►
Description
Gain insight into recent state budget and tax actions as NCSL shares its newest survey information.
A
I
want
to
kick
off
with
a
couple
of
questions,
so
you
all
are
fiscal
people,
so
I
want
you
to
think
back
to
one
year
ago
when
we
were
right
in
the
throes
of
the
pandemic
and
right
in
the
chat.
The
first
word
that
comes
to
mind,
reflecting
on
your
state's
budget
situation
back
then
so
think
back
to
early
may
and
just
write.
One
word
describing
your
budget
situation
and
then
I
want
you
to
write
this.
A
The
first
word
that
comes
to
mind
when
you
think
about
your
state's
current
budget
situation
and
then
also
include
your
state.
So
we
know
who
is
represented
here
and
so,
while
you
all
are
doing
that
I'll,
introduce
myself,
I'm
mandy
rafal
with
the
the
director
of
ncsl's
fiscal
affairs
program-
and
this
is
the
second
of
our
seven
part
spring
fiscal
briefing
series.
B
Thanks
mandy,
so
as
imagine
as
mandy
mentioned,
my
name
is
angela,
oh
and
I'm
with
the
few
charitable
trusts.
Pew
is
a
non-profit
nonpartisan
organization
that
conducts
research
and
analysis
to
improve
public
policy.
I
work
on
the
state
fiscal
health
project
which
helps
advance
data
driven
best
practices
to
build
fiscally
well-managed.
B
So
last
year
the
last
year
and
a
half
was
just
very
unpredictable.
I
don't
think
anyone
in
state
budgets
in
the
policy
world
could
have
predicted
what
was
going
to
happen
to
state
finances
right.
So
before
the
pandemic,
many
states
thought
they
were
prepared
for
a
downturn
because
of
their
flush
rainy
day
funds.
B
And
then
after
that,
we'll
hear
from
colleagues
about
uncertainty
in
the
world
of
state
pensions,
and
so
now.
I
would
like
to
turn
some
time
over
to
representative
ansel
and
representative
macboo
just
to
provide
a
little
bit
of
context
and
background
about
their
budget
picture
in
the
state
before
we
get
into
the
q
a
session
representative
ansel.
Would
you
like
to
begin
sure.
C
C
Even
last
fall
and
I've
been
thinking
some
about
the
reasons
for
that.
One
of
the
things
that
we
did
very
very
quickly
was
moved
to
fully
remote
work
and,
when
I
say
fully
remote,
we
left
the
state
house
on
march
13th
last
year
and
we
have
still
not
been
back
in
no
committees
have
been
in
the
state
house.
We
don't
do,
we
do
caucuses
remotely.
We
do
committee
meetings,
we
do
floor
sessions
remotely,
it
works,
it's
exhausting
and
we
have
learned
to
unmute
ourselves,
mostly
most
of
the
time
everything
that
we
do.
C
Is
it
on
youtube
and
is
out
there
for
everybody
to
see
all
the
time
which
is
also
exhausting,
but
it
it
allows
for
a
lot
of
public
input.
But
I
think
that
quick
shift
to
the
a
remote
world-
and
I
have
to
credit
our
former
speaker
with
making
that
happen
when
nobody
really
knew
what
the
tools
were
and
and
how
to
make
it
happen,
a
credit
that
you
know
some
of
our
success
in
getting
through
this.
To
being
able
to
make
that
shift.
C
Another.
I
think
thing
that
is
not
unique
to
our
state,
but
has
been
helpful
to
us.
Is
that,
although
we're
definitely
a
democratic
legislature,
we
have
a
republican
governor.
We
have
a
pretty
strong
tradition
of
cooperation
and
nonpartisanship
and
a
lot
of
the
work
that
we
do,
and
especially
in
the
early
months
of
the
pandemic,
that
really
made
a
difference.
It's
frayed
a
bit
not
surprisingly,
and
most
of
our
battles
tend
to
be
institutional
rather
than
partisans,
so
they're
between
the
branches
rather
than
between
the
parties.
B
B
How
do
committee
meetings
look
like
and
it's
I
just
find
it
so
interesting
that
so
many
offices
and
like
legislatures
were
so
able
to
quickly
adapt
to
that
situation.
So
thank
you
for
that
representative
marco.
Can
we
also
hear
from
you
yeah
kind
of
just
what
was
happening
in
the
state
before
and
during
the
pandemic
and
kind
of?
What's
the
outlook
right
now
that
you
see.
D
D
I,
I
think
it's
good,
that
we
have
a
diverse,
diverse
group
here
with
representative
ansel
and
then
myself,
because
I
think
we
have
two
totally
different
stories.
But
first
of
all
I
want
to
just
say:
I'm
I'm
very
excited
to
see
that
there
are,
let's
see
now
67
people
on
this
call,
I'm
also
chairman
of
the
budget
and
revenue
and
salt
task
force
for
ncsl,
and
I
want
to
encourage
you
if
you're,
not
part
of
that
team,
we're
doing
some
amazing
work.
D
It
was
our
committee
that
moved
the
quill
decision
through
the
wayfarer
all
the
way
up
through
the
south
dakota
supreme
court
and
all
the
way
to
the
u.s
supreme
court,
and
hopefully
all
of
the
states
have
benefited
from
that.
And
so
we've
got
some
more
wonderful
things
that
we're
planning
on
working
on.
We
will
be
having
an
in-person
meeting
in
september,
assault
task
force
and
then
we
will
be
having
the
national
convention
in
tampa
in
november.
