The 115th Congress-Washington 2017

[Tallahassee News Station]

Stacey huffed. "Objection Mr. President. The Senators can go fight and make up on their own time and not ours. Censure isn't no toy. I move to act on the docket."

[Tumblrena]

Washington D.C.
United States Senate
1152
Tuesday
23 January
2017

"I second the motion to act on the docket." María Antonieta says.

[Prolieum]

Senate Floor-Chair

"With objections, the motion to move on the resolution of censure fails. Without objection, the motion to act on the docket is passed."

"The chair invites the Senator from Vermont to lay out the Union Pension Protection Act."

[Dentali]

Senate Floor-Chair

"With objections, the motion to move on the resolution of censure fails. Without objection, the motion to act on the docket is passed."

"The chair invites the Senator from Vermont to lay out the Union Pension Protection Act."

"A busy day" Fowler thought to himself

"Before I begin I want to establish this this bill is a step towards fiscal responsibility and stability. It is also my hope that this bill will be a step towards opening the market for private pension insurance. If we do not act now pensions will become the next great fiscal crisis for our nation."

Official Name: UNION PENSION PROTECTION ACTNickname:UPPA

Overview: With the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation or the PBGC projected to become insolvent in the next decade and require a massive bailout, substantial reform is necessary to ensure a minimal impact on the taxpayer while allowing pensioners of failing plans to be spared a total loss of benefits. Multi-employer plans must be held accountable to the same rules as single employer plans, and trustees must be held accountable for negotiating plans they have no intention or ability to fulfill, leaving the American taxpayer to pay for the pensions of their supposed beneficiaries. Plans must also have the flexibility to adjust to changing times in the case of emergencies to keep plans solvent and deliver as much benefits to pensioners as possible.

Section 1: A large and growing number of multiemployer pension plans are projected to become insolvent over the next decade, as well as the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation or the PBGC which ensuring the plans. This is in large part, but not limited to, unrealistic pension plans being negotiated that trustees have no intention or ability to fulfill. Without reform the PBGC will be unable to pay promised benefits to the beneficiaries of the failed pension plans it had insured. Without altering the rules regarding multiemployer pension plans and the PBGC’s rules regarding such plans, millions of workers will lose pensions and taxpayers will have to fund a massive bailout.

Section 2: Upon the agreement of the trustees, consisting of the the all parties involved in negotiating a pension plan, the pension plan may be renegotiated if the PBGC determines the existing plan is headed to insolvency.

Section 3: Trustees will be given the authority to amend benefit accruals, benefit qualifications, freezing benefit accruals, reducing benefits, and changing the retirement age for individuals more than 10 years away from retirement upon approval from the PBGC. Benefit reduction authority currently held in MPRA will be extended to multi-employer pension plans approved by the PBGC.

Section 4: With this increase in authority for trustees, they will also have increased consequences for fraudulent activity. Courts can now hold all trustees personally and corporately liable for the debts of the plans they administer, not just select corporate officers.

Section 5: Multi-Employer pension plans will no longer be able to set their own interest rates and mortality rates. Instead they must use the same rates as single employer plans established by the PBGC. Acknowledging that single employers plans have not had the same sort of financial issues the multi-employer plans have had.

Section 6: Risk-based premiums will be established for multi-employer plans, as evaluated by the PBGC. Financially solvent plans will be charged lower premiums and plans that are more likely to face insolvency will have larger premiums.



This bill is then honorably presented to The Senate for consideration in order to reform the PBGC and to improve the United States Law and is backed by Senator Zachary Fowler on January 3rd, 2017.

[Vaquas]

Breckenridge angrily writes something down and shoves it in his pocket. He is visibly dejected, having sunk down further in his seat than was typical of the young Senator.

[Prolieum]

Senate Floor-Chair

"The floor is open to questions."

[Dentali]

Breckenridge angrily writes something down and shoves it in his pocket. He is visibly dejected, having sunk down further in his seat than was typical of the young Senator.

Fowler sends a note to Breckenridge

"We couldn't prove his reason for leaving, trust me im not happy either"

[Tumblrena]

Washington D.C.
United States Senate
1220
Tuesday
23 January
2017

McGareth decides to ask a question and stands up. "Does this apply to state pension plans?"

[Dentali]

Washington D.C.
United States Senate
1220
Tuesday
23 January
2017

(Image)

McGareth decides to ask a question and stands up. "Does this apply to state pension plans?"

"It only deals with pension plans that are insured by the PBGC. PBGC insures the pension plans of most private (non-governmental) employers but they do not insure, public sector pensions. While I believe that most state pension plans need serious reform, that is a matter for individual states."

[Tumblrena]

Washington D.C.
United States Senate
1224
Tuesday
23 January
2017

Sam sits down and María Antonieta stands up.

"Senator, where is Congress given the Constitutional authority to forcibly set interest rates for nongovernmental private pension plans?

[Dentali]

Washington D.C.
United States Senate
1224
Tuesday
23 January
2017

(Image)

Sam sits down and María Antonieta stands up.

"Senator, where is Congress given the Constitutional authority to forcibly set interest rates for nongovernmental private pension plans?

