Raimondo, Taveras Continue Throwing Pension Punches in Race for Rhode Island Governorship

The pension system continues to occupy center stage in Rhode Island’s race for governor. In one corner is current state Treasurer Gina Raimondo, whose 2011 pension reforms were among the boldest in the country and are the subject of numerous lawsuits from labor groups.

In the other corner in Angel Taveras, the current mayor of Providence who has been critical of the pension system’s investments under Raimondo and has accused the Treasurer of being in bed with Wall Street.

Raimondo released a new campaign ad yesterday – you can watch it above – that responded to Taveras’ claims. The Providence Journal reports:

In a new one-minute TV ad released to the media on Monday morning, Raimondo, the state’s general treasurer, looks into the camera and says of her leading rival in the Democratic primary race for governor:

“I’m Gina Raimondo and you might have heard about Mayor Taveras attacking pension reform, claiming I did it to enrich Wall Street. Nothing could be more wrong.”

“I was 11 years old when my dad lost his job at Bulova. I have never forgotten how hard that was. So when I became treasurer and inherited the pension crisis, I knew if we didn’t face up to the problem a lot of people were going to get hurt. And we couldn’t let that happen” she says in the video.

Raimondo, who is being sued by the state’s public-employee unions, next says: “Our reforms passed by overwhelming majorities in the legislature and, in the end, most of our changes were agreed to by every union except one.”

The Taveras campaign has been extremely critical of the hedge funds investments and accompanying investment fees incurred by the state’s pension system under Raimondo’s watch.

A Taveras spokesperson responded to Raimondo’s new ad:

“As a former venture capitalist who raised fees to Wall Street to $70 million, the Treasurer [Raimondo] has taken over $500,000 from the financial industry. The Treasurer received a no bid, secret contract managing taxpayer money that ensured that her venture capital firm was paid whether they made money or not. Rhode Island deserves a governor who has a record of standing up to Wall Street.”

Raimondo has been adamant that most unions were receptive to her reforms. But several union leaders have gone on record to say that is not the case. As the leaders told the Providence Journal:

Leaders of several of the state’s public-employee unions — including Council 94, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees — accused Raimondo of misrepresenting their position in the high-stakes pension fight headed for trial next month.

“Council 94, AFSCME vigorously opposed the pension changes. The treasurer’s process was a farce,” said Council 94 President J. Michael Downey, a Taveras backer.

“Our ideas and suggested amendments were ignored. She broke her word about taking care of people with the least amount of pension benefits, in her words: ‘the little guy.’ And she harmed many municipal employees whose pensions were healthy,” Downey said.

Added Paul Reed, president of the Rhode Island State Association of Firefighters: “She never negotiated with us on any of these things.”

Both of those union leaders support Taveras.

Watch Taveras’ original ad below:

New Jersey Is Still Waiting For Return on Hedge Fund Investments

New Jersey Pension Returns
CREDIT: International Business Times

New Jersey is one of the most active states in the country when it comes to investing pension fund assets in hedge funds. That strategy carries risks and boatloads of fees—but it also carries potentially big returns.

Journalist David Sirota investigated the state’s investment decisions and the corresponding return data. He found that New Jersey was certainly straddled with management fees.

But the promised returns have not yet materialized. From Sirota:

Between fiscal year 2011 and 2014, the state’s pension trailed the median returns for similarly sized public pension systems throughout the country, according to data from the financial analysis firm, Wilshire Associates. That below-median performance has cost New Jersey taxpayers billions in unrealized gains and has left the pension system on shaky ground.

Meanwhile, New Jersey is now paying a quarter-billion dollars in additional annual fees to Wall Street firms — many of whose employees have financially supported Republican groups backing Christie’s reelection campaign.

Neither Christie nor the state pension fund’s top investment official responded to Sirota’s requests for comment. But to a certain extent, the numbers speak for themselves. Here’s a chart of the state’s management fees since 2009:

New Jersey's pension investment expenses since 2009
CREDIT: International Business Times

More from Sirota:

In 2009, the year before Christie took office, New Jersey spent $125.1 million on financial management fees. In 2013, the most recent year for which data is available, the state reported spending $398.7 million on such fees. In all, New Jersey’s pension system has spent $939.8 million on financial fees between fiscal year 2010 and 2013.

That’s only a little less than the amount Christie cut from state education funding in 2010 — a cut that played a major role in shrinking the state’s teaching force by 4,500 teachers. That money might also have reduced the amount the state needs to pay into the pension system to keep it solvent.

That last part, bolded, is important. A major catalyst behind New Jersey’s incoming round of pension reforms was the state’s towering pension payments. Christie decided to divert money from those payments to plug holes in the general budget.

But that decision decreased the health of the state’s pension systems, and Christie now intends to introduce another series of reforms which will likely focus on cuts to benefits.

As you can see, there’s a lot of cause-and-effect reverberating throughout New Jersey’s pension system right now.

Sirota has much more on this situation in his article, which you can read here.

Australia Looks to Cut Down Investment Fees After Scathing Report

583px-Australia_satellite_plane

Pension funds are becoming increasingly allergic to fees eating into their returns, as CalPERS demonstrated this week when it announced a decision to cut hedge fund investments by 40 percent. But the United States isn’t the only country where this concern is taking hold. From the Financial Times:

Australia’s highly regarded private pension system faces sweeping reform following a sharply critical report into the fees charged by superannuation funds, which manage $1.8tn ($1.7tn) of assets.

Although Australia has the fourth largest private pensions savings pool in the world, the operating costs of the country’s superannuation funds are among the highest in the OECD, leaving scope for significant improvements in retirement incomes.

Fees should be cut by an average of 40 per cent (or 38 basis points) across the entire superannuation sector, according to an interim report released last week by the Murray inquiry, chaired by David Murray, a former chief executive of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia. This would deliver savings of about $7bn ($6.6bn) a year from annual running costs of $20bn ($18.8bn), boosting the average retirement payout by $40,000 ($37,574).

“There is an opportunity for innovation to deliver better outcomes for retirees and to better meet the needs of an ageing population,” said Mr Murray.

The report called for a “fundamental change” in the way the country manages its assets. It urged Australia to look at other parts of the world for ideas. From FT:

The report suggested Australia’s government should consider following the example of Chile and auction the right to manage default funds for all new pension accounts to the lowest cost provider. Fees charged by successful bidders in Chile have fallen 65 per cent since this approach was introduced in 2008.

The report also urged the government to consider introducing some form of compulsory deferred annuitisation that would pay out after the age of 85 – just as the UK is abandoning near-compulsory annuitisation.

The report said Australia was “unusual” in not encouraging citizens to convert their retirement savings into an income stream with longevity protection.

A “fundamental change” in the approach to asset management is required by Australia’s pension system, which focuses on maximising wealth on retirement rather than ensuring a sustainable income flow for life, said Mr Murray.

The panel that produced the report, called the Murray Inquiry, will send its official policy recommendations to the Australian government in November.