NH Senate passes bill to make comprehensive changes to the state retirement system

[Keith and stuff]

Edit: This bill didn't become law but the text in it was moved to the budget bill and the budget bill became law.

The NH Senate passed SB 3 to make comprehensive changes to the state retirement system which would make government workers pay a much larger share of the costs of their retirement and save the taxpayers massive amounts of money in the coming years. This bill has overwhelming support with 16 or 24 NH State Senators co-sponsoring the bill and a finally passage of 19 to 5 on the NH Senate floor.

http://www.nhliberty.org/bills/view/2011/SB3

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/bill...billnumber=SB3

AMENDED ANALYSIS

This bill makes various changes to the state retirement system including:

I. Increasing retirement ages of group II members for service retirement, disability retirement, vested deferred retirement, and split benefits.

II. Changing the definitions of earnable compensation and average final compensation used in calculating retirement benefits.

III. Changing the composition of the board of trustees.

IV. Eliminating the special account.

V. Eliminating the retirement system funding of medical benefits premium payments.

VI. Increasing contribution rates.

VII. Establishing a voluntary defined contribution plan administered by the board of trustees.

VIII. Limits when a member in service may concurrently receive benefits.

[libertybrewcity]

NH is doing glorious things.

[eduardo89]

Very good, I hope more states join and make similar changes.

[Keith and stuff]

Finally, an article about this.

Senate passes retirement system reforms
By GARRY RAYNO
New Hampshire Union Leader Staff

http://www.unionleader.com/article.a...4-83db4a026772

But supporters said without changes, other cities and town will see police and firefighting positions unfilled like the 41 in Manchester because of the high cost of employee benefits. Public workers will be laid off, they said.

The bill’s prime sponsor, Sen. Jeb Bradley, R-Wolfeboro, said opponents talk about sharing the burden. "The shared burden right now is crushing employers, which mean property taxpayers," he said.

Without changes in the retirement system, supporters said, the system is not sustainable.

Senate Bill 3 would require newly hired and non-vested employees to work longer and contribute more to their pensions.

The bill also changes how retirement benefits are determined using a five-year average instead of a three-year average.

Also the bill eliminates funding for retiree medical benefits and there would be greater restrictions on retirees working part-time while collecting retirement benefits from the system.

[Keith and stuff]

I similar, though different bill, bill HB 580, passed the NH House by a vote of 228 to 139.

http://www.nhliberty.org/bills/view/2011/HB580

ANALYSIS

This bill makes various changes to the state retirement system including:

I. Increasing retirement ages of group I and group II members for service retirement, disability retirement, vested deferred retirement, and split benefits.

II. Changing the definitions of earnable compensation and average final compensation used in calculating retirement benefits.

III. Changing the composition of the board of trustees.

IV. Eliminating the special account.

V. Eliminating the retirement system funding of medical benefits premium payments.

VI. Increasing contribution rates.

VII. Establishing a voluntary defined contribution plan administered by the board of trustees.

VIII. Prohibiting a member in service from concurrently receiving benefits.

[eduardo89]

So the two bills need to be consolidated now and re-voted?

[Keith and stuff]

I don't know what they are going to do. I think both bills moved over to the different house. I'll keep you posted on future developments

[Keith and stuff]

House, Senate pass retirement system reforms
By GARRY RAYNO AND TOM FAHEY
New Hampshire Union Leader
22 minutes ago

http://www.unionleader.com/article.a...4-83db4a026772

The Senate and House will exchange bills, and eventually will have to agree on a single approach to the issue.

[LibertyRevolution]

I would be pretty pissed off if the company I worked at for 40 years decided to not honor the retirement plan that they agreed to upon hiring me.

[Keith and stuff]

I would be pretty pissed off if the company I worked at for 40 years decided to not honor the retirement plan that they agreed to upon hiring me.

Except it is the state of NH and the reason it cannot fund the ridiculously lavish retirement plan is that year after year the state government screwed up by promising the stars when only the moon was possible. And guess what, so did almost every other state and also the federal government and so on. It's either a complete economic collapse or governments attempt to partly fund the extremely poorly designed systems in a way that prevents or slows down the complete economic collapse.

I would be mad too. However, I have worked for the government and I did sign a contract and was promised certain things. For nothing that was my fault, part of my military bonus was taken away and some of the benefits that existed when I joined the military were removed before I got out. It was a horrible experience and I saw first hand that the government will lie to it's workers and treat them poorly. Of course, government leaders continuously lie to non-government workers and treat them far, far worse.

And that's just how it is when dealing with the government. The best way to avoid or reduce the problems is to deal with the government as little as possible.