"It does not, but if a pension plan wants to be insured by the PBGC it is required to abide by rates deemed acceptable to the PBGC, if they don't like the rate they don't get insurance."

[Tumblrena]

Washington D.C.
United States Senate
1225
Tuesday
23 January
2017

"Then the Senator would not object to creating a provision to allow employers to opt out of the PBGC?" María Antonieta questions.

[Dentali]

Washington D.C.
United States Senate
1225
Tuesday
23 January
2017

(Image)

"Then the Senator would not object to creating a provision to allow employers to opt out of the PBGC?" María Antonieta questions.

"I would not in principle, however doing so would require a great deal of new rules regarding pension insurance. I would rather work on that in a separate bill altogether given the complexity of phasing out the PBGC, as for right now I wish to reform the problematic section of of the PBGC using rules established for the well functioning section of the PBGC."

[Tumblrena]

Washington D.C.
United States Senate
1228
Tuesday
23 January
2017

"If being under the PBGC remains mandatory then I return to my question on Constitutionality." María Antonieta points out.

[Dentali]

Washington D.C.
United States Senate
1228
Tuesday
23 January
2017

(Image)

"If being under the PBGC remains mandatory then I return to my question on Constitutionality." María Antonieta points out.

"As I said before presenting the bill, the eventual goal is opening pension insurance to the free market. I agree with you that forcing someone to purchase insurance from the government is unconstitutional, however I do believe pension plans should be required to have insurance. Transitioning into a free market system for pension insurance will not happen overnight and if we are not careful with the transition it could leave thousands without pensions. This bill is the first bill in the transition into a free market system that is more in line with the constitution. I would be happy to discuss the next step with you as soon as possible and move towards that goal."

[Dentali]

Fowler looks around to field more questions, giving a few more moments before he will motion for debate

[Prolieum]

Senate Floor

Mattias Kinglsey had done some precursory research on the PBGC after Fowler's meeting with him, though he'd hardly call himself an expert, and now had donned a pair of cheaters to read over the bill.

"Senator Fowler, I'm lookin' at this part here in Section 4 ,where tha trustees pay debts if things go south. Isn't that what tha government s'posed to be doin' when things don't work?"

[Dentali]

Senate Floor

Mattias Kinglsey had done some precursory research on the PBGC after Fowler's meeting with him, though he'd hardly call himself an expert, and now had donned a pair of cheaters to read over the bill.

"Senator Fowler, I'm lookin' at this part here in Section 4 ,where tha trustees pay debts if things go south. Isn't that what tha government s'posed to be doin' when things don't work?"

"If the trustees are held negligent or fraudulent in court they are held responsible but otherwise they don't pay. And regardless the insurance will still be primarily funded by the insurance itself, the liability is to discourage those who attempt to abuse the system."

[Velahor]

House Floor
Smith: “Well, if nobody wants to debate this bill, I suppose we can assume that everybody in the house agrees with it.”

[Tumblrena]

Washington D.C.
United States Senate
1235
Tuesday
23 January
2017

María Antonieta jumps in right after Fowler answers Kinglsey. "We can talk about transitioning into a free market system and the next step Senator, but what I'm talking about right now is imposing interest rates. I'm not talking about abolishing the PBGC right now but the extra powers being given to it that I don't see granted Constitutionally. The question is do you believe that interest rate mandate is Constitutionally justified?"

[Democratic Peoples republic of Kelvinsi]

De Nieto:"I move to call the previous question."

[Dentali]

Washington D.C.
United States Senate
1235
Tuesday
23 January
2017

(Image)

María Antonieta jumps in right after Fowler answers Kinglsey. "We can talk about transitioning into a free market system and the next step Senator, but what I'm talking about right now is imposing interest rates. I'm not talking about abolishing the PBGC right now but the extra powers being given to it that I don't see granted Constitutionally. The question is do you believe that interest rate mandate is Constitutionally justified?"

“Senator, as it stands we are letting them set their own rates and it’s costing tens of billions. No other insurance organization let’s people pick their whatever rates they want. So yes right now it is justified, given the choice between bankrupting our nation,imposing a burden equivalent to $4,000 per household by 2030 and instituting rules every other insurance entity uses:.. I pick the latter. But to directly answer your question, the constitution does not directly cover pension insurance and the Supreme Court has not ruled it unconstitutional so I have no reason to doubt its constitutional standing despite already doing this very practice with single employer plans”

[Tumblrena]

Washington D.C.
United States Senate
1238
Tuesday
23 January
2017

"Senator Fowler, are you saying that the Congress has all powers not denied to it by the Constitution?" María Antonieta questions in.

[Dentali]

Washington D.C.
United States Senate
1238
Tuesday
23 January
2017

(Image)

"Senator Fowler, are you saying that the Congress has all powers not denied to it by the Constitution?" María Antonieta questions in.

"Not at all, I am saying this is something Congress has had control over since 1976 without being rebuffed on a constitutional basis. As I said earlier it is a power I want to see phased out but firstly we must fix the problem it has caused."

[Tumblrena]

Washington D.C.
United States Senate
1239
Tuesday
23 January
2017

"Can you explain how the power is being 'phased out' by being expanded dramatically?"