Archive by Author

For restaurants fighting inflation, policymakers can help

The price of chicken wings skyrocketed 40 percent in 2021 and continues to rise. Now that favorite summer staple, ice cream, is suffering similar impacts. No matter what—or where—you might eat out, the ingredients that go into your meal, snack, dessert, or beverage are likely far more expensive than they used to be.

Such news will come as no surprise to most Americans, who have had to dig deeper in recent months. Inflation is affecting food costs across the board, but the consequences are not spread equally.

Restaurants are struggling with hits from every direction. From one side, they are suffering price hikes on menu ingredients, supplies, energy and more. From the other, customers are extremely price-sensitive right now. If a family is spending extra on groceries, they often make up the difference by dining out less. Restaurants are under immense pressure to offer competitive prices to keep tables, booths, and takeout queues full.

The results are disproportionate. Wholesale food prices have risen 15.6 percent since this time last year. Grocery stores were compelled to raise their prices by 11.9 percent between May 2021 and May 2022. Restaurants, however, have only raised menu prices 7.4 percent in the same timeframe.

If restaurants are absorbing more than half of wholesale food price increases, they must make it up elsewhere. They aren’t doing it by cutting payroll. In fact, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data, average earnings for eating and drinking place workers jumped 15.1 percent between December 2020 and December 2021, the largest 12-month increase on record. Since May 2021, those wages are up over 10%.

Restaurants have always survived on razor-thin margins. Historically, for every dollar a customer spends in a restaurant, 33 cents would go to food costs, 33 cents to labor costs, and 29 cents to other costs, like rent, utilities, and supplies. Even in the best of times, a restaurant earned just a nickel on each customer dollar. With the cost of nearly everything going up, restaurant income has plunged 75 percent—leaving margins just above a mere 1 percent.

No wonder 57 percent of restaurant operators say they’re falling behind on expenses.

Sadly, when it comes to inflation, there is no silver bullet. But that doesn’t give our elected leaders a free pass. On the contrary, there’s much Congress and the Biden administration can still do.

A great example of progress is the bipartisan Ocean Shipping Reform Act, which was championed by Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and John Thune (R-S.D.) and signed into law by President Biden. The bill will help control shipping rates, which get bundled into the cost of food and other goods, while also improving reliability to relieve supply chain bottlenecks.

Policymakers should take this success as a model and move rapidly on additional measures, from international trade to transportation to second chance hiring. For instance, 201 tariffs remain in place on imports from China. Lifting them would ease prices on food and back-of-house products restaurants need. By the same token, ending the 232 international steel and aluminum tariffs would help control production costs, from equipment to canned goods.

Within U.S. borders, we need to move products from ship to shelves faster and cheaper. That means trucking. The DRIVE Safe Act contains provisions that would help address the national truck driver shortage. Fortunately, the infrastructure bill included a pilot program and funding based on the DRIVE Safe Act so initial steps are in place, upon which we can build.

Finally, Congress can help match willing workers with willing employers. Commonsense immigration reform can create a clear path to legalization—and legal work—for the more than 11 million undocumented individuals living in the U.S. The nation’s visa program must be modernized to meet today’s talent needs with non-immigrant workers in occupations that do not require a college degree. Government-private sector partnerships should also expand employment opportunities for formerly incarcerated individuals who deserve a chance at a good job.

Restaurants have survived some of the most challenging economic circumstances in living memory—relying on grit, determination, and customers’ ongoing support. If we can count on elected leaders to address inflation, restaurants will remain our community cornerstones throughout 2022 and beyond.

Sean Kennedy is the Executive Vice President of Public Affairs for the National Restaurant Association.

Source: TEST FEED1

FDA panel votes to greenlight updating COVID vaccines for omicron

An expert advisory vaccine panel for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Tuesday voted in favor of recommending updated COVID-19 vaccines specifically designed to combat the omicron variant.

Among the voting members of the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC), 19 voted in favor of recommending an omicron-specific booster while two voted against the endorsement.

The FDA is not required to follow the committee’s recommendations, though the agency usually does.

Several members of the vaccine panel reasoned that the likely benefits of an omicron-specific vaccine — possibly a bivalent shot — outweighed the possible risks.

During the meeting, however, members brought up several possible points of contention regarding the recommendation.

