Dear Editor:

Regarding public pensions, many people believe that if  higher taxes are required to pay for unaffordable obligations, then so be it, but this is no longer feasible.

First, it is a legal precedent that a government entitlement is not a legally binding contract, simply because Franklin D. Roosevelt’s original Social Security Act states that the federal government has “the right to alter, amend, or repeal any provision” if the need calls for it. In other words, any insurance company contracting with a customer would face some serious legal challenges due to such language in a real, legally binding “contract”, but not FDR’s federal government.

Secondly, even though a private insurance company may be contractually bound to pay for benefits, our federal government has no legal authority to issue such contracts. It can create laws, but not endless entitlements, and that is the fundamental flaw with Social Security. Simply stated, no representative government can enter into “contracts” which must be upheld forever, because in doing so, they would bind the future legislatures and taxpayers they will represent.

In short, public pensions are already dead, and that is not necessarily a bad thing. Don’t get me wrong. I am not condemning things like Social Security, or public pensions, but they are obviously predicated upon government transfer of wealth from one individual to pay another, and asking taxpayers to ever increase their contributions should be accompanied by reasonable concessions from those who stand to benefit.

Phil Molvar

Southport