<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <title>The Fighting 29th</title>
  <subtitle>All about New York's 29th Congressional District</subtitle>
  <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.fighting29th.com/2008/09/kuhl-and-pension-risk.html"/>
  <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.fighting29th.com/node/5007/atom/feed"/>
  <id>http://www.fighting29th.com/node/5007/atom/feed</id>
  <updated>2008-09-24T09:44:36-04:00</updated>
  <entry>
    <title>Kuhl and Pension Risk</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.fighting29th.com/2008/09/kuhl-and-pension-risk.html" />
    <id>http://www.fighting29th.com/2008/09/kuhl-and-pension-risk.html</id>
    <published>2008-09-24T09:39:36-04:00</published>
    <updated>2008-09-24T09:44:36-04:00</updated>
    <author>
      <name>Rottenchester</name>
    </author>
    <category term="News" />
    <summary type="html"><![CDATA[<p>Time's Jay Newton-Small has been <a href="http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/09/why_pensions_may_be_more_vulne.html">studying</a> the Pension Protection Act of 2006.  That bill made automatic enrollment in 401(k) plans the default for employers.  Randy Kuhl's role in the bill isn't the stuff of political dreams.  He wanted to allow risky hedge fund investments in pension funds:</p>
<blockquote><p>But that bill <a href="http://www.pomtalk.com/pomtalk/pension_reform/index.html">opened</a> up pension funds to huge <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2006/07/28/pf/retirement/hedgefunds_pensions/index.htm">new</a> risks. The legislation relaxed regulations to make it easier for hedge funds and financial institutions to hold large stakes in the pension funds without the fiduciary duties that usually come with investing in people’s retirement. This was a controversial provision that even the White House and Senate Republicans were leery of – Dems mostly opposed it – but House Republicans were adamant in seeing it included in the bill. In fact the original language of these provisions – introduced as an <a href="http://republicans.edlabor.house.gov/archive/markups/109th/fc/hr2830/629a3.pdf">amendment</a> in committee by Republican Representatives John “Randy” <a href="http://kuhl.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=41249">Kuhl</a> of New York and Rob Andrews of New Jersey – called for even greater changes to the system: allowing hedge funds and financial institutions to hold up to 50% stakes in pensions funds.
</p>
</blockquote>
    ]]></summary>
    <content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>Time's Jay Newton-Small has been <a href="http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/09/why_pensions_may_be_more_vulne.html">studying</a> the Pension Protection Act of 2006.  That bill made automatic enrollment in 401(k) plans the default for employers.  Randy Kuhl's role in the bill isn't the stuff of political dreams.  He wanted to allow risky hedge fund investments in pension funds:</p>
<blockquote><p>But that bill <a href="http://www.pomtalk.com/pomtalk/pension_reform/index.html">opened</a> up pension funds to huge <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2006/07/28/pf/retirement/hedgefunds_pensions/index.htm">new</a> risks. The legislation relaxed regulations to make it easier for hedge funds and financial institutions to hold large stakes in the pension funds without the fiduciary duties that usually come with investing in people’s retirement. This was a controversial provision that even the White House and Senate Republicans were leery of – Dems mostly opposed it – but House Republicans were adamant in seeing it included in the bill. In fact the original language of these provisions – introduced as an <a href="http://republicans.edlabor.house.gov/archive/markups/109th/fc/hr2830/629a3.pdf">amendment</a> in committee by Republican Representatives John “Randy” <a href="http://kuhl.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=41249">Kuhl</a> of New York and Rob Andrews of New Jersey – called for even greater changes to the system: allowing hedge funds and financial institutions to hold up to 50% stakes in pensions funds.
</p></blockquote>
    ]]></content>
  </entry>
</feed>
