64% of FL voters think that state workers would be required to contribute to pensions

More Florida voters are taking a wait-and-see attitude on their new governor, Rick Scott, who gets a 35 – 22 percent job approval rating with 43 percent undecided, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today. By 56 – 29 percent, voters are generally optimistic about the next four years with Scott as governor.

But Florida voters aren’t thrilled with his plans to cut at least 5 percent of the state work force, calling it a “bad idea” 46 – 42 percent, the independent Quinnipiac University poll finds.

Voters, however, say 64 – 28 percent that state workers should contribute to their pensions, which they do not do now.

Although by 52 – 34 percent voters say they prefer cutting services to raising taxes to meet the state’s budget shortfall, they say 48 – 44 percent that Scott should not have promised to do so without raising taxes.

more: http://saintpetersblog.com/2011/02/02/quinnipiac-poll-more-florida-voters-are-taking-a-wait-and-see-attitude-on-their-new-governor-rick-scott/

pay. Teachers in Florida are among the lowest paid in the nation - down around 40th.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

the current state pension system is unsustainable. This is an issue which cuts across party lines.

Broward voters can, and should, do better in the future. I don't trust multimillionaires to make decisions for the common man.

easily defeated his Republican opponent in the November election. Perhaps Broward County voters know him better than someone from Orlando.

to the point of them making 5K over the median income in their district,and make them pay for thier healthcare insurance, their pensions and limit them to an automobile expense reimbursement from Tallahassee to their home base at the same rate we get in private (.42). No more freebies.

This should apply to every office holder and their staffs from places like Yulee to Miami. Otherwise they're just talking a game.

the remainder of the year they are out there hustling tips and money like a crack whore in need of a fix. I guess I can now understand how Jim Normans wife felt. I mean, hell imagine someone coming up to your wife and dropping 450 large and a couple of boats to boot. It's like a godsend.:shrug:

years without a raise, like I have for the past six.

What is the difference then between a pension and a 403K then? I worked in NY for both the schools and a non profit agency. I did not contribute for my pension at either of them. I declined ALL 403K for that very reason. I am a TA making $13/hour. I cannot afford to contribute.

This is just double talk to eliminate pensions.

In NY at the school and non profit I worked at, the pension was automatic and free. If you wanted to, you could sign up for that 403B and contribute to that. It's still the same as a 401K. The 403B is for educational and non profits while the 401K is for businesses. Here in Collier, it's either or. Pension (free) or 403B (contributory). You cannot have both here.

My question is still the same. If you have to make contributions to a pension, it's not a pension anymore. Call it what you will. It then becomes a "403B".

I too old and make too little money for this to be worth it. If Scott manages to get this passed, I hope I can opt out of this "pension".

As I understand it, you can have both anywhere. A 403B is a pre-tax contribution from my salary that both my wife and I make. I don't think it varies from county to county. When I retire I will have my FRS pension, whatever I save in my 403B, and Social Security (I hope). If the Rethugs force us to pay into our pension, I guess I'm already set up with a 403B, but I'm not going to contribute MORE than I already do. I can't afford it.