The Wall Street Journal reports that Randi Weingarten is taking union pension funds away from hedge funds that attack teachers’ pensions. Leading hedge funds have contributed to organizations that want to eliminate defined-benefit pensions and substitute 401k plans for them. The hedge fund billionaires have also taken the lead in funding nonunion charter schools.
Randi has pushed the investment committees of unions to withdraw their pension funds away from hedge funds that are subsidizing attacks on teachers’ pensions.
Defenders of the hedge funds say that the unions should seek the best return on their funds, without regard to the politics of the hedge fund.
Randi has the better side of this dispute. Why should teachers invest their pension funds in a company that wants to take away their pensions?
Daniel Loeb, Paul Singer and dozens of other hedge-fund managers have poured millions of dollars into promoting charter schools in New York City and into groups that want to revamp pension plans for government workers, including teachers.
The leader of the American Federation of Teachers, Randi Weingarten, sees some of the proposals, in particular the pension issue, as an attack on teachers. She also has influence over more than $1 trillion in public-teacher pension plans, many of which traditionally invest in hedge funds.
It is a recipe for a battle for the ages.
Ms. Weingarten started by targeting hedge-fund managers she deemed a threat to teachers and urged unions to yank money from their funds. Then she moved to Wall Street as a whole.
Her union federation is funding a lobbying campaign to eliminate the “carried-interest” tax rate on investment income earned by many money managers. It is trying to defeat legislation that would increase the charitable deduction in New York state for donations to private schools. And it has filed a class-action lawsuit accusing 25 Wall Street firms of violating antitrust law and manipulating Treasury bond prices.
‘Given your strong support…for an organization which is leading the attack on defined benefit (DB) pension funds around the country, I was surprised to learn of your interest in working with public pension plan investors.’
—Randi Weingarten, in March 15, 2013, letter to hedge-fund manager Daniel Loeb
Some pension funds have withdrawn money from hedge-fund managers criticized by the teachers union. And some hedge-fund managers stopped making donations to advocacy groups targeted by Ms. Weingarten.
Hedge funds, reluctant to buckle to the pressure, say Ms. Weingarten is doing a disservice to the teachers she represents, because funds should aim solely to earn the highest possible return on their assets. The personal beliefs or donations of hedge-fund managers, they argue, shouldn’t be a factor in that decision. At least one manager, Mr. Loeb of Third Point LLC, has increased his donations to a charter-school group, citing Ms. Weingarten.
Sander Read, chief executive officer of Lyons Wealth Management, which hasn’t been targeted, likened what Ms. Weingarten is doing to “hiring a dentist because of their political beliefs. You may see eye to eye on politics, but you may not have great, straight teeth.” None of the hedge funds targeted by the teachers unions would discuss the matter publicly, a sign of how sensitive the battle has become.
Ms. Weingarten said in an interview: “Why would you put your money with someone who wants to destroy you?”
The battles are rooted in a political fight over how to improve public education. Republicans have long sought major changes, such as creating new competition for public schools, including charter schools. Democrats largely have supported solutions backed by the unions, particularly increased spending for existing schools.
About a decade ago, some liberals joined conservatives in pushing to expand charter schools. Those efforts received financial support from hedge-fund managers including Mr. Loeb, Mr. Singer of Elliott Management Corp. and Paul Tudor Jones of Tudor Investment Corp., who together kicked in millions of dollars.
Some of those involved in the effort cast public-school teachers and their unions as obstacles to improving education. The reputation of the teachers union took a beating.
When Ms. Weingarten was elected president of the American Federation of Teachers in 2008, she aimed to restore public trust in public-school teachers and their unions.
As she rose in the union, she got close to Bill and Hillary Clinton. Last summer, the federation became the first union group to endorse Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign. Ms. Weingarten sits on the board of the super PAC supporting her candidacy, and the American Federation of Teachers has donated $1.6 million to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation.
Ms. Weingarten’s federation represents about two dozen teachers unions whose retirement funds have a total of $630 billion in assets, a big chunk of the more than $1 trillion controlled by all teachers unions. The federation doesn’t control where that money is invested; the unions themselves do. But Ms. Weingarten can make recommendations.
She instructed investment advisers at the federation’s Washington headquarters to sift through financial reports and examine the personal charitable donations of hedge-fund managers. She says she focuses on groups that want to end defined-benefit pensions. Many of the same entities also back charter schools and overhauling public schools.
In early 2013, the union federation published a list of roughly three-dozen Wall Street asset managers it says donated to organizations that support causes opposed by the union. It wanted union pension funds to use the list to decide where to invest their money.
The Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, a think tank that supports increasing school choice and replacing defined-benefit pension plans with 401(k)-type plans for future government employees, is one of the groups to which donations were viewed unfavorably.
Lawrence Mone, its president, says the tactics amount to intimidation. “I don’t think that it’s beneficial to the functioning of a democratic society,” he says.
After KKR & Co. President Henry Kravitz made the list in 2013, Ms. Weingarten got a call from Ken Mehlman, an executive at the private-equity firm and former chairman of the Republican National Committee.
Mr. Mehlman said KKR had a record of supporting public pension plans, according to Ms. Weingarten.
Ms. Weingarten agreed, removed Mr. Kravitz’s name from the list and invited Mr. Mehlman to talk about the firm’s commitment to public pensions at a meeting in Washington with 30 pension-fund trustees representing 20 plans that control $630 billion in teachers’ retirement money.
When Cliff Asness of hedge fund AQR Capital Management LLC found out Mr. Kravitz had gotten off the list, he called Mr. Mehlman, a friend. Mr. Asness also hired a friend of Ms. Weingarten’s: Donna Brazile, a vice chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee who has been a paid consultant to the American Federation of Teachers.