D
So
if
you
solve
task
force,
I
would
love
to
invite
you
to
be
part
of
that
and
we
want
a
diverse
group
of
people
in
wisconsin.
My
first
word
was
concern
because
we
just
did
not
know
we
were
profoundly
concerned.
We
didn't
know
what
we
didn't
know,
I'm
old
enough
to
have
lived
through
the
I
had
gotten
married
in
78,
so
by
the
time
1980
came
along
and
the
aids
epidemic
hit.
D
D
We
realized
that
there
was
a
lot
of
misinformation
and
poor
information
that
was
out
there,
and
our
numbers
were
literally
off
our
our
our
terrible
projections
that
everything
was
going
to
go
to
heck
in
a
handbasket
were
off
by
a
factor
of
10,
not
10
by
a
factor
of
10,
and
I
don't
know
health
care.
But
I
do
know
data
and
that's
unconscionable
to
be
that
off
and
we
wisconsin
continues
to
prosper
from
that.
D
Our
budget
revenue
increases
have
just
continued
to
increase
and
that's
the
sad
dichotomy
of
it
all
many
of
our
s
corpse
and
s
election
co.
Excuse
me,
our
s-corps
and
our
llcs
converted
because
of
tip
ja
and
assault
discussions
converted
to
c
corps,
and
so
that
brought
in
in
our
our
highest
level
on
personal
property
and
personal
income
is
7.6.
D
So
we
continued
to
have
as
we
moved
into
the
fall
and-
and
we
continue
to
up
that-
those
projections
our
fiscal
year
ends
in
june
and
even
though
we
now
have
already
82
that
I
authored
authorized
550
million
worth
of
additional
tax
relief,
we're
still
running
in
excess
of
two
billion
dollars
in
in
in
surplus.
So
we
don't
have
a
budget
problem.
I
see
nothing
but
opportunity,
and-
and
that's
where
we
go
there
to
the
point
of
remoteness.
The
wisconsin
assembly
is
hard
driven.
D
As
you
know,
the
pres,
the
head
of
ncsl
now
is
robin
vos.
Who
is
our
speaker
and
so
he's
very
efficient
guy
and
we
cleared
our
decks
and
then,
when
the
coronavirus
thing
hit,
things
did
start
to
shut
down
and
we
had
150
pieces
of
quality
legislation
that
died
in
the
senate
because
they
refused
to
come
in.
That
was
very
frustrating
for
us
and
it's
the
old
joke.
You
know
it's.
The
democrats
aren't
our
enemies,
they're
a
rival.
The
enemy
is
the
senate
and
I'm
sorry
senator
bennett.
D
D
Is
someone
needed
to
explain
to
me
what
an
essential
person
is
versus
a
non-essential
person,
because
my
concept
is
that
everybody
is
essential.
It
made
no
sense
to
me,
and
so
I
think
it
was
that
it
was
having
not
the
right.
We
were
trying
to
make
decisions
with
insufficient
data,
and
once
that
became
substantially
clearer,
that
was
the
very
very
frustrating
part.
D
It
was
in
addition
to
my
role
here.
I
no
longer
have
vested
interest,
but
our
family
owned
several
businesses,
and
you
know
we
just
assumed
we
were
essential
and
we
just
kept
on
marching
and
had
zero
problems,
actually
added
165
employees
in
the
last
nine
months
and
again,
it's
the
sadness
of
that
dichotomy
of
those
folks
that
were
were
deemed
essential
and
those
that
were
deemed
non-essential
and
the
the
profound
ramifications
and
those
folks
are
the
ones
that
we
need
to
help
right
now.
B
C
It
didn't
work
this
time
because
in
july,
which
is
when
we
normally
would
have
done
the
forecast,
we
didn't
know
what
was
going
to
happen
with
the
pandemic.
I
mean
there's
no,
but
nobody
knew
we
didn't
know
when
a
vaccination
was
going
to
be
developed.
We
didn't
know
how
it
was
going
to
be
deployed.
We
didn't
know
when
businesses
were
going
to
reopen,
and
so
all
the
uncertainty
around
revenue
really
came
out
of
the
uncertainty
around
the
pandemic,
and
they
were
just
not.
They
were
things
that
were
not
knowable.
C
So
what
we
did
is
we.
We
postponed
the
revenue
estimate
for
a
couple
months
so
that
we
would
have
a
little
bit
better
information.
So
we
didn't
make
that
initial
budget
decision
based
on
bad
information.
We
did
a
temporary
budget
and
then
waited
until
we
had
better
information
and
were
able
to
do
the
basically.
It
was
sort
of
like
a
nine
month
budget,
so
it
would.
That
would
have
been
obviously
good
to
know,
but
how
I
don't
know
how
we
would
have
known
it.
C
And
so
had
we
known
that
that
deadline
was
going
to
be
postponed
and
that
there
was
going
to
be
more
federal
aid
with
with
fewer
strings
that
would
have
been.
That
would
have
made
a
big
difference
and
just
say
from
where
I
sit.
I
wish
I'd
known
earlier
that
schools
were
basically
going
to
not
to
be
fully
open
for
more
than
a
year
we
kept
thinking
gee.
This
is
going
to
be
really
bad
for
a
couple
months.
It's
going
to
be
really
bad
for
the
summer.
C
It's
going
to
be
really
bad
for
the
fall,
and
it
turns
that,
if
we'd
known
ahead
of
time,
how
long
it
was
going
to
be,
I
think
there
are
some
things
that
we
could
have
done
in
response.