Some members argued that approaching the COVID-19 pandemic like it was the flu with seasonal boosters was not the right path, pointing out that the SARS-CoV-2 virus has been shown to mutate faster than the influenza virus.

DEVELOPING

Source: TEST FEED1

House Dems pin blame on corporate landlords for rising rental costs

House Democrats pointed the finger at corporate landlords for climbing rental costs during a hearing on housing Tuesday, leading Republicans to accuse the majority of trying to deflect blame for record inflation.

Democratic lawmakers at a House Financial Services subpanel Tuesday blamed private equity firms for the “predatory purchasing” of single-family homes in bulk and jacking up rent and fee prices, exacerbating a housing crisis they argued predates the pandemic.

“This predatory purchasing contributes to our nation’s shortage of affordable housing and exacerbates the racial wealth gap,” said Rep. Al Green (D-Tex.) at the hearing.

Government data shows that rents in May were up 5.2 percent over last year, and a committee study found the tenants of corporate landlords frequently faced even higher rent and fee increases.

Republicans framed the hearing as an attempt to distract from the effects of inflation around the country, which they blamed on reckless spending from Congress.

“Another day, another new excuse from my friends across the aisle trying to explain [away] their role in causing record-breaking inflation,” said Rep. William Timmons (R-S.C.). “None of these attempts to explain away inflation have worked.”

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) responded to those claims by saying the GOP “rails” against inflation but its members “don’t have any answers.”

The subcommittee found that private companies expanded their portfolio of single-family homes by over 75,000 properties between 2018 and 2021, and that the companies tended to purchase homes in neighborhoods with a significantly larger Black population than the national average.

By outbidding individual buyers and paying for the homes in cash, Democrats and experts at the hearing said the private equity firms were responsible for unexpectedly raising rent prices and pricing people out of the housing market.

Elora Raymond, an assistant professor in the School of City and Regional Planning at Georgia Tech, said the firms were also bad landlords. 

“These firms have exceptionally high eviction rates and profit from gentrification,” she said. 

GOP lawmakers pointed out that corporate landlords account for a small fraction of total home ownership. But experts emphasized the homes owned by the firms are over-concentrated in specific metropolitan areas, causing rents to soar in some areas.

“Their portfolios are heavily concentrated in specific markets across the sun belt and Midwest, where tenant’s rights are generally more favorable to the landlord,” said Sofia Lopez, the deputy campaign director of housing for the Action Center on Race and the Economy. “This concentration isn’t race neutral… (it) overlaps with Black communities in particular.”

Experts advocated for federal investments in housing to minimize the gap between the housing demand and units available and federal rent controls.

“Profit maximization has no place in our homes,” said Lopez. “We need massive federal investment in truly affordable housing, free from the harmful practices of private equity landlords.”

Source: TEST FEED1

The G7 infrastructure partnership is a step in the right direction

The Biden administration’s new China-focused global infrastructure initiative, announced at this week’s G7 summit, is more than just a policy program. It is a historic breakthrough and could become a clear alternative to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). 

The $200 billion investment program advances the administration’s China policy of “invest, align, compete,” puts infrastructure at the heart of foreign policy and leverages it to restore American foreign policy in a constructive way.

This is long overdue. The U.S. was once preeminent in infrastructure at home and abroad. But since 1980, China has assumed leadership, investing 8 percent of its GDP in infrastructure compared to 1 percent for the U.S. China has used the investment to lift its population out of poverty, launch its export economy and sustain its domestic infrastructure industry through Belt and Road. 

Our underinvestment in infrastructure has left us unable to compete with China or anyone else.

The $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act is a generational investment that helps restore U.S. competitiveness. But unlike the act, which is entirely government-funded, the global infrastructure initiative takes a different approach by including private investment. This is the right and necessary long-term funding solution for infrastructure. But to make it truly effective, several steps are necessary:

• Invest in U.S. infrastructure first. Strong domestic infrastructure makes for a strong sustainable foreign infrastructure strategy. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act is not large enough to address all our needs. Private investment is required, for example by U.S. pension funds. If the private sector cannot readily invest in our own infrastructure, why would it invest internationally?

