Why are government pensions sacred?

Raising taxes and cutting spending, programs or even people to close budget gaps ... are common and logical if regrettable responses to public sector budget shortfalls, a falling market. lower revenues and a shrinking tax base. But seldom if ever do I hear a word about reducing the pensions public employees or retirees are getting or have been promised.

In the private sector, if a company goes bankrupt and its pension reserves are inadequate to cover promised present and future claims, the funds are transferred to the Federal Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation (PBGC). Usually, the PBGC soon advises the former employees that their benefits or future benefits will be cut.

This could be up to a third or more. Tens of millions of Americans are painfully aware of this process and tens of millions more will soon be. With the exception of an occasional word about renegotiating pension benefits downward for future employees, I sense an assumption that promised public pension benefits are untouchable. If there are shortfalls, and the public pension plans are virtually all seemingly in shortfall, then the taxpayer must pay more even though many nonpublic financed pensions are gone or reduced.

From what I read, unfunded pension systems for teachers and state, municipal and county employees were already a huge, huge problem before the current economic situation. We all know the federal system pretty much works on a pay-as-you-go basis. Is there a reason why public pension benefits are seemingly off-limits? Is there a recourse?

This is not about the value of the public service. f private pensions promised by employers can go bust and be unilaterally adjusted because of finances, why not public? Just asking.

Don Ruhter

Barrington