That
would
have
been
better
for
kids,
overall
and
better
for
teachers.
So
you
know
a
lot
of
the
uncertainties
that
I
look
back
on
are
really
driven
by
the
fact
that
we
were
dealing
with
a
pandemic
that
nobody
knew.
I
mean
when
I
think
back
about
you
know
washing.
C
You
know
a
box
of
crackers
when
I
brought
it
home
from
the
store.
We
didn't
know
whether
that
was
something
we
had
to
do
or
not
and
there's
just
so
much,
not
just
the
uncertainty.
There
was
just
so
much
that
was
unknown,
and
so
it's
hard
to
think
back
now
at
how
we
operated
in
that
world
at
that
point,
but
so
anyway,
those
those
are
the
main
things.
B
C
C
C
It
is
a
program
that
we
started
last
summer
last
august
called
vermont,
everyone
eats,
which
is
we
started
with
a
5
million
grant
using
cares
money,
and
this
is
a
program
where-
and
I
just
I
mention
it,
because
I
think
it's
that
I
think
it's
instructive
of
the
kind
of
creative
thinking
that
people
do
in
a
crisis
and
what
it
does
is.
It
provides
nutritious
meals
to
vermonters
who
are
needing
food
in
need
of
food
assistance
by
paying
restaurants
to
provide
the
meals.
C
So
restaurants
would
get
ten
dollars
a
meal,
they
would
provide
it
using
local,
locally
sourced
ingredients
and
then
it
would
be
provided
to
people
in
need.
We've
now
hit
a
million
meal
mark
which
wouldn't
be
a
lot
for
a
lot
of
states,
but
we
only
have
600
000
people.
So
it's
a
pretty
big
deal
for
us,
not
an
awful
lot
of
money,
but
a
really
good
example
of
what
people
can
pull
together
when
they
are
forced
to
think
creatively
and
it
basically
helped
farmers.
C
It
helped
food
producers
to
help
restaurants
and
it
helped
individuals
and
families-
and
just
you
know,
was
a
great
example
of
what
can
happen
when,
when
you're
in
a
crisis
and
when
people
get
out
of
the
way
and
let
people
collaborate
and
come
up
with
inventive
and
creative
ideas,
so
you
know
I,
I
think
the
I
think
the
well
I'll
stop
there,
because
I
think
I'm
gonna
start
answering
your
other
questions.
If
I'm
not
careful,
okay,.
B
Great
thank
you,
representative,
ansel
representative
walco,
back
to
you
same
thing
for
wisconsin.
Is
there
anything
whether
it
was
if
it
could
be
codified
or
just
in
practice
that
would
have
been
helpful
policy
improvement
going
forward
from
anything
that
happened
in
the
last
year
where
you're
like?
If
this
was
in
place,
it
would
have
made
my
life
as
a
policy
maker
a
little
bit
easier.
D
I'll
have
to
tell
you
again:
we've
had
10
years
of
trying
to
implement
all
those
things
and
one.
I
I
see
jonathan
bell
and
jason
powell
chit-chatting
here
a
little
bit
and
I'm
a
little
bit
jealous
the
one
thing
I
wish
we
would
have
done
that.
I
think
we
absolutely
need
to
do
is
to
implement
the
utah
stress
test
model.
D
D
We
we're
at
13.4
billion
now
we're
at
12.4
billion,
and
we
restructured
it
at
all:
we're
saving
four
million
dollars
a
week,
200
million
dollars
a
year
in
interest
payments
alone,
and
so
that's
just
good
stewardship
and
that's
just
good
smart
planning.
But
I
don't
know
what
that
real
number
is.
It's
now
approaching
1.2
billion
dollars,
we
haven't
touched
it
it's
still
sitting
there,
and
so
does
that
grow
to
two
billion
dollars.
I
mean
if
you're,
texas
or
you're
or
you're
alaska,
then
it's
not
unusual
to
have.
D
D
The
second
thing
is
not
just
debt,
but
not
just
many
pay
funds,
but
but
but
the
debt,
so
both
of
those
issues
are
numbers
and
then
how
you
back
out
of
those
as
you
move
into
a
recessionary
period
which
we
never
actually
had
in
wisconsin,
and
so
so
again
you
ask:
what
do
I
wish?
We
had?
That's
the
one
thing
we
don't
have
and
I
would
like
to
be
able
to
get
that
done,
but
we've
already
again
the
premise
of
your
you
organization.
D
D
So
I
think
that's
when
I
look
at
some
of
the
things
that
we've
learned
is
that
the
value
of
responsible
budgeting,
the
value
of
paying
down
debt,
the
value
of
having
a
healthy
rainy
day
fund,
and
when
you
compare
us
to
the
rest
of
the
folks
in
the
midwest,
I'm
very
proud
of
being
where
we're
where
we
are,
and
it's
allowing
us
to
do.
You
know
some
things
that
some
folks
aren't,
and
I
know
the
second
half
of
this
is
pensions.
D
I've
worked
very
closely
with
our
state
wisconsin
investment
board,
a
team
and
we're
either
the
only
or
one
of
the
only
fully
funded
pension
organizations
in
the
state.
So
we
have
zero
problem
with
that.
We're
not
upside
down
with
that
whatsoever
and
those
are
all
very
encouraging.
But
again
that
didn't
happen
by
accident
that
was
very
deliberate
over
quite
a
long
period
of
time
through
various
administrations.
D
Just
like
janet
was
saying
we
have
a
split
government.