Ms. Brazile arranged a lunch meeting between Mr. Asness and Ms. Weingarten, where they discussed ways to work together. Not long after, Mr. Asness’s firm paid $25,000 to be a founding member of a group that KKR’s Mr. Mehlman was starting with Ms. Weingarten to promote retirement security.
Mr. Asness was removed from the list. A year later, when Ms. Weingarten noticed he continued to serve on the Manhattan Institute board, she considered putting him back on.
In September of last year, when the California State Teachers’ Retirement System, or Calstrs, considered increasing its hedge-fund investments, Ms. Weingarten saw another chance to apply pressure.
Dan Pedrotty, an aide to Ms. Weingarten who runs the hedge-fund effort, spoke to a Calstrs official about Mr. Asness’s continued service on the Manhattan Institute’s board. The Calstrs official then called Mr. Asness.
In December, Mr. Asness said he would step down from the Manhattan Institute board. His spokesman says he already had made the decision at the time of the call, after reassessing time spent on the boards of several nonprofit groups.
“Randi is committed to helping hard working employees achieve the secure retirement they deserve,” Mr. Asness said in a written statement.
Mr. Loeb, founder of the $16-billion Third Point fund, has been more combative. He is a donor to the Manhattan Institute and chairman of the Success Academy, which operates a network of charter schools in New York City.
‘I can appreciate that it may be frustrating for the certain plan sponsors to invest with managers who have different political views or party affiliations, an issue they must come to terms with due to their fiduciary responsibilities.’
—Daniel Loeb, in March 22, 2013, email to union leader Randi Weingarten
In a March 2013 letter to Mr. Loeb, Ms. Weingarten noted his support of a group “leading the attack on defined benefit pension funds” and said she was “surprised to learn of your interest in working with public pension plan investors.” Seeking business from union pension funds while donating to the group, she wrote, “seem to us perhaps inconsistent.”
The two agreed to meet.
Mr. Loeb emailed Ms. Weingarten, noting his fund’s average annual return of 21% over 18 years. “I completely respect the political considerations you may have and understand if other factors dictate how funds are allocated,” he wrote.
A week later, Ms. Weingarten wrote back to reiterate that unions were wary of investing with Mr. Loeb “given the political attack on defined benefit funds.”
In response, Mr. Loeb asserted that it must be “frustrating” for unions to invest with funds that “have different political views or party affiliations.” He added: “At least we can rejoice in knowing that as Americans we share fundamental values that elevate individual opportunity, accountability, freedom, fairness and prosperity.”
The meeting was called off, and Mr. Loeb was added to the list.
At a fundraising dinner that May for his charter-school group, Mr. Loeb stood up and said: “Some of you in this room have come under attack for supporting charter-school education reform and freedom in general.” He called Ms. Weingarten the “leader of the attack” and pledged an additional $1 million in her name.
“Both Randi and I believe America’s children deserve a 21st century education, and I hope the day comes when she embraces the positive change created by public charter schools,” Mr. Loeb said recently in a written statement.
In late 2013, state union officials pressed a Rhode Island pension fund to fire Third Point. The following January, the pension fund did just that, pulling about $75 million from Mr. Loeb’s fund. A spokeswoman for the state treasurer said at the time that Mr. Loeb’s fund was too risky.
Roger Boudreau, a member of the teachers union and an elected adviser of the Rhode Island fund at the time, says the donations played a role. “It’s fair to say that those kinds of donations are going to be looked at very critically,” he says.
Around that time, a giant billboard appeared above Times Square. “Randi Weingarten’s Union Protects Bad Teachers,” it read above a picture of her scowling face.
Ms. Weingarten immediately assumed the hedge-funders were behind the attack. The entity listed as the billboard’s sponsor is the Center for Union Facts, a Washington-based advocacy group. The group declines to disclose who paid for the billboard.
“We all guessed it had to be people like Dan Loeb,” Ms. Weingarten says. Mr. Loeb declined to comment.
The billboard kicked off a campaign against Ms. Weingarten by the Center for Union Facts, including radio and newspaper advertisements. “She’s the head of the snake, so it was appropriate to go after her personally,” says the group’s president, Richard Berman.
The ads directed people to a website that said she oversaw a “crusade to stymie school reforms and protect the jobs of incompetent teachers.” It listed her salary and called her a “member of the elite.”
In September 2014, Mr. Berman sent a 10-page letter to lawmakers, union officials and opinion leaders charging that Ms. Weingarten‘s “ineptitude is a threat against America, against hard-working teachers, and especially against our nation’s children.”
Lorretta Johnson, secretary-treasurer of the American Federation of Teachers, responded in a letter to union leaders that Mr. Berman represented a “front group whose mission is to vilify and destroy unions.”
The Center for Union Facts, led by Richard Berman, is a rightwing, virulently anti-union public relations firm that specializes in demonizing unions; it has also defended the tobacco industry against critics.
That’s a great start!
Next, demand that the politicians the union endorses don’t support policies that destroy public education via charters, vouchers, and VAM scores, and you may win this pro-union voter back into your fold.
Agree Liz with your simple cogent statement. It’s about time.
This post is welcome news. When the NON-PROFIT, TIAA-CREF, denounces privatization of Social Security and when they make a public statement in favor of defined benefit pension plans, it will also be a good day.
It amazes me politicians and their lobbyists are still trying to take away Social Security. Half of the elderly people in this county would be destitute without Social Security. Homeless. On the street. They worked their whole lives.
Do they not know that working class people don’t have retirement plans? How could they not know that?
Hedge funder, Pete Peterson has been leading the attack against S.S., IMO, for obvious reasons.. To this point he has spent an estimated $500,000,000. His “Fix the Debt” campaign failed. Reportedly, Madelyn Albright is on the board of the newly named attempt to impoverish those most in need. False, narrowed choices about funding, follow the narrative of crisis.
