Freedom Path “Two Scoops…” Mailer Misses the Truth on Double-Dipping

It’s called double dipping. The law allows schoolteachers and other public employees to retire and take pension benefits from the state retirement system, then go back to work full time — often in a similar job — and receive large 401(k) contributions from their employer while continuing to earn a salary and take pension benefits.[...]

Unfortunately, the state retirement system can’t afford it. If the Legislature doesn’t change the rules, double dipping could cost the retirement system $900 million over the next decade. The Utah pension system is already underfunded by about $6.5 billion due to the hit it took when the stock market crashed. That’s why the Legislature must put an end to double dipping.

[italics are mine]

• “Double-dipping could cost the state nearly $900 million over a decade — more wasteful government spending.” Again, this appears to be a true statement. Robert Gehrke reported that “[a]n audit of the retirement system finished late last year showed the double-dipping would cost the state $897 million in the coming decade.” However, this is the problem that Liljenquist’s bill set out to solve, not the problem that resulted from his vote.
• “As a State Senator, Dan Liljenquist introduced a bill that would have ended the practice of double-dipping for state workers–but then turned around and later voted to allow double-dipping to continue.” Upon review, this statement begins to cross over into the grey territory and causes me to question the integrity of the writer. Further,  we have to rate this statement  as MISLEADING.What really happened?

The original bill would have ended the practice completely. According to the Roche article that Freedom Path cites, Rep. Stephen Sandstrom asked that the bill be amended in the House to allow people who left their job for a year to return if they had not been replaced. Roche writes that

Liljenquist said the change accommodates retirees who find themselves in the position of having to go back to work but ends what he called the “sweetheart deal” that gives workers an incentive to retire early and come back.

However, the reform still saved money and ended double-dipping as it had existed before–and it had been proposed and sponsored by Dan Liljenquist. Further, the bill did not expand government waste, but actually cut it. The fiscal note tied to the bill–an analysis of the costs of the law–said that “over time there will be a net savings to the retirement system for individuals that work longer. Savings to the state may be as high as $10.5 million depending on retirement patterns.”

This, after a potential cost of $900 million over a decade. If my math serves me right, that’s a switch in the direction of savings.

In contrast, Dan Liljenquist was the original sponsor of the bill, which passed with almost unanimous Republican support and the Governor’s signature.

The Salt Lake Tribune’s summary of the Dan Liljenquist reform is as follows:

Sen. Dan Liljenquist’s package of bills would replace the current pension plan with a kind of 401(k) plan; eliminate so-called double dipping in which a retired public employee comes back to work and draws a retirement check and paycheck; and extend the retirement eligibility for peace officers. The changes are prospective and largely leave current employees unaffected. Liljenquist said the changes are needed because the economic crash walloped the current system, creating a $6.5 billion gap in the long-term funds and obligations.

•  ”As a State Representative, Chris Herrod supported weakening a proposal to end double-dipping–instead opening the door to allow state workers to collect both their pensions and a state paycheck if they wait at least a year to return to work.”

My problems with this statement are multiple. First, the statement avoids the obvious–that the proposal to end double-dipping was Dan Liljenquist’s. To admit as much would have punched holes in the previous attack on Liljenquist. Second, state workers can’t just “return to work.” They must be rehired. Last, as before stated, only one Republican voted against the bill, the bill resulted in savings, and was attributed to the reasons why Utah was able to avoid disaster after the $6.5 billion shortfall that year.

For these reasons, this statement is MISLEADING.

CONCLUSION: “Two Scoops” Distorts the Truth and Lies to Voters

The “Two Scoops” mailer ends with this statement: “Utah Can’t Afford Big Spenders Like Dan Liljenquist & Chris Herrod.” This is, perhaps, the biggest lie of the brochure.

So, back to the beginning:

DO DAN LILJENQUIST AND CHRIS HERROD SUPPORT DOUBLE-DIPPING?

Clearly, the answer is “No, they opposed it.”   Not only had double-dipping reform been proposed and supported by Liljenquist or Herrod, respectively, but the pension reform that passed resulted in savings, not further government waste, relative to what was done earlier.

In fact, the unions turned out in force to fight them on it.

Some 200 people jammed a committee room Wednesday and more spilled into overflow rooms to hear a Senate committee debate what are perhaps the most drastic changes in the history of Utah’s public employee retirement system.

If Liljenquist and Herrod were to do the same thing Hatch with Medicare Part D, the Hatch Campaign would go crazy (and perhaps they have…we’ll look at a mailer  by Freedom Works attacking Hatch later). Instead, Freedom Path, Orrin Hatch supporting  political action committee, has explicitly flipped Liljenquist and Herrod’s records upside down to exactly the opposite of what really happened.

That’s misleading to Utah voters, and that’s bad for Utah politics.

Ironic: By doing so, does Freedom Path realize that it has by association attacked every Republican member of the Utah State Legislature and Governor Herbert?  Each Republican (with one exception) voted for it, and the Governor signed it.

TOMORROW (or the next day)…”Jobs not Made In the USA”

[Salt Lake Tribune]