We
have
full
control
of
the
legislature
on
the
republican
side.
We
have
a
democratic
governor,
but
for
us
to
get
81
and
82
signed
was
phenomenal
and
I'm
proud
to
be
able
to
take
my
picture
with
governor
evers
and
the
pen
that
signed
that
bill
and
put
that
up
there.
That
was
a
quality
piece
of
legislation
that
was
a
reagan
and
tip
o'neill
discussion.
D
I
have
lunch
with
the
department
of
readiness
secretary,
almost
weekly
and
we
work
very
close
hand
in
hand,
even
though
those
things
we
will
never
agree
on,
there's
a
lot
of
things
that
we
do
agree
on,
and
so
those
are
some
of
the
things.
I
think
one
of
the
other
pieces
that
I
wish
we
had,
which
we
do
not
have
in
wisconsin,
which
is
a
very
big
source
of
irritation,
is
we
have
zero
control
over
any
of
those
federal
dollars.
D
B
Okay,
great,
I
know
we're
coming
a
little
close
to
time,
but
we
have
two
more
questions,
so
I
guess
our
next
question
is:
how
have
you
balanced
the
need
to
close
immediate
budget
gaps
with
the
need
to
consider
long-term
structural
balance
and
so
representative
ansel?
If
you
want
to
start
with
this
one,
that
would
be
great.
C
What
we're
doing
this
year
with
arpa
money
is
we're
in
we're
sort
of
winding
down
our
session
at
the
point
of
adopting
a
budget
that
will
spend
about
half
of
it.
We
understand
that
we
don't
have
the
guidance
yet,
which
is
a
frustration
and
but
we're
putting
the
other
half
aside
for
january.
Now.
That's
that
we're
we're
not
in
agreement
with
the
governor
about
that
at
the
moment
that's
still
being
negotiated,
but
the
that
that's
been.
C
The
approach
is
to
postpone
a
lot
of
those
decisions
for
next
january
and
the
when
the
of
the
money
that
we
are
appropriating
there's
we're
developing
a
system
where,
if
they're,
if
the
money
doesn't
get
spent,
the
administration
needs
to
come
back
to
the
joint
fiscal
committee
for
approval
to
spend
it
in
some
other
way.
So
we're
we're
holding
pretty
tight
to
our
legislative
role
with
respect
to
the
federal
money,
and
we
did
last
year
as
well.
C
Although
it
was
a
little,
was
a
little
different
than
it
normally
is,
but
it
worked
fairly.
Well,
the
you
know
we're
also
struggling
as
I
expect.
Every
state
is
with
this
federal
money
between
the
what
we
use
for
one-time
expenditures
and
what
we
use
for
ongoing
expenditures,
and
that's
that
continues
to
be
a
challenge,
because
once
this
money
is
gone,
we're
going
to
be
back
with
our
usual
revenue
stream
and
it's
fine,
but
it
needs
care,
and
we
need
to
be
careful
about
the
ongoing
commitments
that
we
make.
B
Great
thank
you.
I
know
we're
close
to
time,
but
I
do
want
to
ask
the
last
question,
and
so
rep
representative
malco,
marco
I'll,
ask
kind
of
both
questions
and
if
you
want
to
respond
to
both
in
kind
of
a
lump
sum
way,
that
would
be
great.
But
our
last
question
was
with
new
federal
aid
providing
some
relief
for
states.
D
This
is
not
gonna
be
popular.
I
don't
think
we
should
do
arpa
at
all,
not
a
penny.
I
think
it's
ridiculous.
I
think
we're
taking
tons
and
tons
of
cash.
We
are
priming
a
pump
that
doesn't
need
to
be
primed
anymore.
I
think,
when
you
put
in
our
case
five
billion
dollars
of
liquid
liquidity
into
our
our
market,
something
happens
and
I
think
we're
running
a
risk
of
hyperinflation.
D
I
think
we
are
rewarding
people
for
not
working.
I
think
that's
detrimental
to
jobs.
We're
already
seeing
now
folks
are
saying
we
need
job
creation.
I
said.
Well,
you
know
that's
just
pure
economics,
and
I
think
the
other
issue
is
we.
Are
you
know
what
what
we're
doing
with
that?
Those
dollars
that
it's
not
going
into
infrastructure?
That's
not
going
into
issues
that
will
re
will
pay
a
dividend
there,
it's
being
moved
from
people
that
are
creating
wealth,
people
that
are
consuming
wealth,
and
I
get
that
that's
a
keynesian
theory.
D
D
We
have,
we
have
no
control
over,
what's
happening
with
that,
and
so
those
monies
are
if
they
come
in
and
here's
the
other
problem
I
have
with
it
is
the
federalism
part
somebody
is
tweeting
on
the
thing
here
asking
about.
Are
we
concerned
about
the
tax
cuts?
Absolutely
if
all
of
a
sudden
that
part
and
parcel
to
this
says
I
can't
manage
my
tax
policy.
That's
nuts,
that's
absolutely
nuts,
and
so
I
think,
there's
a
lot
of
problems
with
arpa
right
now.
From
many
reasons,.
C
And
that's
why
montana
and
vermont
are
so
different
because
we're
going
to
find
a
way
to
use
it,
but
I'm
glad
you
mentioned
the
tax
cuts.
We've
had
we've
been
having
a
big
debate
over
the
last
month
or
two
about
the
whole
link
up
question.
We
have
an
income
tax
and
a
corporate
tax
in
the
state
tax.