We’ll watch our politicians to see if they buy into the narrowed choices which will benefit the richest 0.1%.
Chiara – ‘Do they not know that working class people don’t have retirement plans?’
Please let’s don’t forget that middle-& upper-middle corporate workers also do not have pension plans. My husband chose a profession in utility engrg in the ’70’s because it was ‘stable’. Utilities were deregulated in the ’80’s-’90’s. By the early ’90’s anyone working in engrg/ constr lost their pensions– replaced by partially-matched donations to 401(k)s, which lost 40% of their value in 2008, & are losing another bunch now w/volitility due to BRExit.
Me & dh will be OK in retirement ONLY because of his pre-early-’90’s pension, plus Soc Sec for both. Our 401(k)s are not nothing, but their values pale compared to pre-’90’s pensions & SocSec.
Chiara…it would fill the SS coffers in perpetuity if the SS stop of $118,500 is lifted and increased to those wealthy earners of $1 Million. This would not be a burden to the 1 – 2%, nor to the .01% like Jamie Dimon and Lloyd Blankfein who take home bonuses of $25 Million for running their ‘too big to fail” banks, nor the Kochs and the Waltons who make about $60K a minute..
I wouldn’t invest with someone working against me either. Good move Randi!
While pension trustees have a “fiduciary responsibility” to their members there is no prohibition to pick investment advisers who aren’t also attacking the pensions the trustees are sworn to protect – we should all jump on board the campaign and urge our pension trustees to follow suit.
Agree. Contact your pensions and tell them to avoid hedge funds and Wall Street firms that side with those working against the public sector.
The defined benefit plans are far better than the defined contribution plans. (Both of course best.)
The WSJ article says Randi opposes a proposal to “increase the charitable deduction in New York state for donations to private schools”.
Actually what has been proposed in NY and she opposes is a tax-credit scheme to aid private schools and wealthy donors, similar to vouchers — not a tax deduction. The Governor’s proposal would make donors to private schools eligible for a credit equal to 75 percent of their contributions, up to $1 million. The Senate version would allow donors to gain a credits of up to 90 percent of their contributions, up to $1 million.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/states/new-york/albany/story/2015/05/cuomos-new-tax-credit-plan-offers-more-for-private-schools-022145#ixzz4CyVDtxuN
N.Y. Governor “1%” Cuomo.
This is a healthy development for anyone who is interested in transparency and accountability.
Hedge funds have helped contribute to the fiction that pensions work like this—teachers sock away some of their own money, and thanks to hedge funds and other savvy investments, their investment generates 8-10% annually. In 25 years, presto, there’s enough to pay teachers one year of retirement for every year they taught!
In reality, teachers don’t contribute much of their own money, districts massively short-change long-term contributions to pay off the underfunded obligations of the past, and everyone who benefits fights to keep the true costs of everything hidden from the taxpayers who are ultimately on the hook for it all. The New York City Department of Education spent an astonishing $3,273 per student just on pensions last year, and that figure is only going to explode upward to pay for past underfunding and retroactive enhancements. And all of this has been enabled by ridiculous assumptions regarding returns.
Good for Randi.
Tim,
Pension costs exploded under Mayor Bloomberg. As did charters.
Teachers don’t contribute much of their own money?
In MA teachers contribute 11% of every paycheck. Our employers (local taxpayers) contribute zero. No Social Security. Our state pension system is over 95% self-funded, soon to be 100%.
If we did switch to social security and dropped the pensions, then our employers would have to pay their matching share. This would result in a significant increase in taxpayer costs and a diminished retirement system- lose/lose.
A well-run pension system is win/win.
The average national pension is $19,000. The average state budget spends just 3% on pensions (far less than the corporate welfare that often fails in its objective of employment). Many states, tax pension income. Many state and local pensioners are prohibited by law from the benefits of Social Security and Medicare., The ratio of pensioners remaining in the state, and paying taxes is very high e.g Ohio- 82%. The beneficial multiplier effect of the pensioners’ spending has been evaluated and posted, by state. The research is available on-line.
“The average state budget spends just 3% on pensions (far less than the corporate welfare that often fails in its objective of employment).”
This is why increasing corporate welfare is the best way to reduce pension costs.
“….to pay off the underfunded obligations of the past…”
WHO is charged for those underfunded obligations of the past?
By rights, every taxpayer should be charged for that. Or every student. But is that what happens?
Or maybe the reason that the DOE spent “an astonishing $3,273 per student” on pensions last year is because charter school children are free riders and the more charter school students there are, the more the dwindling number of public school students get to cover the charter school kids’ share of those past obligations?
If my kids’ public school declares itself a charter, do we get to keep an additional $3,273 per student? Just think, an additional $2 million to spend this year for a smallish size school of 600 students. No wonder charter schools are awash in money since they get the same money but don’t have to give back $2 million to pay for those underfunded pensions for long retired teachers.
And in a few years when charter school populations double, maybe my kids’ will be charged $5,000 or $6,000 out of their allocation for historic pension costs that the charter school students don’t pay for.
Just think what a nice marketing ad that is: “Come to our charter school because we have an extra $2 million to give your kid the kind of education he deserves (if the charter thinks he is deserving, of course). Plus, we can then lobby publicly that we spend much “less” per child even if we get far more to spend!”
As long as you despise the poorest and most vulnerable students as much as the richest pro-charter folks do, you are delighted to promote dishonesty and the fact that you get even richer doing it is only one side effect of your biggest goal — punishing the most vulnerable kids who you believe are worthless and don’t deserve one penny of your precious billions.
“In MA teachers contribute 11% of every paycheck. Our employers (local taxpayers) contribute zero. No Social Security. Our state pension system is over 95% self-funded, soon to be 100%.”
Thank you for providing an typical example of how people who benefit attempt to cover up the true cost.
