A reader apparently took me up on my suggestion that he contact his lawmakers about their pension plan. He shared this with Cindi, who shared it with me:
I want the same retirement plan the legislature is voting for themselves. I will work my a** off untill God knows when to pay for health ins & a retirement I can live on. It is no wonder you guys try so hard to keep getting elected.
Kenny rowland
Blythewood Sc
And this, he said, was his reply:
Mr. Roland:
For 77 years I’ve worked my ass-off for every damn thing that I own–which ain’t much! And I sure-as-hell don’t need smart-ass-remarks from people lilke you & that’s why I’m going home in June! In conclusion, if you want the same retirement plan like mine, then get elected like I did, spend 34 years in & retire!
Kay Patterson
Related Posts
Brad,
If you want to do the people of South Carolina a great service, you will get the news department to print that email on the front page. That’s what it will take to get people motivated.
Unfortunately, what Mr. Patterson says is probably very representative of what the majority of legislators believe. As long as they have the power to spend other people’s money (and put it into their own pocket) and as long as people keep putting incumbents back into office, this will be what we have to live with.
Term limits is part of the solution. If eight years is enough for a governor, it’s enough for a state rep. Let them find another trough to eat from.
There’s a lot of “ass” being thrown about today. Even our senior senator was caught doing so this morning.
I’ve nothing but the greatest respect for ass-less folks, particularly those who lost theirs through good, honest work. But it’s mere service in the legislature, not whether one is ass-less or a lard-ass, that qualifies for the cushy pension deal. That’s not fair and just to the public.
So I appreciate Senator Kay Patterson’s service, but he doth exaggerate a bit. While his ass — if he still had one — would be 77 years old, I doubt that he started working it off at birth.
Interesting, Senator Patterson doesn’t disagree that the legislature retirement plan is the better plan. Responses like this are just one more reason for term limits in state elected offices. These legislators get a little too “comfortable” after they’ve been in a while.
To Sen. Patterson… would you like me to hold the door for you as you pack your boxes and carry them out to your car?
I agree with Doug — put the on the front page of The State.
And I’m somewhat curious about Sen. Patterson’s pension — he put in 34 years — with that of the guy you featured in last Saturday’s edition, John Rushman, who’s retiring after 33 years of teaching here in Columbia, not the hard work of legislating.
There are no bills, no highway interchanges, no bridges with Rushman’s name on them. All he’s done is to teach math — easy stuff like algebra and geometry — to seventh- and eighth-graders, meeting with those who wanted more of his “MathWorld” help before and after school. He’s taking the state team to the nationals again this year; they placed 14th last year.
Too bad he couldn’t do more with his life, no? Heck, only his student and their parents will remember him. But he’s probably pleased as punch with that.
Maybe I’m the only one, but I think Sen. Patterson’s response was hilarious.
SC Club for Growth Denounces SC House Giving Legislature a Backdoor Pay Increase:
The South Carolina Club for Growth today called on the South Carolina Senate to show fiscal discipline and reject the House of Representatives’ backdoor pay increase for legislators.
Today’s new legislative perk, hidden inside a larger bill which increases the state’s unfunded liabilities, increases legislators’ pensions by 2% each year one day after the state’s Board of Economic Advisors cut state revenue estimates by $180 million over the next two years. The legislative pension system is already three times more generous than the regular state employee system – and the regular system is reportedly more generous than 90% of similar public plans around the country according to a study done by the state Chamber of Commerce.
“It’s appalling that the House would pass this legislation without considering the long-term impact. Our state faces $20 billion in unfunded benefits to retirees and today’s decision adds billions in guaranteed new expenses to the retirement system. Press reports today quote an outgoing legislator telling a constituent to ‘get elected like I did’ if he wants a similarly generous retirement. We think it’s time for some legislators to get unelected given their disdain of the taxpayers.”
“In their haste to pad their own pockets, Legislators seem to have forgotten who pays their bills. Like other changes to the retirement system that have put us billions of dollars in the hole, this bill amounts to fiscal child abuse as the costs eventually must be borne by future generations,” said Matt Moore, Executive Director of SC Club for Growth.
“On top of that, House members evaded responsibility to their constituents by passing the bill without a roll-call vote. It’s shameful that in an election year these Representatives are trying to hide their actions from their constituents. We’re hopeful the Senate will recognize the problems with the bill and reject it.”
Thanks for sharing that, Matt. Tell me something — did y’all know about that being in the legislation before Cindi’s column?
Kay Pattersons’ constituents apparently liked whatever he did for them so much that they kept this arrogant old fart in the legislature for as long as he was there.
It’s really sort of hard to argue with that, isn’t it? David
Firstly, I think the idea of the increased retirement package is awful.
Secondly, I know that the language used by the Club for Growth, and by Governor Sanford, shows that they would rather collect political kudus than solve the problem. The bombastic language was written for the public, and not to create an avenue for constructive action with those that are actually voting on the issue.
Folks…you just gotta see the truth that is right before your eyes… Sanford and his buddies don’t actually care about the budget or us…they just love to bitch and moan and groan, and score political points. Thye love the game of politics, not the hard work of government. If they CARED ABOUT SOUTH CAROLINA they would build consensus, and affect change. But instead the cry cry cry.
Today, Mark Sanford and the Club for Growth raised political capital that they will never spend for the benefit of the taxpayers of SC. So what is the point? The truth is they do it because they are building their kingdoms…and doing it at our expense.
Eric: What’s so hard about not voting for a ridiculous bill? Or at least banding together to require a roll call vote?
These Representatives had every chance to vote against or at least hold up the bill and they didn’t.
The truth is that LEGISLATORS are building their kingdoms at the TAXPAYER’s expense.
There’s a solution, but it’s not easy. Just as pay raises are not effective for the current session of the legislature, alter the constitution such that legislators qualify for the pension in effect when first elected and that any changes made during their tenure do not apply to them. I guess a break in service would re-qualify them anew, but it would stop some of the self-serving nonsense we see today. Chances of passing?
The problem with the right wing/libertarian types is that they are only interested in leaders that “talk the talk”, not “walk the walk”.
Sanford talks and talks, but never is able to accomplish anying. But the righties are thrilled with him…so you can see…it is about talking the talk.
When they become interested in people that actually do something, I may rejoin their casue. Till then…I will take a pass.
Frankly, I don’t think you Sanford critics want Sanford to accomplish his reforms. I never see any of you offer a roadmap of how Sanford or any honest governor could convince the power-hungry crooks in the legislature to suddenly do the right things.
“Tell me something — did y’all know about that being in the legislation before Cindi’s column?”
Nope – thanks to Cindi for sharing. I would have heard it from another source, eventually, but Cindi was first out of the box on this one.
Think the legislators are doing good, check out some of the exorbitant salaries being paid to their staff. Interesting that some staffers make more than state agency heads that you would think have more responsibility. The golden rule, “he that has the gold, rules”.
Is there anyone still around who remembers WHEN part-time legislative positions became full-time careers deserving (or not) a tax payer funded pension?