So
we
are
affected
by
what
the
federal
government
does
and
it's
very
frustrating
to
me
that
those
decisions
get
made
without
legislative
input,
we're
taking
taking
those
decisions
back.
D
No,
I
just
I
just
wanna
again,
I'm
just
very
proud
of
being
part,
it's
so
great
to
have
when
I
said
our
first
problem
was
good
data.
I
mean
having
the
pew
guys
and
I'm
not
pulling
smoke
up
your
skirt.
I
honestly
love
having
you
guys
as
a
resource,
and
I
think
and
ncsl
too
they've
been
profoundly
helpful
to
me.
Certainly,
we
built
some
of
our
own
information.
D
So
thank
you
for
the
reports
that
you
give
me
and
I
want
to
encourage
everybody
on
the
call,
if
you
have
any
other
things,
give
angela
a
buzz
she's
dying
to
get
that
information
out
to
you
and
would
be
more
than
happy
to
help
you
and
again,
our
friends
in
utah,
with
some
of
the
platforms
that
they've
been
able
to
articulate
and
use
use
them.
That's
part
of
the
joy
of
being
part
of
ncsl
is
that
you
don't
have
to
make
this
stuff
up.
Chances
are
someone's
already
thought
about
it.
D
B
E
E
David
drain
from
the
pew
charitable
trust
will
be
facilitating
the
next
portion
of
the
program
focused
on
measuring
and
managing
uncertainty
in
state
pensions.
So
we've
had
an
opportunity
to
delve
into
kobit's
impacts
on
state
budgets
and
explore
some
tools.
Policy
makers
can
use
to
help
them
prepare
for
and
mitigate
budget
uncertainty.
E
E
We're
also
pleased
to
welcome
south
carolina
senator
sean
bennett.
He
was
first
elected
in
2012
and
represents
the
greater
somerville
area.
Senator
bennett
serves
on
the
senate,
finance,
banking
and
insurance
and
labor
commerce
and
industry
standing
committees
and
is
chairman
of
the
senate
ethics
committee,
as
well
as
the
special
joint
committee
on
pensions,
he's
been
providing
financial
planning
and
wealth
management
assistance
to
individual
and
business
clients
since
1993..
E
And
finally,
I
would
like
to
welcome
senator
george
munoz,
who
chairs
new,
mexico's
senate
finance
committee
and
has
represented
the
gallup
area
since
2009.
among
other
notable
bills.
He
sponsored
bipartisan
legislation
in
2020
to
shore
up
the
state's
retirement
system
for
state
and
local
government
employees.
F
F
My
name
is
david
drain.
I'm
a
senior
researcher
with
the
pew
chartable
trusts
on
our
team,
looking
at
state
and
local
retirement
issues.
Our
work
on
this
really
started
back
in
2007
with
our
first
report.
Looking
at
the
funding
of
state
pension
plans
and
state
retiree
health
care
plans,
we've
since
expanded
that
work
to
cover
plan,
design,
retirement
security,
risk
and
uncertainty,
governance
and
investment,
performance
and
fee
disclosure
I'll
be
sharing
some
of
our
research
and
findings
with
you
focusing
on
how
state
pension
plans
have
reacted
to
the
impact
of
covet
19.
F
lessons.
We
learned
from
some
of
the
successful
states
that
manage
risk
and
uncertainty
in
terms
of
pension
funding
and
then
some
tools
and
measures
to
gauge
the
fiscal
stability
of
a
state's
public
sector
retirement
systems.
Following
that
I'll
be
joined
by
senator
george
munoz
and
senator
sean
bennett
for
discussion
of
their
state's
experiences
and
one
of
the
biggest
strengths
of
ncsl,
at
least
from
my
perspective,
is
the
ability
of
states
to
learn
from
each
other.
F
It's
also
worth
pointing
out
that
this
overall
picture
concealed
a
tremendous
amount
of
variation
between
some
of
the
well-funded
states
and
some
of
the
more
poorly
funded
states
which
we'll
be
discussing,
and
let's
get
to
that
volatility.
You
know
so
from
you
know,
december
from
february,
through
march
2020,
we
saw
historic
losses
in
the
s
p,
500
and
a
tremendous
impact
of
state
and
local
pension
plan
balance
sheets,
and
then
we've
really
seen
a
subsequent
swing
upwards
in
investment
markets
that
have
largely
mitigated
those
initial
losses.
F
One
of
the
things
that
we
saw
in
response
was
a
number
of
states
cutting
back
on
what
they
were
planning
to
set
aside
to
pay
for
pensions
either.
Putting
aside,
you
know,
setting
aside
supplemental
pension
contributions
as
a
way
of
giving
relief
to
other
parts
of
the
state
budget
or
delaying
planned
increases,
though
I
think
it's
worth
pointing
out
that
compared
to
the
state
response
and
following
the
dot
com
crash
in
the
great
recession,
state's
commitments
to
pension
funding
has
been,
you
know
remains
much
much
stronger
and
much
higher.
F
But
while
we've
seen
a
strong
run-up
in
financial
markets,
recently
forward-looking
projections
of
what
economic
growth
will
look
like
what
an
inflation
might
look
like
what
bond
yields
and
stock
market
returns
might
look
like
suggests
that
state
pension
plans
can't
count
on
the
returns
that
they
were
historically
able
to
get
or
what
they're?
Currently,
assuming
that
they'll
get
in
investment
performance,
you
know
we
have
seen
a
tremendous
amount
of
states
lowering
their
assumed
rate
of
return.