Yes, younger MA teachers (those hired after 2001) contribute 11% of every paycheck, and no, teachers in MA and their employers do not contribute to Social Security (which is an enormous mistake, but that’s a subject for another day).
What mathman has left out is the small matter of an annual appropriation from the taxpayers of the state of Massachusetts to the fund. In FY 2015, that appropriation was about $1.6 billion. The state says the funding ratio is about 68%, with a $10.9B unfunded liability; think tanks calculate it as low as 60%.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2014/01/15/state-boost-pension-funding-cover-obligations/Gs4CxBj5Adzs8EseX8KeCI/story.html
Yes, Diane, part of the explosion in costs was a non-transparent backroom deal to get rid of the “Rubber Room” (but not really) in exchange for a retroactive pension enhancement. Yet another very good reason to completely oppose undemocratic, non-transparent, unaccountable mayoral control, with or without added checks and balances.
In California, teachers paid in 8% or more and the district a fraction of a percent more to match it.
CALSTRS reports that it has about 188.8 billion as of May 31, 2016. The money teachers and districts paid into CALSTRS is invested in a portfolio that is broadly diversified into six asset categories. The money we paid in just doesn’t sit their and rot. It grows, and because of the losses to the CALSTRS fund caused by the Wall Street and Big Bank greed in 2007-08, California’s governor and the legislature voted last year to increase funding to the teacher’s retirement fund to help make up for the funds losses.
http://www.calstrs.com/current-investment-portfolio
But I do collect SS because I worked in the private sector for more than 10 years before I became a teacher but because I was a teacher, I only get half of what I’m qualified for.
The CALSTRS fund has enough money to meet its obligations for decades unless the hedge fund frauds and crooks, Wall Street and the Big Banks cause more financial crashes because of their greed driven risk taking.
In Missouri, teachers put in 14.5% of their salary and the district contributes 14.5%. Since the district’s contribution goes into the teacher’s contribution one can look at it as the teacher putting in 29%. Just a tad more than “not much of their salary”.
Tim, your reference is for state workers, not teachers. Your original comment talks about TEACHERS, not state workers. Stay on topic, please, and look at the teacher retirement system.
Mathman,
The MTRS is included in the state pension systems referred to in the Globe piece, but you are right, I should have provided a more specific source.
Here’s the most recent annual filing for the MTRS. In it, you’ll see that MTRS has a significantly less favorable funding ratio than the state’s pension system as a whole, 54.3% (that information is buried on the last page), and that despite solid investment earnings and the huge appropriation of state money, last year the fund paid out $110 million more than it earned.
Click to access 2015mtrsfinancialreport.pdf
There are other factors that explain why public pensions like MTRS do not have adequate funds today to meet their long term obligations. Blaming teachers, teachers’ unions or defined benefit plans is BS.
US news reported in October 2008 that, “The value of pension funds and retirement accounts dropped by roughly $1 trillion, or almost 10 percent, in the year ending June 30, the CBO told the House Education and Labor Committee Tuesday, citing Federal Reserve data. Since then, asset prices have dropped even further. The CBO says that retirement assets may have declined by as much as $2 trillion over the past 15 months.”
http://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/planning-to-retire/2008/10/08/retirement-savers-lost-2-trillion-in-the-stock-market
Who do we blame for that $2 Trillion in loses to pension funds and retirement accounts?
Then there’s Hedge Funds.
“One reason pensions turn to hedge fund managers is to try to close the expansive gap between what the pensions owe their beneficiaries and the amount of funds that they have to meet those obligations. According to a report by the Pew Charitable Trusts, that gap was around $1 trillion in 2013, the most recent year available.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/08/business/a-hedge-fund-sales-pitch-casts-a-spell-on-public-pensions.html?_r=0
If the federal government—you know, It think, the same Congress that allowed banks to create too much money too quickly and used it to push up housing prices and speculate on financial markets, starting in 1999 by an overwhelming veto proof vote—can bail out Wall Street, the auto industry and banks, etc. through TARP, it can damn well bail out the public pensions that lost about $1 trillion from the same financial crises. In addition, public pensions affect a lot more people than the stock holders and CEO’s of all those corporations that were bailed out by TARP.
The feds could also put a stop to Hedge Funds looting the pensions.
“All across America, Wall Street is grabbing money meant for public workers.”
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/looting-the-pension-funds-20130926
If the feds don’t bail out public pensions, then that, I think, is cause for a bloody revolution and civil war to rid ourselves of the top predators of the 0.01% and their psycho minions.
Lloyd,
Markets bubble and correct all the time, and there are no guarantees. This is what makes it foolish to assume 8-10% returns when calculating “normal costs” of pensions.
(By the way, it turns out TARP and the other bailouts staved off a big, stinking, capital D depression. And the “gains” that led to that $2 trillion “loss” were largely created by the same toxic financial junk that caused the losses; you don’t get to cherry pick.)
I work for a big publicly held company that is incapable of any long-term planning because “Wall Street,” which is in thrall to huge institutional investors, will punish it quickly and harshly for pursuing any goal other than achieving the highest possible quarterly growth. If my company proposed to offer a defined-benefit pension to its employees, its stock price would go into complete freefall and its leaders would be replaced.
So Randi didn’t go far enough. She should have called on the affiliates to get their money out of publicly held companies and the stock markets entirely. Anything less would be intellectually inconsistent and illogical.
I’m curious. Do you think teachers don’t deserve the retirements they were promised by often crooked politicians that are bought and paid for by crooked CEOs and billionaires?
Did the teachers cause the 2007-08 global financial crises?
Did the teachers pressure members of both Houses of Congress to vote for the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in 1999 that repealed portions of the Glasss-Steagall Act?
You also cannot cherry pick facts to support whatever you think.
