Ron Saxton fails the PERS test

Since before he finished third in the 2002 GOP primary, Ron Saxton has been claiming status as the idea man in the battle to rein in Public Employee Retirement System (PERS) costs.

Not so fast, Kemosabe.

As Coyote reported tonight on Northwest Republican, Saxton and his opponents were recently invited to a candidate's forum on the PERS issue; the forum was hosted by Jesse Villarreal, Jr., founder of PERS Help and author of a recent article in Brainstorm Northwest about the damning lack of transparency in the PERS system.

Jason Atkinson showed up at this forum. Kevin Mannix showed up. But Ron Saxton -- the man who supposedly brought the PERS issue to the forefront and supposedly has the monopoly on good ideas -- was nowhere to be found.

As noted in his column in Oregon Catalyst today, Villarreal said that Jason Atkinson was the best candidate to put PERS on a path to self-sufficiency, transparency and accountability. Villarreal said it was "evident Atkinson has studied PERS and has developed a comprehensive plan to protect PERS members from PERS and save Oregonians from excessive fees, loopholes and self-dealing."

Specifically, Villarreal noted these aspects of Atkinson's plan:

• • Replace PERS with a defined contribution plan, otherwise known as a 401(k);
  
• • Eliminate loopholes that award some PERS members with more favorable benefits;
• • Stop "double-dipping," where a PERS member can retire from his job and start earning PERS retirement checks, yet go back to work for a state agency and pull in another check;
• • Provide the opportunity for private fund managers to oversee PERS investments, thereby improving efficiency and eliminating both the monopoly aspect and the inherent conflicts of interest;
• • Request that the attorney general audit the PERS system;
• • Require the PERS board and members of the Oregon Investment Council to carry insurance that would protect the state against fraudulent activities and penalize those involved in fraud.

Villareal not only expressed frustration that Saxton chose to skip the forum, but said Saxton "has not developed a plan to reform PERS."

Of course, that's not what you'll hear from Saxton. His PERS commercial says Saxton "has fought to reform PERS for years." That's funny, considering the only thing about PERS on his website is buried at the end of a section on controlling state spending and taxes, and all it says is that he'll reform PERS "before it bankrupts our state."

His commercial expands on the issue by promising no changes to retirees or earnings to date, and pledging to "replace PERS with a retirement plan similar to what you have available in the private sector."

That's it. Deep, isn't it?

Of course, Saxton's trademark idea, floated last year in Brainstorm Northwest, was to fire all PERS employees and rehire them in order to void the contractual issues with PERS. Never mind that it would result in what Villarreal called "tens of millions of dollars in lawyer fees and decades of court battles."

If you're reading this and think it's a good idea to vote for Ron Saxton because he has the best chance to win in November, read this comment from Villarreal and think again:

If Saxton and Kulongoski were to face each other in the general election this fall, Saxton would face the wrath of at least 311,000 PERS members, plus one family member, plus at least one friend which would be one million people voting against a man who claimed to have a plan but simply didn’t do his homework.

One million people voting against Ron Saxton. In 2002, 1.26 million Oregonians cast votes -- total. How does Ron Saxton have the best shot in November when 80 percent of likely voters will want no part of a Saxton administration?

In his commercials, Ron Saxton likes to say "all the candidates for governor are career politicians, except Republican Ron Saxton." Well, maybe a little time as a politician would help him understand PERS.

UPDATE: This has been updated to reflect Villarreal's column in Oregon Catalyst.