F
So
that's
some
of
the
challenges
we're
seeing
across
state
pension
plan
funding,
but
it's
worth
pointing
out
that
a
number
of
states
have
really
managed
this
effectively
and
it's
useful
for
a
couple
reasons.
You
know
one
you
know
simply.
I
think
it
demonstrates
that
you
can
offer
secure
retirement
benefits
to
workers
retirees
in
a
financially
sustainable
manner,
but
also
points
out.
The
differences
we
see
are
not
bad
luck
or
good
luck.
F
It's
the
result
of
policy
choices
and
if
you
look
at
the
top
10
states
in
terms
of
pension
funding,
they've
funded
95
of
their
liabilities
and
we're
paying
about
12
percent
of
payroll
and
contributions
on
average.
If
you
look
at
the
bottom
10
states,
they
have
funded
about
50
of
their
liabilities
and
we're
paying
about
30
percent
of
payroll
on
average,
and
that
number
almost
certainly
needs
to
go
up
further.
F
Employee
plans
in
five
states
is
useful
models
for
policymakers
in
other
jurisdictions
and
by
no
means
that
we
want
to
suggest
that
these
are
the
only
states
doing
well,
but
they
show
an
interesting
variety
of
different
approaches
that
have
all
led
to
successful
outcomes
beyond
wisconsin
that
got
mentioned
already
from
representative
marco.
You
know
we
see
nebraska
south
dakota,
tennessee
and
utah's
plans
for
state
employees
and
in
some
cases,
for
teachers
and
local
employees
as
well.
F
Costs
have
been
stable
and
funding
ratios
have
been
high,
they're,
not
they're,
paying
for
benefits
when
they're
earned
and
not
putting
unfunded
liabilities
to
future
taxpayers.
Providing
everyone
a
path
to
retirement
security,
they
have
plans
for
uncertainty.
So
if
investments
fall
short
or
something
else
happens,
they
know
who
who
will
be
responsible,
but
they
also
in
some
cases,
ways
to
share
gains
and
ensure
good
times
and,
lastly,
the
govern
transparently
and
make
it
clear
to
stakeholders
and
policy
makers.
F
F
You
know,
places
like
washington
and
california
have
been
doing
this
for
years.
In
other
cases,
this
has
been
a
more
recent
development
and
it's
useful
going
over
what
is
pension,
stress,
testing
and
really
it's
a
way
of
looking
at
what
will
happen,
both
the
public
planned
balance
sheets
as
well
as
government
budgets.
Both
of
everything
goes
as
planned
if
investments
deliver
exactly
what
they're
supposed
to,
if
every
other
actual
assumption
was
right,
but
also,
if
things
fall
short,
if
investments
underperform,
if
policymakers
don't
contribute
what
they're
supposed
to
or
if
something
else
unexpected
occurs.
F
Importantly,
we
don't
see
this
as
an
academic
exercise.
Policy
makers
and
budget
officials
can
get
a
tremendous
amount
of
information
from
this
from
colorado,
which
uses
stress
tests
and
found
that
there's
a
one
in
four
chance
of
insolvency
under
the
current
policy
and
that
information
drove
a
successful
reform
effort
in
the
state
to
south
dakota,
which
you
know
in
light
of
the
impact
of
covet
19
asked.
F
Will
our
existing
policies
be
sufficient
to
weather
this
storm
and
they
found
that
the
answer
was
yes,
but
only
because
of
the
market
recovery
that
happened
from
march
to
june.
So
there's
a
lot
of
valuable
information
to
get
from
that
from
this
kind
of
analysis
and
part
of
the
reason
we
see.
This
is
useful
for
states
both
to
assess
the
sustainability
current
policy,
but
also
for
just
budget
planning,
even
about
well-funded
system.
What
might
my
contributions
rise
to
in
the
case
of
a
downturn?
F
Can
I
plan
for
that,
whether
it's
knowing
that
that
increase
will
occur,
whether
it's
to
rainy
day
funds
or
other
tools
just
to
quickly
wrap
up
and
then
we'll
start
our
discussion?
You
know
the
kovid
19
pandemic
exposed
already
underfunded.
State
pension
plans
to
a
tremendous
amount
of
volatility
and
strained
revenues,
but
strong
investment
performance
has
mitigated
a
lot
of
those
earlier
losses.
F
So
hopefully
they're
both
here,
but
you
know
to
start
off.
You
know
senator
bennett,
during
the
onset
of
the
pandemic
and
the
height
of
the
uncertainty.
What
kind
of
information
where
you
hope
would
have
been
helpful
to
have
about
your
retirement
system
and
what
were
your
major
concerns
related
to
pensions.
G
Thanks
david
appreciate
appreciate
the
time
just
to
speak
with
the
group.
You
know
that's
a
hard
question
for
me
as
chairman
of
the
pension
reform
committee.
There
wasn't
a
whole
lot
of
information
that
I
didn't
get,
so
I
probably
got
more
than
most
legislators,
but
I
think
just
having,
particularly
at
the
start
of
the
pandemic,
when
the
markets
were
seeing
such
dramatic
decline.
G
F
H
H
But
I
agree
with
senator
ben
you
just
can't
be
so
reactionary
in
this
market
january
to
april.
If
you
would
have
sold
off
you
would
you
would
have
got
hammered,
we
recovered
your
system
came
through
and
we
also
in
new
mexico
had
been
making
pension
changes
for
the
last
three
years
and
those
helped
us
survive
and
get
through
that.