I’m sure you have heard of the domino effect where one thing falls leading to the next thing to fall. If the government hating libertarians, and democracy hating autocratic loving neo-liberals and neo-conservatives, or greed worshiping hedge funds, etc. manipulate the system to get rid of or reduce teacher pensions, what pension or retirement fund will be next? When will the entire system go down taking us all with it becasue of the actions of a few in powerful positions.
Yes, Randi must go much further to protect those public pensions and the millions who worked decades and paid into them.
And you cannot ignore many of the points I made and write them off with a flippant allegation that I was cherry picking.
Tim…you ignore that dedicated teachers sign on to this job of education for the lowest of salaries due to their calling for teaching.
Everyone wants, demands, gifted teachers, but wants them to work at minimum wages. When most young teachers decide to follow their hearts, they buy in to a system where they generally start at about $40K, and then spend 30 years getting to about $80 – 90 K. The plan is that they pay in for their retirement for all those years, and that the system protects their earned investment so that it will grow sufficiently that they can buy food, meds, and live above the poverty line in their dotage.
Retirement reimbursement is far from a benefit. Like SS, it is an earned insurance plan for a lifetime of dedication in a very challenging job. Gifted young teachers could instead have gone to law school in the close to the same time, and the same investment in their university education, and their starting salary would be about $90K…and would in 30 years rise to about $300K. Get real Tim!
Tim,
Yes, last year the fund paid out about 110 million more than it took in.
That 110 million is about 3.7% of what was disbursed.
This means that the system was about 96.3% self-funded last year.
You were presented with evidence that destroyed your claims about the Massachusetts teacher pension system’s being self-funded, and now you are grasping at straws.
Without the huge annual infusions of money appropriated from Mass. taxpayers, the MTRS fund would be empty in 8-10 years. Even with those massive appropriations, MTRS is only 54.3% funded, and in the next few years the state will need to almost double its current contribution. The teachers? Crickets.
Click to access 2015mtrsfinancialreport.pdf
Don’t fret, though. I’m sure there are politicians and people at the MTA who are working way harder and smarter than you are to keep this all carefully out of the public eye. And that soon-to-be $2 billion doesn’t come from districts!
No, Tim, it is you that is grasping at slivers of straws as you obviously willingly ignore why public pensions aren’t fully funded. The teachers didn’t cause underfunding. The GOP did most of that for their autocratic bilionare masters, hedge funds, Wall Street, and U.S. Banks, and now some Democrats are doing the same thing as they slash taxes. It doesn’t help that the Justice Department doesn’t throw the corporate crooks that avoid paying taxes into a dungeon but fine them instead a pittance compared to what they attempted to hide.
As mathman pointed out, enough contributions came in to pay for 96.3% of payments to retired teachers. And cutting benefits to retired teachers and public servants that worked most of their lives because of Wall Street, Hedge Fund, Big Bank greed and risk taking is not an option.
This country has an obligation to pay for its promises to working Americans, and if they don’t then it is time to listen to what Thomas Jefferson said about what we have to do to water the tree of liberty.
When the blood starts to flow, will you be a corporate loyalist or support the working class?
Lloyd is correct. There is a tipping point. When contracts of law are voided for the benefit of the wealthy, the question is when, social order transmutes. The growing number of credible threats against politicians, the kings of Wall Street and Silicon Valley, and the most prominent John Birchers, makes the point. When Marc Andreeson feels comfortable praising colonialism in India b/c Indian regulators oppose monopoly market conditions, it’s evidence of risky hubris among the wealthy.
The greatest “intellectual inconsistency” in this comment thread, relates to the implication that the invisible hand is at work in the US. In free enterprise, Wall Street would not exist in its current form. It is estimated that the financial sector has been a long term drain on GDP, estimated at 2% per year. The distortion occurs b/c the political process is hamstrung by the richest 0.1%, denying the market conditions that make capitalism work. One result is, the oligarchs impose their will, like in the example of the fully captured US Dept. of Education, to take profits from unwitting or unwilling communities.
Lloyd’s math is awful by intent, and it goes downhill from there.
A review of CalPERS top holdings reveals that Lloyd is very much involved in the rigged and parasitic financial sector.
His pension checks are dripping with the blood of Congolese and Chinese slave laborers; the money extracted by the world’s foremost producer of greenhouse gases and funder of climate change denial (Exxon); the profits of redlining and mortgage discrimination and many other toxic financial instruments (Wells Fargo; Chase); the spoils of destroying America’s Main Streets and mom-and-pop businesses (WalMart); marketing addictive drugs to healthy people, including paying doctors to push an untested antipsychotic onto children (Johnson & Johnson); money made by stampeding over intellectual property laws and ignoring personal privacy (Google); war profiteers and serial polluters (General Electric); and, hilariously, the great bloatware monopoly, Bill Gates’s own Microsoft.
Lloyd, you are eyebrows-deep loyal to corporations that increase income inequality, that ruin the earth, and that poison people. What was the word you used, “minion”?
Pension obligations are serious and must be fulfilled so long as states are solvent and able to meet them. That doesn’t mean that we all have to play along with the bullshit. None of them are self-funded. All of them divert resources from classrooms. The big returns institutional investors demand have negative consequences. Please spare us the sanctimony and the outright lying about the math.
Tim, you have a right to your flawed and biased opinions, but that does not make what you think right, and you are wrong. Retired teachers do not have blood on their hands because of investments the governor appointed board of CALstrs approved.
You are playing a dangerous games with words and accusations. I think you have been listening to The Donald to much.
“Retired teachers do not have blood on their hands because of investments the governor appointed board of CALstrs approved.”
Maybe not on their hands. The blood doesn’t actually get on the checks that the funds send out.
My goodness, Lloyd. The ease and frequency with which you lie about issues related to pensions is ridiculous. It’s like a reflex action.
