March 12, 2013 02:18 PM UTC

Hank Brown, Former U.S. Senator, Supports Colorado's Breach of Public Pension Contracts.

• 0 Comments
• by: PolDancer

Hank, come on now.  I am speechless (although, thankfully I can still type.)  You support the breach of Colorado PERA retiree pension contracts?  The Colorado Court of Appeals recently confirmed the contractual status of these PERA pension benefits.  Given the fact that you are collecting a significant government pension yourself (one that has remained inviolate) I am surprised to see you out front on this issue.  Did someone put you up to this?

Hank Brown is undeniably a talented man.  He is a former U.S. Senator from Colorado, a former CU President, and a former President and CEO of the Daniel’s Fund.  He has also provided honorable military service to our country.  Let’s pause for a moment and acknowledge his achievements.  (OK, moment’s up.)

Inexplicably, Hank Brown’s name appears on a recent article supporting the Colorado General Assembly’s 2010 breach of Colorado pensioner contracts.  Hank, did you really write this article?  (He might have, but I suspect that the proponents of the 2010 PERA contract breach put him up to it.  Admittedly, this is pure speculation on my part . . . Hank, please correct me if I am wrong.)  I suspect that the proponents of the 2010 PERA contract breach brought the idea to him, and he responded along the lines of “Sure, write something up for me and I’ll take a look at it.”

Now, Hank Brown has been well-compensated for his labor and talent.  As far as I know, Hank Brown has given away much of his life’s earnings to charity. (I really would not be surprised.)  If this were true, I believe that it would significantly diminish the hypocrisy I observe in his support for the 2010 Colorado PERA “pension reforms.”  It pains me (seriously!) to even use the word “hypocrisy” in the same sentence with the name of a man of such stature.

Hank Brown deserves every penny of the compensation he is due for services he has provided to his employers.  But, even those blessed with less prodigious talent deserve to be paid the consideration due under their contracts.  Even the “little guys” (retired Colorado snow plow drivers, prison guards, teachers, all middle class Colorado PERA retirees who are our friends and our neighbors) deserve to be paid what they are owed for work they have performed in the past.  The contracts of Colorado PERA retirees should be honored just as the contracts to which Hank Brown is a party are honored.

The Duke Chronicle on Hank Brown’s “$2.6 million” federal pension:

“Members of Congress rant and rave about government spending, but when it comes to their golden retirement pensions — somehow that doesn't count.”

“On the Senate side, the Midas awards go to next year retirees: Sens. Sam Nunn, D-Ga., Bill Bradley, D-N.J., and Hank Brown, R-Colo., who will each collect estimated lifetime benefits in excess of $2.6 million.”

Link:

http://www.dukechronicle.com/articles/1996/01/11/congressional-pensions-out-touch-reality

Philanthropy News Digest (December 2, 2003) on Hank Brown’s “$400,000” salary at the Daniels Fund:

“Daniels Fund Cuts Spending, Staff”

“The Denver-based Daniels Fund, which was founded by the late Bill Daniels, a cable TV pioneer, has announced that it will shut its out-of-state offices and lay off about a third of its sixty-two-person staff in an effort to reduce operating costs, the Rocky Mountain News reports.”

"The board felt that our top priority should be helping the poor," said CEO Hank Brown.

“Brown offered to take a reduction in his $400,000 salary before the layoffs were announced, but fund chairman John Saeman refused the offer, saying it was inappropriate.”

Link:

http://foundationcenter.org/pnd/news/story.jhtml?id=52000010

From the book: “Taking Philanthropy Seriously: Beyond Noble Intentions to Responsible Giving,” by William V. B. Damon:

“The fund was also accused of paying Brown an excessive salary and moving into a lavish new office building in Denver, just as it was supposedly trying to economize elsewhere (Goze 2004).”

