Comments on: Richardson vetoes bill that would rein in ‘double-dippers’

By: duh11

duh11 — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 21:11:07 +0000

Think about this scenario. You are 55, 20 year Tier III teacher making $50K.but cannot legally retire for 5 years. Next door is a teacher who retired, came back and is near $90K with both retirement and pension. Both have the same job. But because of this double dipping system, the first teacher just got health benefits cut, has to have 1.5% more taken out for retirement and now may face a pay cut. ….all basically to pay for teacher # 2. Moral and ethical issues here. You bet! Stop double dipping ..the state is broke and so is teacher #1.

By: duh11

duh11 — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 15:11:07 +0000

By: duh11

duh11 — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 14:11:07 +0000

By: pancheetah

pancheetah — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 17:41:48 +0000

dissenting opinion.
I just qualified for retirement in one of the state systems and I hope to return to teaching after I retire as a teacher. I'll make millions! Actually I'll get about $150 a month. My monthly expenses related to my job exceed that amount and I'm not alone. State funding for teachers requires many of us to shell out in order to do our jobs. Legislation needs to address the problem and take into account who is affected and what service they perform for the state.

By: pancheetah

pancheetah — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 16:41:48 +0000

dissenting opinion.
I just qualified for retirment in one of the state systems and I hope to return to teaching after I retire as a teacher. I'll make millions! Actually I'll get about $150 a month. My monthly expenses related to my job exceed that amount and I'm not alone. State funding for teachers requires many of us to shell out in order to do our jobs. Legislation needs to address the problem and take into account who is affected and what service they perform for the state.

By: Kenny87107

Kenny87107 — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 12:50:08 +0000

I'm very disappointed with this. The AG's office is filled with double-dippers and they won't give any specific reasons for their “constitutional concerns.” Richardson just turned his back every honest New Mexican.

By: Julie929

Julie929 — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 01:05:32 +0000

When Bill Richardson vetoed the bill that would rein in double dippers I could not believe it. Although I am registered life long democrat he has he lost my support and faith that he is an honest politician.

By: charlene123

charlene123 — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 00:18:42 +0000

What a let down! I did not expect this from the Governor. He apparently does not listen to New Mexicans. He says NM is in the red and this is one of the reasons. AG is now making noice regarding legal matters, why would a double dipper do that? What is retirement? and if they want to go back to work they can come out of retirement.. This could be challenged?SO What?

Very disappointed.

By: franklinspeaks

franklinspeaks — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 22:49:59 +0000

it is a shame that the governor vetoed this bill – it proves he is just as patronage minded as the now indicated former governor Blagovich practiced in his office. This could have been resolved in the courts as to the constitutional issues and the advice he got from the AG's office who also has at least 13 high ranking officials who are double dippers themselves. Hmmm could this have been an conflict of interest. These double dippers are greedy and not the devoted employee as portrayed by the Governor. It is outright greed on these individuals and the Gov pats them on the head and says it will blow over and the public will forget about you.

Lets remember this veto and contact the representative who brought forward this bill and encourage him to bring it to the table at the next special session.

Also lets make this an issue for the next election debate for the next governor. Maybe then we hopefully get a governor who can make a stand and start the foundation to abolish patronage.

By: babyfatt

babyfatt — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 22:22:28 +0000

Recent news reports have indicated that there are two thousand (thousand!) plus double dippers in state government. This means that in an economic recession there are more than two thousand possible state jobs–jobs that could be filled by New Mexicans who would love the opportunity to work for state government–that are filled by people who if they were not employed would STILL be collecting a state paycheck!

If you want to know what's wrong with the way government works in New Mexico, this veto says it all.