For those interested in the truth, here is a link to the composition of the CalSTRS board. The governor appoints only 5 of the 12 positions, and the appointments must be confirmed by the state senate. 3 board members are active teachers.
http://www.calstrs.com/board-members
The board is responsible for choosing a chief investment officer, and it is that person and their staff who have selected investments in corporations that destroy the environment, increase income inequality and racial segregation, erode our personal liberties and freedoms, and harm our health, all while insisting that private sector firms not offer their workers a defined benefit pension. Sickening.
Tim, using your flawed, biased logic, every American has blood on their hands because of the wars based on lies fought in Southeast Asia that killed millions of civilians and the war in Iraq, also based on lies of WMDs, that has led to ISIL and widespread unrest in much of the Middle East.
The context of your flawed logic and biased comments reveals that you think your are the judge, jury and executioner, and that what you think is the only way to think and everyone else that disagrees with you is wrong, but in reality you only can think for yourself. Your opinion, I think, is one opinion of a very narrow minded, biased person with poison for blood.
I totally reject what you think regardless of where CALstrs has invested some of its money.
But what about the blood on the hands of Bill Gates — according to the evidence and your own logic, he is drenched in blood from head to toe.
http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-gatesx07jan07-story.html
Teachers are not responsible for how the governor appointed CALstrs board invests the money for their retirements. If you think those some of those investments are tainted, then become a muckraker and write about it on your own Blog and social media and urge teachers to put pressure on CALstrs to invest in
http://www.calstrs.com/portfolio-holdings-asset-category
But not so fast, because the law changed in California in 2015, and public pensions must now divest from coal and CA is not the only state moving in this direction. The following link is to a piece that thinks it is wrong to divest money from coal companies because it might put the pension money in other investments that are more risky.
http://stump.marypat.org/article/348/public-pension-follies-divestment-divest-from-all-the-dirty-things
Reblogged this on Exceptional Delaware and commented:
Hedge funds, eh? I distinctly remember writing about them and a local Delaware non-profit about 20 months ago…
Even, Warren Buffett, has described the fallacy of better returns from hedge funds. When returns didn’t beat the market, the hedge funds switched to an argument of less volatility, which was also found to be untrue.
There is no reason to use hedge funds. Research shows they lag behind Index funds. They aren’t worth what they cost. Just ask Warren Buffet.
Correct, and by a wide margin. Glad you made this point, and let’s hope Randi makes it as well. I believe that William K. Black has also repeatedly pointed this out.
Weingarten’s time might be better spent with Christie heading off his plans to reinvent teacher retirement and to provide flat rate student funding across New Jersey. When she gets done with that she could disengage herself from privatizer Clinton’s campaign.
Just to be clear: just because Randi is on the right side of things here (yup, an obvious, no brainer, whopper of a thing that should have been done years ago and she’s now trying to be all Elizabeth Warren on), doesnt mean she still isn’t one of the worst union heads in the history of labor and hasn’t been literally a huge part of the existential crisis facing working teachers nation-wide.
Randi Weingarten sucks. Period. Why has our union money been with those folks for so many years into the reform movement????? Why! That’s the real question that should be embarrassing to her. She’s doing this opportunistically. She saw a “right moment” with a Hillary Clinton/Elizabeth Warren economic populism moment and she wanted part of that.
Take away question: why wasnt union money divested from hedge funds years ago? Real, smart, aggressive union leadership would have had that done right away.
Bravo, sir, and well said!
Unions now protect the hierarchy, not the dues paying rank-and-file.
Ms Ravitch,
Why do you think it is OK to steal the content of the Wall Street Journal and repost it here? Would you be OK with the WSJ and others publisher wholesale excerpts of your books?
I suggest you get familiar with the concept of fair use and stop stealing the content from news sources just because you disagree with the politics of their editorial boards.
http://fairuse.stanford.edu/internet-resources/articles/
Cynthia,
It’s an attributed quote. Diane was clear where it came from and was clear as to how she was using it. It’s fine. Imagine a world where reposting news items is hyper-strict, beyond convention…..really. Ridiculous.
Weird that this is your issue here.
Desperation by Cynthia. Brings out the silliest.
NYSTeacher,
Attribution does not make it fair use. Fair use is measured by…
The four factors judges consider are:
•the purpose and character of your use
•the nature of the copyrighted work
•the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
•the effect of the use upon the potential market.
http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/
Posting 1,868 words of another journalist’s copyrighted work is taking a substantial portion. It would have been nice if Ms Ravitch also gave credit to the author, Brody Mullins.
It seems that most of the time (not all) that when Ms Ravitch posts a Washington Post article or a NY Times article she only links to it and we always see Ms Ravitch give writers like Valerie Strauss full credit for their hard work.
Geez, that’s the dumbest strawman I ever saw. Slippery slope.
WSJ article is behind the paywall, and very few of us are able to access. Your accusation doesn’t fly because it’s like attaching feathers to the pig.
I hope we do take our $ out of the hands of those who fight against us. It makes sense.
Cynthia,
Not to belabor this ridiculousness, but please, approach this with just a smidgen of common sense. How would any public discourse happen if we over-read copyright stuff like you are doing onto newspapers? Every forum, blog, radio show, etc would have to shut down. Radio programs routinely read large chunks of newspaper articles, blogs quote them, etc. The path you suggest is a bit over-earnest, hyper-literal, and completely unwieldy. Aside from you, if a great crime on Diane’s part has taken place, where are the copyright police??
According to your thinking, nobody could clip a newspaper article out of a newspaper and post it in the common area at work. Come on.
Your read of things would lead to a breakdown in public discourse. Ridiculous.
I find it best to attack the ideas you dislike or disagree with. Avoid nitpicking the format.
Do you have any issues with divesting teachers’ pension funds from hedge funds?
NYSTEACHER – tho I’m sure your copyright use points are well-taken, the question that more often occurs to me as a voracious news-consumer: why are WSJ articles even behind a paywall?
