The General Accounting Office has just released a study called “State and Local Government Retirement Benefits—Current Status of Benefit Structures, Protections & Fiscal Outlook for Funding Future Costs.”

Download the report here: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d071156.pdf

State and local government employees represent 12% of the nation’s workforce. Nearly 7 million retirees or their families receive post-employment benefits.

The GAO found that most state and local pension funds are well funded. The GAO calculates that ongoing contributions to pensions should increase to (on aggregate) 9.3% of payroll from the existing average of 9%.

For retiree health care, if funding continues to be on a “pay as you go” basis, the cost, as a percentage of aggregate payroll, will rise from the current 2% of payroll to 5% of payroll in year 2050. The GAO estimates for retiree health care are hardly alarming. Governmental employers, on average, should have little difficulty absorbing a 3% (real) growth in payroll costs over the next 42 years.

The report also has an abundance of data about pension governance, prevalence of public sector Defined Benefit and Defined Contribution plans, and the legal protections of pension and retiree health care benefits.

There is no need to finger point and assign blames in times of a tragedy such as the ongoing fires in Southern California. And yet, there is also no need to deny that a lot more could be done to ensure people’s safety in times like these.

A recent report shows that chronic underfunding of public safety services may have left the San Diego area needlessly vulnerable to the destruction. The Center on Policy Initiatives (CPI) study shows how in San Diego the number of firefighters per 1,000 residents is the lowest among large cities in California. Likewise, the city has failed to implement many of its own official recommendations for increased funding following similar fires in 2003.

Adequately funded and appropriately staffed public services are of critical importance to the nation’s well-being. It shouldn’t take a natural catastrophe to remind us of this.

Click here to read the full CPI report.

With all of the standing, walking, bending, stooping and lifting their work requires, child care providers have one tough job. Yet, the average provider earns a below-poverty-rate income (for a family of four) of just $18,820 a year.

These dedicated professionals deserve better. That’s why Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Rep. Rosa L. DeLauro (D-Conn.) have introduced “The Quality Child Care for America Act.” The legislation would provide an annual $200 million to increase providers’ earnings, and help with their health insurance coverage, retirement benefits, paid sick leave and professional training.

AFSCME, which represents more than 300,000 child care providers and early childhood educators – including nearly 60,000 who joined the union just this past year – will work to pass this bill.

Watch this video to hear AFSCME President Gerald W. McEntee announce his support of The Quality Child Care for America Act. To read more about the bill, click here. For more about child care providers’ jobs, see this U.S. Department of Labor report.

Why did the AFSCME delegation to Oregon’s AFL-CIO convention walk out just before Gov. Ted Kulongoski (D) arrived to address the union members? Because they were protesting salary increases that the governor approved for all state managers that were, in some cases, triple what rank-and-file employees – members of Council 75 – are scheduled to receive under a recent settlement with the state. Learn more at the Oregon AFSCME site.

Today, by a vote of 273 to 156, the House of Representatives failed in its attempt to override President Bush’s recent veto of legislation to renew and expand the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). Read President McEntee’s statement on the vote. While the vote to override was supported by a large bipartisan majority, supporters of the bill failed to win the two-thirds majority necessary to override a veto.

The bill would have provided health coverage to a total of ten million low-income children, four million more than are covered by the soon-to-expire law. Two Democrats voted against the bill: Jim Marshall (GA) and Gene Taylor (MS). Forty-four Republicans voted for the bill, as listed below:

Four House members did not vote: Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX), Julia Carson (D-IN), Peter King (R-NY) and Bobby Jindal (R-LA).

Go to this link for the full roll-call vote: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll982.xml

It was only a year ago that the Bush-appointed and Republican-dominated National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) denied millions of men and women the chance to bargain for a better future. The infamous party-line vote on the so-called “Kentucky River” cases reinterpreted the definition of “supervisor,” expanding the number and type of workers who could be classified as such – and be barred from joining a union.

The decision affected numerous workers, including thousands of nurses who coordinate the work of other employees to deliver services. According to NLRB-speak, they are now “supervisors,” a decision that does not bode well for the nearly 60,000 nurses represented by AFSCME in 35 states and the District of Columbia. The sheer absurdity of the situation prompted this outrageous spoof by comedian Stephen Colbert, host of Comedy Central’s “The Colbert Report.”

Enter the RESPECT Act, a bipartisan initiative to redress the NLRB’s decision and allow more than eight million workers to regain their right to join a union. The Re-Empowerment of Skilled and Professional Employees and Construction Tradeworkers Act was recently passed by the House Education and Labor Committee and is now headed for debate in the full House of Representatives. It presently has 149 co-sponsors (and counting).

It’s time to restore the American Dream for working families. After all, it’s just a matter of RESPECT.