F
H
I
think
I
think
the
most
important
thing
that
we
can
learn
is
is
make
those
structural
changes,
even
though
they're
difficult
and
they're
hard
in
legislators
legislatures
make
those
changes
before
so
you're
on
that
path.
So
you
don't
hit
this
pandemic
and
say:
okay,
we've
got
to
make
a
knee-jerk
reaction
to
make
these
changes
to
our
pension
reform,
so
plan
ahead-
and
you
know
always
be
looking
at
that
20-year
funding
for
funding
and
make
sure
that
you're
set
on
that
path
completely.
H
So
if
something
does
hit
you're,
not
reacting
and
then
you're
getting
hit,
it's
not
easy
to
do,
especially
not
easy
during
the
crisis
last
year,
we
did
it
in
january
right
at
the
beginning
of
the
pandemic,
and
nobody
really
knew
what
the
pandemic
was.
Gonna
do
and-
and
so
it
was,
it
was
a
long
battle
and
pension
fights
are
always
a
battle
among
every
group
in
every
state
and
every
legislature.
G
Yeah
from
our
experience,
most
recently
is
just
as
much
as
you
possibly
can
is
streamline
the
structure
and
the
organization
of
the
pension,
along
with
the
legislative
process.
So
in
south
carolina
we
have
a
tendency
of
being
a
legislature
that
that
gets
involved
in
the
weeds
way
too
much
and
part
of
the
things
that
we
did
a
few
years
ago.
G
So,
to
the
best
to
the
to
the
point
that
you
can
is
just
create
the
right
structure,
put
it
in
the
hands
of
the
professionals.
Let
them
do
what
they
do
monitor
them
like.
We
should,
from
a
legislative
standpoint,
provide
that
oversight,
but
senator
munoz
point
is,
is
don't
don't
allow
the
legislature
to
get
involved
in
those
knee-jerk
reactions
on
short-term
on
short-term
problems.
Pensions
are,
will
be
here
forever
long
long
after
all
of
us
are
here,
and
they
need
to
operate
the
way
that
they
should
operate.
F
And
then
you
know,
how
does
how
can
a
state
balance
the
need
to
close
immediate
budget
gaps
with
the
long-term
solvency
and
financial
stability
concerns
and
in
the
case
of
south
carolina,
you
know?
How
are
those
balances
decided
on
you
know
when
you're
considering
the
delay
and
the
contribution
rate
increase.
G
Yes,
so
you
just
have
to
make
the
commitment
right.
You
just
have
to
make
the
commitment
that
the
that
closing
the
unfunded
liability
is
a
a
primary
factor
in
every
budget
process.
So
that's
that's
what
we
have
done
now,
what
we?
What
we
have
done,
unfortunately,
is
is.
We
have
gone
to
a
a
dedicated
funding
stream.
I
think
somebody
mentioned
david.
G
You
know
we
struggle
sometimes,
with
you
know,
we've
got
25
50,
100
million
dollars
of
one-time
money.
Do
we
dedicate
it
to
a
you
know
an
18
billion
dollar
liability
and
even
if
we
did
that,
does
it
move
the
needle?
That's
the
the
conversation
that
that
takes
place
with
a
lot
of
our
members,
so
when
we're
not
able
to
do
that,
having
that
overfunding
of
the
of
the
contributions
is
a
good
thing,
I
think,
in
order
to
to
design
the
plan
and
we're
looking
at
phase
two
right
now
for
reforms.
F
H
Well,
I
think
senator
benner
kind
of
touched
on
it,
but
when
the
gatsby
came
into
play
and
we
had
to
move
all
these
pension
liabilities
to
the
front
page
of
our
balance
sheet
and
look
at
all
our
bond
ratings
and
all
our
costs
and
and
what
our
pension
funds
could
cost
us.
If
we
didn't
see
that
they
were
solvent,
when
we
did
this
in
new
mexico,
we
looked
at.
D
H
The
employee
part
employment,
employee
poll
is
shrinking
in
the
states
and
how
are
we
going
to
handle
that
with
the
amount
of
benefits
that
we
have
in
the
retirees
in
order
to
keep
that
that
base,
keep
moving
up
and
keep
adding
to
the
policy
to
the
fund?
But
that
was
one
of
the
most
significant
changes
that
we
that
we
had
to
do
was
you
know,
change
employees
had
to
contribute
more
employer
had
to
contribute
more,
and
we
had
to
make
structural
changes
and
changing
it
to
fix
cola
instead
of
a
cola.
H
Every
two
every
two
years
is
going
to
be
the
biggest
benefit.
I
think
we
can
do
to
balance
balance
those
funds
and
those
are
long-term
structural
funds.
We
also
talked
about
you
know,
put
100
million
dollars
in
so
you
take
a
cup
of
water
out
of
the
ocean
and
you
put
it
in
in
a
6
billion
deficit.
You
don't
really
do
anything.
How
do
we?
How
do
we
get
there
and
how
do
we
keep
them
at
that?
H
H
G
Sure
so
our
biggest
thing
is,
as
we
mentioned
about
three
years
ago,
we
did
phase
one
of
our
pension
reform,
which
was
shoring
up
the
existing
pension
and
making
sure
that
that
was
going
to
be
able
to
live
up
to
the
promises
that
we
made
to
existing
employees
as
well
as
retirees
phase.
Two
of
that
is
what
we're
working
on
now
hope.
We
had
hoped
to
kind
of,
introduce
that
and
get
that
to
the
floor
this
year,
that
didn't
work
out
from
the
timing.