Answer: becauuse Rupert Murdoch bought them, & that was his decision for his Newscorp properties. Not that I care– not really. Once the Murdoch name was attached, the value of WSJ content sunk so low in my valuemeter that I washed my hands of them. The only other Murdoch paper I might have remotely cared to read is NYPost (just to be well-rounded; it was always a rag). I’m happy to imbibe free Forbes articles in lieu.
Chic Trib is paywalled: as a NE’r I can live w/o it. LAT (tho not a fave) has loosened up, many free articles.
NYT lets you read 10 articles free for a month (unlimited to me because I get the Sunday NYT delivered). WaPo only briefly toyed w/putting VStrauss beyond my ken, for maybe a year. Since then I’ve found over time that they are my primary source of news (as pulled down by GoogleNews filtered to my interests).
“Free” online means I am bombarded with more commercial visual distraction than when paging thro the NYT Style section! Minute per minute it’s equivalent to watching a CBS primetime reality show.
I expext Murdoch is reaping what he sowed. I imagine his WSJ subscription readership is reduced in number but far deeper in terms of right-wing echo chamber.
Depriving these blood-sucking Wall Street cronies of profits is the only language they understand. Now Randi Weingarten should also threaten the DNC of any further future AFT presidential endorsements unless the Democrats nominate a public school advocate to be the next Education Secretary in 2016. Please, no more Arne Duncans !!!
I have just gained a great deal of respect for Randi. Now, how can I get a link or a copy of the list of anti-public school hedge funds in order to make sure my own, personal investments and those of my family are not corrupted by privatization scheming?
And I for one will be joining the AFT this coming school year. Even if the dues cost more. It just might be a better return than those hedge funds.
Oh please. Randi is awful. She jumped on this opportunistically. Taken as a whole, nearly everything she has done has harmed working teachers. A stopped clock is right once a day. Please.
Randi is part of the problem. Period.
Why wasnt she talking of divesting 5 years ago?
From what I read, it sounds like she’s been at this for awhile, and she is fighting fire with fire.
GOOD for her. In KS, nationally everyone has heard how the Governor is raiding KPERS to fund the government. KS has one of the worst funded public pensions. KSLEG wants to take it away and stick workers with 401K. 401K gives the public workers retirement fund to the wolves.
The rear guard action of the hedge funders who doth protest too much, the managers who have their knickers in a knot would have us believe that the free market isn’t so free, that there are no other hedge funds or other investment strategies that would be suitable. They would also have us ignore the big picture, that any slight reduction in ROI, if any, would be more than offset by the gains in job security, professional autonomy, pay/benefits, and other important “externalities” that are of value to both teachers and students. Instead, they want us to focus on Milton Friedman’s hallucinations about the primacy of shareholder value, a criminogenic idea, as the only consideration. We are no longer fooled by such sophomoric sales pitches. Randi is dead on th this and all should support it.
Fantastic to hear this! We have been funding out own demise. Anti school folks should never see a penny of our money.
Randi has too many connections, too many conflicts of interest, to have made any presidential endorsement.
I want to know why a portion of my AFT dues went to “charities” controlled by the Clinton family. Randi is also a Clinton Superdelegate – and I’m sure that played a role in giving Hillary the AFT endorsement. The entire leadership is rotted to the core. I am, thoroughly disgusted with Randi and I think the AFT needs tearing down to be rebuilt in a more democratic manner.
I am a former public school teacher who worked in Massachusetts for more than three decades. I have been retired since 2004. Still, I try to keep up with what is going on in education in our country. I wrote the following article for the blog Flowers for Socrates in August of 2014. I thought you might find it interesting reading. NOTE: I used about twenty sources for my piece:
Who the F*ck is Dan Loeb and How Is He Connected to Teacher Pensions and School Reformers?
https://flowersforsocrates.com/2014/08/17/who-the-fck-is-dan-loeb-and-how-is-he-connected-to-teacher-pensions-and-school-reformers/
There’s about $3 trillion in public pension funds today. So, the real question is: Why haven’t public pension fund managers used that $3 trillion club to hammer hedge funds into quitting the charter school business? Yanking trillions of public pension fund money out of hedge funds would tank many hedge funds, so they’d have to play ball. And why would the managers of the California teachers’ pension fund want to support hedge funds?
Wall Street banks want to convert the $3 trillion in public pension plans into 401(k) accounts from which the banks can reap billions in those “management fees” from which they already drain billions of dollars from private workers’ 401(k) accounts. The strategy Wall Street is using to convince voters that this conversion is “necessary” is by deceiving voters into thinking that states are deeply in debt to public pension plans through something called “unfunded liability.”
Wall Street banks are getting away with their deceptive “unfunded liability” crusade against public pension plans because while everyone THINKS they know what an “unfunded liability” is — uninformed people wrongly think it’s a current debt owed by their state to a public pension — only someone who is an actuarial accountant actually knows what an “unfunded liability” really is. And the main thing that an “unfunded liability” is NOT is that it’s NOT a current debt owed by any state. Here are the facts that you should remember and use to speak up each time you hear someone complaining about how your public pension plan is “bankrupting” your state:
1. The non-political Boston College Center for Retirement Research reports that the national average state contribution to public employee pension plans is only about 5% of the typical state’s annual budget. That’s just 5 cents out of a state’s annual budget dollar, and that 5 cents is never going to “bankrupt” any state.
To actuarially calculate an “unfunded liability” you take that small 5 cents per annual budget dollar contribution to the pension plan and add it up for the next 30 years, increasing each year’s contribution to allow for inflation and other economic factors. The sum total of that 30 future years of small annual contributions is the “unfunded liability.” It’s typically a large amount — large enough to panic the majority of voters who mistakenly think it’s an actual current debt, when in fact it’s only the 30-year sum of small annual contributions that are easily afforded, like a mortgage or a car payment.
