A response for Mr. Leibensperger from a retiree

Kathie Bracy to Bill Leibensperger, December 18, 2007
Subject: Re: In the spirit of open communication

Hi Bill --

I just received a response from the person who wrote the commentary I think you were referring to. This individual has expressed the need to remain anonymous for now, so I am acting as a conduit. I'm afraid you won't find it very complimentary, but I am pasting it below in its entirety.

Kathie
-----
Kathie,

Your reply is excellent as always. I think I did hit a nerve but at least he was civil and his remarks were calculated and tempered. I'll give him credit for that! He is correct in his assessment that they can't please everyone all of the time. On the other hand I still believe OEA has outlived its purpose with respect to active and retired teachers. I loved the way he tossed out the proverbial carrot to try and get you to give up the name of the author of the article. He indicated that he would like to call and "talk." Riiiight! They want to be able to identify their enemies so they can work to neutralize us. Nothing more! If they were concerned about "a spirit of cooperation" they would stop the attacks against Dennis and John and work with them to create consensus to benefit ALL retirees and actives. I'll remind Mr. L that it was the OEA dominated board that did away with the spousal subsidy placing an extreme hardship on a lot of retirees with non-teaching spouses. It was the OEA faction that demonstrated little to no empathy or regard for retirees who went out prior to 1999 which preceded the 88% at 35 years, that certain high wage retirees are milking from the system. The same OEA dominated board did absolutely nothing to try and level the playing field among retirees. They rewarded a certain class with a wonderful retirement so that they don't have to worry if they have to provide spousal coverage. Then the same uncaring OEA left the rest of us with the crumbs while they made up lies about how they had to do it this way. As you and I know we aren't seeing the same type of hardship among OPERS retirees are we? Their board took measured steps to make sure that no single class of retirees was more severely impacted by their decisions. No! I'm sitting here ill typing this and madder than hell. In my mid 60's I HAD to go back to work to be able to afford retirement. Why am I ill all of the time? Because my body and immune system can no longer fight off the myriad of bugs that we come into contact with while working with young children. As you well know small children are nothing more than walking, talking and breathing Petri dishes of viruses and bacterial infections. And he wants to know why some of us are pissed off? Give me a break! While a bunch of former highly paid superintendents and former OEA big wigs are basking in the sun in Myrtle Beach, Palm Springs, Jekyll Island, Bradenton, Fort Myers, Tucson, and other meccas of sunshine, the rest of us are destroying our bodies to be able to afford health insurance for our spouses.

Let me assure you he doesn't want to talk with me. I'd light him up like the Fourth of July with facts and numbers and not the hype and bullshit that he and other OEA diehards espouse in the name of fairness and equality. There never was any reason to reduce the HC contribution from 4% to 1% and eliminate the spousal subsidy. The OEA dominated STRS Board are the ones who went to the ORSC and asked them to allow STRS to reduce the percentage to HC because they couldn't maintain both funds at 30 years. They used that so they could push the 88% at 35 year prize for those who were planning on going out after rising to six figure salaries. They used the argument that they had to do this to maintain solvency on the pension side to fully fund it for 30 years. They created a windfall for a group of highly paid people who never paid nearly enough into the system to warrant the amounts they are receiving. I remember Damon and the OEA faction stating that the change was "COST NEUTRAL." If the OEA and its STRS Board lackeys truly believe that this "golden parachute" for a privileged group is "cost neutral," I think I can locate some prime real estate south of the City of New Orleans and sell it to them at bargain prices.

You can share my comments with him. Ask him how much he's going to receive when HE retires? I'll compare my $34,000.00 pension to what he's going to receive. In fact I'll be happy to trade him even; mine for his! I'll bet he'll jump on this offer??!! Oh! And he can pick up the $10,000.00 it is costing me out of my pre-tax retirement check for HC annually. I'm sure he'll run to the front of the line of takers??!!