners or midwesterners or anyone from the great expanse of flyover between here and DC/NY, they do so without any sense of irony at how fucking mismanaged and teetering on collapse their bloated socialist utopia is.

    1. Hugh Akston   13 years ago

      The state can't even get the weather right. It was 103 degrees here yesterday!

      1. Sudden   13 years ago

        Yeah, you really should get the hell out of the Valley. Although, having said that, Thousand Oaks ain't much better today. I gotta keep bathing my fermenting homebrew in ice this week to keep the temp from breaching 70.

        1. SKR   13 years ago

          You should know better than to try and brew in Thousand Oaks in September. It's almost always brutally hot.

      2. SKR   13 years ago

        Is it just me or have the weather forecasts been especially terrible this summer? It's like the algorithm being used has too short a timeframe and the forecasts end up being updated really frequently. That sounds like it would make the forecasts more accurate, but when you need a reasonable expectation of what the weather will be like in 3 days it really sucks.

  10. wheelock   13 years ago

    Unreal

  11. Enjoy Every Sandwich   13 years ago

    I wonder what happens if you do "opt out". Maybe a visit from Da Union asking you why you aren't being an economic patriot?

    1. Hugh Akston   13 years ago

      As I intend to opt out at the first and every opportunity, I'll let you know.

  12. Raston Bot   13 years ago

    in 5 years there will be mandatory matching by the employer.

    also SB 1234? that's the kind of number an idiot has on his luggage.

    1. SKR   13 years ago

      dammit you beat me to the Spaceballs reference.

  13. BigFire   13 years ago

    Fuck. My co-worker's escape plan to Florida is looking better and better every single day.

    1. Brett L   13 years ago

      C'mon down. Bring your money, we'll let you keep it, minus 7.5% on all sales transactions.

      1. Spartacus   13 years ago

        It's only 6% where I live. You must live in one of them there cities.

        1. Brett L   13 years ago

          Taxahassee.

  14. The Late P Brooks   13 years ago

    a portable savings plan with a guaranteed return.

    A projected return which is totally realistic and easily achievable.

  15. LTC(ret) John   13 years ago

    And I continually advise my Swiss masters, er...employers, to get every employee position we can out of Kalifornia. Now they know why.

  16. Number 2   13 years ago

    The good news: the courts will likely find this ridiculous scheme to be preempted by ERISA.

    1. HazelMeade   13 years ago

      this.

  17. RPR2   13 years ago

    I thought IQ tests for employees were illegal.

  18. A Serious Man   13 years ago

    And how many Californians are going to be surprised when they find their paychecks getting smaller due to this law because they have no idea about it?

    And what happens if you finally come to your senses and leave the state to work elsewhere? Is the money you put in still yours or will it just go down the sinkhole into some teacher's pocket?

    1. Restoras   13 years ago

      Is the money you put in still yours

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

      *catches breath*

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

  19. TigTang   13 years ago

    These guys really do seem to know whats going on over there.

    http://www.PrivateData.tk

  20. califernian   13 years ago

    It's brilliant and it will work. It's just a watered down state-level version of the original Social Security scam. And that's still going strong.

  21. johnl   13 years ago

    Please see 100008, where the actual "benefit" is defined. This is a defined contribution plan, not a defined benefit plan.

  22. HazelMeade   13 years ago

    Lawsuit potential.

    All that's needed is one guy to sue the state of California to get his money back for providing him inadequate notice of the "opt-out" timeframe.

  23. johnl   13 years ago

    It just shows how out of touch with reality that the CA Democratic party is that they think that 3% of income, unmatched, invested in low risk instruments, is going to amount to much of anything.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

The Supreme Court Said States Can't Discriminate in Alcohol Sales. They're Doing It Anyway.

C. Jarrett Dieterle | 5.24.2025 7:00 AM

Cocaine Hippos, Monkey Copyrights, and a Horse Named Justice: The Debate Over Animal Personhood

C.J. Ciaramella | From the June 2025 issue

Harvard's Best Protection Is To Get Off the Federal Teat

Autumn Billings | 5.23.2025 6:16 PM

Trump's Mass Cancellation of Student Visas Illustrates the Lawlessness of His Immigration Crackdown

Jacob Sullum | 5.23.2025 5:30 PM

Come July, Keys Will Be De Facto Illegal In Minnesota

Christian Britschgi | 5.23.2025 5:00 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!