AFSCME has launched an ad campaign targeting members of Congress who voted against the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP).

Although the bill was passed in Congress, Pres. George Bush vetoed the legislation, showing once more how out of step he is with the country. As a matter of fact, that is exactly what a recent ABC News – Washington Post poll says: 7 out of 10 Americans favor expanding coverage for low income children.

Why are these legislators so intent on following the President off the cliff? We are trying to save them from following this path but, most of all, we are trying to save health care for our children.

See all the ads here.

AFSCME President Gerald W. McEntee reacts to efforts by Bush supporters to discredit 12-year-old Graeme Frost and his family.

The allies of President Bush who back his veto of bipartisan legislation to provide health coverage to children in low-income families took the politics of personal destruction to a new low this week. Front page stories in the Baltimore Sun and New York Times tell the story. They reveal the behind-the-scenes wheels of a smear campaign, based entirely on falsehoods, to destroy the credibility of a Baltimore family that stepped forward to speak out in opposition to the President’s veto.

The parents of 12-year-old Graeme Frost, and his younger sister Gemma, used the Maryland State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) after their children were seriously injured in an automobile accident. After the accident, Graeme lay comatose, with severe brain trauma. His younger sister was in even worse shape. Both parents in the Frost family work, making a combined income of less than $50,000 a year. On that income, they raise four children. But they could not afford private health insurance.

Thanks to SCHIP, Graeme and Gemma got the emergency medical care they needed. They, and their parents, know the SCHIP program works. Graeme said so publicly, at a press conference with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and in a front page Baltimore Sun story. Later, Senator Harry Reid selected him to give the weekly Democratic Radio Address, and he told a national radio audience about the medical care he received:

Three years ago, my family was in a really bad car accident. I was in a coma for a week and couldn’t eat or stand up or even talk at first. My sister was even worse. I was in the hospital for five-and-a-half months and I needed a big surgery. For a long time after that, I had to go to physical therapy after school to get stronger. But even though I was hurt badly, I was really lucky.

Graeme and his family made a powerful case that SCHIP funding saves lives. So, the President’s allies set out to destroy them. Right wing blogs went into overdrive, questioning the cost of the family’s home, the family income and even the cost of the private school the children attend. Now it turns out, these smears were all unfounded. Yes, Graeme goes to a private school, but his tuition is largely paid through a scholarship.

By targeting a family for speaking the truth about a program the President wants to dismantle, the Bush’s allies crossed the line. Instead of debating this vital program on the merits, they thought they could win by Swift-boating a working-class American family. By mounting a disgusting campaign to smear the Frost family, the President’s backers have gone too far. Their efforts should and will backfire.

President Bush should call this smear campaign off. He should tell Rush Limbaugh, Michelle Malkin and Senator Mitch McConnell to call off their dogs and leave this family alone. The brave Frost family has been through enough and doesn’t deserve this for speaking out about a vital program that helped them. The President’s allies have brought Bush-era gutter politics to a new low.

With the stroke of a pen, Pres. Bush has shattered the hopes of millions of low-income children to get the medical care they need.

By vetoing a bipartisan bill to expand the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) he has turned his back on kids from low-income families who might either lose or never get the health care they deserve. Not only that, but he is ignoring the fact that 7 out of 10 Americans favor expanding coverage for low-income children.

SCHIP provides health coverage to children whose parents do not qualify for Medicaid, but can’t afford private insurance. The vetoed bill would have preserved coverage for 6.6 million kids while allowing an additional 4 million children into the program over the next five years.

Apparently, Pres. Bush thought that was a bad idea even though only two days ago he was proclaiming “Child Health Day” and, in his own words, recognizing “the important role the State Children’s Health Insurance Program has played in helping poor children stay healthy.” Talk about selective memory… and brazen hypocrisy.

As Pres. McEntee said: “If we can find billions to spend on the never-ending war in Iraq, we can find the money to protect the lives and health of low-income American children. President Bush’s veto is callous and immoral. Congress should waste no time in overriding him.”

George Bush and the Republican leadership, in the twilight of a failed presidency, are blocking funding for domestic priorities like cancer research, infrastructure improvements and veterans programs. Now Bush is threatening to veto SCHIP, the health care program for low-income children, while at the same time asking for billions more to fund his mismanaged war in Iraq.

In his latest entry on Huffington Post, President Gerald W. McEntee announces that AFSCME, along with Americans United for Change, USAction and a consortium of concerned groups, are launching a campaign to demand that Congress override the expected SCHIP veto.

We are locked in an epic battle with President Bush. A battle to preserve the role of the public services that keep our families safe and our communities strong. A battle over what kind of America we want to be.

Read the full post.