2. The actual fact is that nearly all of most states’ public employee pension benefits are paid from: (A) The investment earnings on the pension’s trust fund, which typically generates 70% to 75% of the pension payout; plus (B): Payroll contributions from the pension plan’s active members, leaving that state to pay only that very small 5 cents per annual state budget dollar.
3. Reducing or converting public pension plans into 401(k) accounts will in fact likely (1) raise everyone’s state and local taxes and (2) eliminate tens of thousands of private sector jobs that depend on the pension spending by retired public employees.
For example, in California CalSTRS is estimated to generate about $10 billion in economic activity and support more than 60,000 jobs with state and local governments, reaping over $600,000,000 in annual revenues from the economic activity generated by retired consumers spending their CalSTRS benefit income in the state.
The Los Angeles Times reported that the same is true of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) which is estimated to bring $12 billion into the California economy and to generate a collateral $26 billion in economic activity while supporting over 93,000 jobs.
Plus, much of the investment income that’s paid to retirees by these public retirement plans is IMPORTED INTO the states as dividends on the worldwide stocks in which the plans are invested.
The same is true for public pension plans in most other states.
Bottom Line: States are not deep in current debt to their public pension plans, and cutting the plans could likely increase everyone’s taxes and eliminate tens of thousands of jobs.
Speak up! Whether you’re at a neighborhood barbeque, at your Elk’s club, or with a group after church — wherever, whenever — SPEAK UP!
Scisne – I just want to pull out a teeny part of your cogent statement here: for readers who must depend on 401(k)’s for retirement, find a fee-only financial planner (also called RIA’s or registered investment advisors) to help you plan for retirement. Check NAPFA (National Association of Personal Financial Advisors). Unlike brokers, they do not depend on transaction fees to survive, & can manage your employee 401(k) while you are working, & will manage funds according to your needs; corporate mgrs of these funds may not fit the bill.
Every California Governor I can remember has tried to get the teachers’ pension funds invested in CalPERS put into the General Fund. It is an endless battle to watch the sometimes challenged overseers at CalPERS and scream (as in indict them) to make good decisions, and to keep their hands (and the colluding pols) out of the teachers’ till. The Austrian Repub Giv/actor who took so many bad turns when in office was prime among these.
At least two California governors borrowed from CALstrs; then refused to pay back the loan. Both times CALstrs took that governor/state to court and won.
I wrote about it in March 2011 here >
https://crazynormaltheclassroomexpose.com/2011/03/30/a-lesson-in-misleading-an-ignorant-public/
Good news. Ugliest picture that the WSJ could find of Randi.
Proud to claim a nephew who, in the early 1980s, helped organize students at Occidental College to oppose the university’s endowment practice of investing in South Africa. Mandela was in jail. Apartheid was the rule. The ethic of divestment took root across the country, spurred by demonstrations and sit-ins of college students. This to say, good for Randi.
On the other hand Randi has allowed the AFT to become a “partner” with 60 other organizations in the anti-union campaign known as TeachStrong.
See the problems here
https://dianeravitch.net/2015/…/peter-greene-says-beware-of-teachstrong/
or in this from Edusyster. http://edushyster.com/if-this-post-feels-entirely-recycled-thats-because-it-is-much-like-teachstrong/
and this from Mercedes Schneider
https://deutsch29.wordpress.com/2015/11/09/teach-strong-more-of-the-same-but-with-a-game-board/
Where were Randi’s due diligence people when she signed on to an agenda offered up by the Center for American Progress? Does she really LIKE that the AFT is in the same campaign as TFA, TNTP, Relay Graduate School of Education with the infamous Doug Lemov treated as guru. Sixty organizations (up from an initial 40) have signed onto this campaign. Is she aware that the TeachStrong Campaign is now releasing details on the “principles” that were not present in the initial PR and invitation to sign up, agree to nine one-line principlesto “uplift” teaching? Has anyone at AFT looked at the two recent elaborations of how these principles are being morphed into nine policies, released on a once-a month basis and actually disclosing what the first round of PR really means? Did anyone at AFT look at the commissioned push survey, designed to shape “messaging” about the campaign?
TeachStrong reminds me of how many people were enticed to endorse the Common Core State State Standards before they were even published. Classic bait and switcheroo.
Let’s not look a gift horse in the mouth.
I too have fond memories– starting with late ’60’s campus protests against SA apartheid at Cornell. By the ’80’s this was an organized campaign of divestiture. I am proud to claim a cousin– a ’60’s member of the Cornell Dean’s Office– who later founded, out of CA, an anti-apartheid divestiture organization called Ploughshares. He travelled all over the US theoughout the ’80’s, counseling corporations on the details of how to divest themselves of investments that supported SA apartheid. They succeeded.
Congratulations to Randi Weingarten for having found a way to use teachers’ union clout for something that actually might help improve the lot of teachers– we are a big part of the middle class! You go, Randi!
Love you more and more Laura….you are our informer and our conscience. Big hug for today.
Thank you, Randi Weingarten! As a teacher & parent, you just went up several notches in my esteem. Disinvestment is a time-honored and effective way to change policy.
It’s all about payoffs.. On both sides.
When Cliff Asness of hedge fund AQR Capital Management LLC found out Mr. Kravitz had gotten off the list, he called Mr. Mehlman, a friend. Mr. Asness also hired a friend of Ms. Weingarten’s: Donna Brazile, a vice chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee who has been a paid consultant to the American Federation of Teachers.
“Both sides”, false equivalency. As long as corporations can use the profits generated by consumers, to guarantee the political policies and laws that they want, whatever transactions are deemed “payoffs”
have to be viewed through the lens of gross inequality. As long as corporations have executive salaries that they can offer, through government/industry revolving doors, the situation is gross inequality.
Why did she wait so long!!!!