Link:

http://books.google.com/books?id=4GmFOE1pWSgC&pg=PA57&lpg=PA57&dq=hank+brown+Daniels+fund+salary&source=bl&ots=rMUIJcxV7p&sig=Wtf74a33OUYIvxm6Cnm-9hvGtEs&hl=en&sa=X&ei=cGk_UbayJOjcyQG9i4Bw&ved=0CD4Q6AEwAjgK#v=onepage&q=hank%20brown%20Daniels%20fund%20salary&f=false

Excerpts from Hank Brown’s March 11, 2013 article on the 2010 PERA pension “reform”:

“Take the example of the tough choices made to shore up PERA, Colorado's state pension system.  After the economic downturn of 2008, there were serious concerns about PERA's long term sustainability.  In fact, PERA’s own projections indicated the fund would be exhausted by 2030.”
 
(My comment: The “choices” that the Colorado General Assembly made in enacting SB10-001 were not “tough choices.”  The Colorado General Assembly took the easy way out.  It was much simpler to attempt a breach of Colorado PERA retiree pension contracts [to fix a problem created by the Legislature’s chronic underfunding and mismanagement of the pension] than it was to ask voters for new revenue to meet the state’s contractual obligations.  Hank, you write that PERA’s projections indicated that the fund would be exhausted by 2030.  Well, of course the PERA pension fund will eventually be exhausted if the State of Colorado continues to underfund the pension . . . to skip annual required contributions recommended by PERA’s actuaries.  I “project” that if I “underfund” my contractual mortgage obligations I will eventually encounter “foreclosure.”)

Back to Hank Brown’s PERA article:

“A bipartisan majority of the Colorado General Assembly had the courage to make a series of hard decisions and demanded tough sacrifices from public employees.  Increased contributions from public employers were mandated.  When permissible, increased contributions come from money otherwise available for employee wage increases.  The legislature imposed a two-percent cap on cost-of-living adjustments and toughened age and service requirements. Republicans and Democrats alike recognized that decreasing future benefits alone would not adequately provide a long term solution. The legislature took the difficult and unpopular step of reducing cost-of-living adjustments for all employees, including current retirees.”
 
(My comment: Hank, perhaps you are unaware that this “bipartisan majority” [a three-vote majority in the House] was “encouraged” by 27 lobbyists.  The “bipartisan majority” did NOT demand “tough sacrifices” from Colorado PERA-affiliated EMPLOYERS.  As the legislative sponsors of SB10-001 and Colorado PERA administrators have acknowledged, PERA-affiliated employers [that is, those who legally owe the PERA pension debt] contributed a mere 10 percent of the SB10-001 “fix.”  Reasonable?

Further, SB10-001’s age and service requirement changes did not apply to current employees. Such a PERA pension reform to “partially-vested” PERA contractual obligations would have constituted a “less drastic” change to PERA pension contracts than SB10-001’s breach of “fully-vested” statutory pension contracts.

Hank, FYI . . . your fellow Republicans during the 2010 SB10-001 Senate floor debate:

Senator Harvey, “We have made a commitment.  We have a contract with current retirees.  That is already in place.”  “Reforms should be made for new hires.”  “We do not have that commitment to new hires.”

Senator Spence, “The bill places an unfair burden on retirees.”

Senator Scheffel, “We are breaching our promises to existing retirees.”

Senator Lundberg, “This bill is a deal that was cut before this body met.”)

Back to Hank Brown’s PERA article:

“Through a little ‘Colorado Courage,’ policy makers ensured that PERA is on track to be fully funded and provide retirement security not just for today's retirees, but for those beginning their careers in public service and those yet to be hired.”

(My comment: Is “Colorado Courage” a euphemism for “breach of contract”?  I don’t believe that repudiation of one’s contractual obligations is “courageous.”  Is there something about living Out West that exempts us from the strictures of the U.S. Constitution?  Where does that come from?  Also, how does breaking the contracts of Colorado PERA retirees ensure their “retirement security”?  I feel like having my pension benefits illegally seized by the state reduces my retirement security.)

“Hank Brown is senior counsel at Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP.”

Link to full article:

http://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/congress-could-use-some-colorado-courag-87597/

Colorado PERA active and retired members, please forgive Hank Brown this (not so youthful) indiscretion.  (I like the guy.)  While you are forgiving him, please support Colorado public pension contractual rights and the rule of law in our exceptional state.  Contribute at saveperacola.com.  Finally, Friend Save Pera Cola on Facebook!