• Encourage our G7 partners to invest in U.S. infrastructure. Congress should immediately remove taxes that discourage foreign capital from investing in U.S. infrastructure. The proposed partnership focuses on climate change and other key areas. But we can also attract private investment and advance the global partnership via a U.S. global sustainable urban technology and innovation fund — one that promotes our venture capital industry andplay a key role in the tech-enabled growth of global mega-cities such as Jakarta, Manila, Mumbai and Mexico City.

• Give the private sector the right tools. If the private sector is to participate in the global infrastructure partnership, it will need support. This must include political risk insurance through G7 development agencies — similar to what Chinese companies receive from their government. The U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) should be given the necessary tools to compete. This entails making it a government-sponsored enterprise with an independent board and equity capital of at least $100 billion — sufficient to make a real difference.

• Strengthen existing multilateral institutions instead of constantly criticizing them and marginalizing them. The U.S. has traditionally played a key role in multilateral agencies such as the World Bank where it has effective veto power, as well as in other international organizations that have a direct impact on global infrastructure, such as The World Health Organization, the International Labor Organization, the United Nations Development Program, or the International Maritime Organization. But over the last decade, the U.S. has taken, at best, a passive role; at worst it has abdicated its leadership to the benefit of others. We must reengage if we want the global infrastructure initiative to be successful.

• Compete with China in some areas but cooperate in others. No program, not even the G7 initiative, can match China’s long-term infrastructure investment. We should adopt co-opetition, not confrontation with China. We should redouble our efforts to encourage China to bring Belt and Road closer to the international rules-based system and leverage multilateral institutions, as well as our own Development Finance Corporation, to cooperate when we can and compete when we must. We should also reverse a mistaken 2015 decision, join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and work within the institution to drive further global integration.

These steps add up to a unified domestic/foreign policy strategy, with infrastructure at its heart. It can benefit the U.S. economy, strengthen our global strategic presence and put our relationship with China on a more stable footing — all with the support of the private sector, a strong message to deliver on behalf of Western democracies. If managed correctly, it can be a victory for all concerned.

Sadek Wahba, Ph.D., is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and of the Global Advisory Council of the Wilson Center, the U.S. nonpartisan policy forum for tackling global issues, and a senior fellow of NYU’s Development Research Institute. He is also chairman of I Squared Capital. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of these organizations.

Source: TEST FEED1

Boebert says she is 'tired' of separation between church and state: 'The church is supposed to direct the government'

Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) says she is “tired” of the longstanding separation between church and state in the U.S., adding that she believes “the church is supposed to direct the government.”

In a Sunday speech at the Cornerstone Christian Center in Basalt, Colo., ahead of her primary election on Tuesday, Boebert argued that “the government is not supposed to direct the church,” falsely claiming that dividing religion from the system of government was not what the Founding Fathers intended.

“I’m tired of this separation of church and state junk — that’s not in the constitution. It was in a stinking letter and it means nothing like they say it does,” Boebert said, earning a round of applause from the audience.

Boebert faces a GOP primary challenge from state Sen. Don Coram in Colorado’s 3rd District but has far outraised her opponent in the campaign and is expected to triumph on Tuesday, according to the election watcher FiveThirtyEight.

The concept of a separation between church and state is derived from the establishment clause in the Bill of Rights, which says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”

Roger Williams, who founded Rhode Island, was the first to decipher the clause as “a wall or hedge of separation” between the “wilderness of the world” and “the garden of the church.”

In 1802, then-President Thomas Jefferson penned a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut, in which he wrote the American public had built “a wall of separation between Church and State.”

States have long adhered to the principle since Jefferson’s letter. The Supreme Court applied the clause to states with the 14th Amendment and has used the doctrine to uphold such a wall.

However, the current high court, which has a conservative majority, has recently ruled increasingly in support of religion in public spaces.

The Supreme Court this month struck down a Maine policy that prohibited religious schools from receiving taxpayer-funded tuition aid and ruled in favor of a football coach in Washington state who prayed at the 50-yard line after public school games.

Conservative justices also ruled in May that the city of Boston violated the Constitution by declining a request from a religious organization to fly its flag at city hall.

After the Maine ruling, liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the court “continues to dismantle the wall of separation between church and state that the Framers fought to build.”

“In just a few years, the Court has upended constitutional doctrine,” the justice wrote in her dissenting opinion.

