Old Habits Die Hard

And media distortion continues unabated. The Supreme Court's ruling last Thursday continues to challenge the integrity and intellect of the media's editorial writers, feature writers, and headline writers. Across the state were headlines boasting that the Oregon Supreme Court had ruled that "retirees must now pay for past PERS Board mistakes." I find myself shaking my head asking whether any of these writers read a single word of the Court's decision. The Court said NO SUCH THING. The Court ruling that the appeal of the City of Eugene case was "moot" - there wasn't anything to rule on. The effect of that decision WAS NOT to require PERS to collect from retirees. The Strunk/Sartain decision back in March had already obligated PERS to restore COLAs to retirees on their fixed benefits. PERS has refused to implement that decision. The much-discussed "settlement", which is the subject of another lawsuit, contains no direct reference to retirees. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court's recent (non) decision merely emboldens PERS to TRY to collect from retirees. The Court didn't rule that it must or that it could, and new legal action will probably be necessary to point this significant fact out to the PERS Board. Moreover, Judge Lipscomb himself recommended that PERS NOT try to collect from retirees.

If that distortion weren't bad enough, the editorials in yesterday's Salem Statesman Journal, and today's Oregonian hit new lows. Both offer smarmily sympathetic views of the retirees' plight, but then essentially say, "tough shit". The anti-public employee beat marches on. Time to cancel some subscriptions and stop supporting media and businesses behind this. I'll miss the comics, but I can find those online.

Note: It might also interest the media that the "settlement" is not a "class action". One could assert that it only applies to employees and retirees of the 8 plaintiff employers that settled the suit.