Monday, October 10, 2011

Rep. George Flaggs to subpoena head of PERS Study Commission

An article by Emily Wagster Pettus details the battle lines being drawn over a new front in the war over PERS, with Lt. Gov. Phil Bryant (R) and Gov. Haley Barbour (R) digging in to prevent an inquiry into the motives of the PERS Study Commission. Rep. George Flaggs (D-Vicksburg) is wanting Gulfport Mayor George Schloegel (R) to appear before the Joint Legislative Budget Committee to answer questions about the funding, objectives, and intentions of the PERS Study Commission. Schloegel is the chairman of the PERS Study Commission, and like all members of the Commission, was appointed by Gov. Barbour.

Last week, Bryant, who chairs the Joint Legislative Budget Committee as Lt. Gov., rejected Rep. Flaggs' request to have Schloegel appear before the Committee. Bryant, who is running for Governor, said that he spoke to Gov. Barbour, who told him that Schloegel should not appear before the Committee because he "is not a state employee, the Commission is not a state agency, state funds are not being used to pay for the activities of the Commission and the Commission’s report will only be recommendations."

That's interesting to me, since People who aren't state employees, don't run state agencies, don't get state funds to operate, and only give recommendations are called before legislative committees all the time. For his part, Rep. Flaggs has said that he will subpoena Schloegel to the Committee. Prepare now for great wailing and gnashing of teeth from Republicans over Flaggs' ability to do so. This is nothing but a smoke screen and a delay tactic by Barbour and Bryant, who are trying to simultaneously shift control of PERS to private hands, all while keeping the public from knowing what they're doing until, oh, say November 9, 2011.


Kingfish said...

Trying to shift control to private hands?

Prove it.

Cottonmouth said...

The desire to "study" PERS is a play straight from the national GOP's book. In state after state, Republicans have shifted control of state retirement systems to private hands in an effort to "save the system" and cut back on the "sweetheart deals" state employees receive. Let Schloegel submit to questioning and answer questions about the motives and funding of the PERS Study Commission if there's nothing to hide.

Kingfish said...

I'm asking you a serious question. What document has been issued or statement been made by Barbour or anyone else connected with the study/commission said anything about moving to a 401K?

I asked you a aeries of specific questions the other day. Questions you have refused to answer. I could just as easily say you are touting the Democrat party line.

In case you haven't noticed by the way, some of the pensions in other states NEEDED reforming. I guess you think Calfifornia's, New Jersey's, and Illinois were just fine.

However, name something specific. I want to know why you are against studying pers when no one on the board but one has any investment expertise, PERS has few CFA's, and maybe three legislators in both parties understand this stuff. I want to know what you think about PERS spending half a billion more in payouts this year than it took in in expenses.

And by the way, I'm giving Republicans in private the same questions when they start spouting off about PERS. I'm tired of hacks on both sides of the aisle spouting off about PERS when they know nothing about it.

Have you even read their annual report or audits? Just curious.