Boebert, who has drawn controversy since winning election in 2020 as a far-right conservative with hardlined views on abortion, guns and immigration, argued instead that the church has become subject to the government.

“The reason we had so many overreaching regulations is because the church complied,” she said. “The church is supposed to direct the government. The government is not supposed to direct the church. That is not how our founding fathers intended it.”

Source: TEST FEED1

White House aide testifies Trump sent armed mob to Capitol

Former President Trump, well aware his supporters were heavily armed on Jan. 6, was so determined to join them at the Capitol that he attacked a motorcade driver who refused to transport him there, according to a former high-level White House aide testifying before Congress on Tuesday.

The revelation of a physical confrontation between a frustrated president and his own staff was just one of many bombshells disclosed by Cassidy Hutchinson, a former top aide to Trump’s chief of staff Mark Meadows, who painted an extraordinary portrait of a White House in chaos as the attack on the Capitol unfolded, aides scrambled to convince the president to intervene, and Trump refused to do so.

Hutchinson, the first White House employee to testify publicly before the House committee investigating last year’s riot, suggested there was nothing spontaneous about the events of Jan. 6. She described a series of meetings in early January, when members of Trump’s inner circle were planning for the protests, and depicted Meadows and Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s personal lawyer, as practically complicit in the riot. 

Both had suggested ahead of time that they knew the protests of Jan. 6, 2021, would turn violent, she testified, and both of them would later request presidential pardons. 

“We’re going to the Capitol. It’s going to be great. The president is going to be there, he’s going to look powerful,” Giuliani told Hutchinson on Jan. 2, she testified.

When Hutchinson approached Meadows about it, he said, “There’s a lot going on, Cass, but I don’t know. Things might get real, real bad on Jan. 6.”

Hutchinson, with a West Wing office, had a bird’s eye view of Jan. 6, operating at the intersection of a lame-duck White House, Trump’s desperate efforts to remain in power and the inner workings of the pressure campaign on Mike Pence, Trump’s vice president, to overturn the election results.

“As an American, I was disgusted. It was unpatriotic. It was un-American,” she said of Trump’s encouragement of the violence. “We were watching the Capitol building get defaced over a lie.”

Hutchinson painted a picture of a president unhinged during his Jan. 6 rally on the Ellipse, and eager to get more protesters closer to the stage — so the event wouldn’t look empty — by removing the metal detectors that are virtually compulsory at all presidential events. 

The committee showed evidence, in the form of police call logs, that a number of the protesters that day were carrying weapons, including Glock pistols and AR-15-style semi-automatic rifles. Hutchinson added to that record, saying top White House officials knew, as early as 10 a.m. on Jan. 6., that Trump supporters had knives, guns, bear spray, body armor, and spears attached to the ends of flagpoles. 

She and Tony Ornato, Trump’s deputy chief of staff, went to inform Meadows of the threat. Meadows, she said, was unmoved. 

“I remember distinctly Mark not looking up from his phone. I remember Tony finishing his explanation and it taking a few seconds for Mark to say something. Because I almost said, ‘Mark, did you hear him?’ And then Mark chimed in. It was like, ‘Alright, anything else?’ Still looking down at his phone,” Hutchinson said. 

That information did not disturb Trump, who was apparently furious the magnetometers, or mags for short, were evidently limiting his crowd size as many protesters with weapons elected to watch the speech from outside the screened area, so their arms wouldn’t be confiscated. 

“He felt the mags were at fault for not letting everybody in. But another leading reason and likely the primary reason is because he wanted it full and he was angry that we weren’t letting people through the mags with weapons,” Hutchinson said.

In an earlier interview with the House investigators, Hutchinson had relayed Trump’s pleas to staff and security at the time: “‘They’re not here to hurt me. Take the effing mags away. Let my people in. They can march to the Capitol from here. Let the people in. Take the effing mags away,’” she said. 

But perhaps the most shocking detail of Tuesday’s proceedings came following his Ellipse speech, when Trump insisted on joining his supporters as they marched to the Capitol — something Meadows appeared to be organizing at the last minute.

White House lawyers had warned against making such a journey, with White House lawyer Pat Cippilone warning it would look like Trump was seeking to obstruct justice or incite a rally.

