House OKs rewrite of pension funding rules (Reuters)

(a Dozen Democrats and the UAW supporting it, what up with that?)

House OKs rewrite of pension funding rules

Thu Dec 15, 2005 07:42 PM ET

By Susan Cornwell

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Legislation aimed at reinforcing the creaking system of traditional pensions was passed on Thursday by the U.S. House of Representatives, but the White House warned it wanted a tougher bill or it might cast a veto. The measure overhauls funding rules for employer-provided pensions, a fading feature of old-economy companies, and raises premiums companies pay to the federal agency that insures them, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. (PBGC).

Supporters said the bill was needed to fix traditional "defined benefit" pensions, which as a group are $450 billion underfunded and prevent a taxpayer bailout of the PBGC. The agency's $22.8 billion deficit already has been swelled by bankruptcy filings in the airline and steel industries. Analysts say more pension plans from the struggling auto industry are likely to land in the PBGC's lap.

The bill imposes penalties on companies shedding pension obligations in bankruptcy. But Democratic critics said they feared the bill did not do enough to protect workers or save the defined benefit system, which provides a stable monthly paycheck at retirement. It will "actually worsen the crisis," said California's George Miller.

Still dozens of Democrats joined majority Republicans in backing the bill after a major union, the United Auto Workers, endorsed it earlier this week. The House vote was 294-132.

<http://go.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=10606214§ion=news>
(more at link above)

The roll call is here:

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2005/roll635.xml


Kucinich, Brown, and Conyers voted for this bill that will legalize cash balance plans. Thousands of workers in corporate America are going to see their pensions slashed.

This is unconscionable.

I bet they didn't give them a chance to read the bill before the vote, and just went with the UAW's advice.

I have to do more research into this bill. It appears it's going to hurt most working people, regardless of what the UAW says.

The bill will legalize cash balance pension plans. Corporations will be able to switch to a cash balance plan, and employees will not get the pensions they thought they would get.

Marie Cocco has written about this insidious bill:
http://www.postwritersgroup.com/archives/cocc1201.htm


PLEASE READ, UNDERSTAND, AND DISTRIBUTE TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS YOU CAN!


What is particularly onerous is the question of whether this bill will allow companies to convert the PENSIONS OF PEOPLE WHO ARE ALREADY RETIRED! If this bill legalizes cash balance plans, what would prevent a company from converting existing retirees, already receiving a pension, to a cash balance plan -- handing them a lump sum that is worth far less than the annuity they would have received up until their death?

PEOPLE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IS ABOUT TO HAPPEN HERE!

...suprises me.

Anytime you see the words "Pensions" and "House Republican Bill" together, you can be absolutely sure that this is anti-worker/retirees and pro-corporation.

I guess they just want everything moved back to pre-New Deal or even further, and we no longer have anyway to stop them.

George Miller, ranking minority leader on the House Education and Workforce Committee, is against this bill. He listed the problems with it:

http://edworkforce.house.gov/democrats/pdfs/HR2830problems.pdf

>>
7. The Republican Bill Legalizes Cash Balance Plans Without Worker Transition Protections. The GAO recently reported that without older worker protections over 85% of younger workers and over 90% of older workers would lose expected pension benefits if a defined benefit plan were converted to a cash balance plan. The Republican bill legalizes cash balance plans without protections for long serving employees. Over 8 million workers have been affected by cash balance conversions and many have filed claims with the EEOC and courts for redress.
>>

Also, the Republicans would not allow the Democrats to put forth their alternative:

http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/ed31_democrats/rel121505.html

>>
Last night, in a spectacularly undemocratic and corrupt action, Republicans on the House Rules Committee refused to allow a Democratic alternative to the Republican bill to be brought up for a vote on the House floor today. As a result, the House will only have the opportunity to vote on the Republican bill and on a “motion to recommit” the bill back to committee.

“Republican leaders are not interested in open debate, good public policy, or even democracy,” said Representative George Miller (D-CA), the senior Democrat on the House Education and the Workforce Committee and a co-author, along with Representative Charles Rangel (D-NY), of the Democratic alternative legislation on pensions that was denied a vote today. “They are only interested in imposing their will on the country, regardless of whether it’s what’s best for most Americans. Their pension bill will put the retirement nest eggs of millions of Americans at greater risk.”
>>

I have reading to do.

Thanks again.

...who are supposed to represent a large number of their constituents, and I'm sure this bill was rushed though, just like everything else the House does under GOP "leadership."

If they (GOP "leaders") even pass out copies of the final bill at all, they pass out copies of the 200-300 page bill about 30 minutes before they bring it to the floor for a vote.

I would like to hear more about why the UAW suddenly backed this bill and what's going on, and what changed (or changed hands) there?