More "Interesting" Crap; April 14th

A Video From CNN: Illegal Aliens' Amnesty
http://d.yimg.com/kq/groups/17260182/1610997888/name/ftc-vi26.wmv

If ANYONE ever needed more proof that the fascists have taken over the hallowed halls of Congress--this should do it!!
Please remember..... This video is from CNN, NOT FOX NEWS!!!
[Many Thanks to "Lois Lane" of Pulaski, Va., for this!!]

In Addition To TARP, Porkulus, obamaCare....
   In addition to all that deficit spending, the American Taxpayer also gets to replenish [union] retirement funds lost in the on-going recession!!
Congress (through the Pension Protection Act of 2006) considers funds with less than 80% of needed assets to be in "endangered" status, and those with less than 65% to be in "critical" status. Every year more failing plans, as well as plans who applied to delay their remedial strategies, are listed on the Labor Department's Web site. The list has grown from 230 pension plans in 2008 to 640 at the end of 2009.
   The latest Congressional Budget Office forecasts 2020 public debt climbing to 90% of GDP under Fluffy obama's 2011 Budget. This is not enough for Senator Robert Casey, a Pennsylvania democRAT and habitual ally of labor, who now wants Americans to bail out union pension plans underfunded by hundreds of billions of dollars.  Following on the healthcare model, it's all part of a political calculus in which Washington politicians try to buy votes today for the next election with money that Uncle Sam won't have to spend until afterwards.
   Mr. Casey's bill, the Create Jobs and Save Benefits Act of 2010, is similar to that of Representatives Earl Pomeroy, a North Dakota democRAT, and Patrick Tiberi, an Ohio republicRAT, who seek to bail out pension plans with their proposed Preserve Benefits and Jobs Act of 2009, introduced last fall.
Under these bills, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation would, at the request of the plans, have the authority to take over the pension obligations of employers who have withdrawn from the plans, and pay the benefits out of taxpayer dollars. Once the PBGC shoulders that obligation, it would keep making payments until the last retiree or designated survivor dies.  This legislation, if enacted, could dramatically increase the federal deficit, putting even more pressure on the American taxpayer and the economy. Depending on events, it might add billions to government spending-current underfunding levels are estimated at $165 billion-bumping up future deficits.

Neither bill has been voted out of committee and reached the floor of the House or the Senate, nor have hearings been held. However, the bills have generated support from unions and employers. Unions want to be free of pension obligations so that they can focus on higher wages in future contracts. Employers seek to avoid continuing and possibly higher contributions.

   Unions prefer multiemployer defined-benefit plans to allow workers to keep pensions if they change jobs to another participating company in the same industry. Such plans have the effect of keeping workers in unionized jobs in the same industry for most of their working lives, contributing both to defined benefit funds and to unions' security.  Multiemployer plans are more commonly underfunded than non-union plans. In 2006, even before the market crash, 6% of multiemployer pensions were fully funded, compared with 31% of single employer pensions.
   Why the persistent underfunding? Some union leaders like to achieve wage increases and new benefits when they renew collective contracts, in order to make their reelection more likely. Ensuring that pension plans are kept well-funded takes more work for little visible effect-and may well work against winning more benefits by underscoring their cost to the employer.  Under the Casey and Pomeroy-Tiberi bills, some underfunded plans would be shifted to taxpayers. But it's a vicious circle: once PBGC took over some plans, other employers would want to declare bankruptcy, unload plans on the PBGC, and reorganize under another name. The incentives to do this would be enormous, because companies bailed out by the PBGC would be free of onerous pension obligations and hence would acquire a competitive advantage.
   By bailing out the plans, Congress would be compromising the remedial provisions of the Pension Protection Act of 2006. The Act requires underfunded pension plans to put their houses in order by raising retirement ages; increasing contributions by employers, workers, or both; and lowering benefits. A bailout would remove any incentive for multiemployer pension plans to reorganize their plans responsibly.   Exactly how much mismanagement by employers and union leaders must the taxpayers underwrite?

Yes, Mr. Casey's Create Jobs and Save Benefits Act would save benefits for workers and retirees. But spending billions of taxpayer funds on failed pensions would swell the deficit still further, harming the economy and destroying jobs rather than creating them.

Til Nex'Time....