But a national security chat log indicates they were trying to arrange the trip – despite a 12:57 p.m. warning that Capitol fencing had been breached.

Ultimately it was his Secret Service motorcade driver who would push back against Trump’s demands to be transported to the Capitol, Hutchinson was told by Ornato and Robert Engel, the special agent in charge for Secret Service on Jan. 6.

“I’m the f-ing president, take me up to the Capitol now,” Trump said when Engel informed him they could not safely make the unscheduled journey.

“The president reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel. Mr. Engel grabbed his arm, said, ‘Sir you need to take your hand off the steering wheel, we’re going back to the West Wing, we’re not going to the Capitol.’” 

“Trump then used his free hand to lunge at Bobby Engel,” Hutchinson testified. 

Trump’s explosive anger was a theme that persisted throughout the day, with Meadows repeatedly being largely uninterested in intervening to push back against Trump’s demands.

Cipollone burst into Meadows office shortly after rioters entered the Capitol determined to get some kind of response from Trump.

“He doesn’t want to do anything, Pat,” Meadows said.

“Mark, something needs to be done or people are going to die and the blood is going to be on your f’ing hands,” Cipollone responded.

Cipollone, who Vice Chair Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) pleaded in a recent hearing to likewise publicly testify, would clash again with Meadows just minutes later after Trump sent a tweet saying Pence “didn’t have the courage” to buck the election results.

The crowd at the Capitol was chanting “hang Mike Pence.” Cipollone again approached Meadows to say they needed to do something more.

“You heard him, Pat. He thinks Mike deserves it. He doesn’t think they’re doing anything wrong,” Meadows responded.

Source: TEST FEED1

NYC mayor says Giuliani should be investigated: 'To falsely report a crime is a crime'

New York City Mayor Eric Adams said during an unrelated press conference Tuesday that former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani should be reminded “that falsely reporting a crime is a crime” after video was released that called into question Giuliani’s claim that he was “hit very, very hard” by an employee at a Staten Island, N.Y., supermarket.

“I think the district attorney, he has the wrong person that he’s investigating. To falsely report a crime is a crime. If that video wasn’t there, then this person would’ve been charged with punching the former mayor,” said Adams, referencing a surveillance video from the New York ShopRite where Giuliani had said he felt as though “a boulder hit” him.

“Well, when you look at the video, the guy basically walked by and patted him on the back,” Adams added.

“I don’t know if he said congratulations. I don’t know what he said to him, but it was clear that he was not punched in the head. It was clear that it didn’t feel like a bullet. It was clear that he wasn’t about to fall to the ground. So it was clear that he had a lot of creativity and sensationalism that caused this person to be arrested,” Adams stated during the press conference, while also calling Giuliani “irresponsible” for a former mayor.

The video shows Giuliani barely moving after a ShopRite employee’s hand makes contact with his back. The employee is then seen saying something to the former mayor.

Giuliani commented Monday that the ShopRite video of the incident is “probably is a little deceptive,” after describing the alleged attack a day earlier.

“All of a sudden, I feel this, ‘Bam!’ on my back,” Giuliani said Sunday, adding that he nearly fell down from the blow.

“All of a sudden, I hear this guy say, ‘You’re a f—— scumbag,’ then he moves away so nobody can grab him,” he added.

The ShopRite employee, identified as 39-year-old Daniel Gill, was detained after the Sunday incident, according to the New York Police Department, and has been released ahead of his scheduled hearing on August 17.

Giuliani said he believed Gill hit him because of his “pro-life” stance on abortion, with the incident coming just two days after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, which established the constitutional right to an abortion. 

Source: TEST FEED1

Monkeypox case found on George Washington campus

George Washington University officials have confirmed the first case of the Monkeypox virus on its campus.

In an email Tuesday, GW officials told the school community that the individual who tested positive for the virus has been isolated off-campus, where they are receiving treatment from medical professionals.

School officials also said that three close contacts of the patient have been notified about the situation, noting that the risk of the virus spreading within the school community remains low. 

The school’s student newspaper, The GW Hatchet, first reported the news. 

The most recent data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicates there are 16 confirmed cases of monkeypox in D.C.

