Sen. Brad Zaun
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Sen. Brad Zaun Zaun Introduced A Bill To Privatize The Iowa Public Employees' Retirement System For All Future Members Zaun Introduced A Bill Which Would Repeal Iowa’s Pension Systems For All New Public Employees And Replace Them With A Private Market/401(K) Type Plan The Iowa Public Employees' Retirement System Was A Defined-Benefit Program Which Assured Retirees A Monthly Payment. “IPERS is a defined-benefit program - which assures retirees a monthly payment - while many private employers have shifted to 401(k)-style defined-contribution retirement programs, which do not promise a monthly check while building an account for retirement income. In addition, some states have hybrid pension plans that contain elements of both defined-benefit and defined-contribution plans.” [Inside Sources, 8/4/18] ● 1 In 10 Iowans Was An IPERS Member. “IPERS represents more than 360,000 members who teach our children, maintain our roads and parks, care for our most vulnerable residents and protect our citizens. 1 in 10 Iowans is an IPERS member.” [Iowa Public Employees' Retirement System, 2020] ● IPERS' Members Included Current, Former And Retired Employees Of State Agencies, School Districts, Cities, Counties And Other Iowa Government Agencies. “IPERS' members include current, former and retired employees of state agencies, school districts, cities, counties and other Iowa government agencies. The average IPERS member retires after 22 years and receives an annual pension of $16,000.” [Des Moines Register, 12/4/14] ● The Average IPERS Member Retired After 22 Years Of Service, Earning An Annual Pension Of $16,000. “Over 108,000 retirees and their beneficiaries receive IPERS retirement benefits. IPERS paid $1.8 billion in retirement benefits during the last fiscal year, with $1.6 billion paid in Iowa. IPERS is a prefunded system – contributions from employees and employers are pooled and invested over the member’s career. The average IPERS member retires after 22 years of service, earning an annual pension of $16,000.” [Iowa Public Employees' Retirement System, 2/3/15] Zaun’s Bill Would Take Away Guaranteed Benefits For New Public Employees, Forcing Them Onto Privatized Plans Which Often Left Workers Earning Less Than Expected And Ending Up With Too Little To Cover Their Retirement Needs Zaun Introduced A Bill To Prohibit Any New Iowa Public Employees From Becoming Members Of Existing Public Pension Funds. “Meanwhile, a bill remains alive in the Iowa Senate for consideration in the 2018 session that would prohibit all Iowa public employees hired after July 1, 2019, from becoming members of existing public pension funds. Senate File 45, authored by Sen. Brad Zaun, R-Urbandale, calls for the development of a mandatory defined contribution pension plan for new public employees.” [Des Moines Register, 7/4/17] Zaun’s Bill Would Divert New Public Employees Into Defined Contribution Retirement Programs Similar To Private-Sector 401(k) Programs That Did Not Guarantee Benefits. “McCoy said he is concerned about Senate File 45, introduced last session by Sen. Brad Zaun, R-Urbandale, which McCoy contended would ‘dismantle’ IPERS and other public pension programs that promise monthly benefits checks. The legislation would require that all new public employees hired after July 1, 2019, would be diverted into defined contribution retirement programs similar to private-sector 401(k) programs that do not guarantee benefits.” [Des Moines Register, 12/11/17] A Defined Benefit System Typically Paid A Set Amount To Employees When They Retired Whereas Defined Contribution Systems Did Not Promise A Specific Amount To Beneficiaries. “A defined benefit system typically pays a set amount to employees when they retire. Defined contribution systems do not promise a specific amount to beneficiaries.” [The Gazette, 10/24/18] ● Americans For Prosperity Called For A Shift To A Defined Contribution Arrangement. “Some conservative groups have called the IPERS defined benefit system outdated. Americans for Prosperity has called for a shift to a defined contribution arrangement. However, if changes were proposed, they would surely be opposed by public sector unions.” [Quad-City Times, 1/26/17] CNN Money: Investors In Defined Contribution Plans Often Earned Lower Returns Than They Expected. “Studies have shown that 401(k)s and other defined contribution plans haven't been as successful as many proponents hoped. […] The array of investment options - many plans have more than a dozen funds to choose from - can be another turnoff. And investors in those plans often earn lower returns than they expected.” [CNN Money, 2018] ● CNN Money: Studies Showed That Defined Contribution Plans Were Not As Successful As Many Proponents Hoped Because Employees Often Declined Investing Their Own Money For Retirement Or Invested Sums That Were Way Too Small To Cover Their Retirement Needs. “Studies have shown that 401(k)s and other defined contribution plans haven't been as successful as many proponents hoped. Turns out that when employees are given the choice of