G
G
We
think
we're
in
a
good
spot
where
our
existing
pension
is
in
the
way
that
that
money
is
invested
and
the
folks
that
are
running
that
and
the
costs
associated
with
those
investments,
there's
always
room
to
make
improvements
and
and
I'm
confident
with
the
people
that
we
have
there
to
make
those
but
going
forward.
We
just
need
to
make
sure
that
we've
got
a
plan
that's
attractive
to
the
next
generation
of
the
workforce.
G
Yeah
well
phase.
One
reforms
were
we're
simply
getting
more
money
into
the
system
right,
making
making
some
differences.
So
the
the
biggest
change
was.
You
know
we
had
a
real
political
fight.
While
I,
I
believe
that
we
probably
should
have
cost
shared
that
more.
There
were
a
lot
of
people
that
didn't
want
to
put
any
more
pressure
on
our
employees,
so
we
actually
capped
our
our
employee
contribution
but
significantly
increased
our
employer
contributions.
G
So
that's
a
challenge
for
us,
but
contribution
levels
were
significant
changes
and
then,
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
just
streamlining
our
structure
getting
a
lot
of
the
a
lot
of
the
pieces
that
got
in
the
way
of
the
governance
out
of
the
governance
again
allowed
for
rather
than
the
legislature
itself,
dictating
what
what
our
targeted
rate
of
return
is.
Get
that
to
the
actuaries
to
make
those
recommendations.
G
We
still
had
the
compromise.
It
still
comes
in
front
of
the
general
assembly
for
approval
of
those
numbers,
but
we
just
had
the
first
one.
After
three
years
they
came
to
us
and
thankfully
we
we
saw
fit
to
listen
to
the
experts
and
follow
their
advice.
We
went
from
seven
and
a
half
percent
down
to
six
at
seven
and
a
quarter.
It's
not
low
enough,
but
we're
trending
in
the
right
direction.
So
those
are
some
of
the
some
of
the
bigger
points
that
we
made.
F
H
Well,
our
actuarials
were
actually
telling
us.
You
know
the
structural
changes
that
we
need
to
make
to
fund
to
get
it
into
solvency
over
over
time
were
key,
and
so,
when
we
increased
the
employee
contribution,
I
think
it
increased
it
to
almost
employer
to
18
employee
to
13,
and
then
we
introduced
the
cola,
which
was
the
biggest
change
structural
change
that
we
made,
and-
and
so
you
don't
get
it
coal
every
year,
but
go
after
five
and
then
every
two
years,
you'll
get
a
cold
increase.
That
structural
change
changed.
H
F
G
No,
I
think
you
know
I
I
just
caught
the
tail
end
of
the
previous
conversation
about
basically
funding
and
where
we're
at
in
these
economic
times
and
challenges
that
are
faced,
I
mean
we're
facing
a
lot
of
those
same
things.
South
carolina
was
very
lucky.
We
came
through
this
pandemic
and
the
recession
really
in
pretty
good
fiscal
shape.
So
we
we
just
completed
our
budget
process
in
the
senate
last
week.
As
a
matter
of
fact,
the
numbers
were
very
good.
We
continue
to
see
good
revenue
numbers
it's
now.
G
G
I
think
I
heard
a
number
of
people
say:
there's
just
a
lot
of
excess
dollars
out
there
that
we're
not
sure
where
to
spend
it.
It
would
have
been
great
for
pensions
to
be
able
to
be
able
to
use
some
of
that
money
on
on
public
pensions,
but
unfortunately
that
was
that
was
not
allowed.
So
we'll
we'll
see
how
the
how
the
next
step
comes.
H
Know
nobody
asked
any
questions,
because
pensions
are
not
sexy
at
all.
They
aren't
battle.
They
are
a
tough
battle
to
take
on
when
you
take
on
employees
so
and
they're
very
hard
to
understand
for
people
that
are
just
looking
at
their
their
retirement
at
the
end
of
the
day
and
how
much
they're
going
to
retire
with.
So
you
know
I
agree
with
senator
bennett.
H
I
I
agree
that
some
of
the
harpa
funds
we
should
have
been
able
to
book
some
of
those
into
our
pension
funds
and
get
us
some
relief
on
debt
we
actually
actually
and
in
the
senate.
We
we
budgeted
our
arpa
monies,
even
though
we
hadn't
received
it
in
it
and
we'll
be
in
a
fight
with
the
governor
and
the
executive
over
how
to
spend
those
and
and
where
they're
well
placed
in
in
the
state.
F
And
with
that
senators,
I
want
to
thank
both
of
you
so
much
for
your
participation.
It
really,
as
I
said
before,
I
think
one
of
the
great
strengths
of
ncsl
is
states
learning
from
each
other.
I
know
I
learned
listening
in
on
the
conversations
between
policymakers
and,
as
always,
we're
happy
to
share
our
research
I'd
like
to
thank
ncsl
for
putting
on
this
this
event
and
I'd
like
to
thank
our
audience
for
joining
us
here
today.
A
And
I
will
just
echo
david
and
thank
you
all
for
your
participation
and
thank
all
our
speakers
for
their
time
and
joining
us
today
and
again,
a
reminder
for
next
week
same
time,
we'll
be
talking
about
how
states
can
spend
their
opioid
settlement
funds
and
then
just
a
final.
Thank
you
to
pew
again
for
their
support
of
the
fiscal
program
series
and
with
that
say,
enjoy
the
rest
of
your
day.