A limited supply of vaccines to treat monkeypox, made available to certain vulnerable populations in the city, ran out less than a day after the immunization initiative launched Monday.

The first suspected monkeypox infection in DC was reported about two weeks ago.

According to the CDC, 26 U.S. states have confirmed cases of monkeypox. 

GW officials advised its school community to avoid close contact with an infected person and requested that students and healthcare workers start wearing N95 masks as well. 

“You can prevent exposure by avoiding close contact with skin or clothing of an infected person and by wearing a mask,” the school said in its email.

Source: TEST FEED1

The next financial hammer to fall: Public pension funds

The public pension situation could get really messy in the near future.

There are currently about 300 state-administered and nearly 6,000 locally-administered public retirement plans, according to PublicPlansData, a project of the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College and the MissionSquare Research Institute.

Those public pension systems have 14.7 million workers (e.g., state and local government employees, teachers, police and fire departments) and 11.2 million retirees.

Collectively, those systems had some $4.5 trillion in assets at the end of 2021. After six months of stock and bond market declines, those assets have likely dropped significantly, putting public pension plans in financial stress.

It’s a pattern we’ve seen over and over again. Public pension systems, often pressed by government employee unions, underfund their plans and overpromise their returns. Like a Ponzi scheme, those systems can get by when the markets and the economy are good.

But when the economy and the markets turn south, many of them will face serious shortfalls. That’s when the finger-pointing begins, yet it seems no one is ever willing to take responsibility. Whoever is directing the pension fund will claim the board approved the questionable investments, and the board members will claim they were just following the director’s advice.

In the worst cases, the pension fund will lobby the city or the state, and sometimes the federal government, hoping that taxpayers will bail it out.

Given that frequent pattern, taxpayers should be concerned about a recent article in the Wall Street Journal titled, “Pension funds plunge into riskier bets — just as the markets are struggling.” The article’s subtitle explains why we should be worried: “More public pension plans than ever are using leverage, investing borrowed money in an effort to earn higher returns and close big funding gaps.”

Historically, public pension funds invested very conservatively to minimize risk and ensure they had the funds to meet their retirees’ needs. And while most public pension funds still don’t use leveraged (i.e., borrowed) funds, some of the largest ones are taking that step. The Teacher Retirement System of Texas, the country’s fifth-largest public pension fund, started using leveraged funds in 2019. And the roughly $440 billion California Public Employees’ Retirement System has voted to start next month, according to the Journal.

While leveraging can multiply market gains in the fat years, it can also magnify losses in the lean years. Those down-times tend to drive some public pension funds to take even riskier steps hoping to recoup some of the losses.

It’s like the gambler who’s on a losing streak but keeps betting in the hope of making up some of the losses. If most public pension funds were already underfunded last year, what does that mean today, when the market has been in a six-month slide?

If the market turns around soon, the leveraged bets may pay off. But no one knows if that will happen. Indeed, many economists think we are in for an even bigger stock market crunch if the Federal Reserve Bank stays aggressive on its interest-rate hikes and the economy enters a recession.

If that happens, we will almost certainly see much bigger losses for some public pension funds.

Interestingly, this is a problem faced primarily by the public sector. Private sector companies have increasingly turned to defined-contribution retirement plans. The company, and perhaps the employee, puts money in a retirement account that belongs to the employee. Once the company has made its contribution, its financial obligation is over.

Most public pensions are still heavily reliant on defined-benefit plans, where the employer promises some level of benefits when the employee retires. Unions tend to favor defined-benefit plans, perhaps because it’s easier to commit fraud and not get caught or punished.

Edward Siedle, a former U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) attorney and a Forbes contributor, explained the problem in 2021 in an opinion piece titled, “Public pension looters need not fear FBI and law enforcement.” He highlights an SEC investigation into allegations of fraud and corruption at Pennsylvania’s $70 billion public school pension plan.  

Of course, some of the private sector’s best money managers have been losing money in this market. But they won’t be able to go to the government and get a taxpayer bailout. If public pensions find themselves severely underfunded, whether because of a down market or bad, even ludicrously risky, investment decisions, or both, that’s exactly what they will do.

Merrill Matthews is a resident scholar with the Institute for Policy Innovation in Dallas, Texas. Follow him on Twitter @MerrillMatthews.

Source: TEST FEED1