investing their own money for retirement, lots of them say no thanks, or else invest sums that are way too small to cover their retirement needs.” [CNN Money, 2018] ● CNN Money: “Obviously, A Defined Benefit Plan Is A Much Better Deal For You.” “You typically don't fork over any of your paycheck to participate in a defined benefit plan. Your employer does. But you do have to put your own money into a defined contribution plan like a 401(k) or a 403(b). Obviously, a defined benefit plan is a much better deal for you. Because defined benefit plans are more costly for employers than defined contribution plans, most of them have - you guessed it - scaled back dramatically or eliminated these plans altogether in recent years. If you still have a defined benefit plan at your company, consider yourself lucky.” [CNN Money, 2018] Zaun Voted For A Bureaucratic Employment Verification Measure That Would Make It Harder For At Least Tens Of Thousands Of Iowans To Access Medicaid And Food Stamps Iowa Republicans Supported An Employment Verification Measure That Would Subject Over 50,000 Iowans To Confusion, More Paperwork, Increased Bureaucracy And Loss Of Health Insurance Iowa Republicans Voted To Make Those Receiving Medicaid Benefits Or Public Food Assistance To Show They Were Working, Volunteering Or Performing Charity Work In Order To Receive Benefits. “‘Able-bodied adults without school-aged children or dependents would be required to work, volunteer or perform charity work to receive Medicaid benefits or public food assistance under legislation passed Tuesday by the Iowa Senate. A total of 31 Republicans voted for Senate File 2366 while 17 Democrats and one GOP senator opposed the measure.” [The Gazette, 3/3/20] Des Moines Register Editorial: Iowa Republicans Should Lean From Arkansas’s Mandated Work Requirements, Which Resulted In “Confusion, More Paperwork, Increased Bureaucracy, Court Fights And People Losing Health Insurance.” “Every once in a while you get to see what happens when a bad policy idea becomes reality. Look no further than Arkansas, which enacted work requirements for Medicaid recipients. Iowa’s Republican lawmakers and governor should take an especially close look. In 2018, Arkansas embarked on an experiment to become the only state to fully implement Medicaid work requirements. Medicaid, funded by federal and state governments, provides health insurance for low- income Americans and ensures health providers who treat poor patients are compensated. Arkansas required many residents covered by an Affordable Care Act expansion to perform at least 80 hours per month of work, volunteering, job training or other activities. What ensued was exactly what should have been expected: confusion, more paperwork, increased bureaucracy, court fights and people losing health insurance.” [Editorial – Des Moines Register, 10/30/19] More Than 70,000 Iowans Would Have Been Affected By A 2019 Employment Verification Measure. “Earlier this year the GOP-led Iowa Legislature jumped on the misguided work requirement bandwagon and supported legislation with language that looks a lot like what Arkansas implemented. […] The nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency cautioned Iowa lawmakers that more than 70,000 Iowans would be affected. The additional work for state employees, hiring more staff, gathering information on beneficiaries and other newly created bureaucratic issues were estimated to cost $5 million the first year and nearly $12 million the second.” [Editorial – Des Moines Register, 10/30/19] The Fiscal Note For The 2020 Bill Anticipated That Over 50,397 Requests For Information Would Be Made To Individuals To Determine If They Were Meeting Work Requirements. “The DHS will need to send 50,397 Requests for Information (RFI) to individuals to determine if they are currently meeting work requirements at $0.60 per mailing and 15 minutes of work for each IM2 FTE position. • There will be an estimated 47,877 individuals enrolled in both the Medicaid and Iowa Health and Wellness Program who do not qualify for an exemption and who are not currently meeting the work requirement.” [Fiscal Note for Senate File 2366 – 2020 Session, 3/3/20] Zaun Voted For The Bill. [Senate File 2366 – 2020 Session, 3/3/20] The Unnecessary Bureaucratic Requirements Would Result In Workers And People Who Should Be Exempt Due To Illness Or Disability Losing Coverage Democrats Warned That Qualified Medicaid Recipients Could Unintentionally Lose Health Coverage Because Of Missed Paperwork Deadlines. “Opponents of the program said qualified Medicaid recipients could unintentionally lose health coverage by missing paperwork deadlines. ‘Even if you do catch a couple of those people the question arises, what about the children of those individuals who are going to get removed?’ said Sen. Bill Dotzler, D-Waterloo. ‘Who’s going to take care of them?’” [Iowa Public Radio, 3/3/20] 78 Percent Of Working-Age Medicaid Recipients In Iowa Were Already Employed. “According to figures gathered by the Kaiser Family Foundation, 78 percent of working-age Medicaid recipients in Iowa are already employed.