Follow Us:


  • Article
  • Comments

Poll: Was Christie Right in Changing Pension-Funding Formula?

The governor's tinkering with the funding formula will cost NJ almost $95M this year, $150M next fiscal year

NJ Spotlight reported this week that the Christie administration quietly changed the funding formula for the state's pension contribution. The move shortchanges the system by $93.7 million in payments due this June, and another $150 million in the next state fiscal year.

The state's pension obligations already are underfunded by $51 billion, according to various rating agencies. What does mean for the future of retirees' pensions?

What do you think of Christie's decision to revise the funding formula?

  • Christie had no choice. The state is facing a huge hole in its budget for this fiscal year and the next; without the changes, big cuts in popular programs would have been unavoidable.

  • The continuing shortfalls in the pension system demonstrate that more needs to be done to ratchet back the benefits of public employees.

  • The underfunding is symptomatic of the problems with the so-called reforms of the state pension system enacted by the Legislature and Christie administration. After years of underfunding the system, the state cannot afford the escalating payments into the fund.

  • Christie is being hypocritical. He said the administration would fully fund the pension program when a bipartisan bill was enacted to deal with the issue. Now he is backtracking.

  • Why aren't promises kept to public employees who are now required to contribute to their own pensions and have to wait to 65 to retire. It's not fair. It's not right.

  • I'm completely befuddled by this whole discussion.

Read more in Polling
Corporate Supporters
Most Popular Stories