• 41
  • New member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 05-31-2009
  • Posts: 1

Topic: personal responsibility

SaveAlabamaPACT.com????!!!!!
Why should the TAXPAYERS be responsible for funding this scam?  Kay Ivey and others not even mentioned from north AL should be held accountable.  However there is lack of responsibility on the part of those who purchased the plan and took the word of others as to how the program was funded and did not do their research.  So break the trends of our country seem to be following and take some personal responsibility.  But at the same time hold the Kay Ivey's of the state accountable for gross negligence!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • From: Lanett, Alabama
  • Registered: 03-27-2009
  • Posts: 124

Re: personal responsibility

41,
This is an open forum and we appreciate you participating. I hope you check back often and continue to provide input into your concerns.

Would you respond to a few questions to you?

1) For the 48,000 kids who are depending on their PACT payments to provide them an education, that was paid for by them, not by the state, would you please comment on you true knowledge regarding the word 'scam'?

2) Why should taxpayers be responsible, you ask? Not one of us as PACT contract holders want anything of the state more than what they contractually agreed to do...pay the payments and your kid gets a 4 year tuition paid education in the state. When the entity, the State of Alabama, can not uphold the contract, who do you think the state is....it is you and I...we all pay...we pay every day for things you and I never know were mistakes in the state...do you keep up with every dollar or every million dollars that the state doles out...you just picked one that made the headlines, because its a shame that our state offices allowed it to happen...on that we agree with you.    Your comments?

3) Personal responsibility? Why do you think this website exists...because we are sitting around waiting on a handout? NOT IN THE LEAST...we are acting in the most positive way we can to influence a government to do the right thing and support a contract that was made with 48,000 kids in the State of Alabama...what more worthy, responsible cause do you want?

4) Accountability? We as SaveAlabamaPACT fought for SJR150 which is being fulfilled as we comment here...excerpt reads  'however, there should be a thorough review of the financial issues facing the PACT Program and to note any evidence of the failure of the proper administration of the program, including the short-term and long-term finances of the program;'
...So which part of accountability are we not addressing?

Why don't you join us in a positive way and actively seek the answers you would like to see addressed? Please post your replies to my questions for all to understand your thoughts and feelings.

And by the way, if you get slammed by a few on the forum, take it in good spirit...just as I did for you.

Einstein once said, 'The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.'

tenrocdoc's Website

  • Registered: 06-28-2009
  • Posts: 9

Re: personal responsibility

i agree with 41 to the extent that taxpayers in general should not bail the state out of a legal problem of the states  creation.  The problem is indeed a self-inflected problem of officers of state government.  However, the state does have a legal and ethical responsibility to honor commitments.  The state can honor commitments by instructing state-supported institutions to accept PACT students at the tuition & fee level prevailing at the time enrollment was made in PACT.  The state thus-far has refused to do so. 

Ms. Ivey, as well as all others on the board of directors have, I believe, broken several Federal laws regarding management of trust funds, management of investment instruments and reporting of funds to share holders.  It is in the best interest of the State of Alabama to press for Federal investigation of these people.

Last edited by Groove (06-29-2009 9:40:36 am)

  • DMG
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 03-29-2009
  • Posts: 14

Re: personal responsibility

Lets get REAL here..... 41 speaks from a lack of knowledge. I can SHOW him the words guarantee in my contract as well as marketing literature.

Second, Kay Ivey is only part of the problem.  Lucy Baxley and her Board(s) changed the contract language.....although it still says the state WILL provide....  41 sounds like a partisan trying to make this a Republican vs. Democrat issue.   It is not.  Its a state obligation.

  • Registered: 06-28-2009
  • Posts: 9

Re: personal responsibility

DMG, my contract also states "the state will provide" ; the state is obligated to honor the contracts.  But I do not believe additional taxes and/or fees should be created to "allow" the state to honor their contractual obligation.

The state set premium payments for the plan.  The state also set tuition for state colleges.  PACT board members directed investment.  The state is also the beneficiary of most plan payouts.  In summary, the state government created the current problem while also reaping the benefit.  Additional taxes and fees to stabilize the plan would only serve to funnel more money into state bank accounts.

I would suggest that PACT be changed to only provide for in-state state-funded college tuition and fees.  The state-funded colleges would then  be ordered to accept PACT students and PACT payment as a payment in full. 

But I also feel Federal investigation of PACT should be done.  This plan appears to have been nothing more than an investment scam that shared many commonalities with PONZI schemes.

Last edited by Groove (06-29-2009 10:09:59 am)

  • DMG
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 03-29-2009
  • Posts: 14

Re: personal responsibility

Hey Groove, I don't want additional taxes either....you may have mis-read my post.

A couple of things, The State did not set "premium" payments.  They calculated what the anticipated increase would be annually to the then current 4 year college costs....and set a price to pay for 4 years of college tuition at the anticipated enrollment date.

Changing the details to only pay for instate institutions is also a bad idea....if a kid gets the opportunity to go private college or out of state school, why penalize the kid......do you actually think my 19 year knew where he would be going when we bought the PACT 17 years ago?

The state does not set the tuition rates.  The individual schools do via a board of trustees.  The schools are also part of the problem.

  • Registered: 06-28-2009
  • Posts: 9

Re: personal responsibility

DMG - my child wants to attend an out-of-state college.  Therefore, I really do not want to loose the option.  However, if loosing the option is the only means of fulfilling the trust I am willing to loose the option.

I realize PACT set or determined, if you prefer, premiums through actuarial means.  I opted to make a one-time payment.  The state has had my investment monies for fifteen years.

The state sets tuition at state supports institutions by proxy.  The state appoints (or approves if you prefer) trustees at each institution.  State schools have increased tuition far in excess of inflation and with each increase they have caused an unanticipated depletion of PACT monies.

In summary, the state controlled both income and distribution of PACT monies with the state being the primary beneficiary of distributed monies.  If the state now defaults arguments for RICO charges and/or running a PONZI  would be viable in Federal court.

  • DMG
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 03-29-2009
  • Posts: 14

Re: personal responsibility

Groove

If the state "sets" the tuition, how can they not force the universities to accept a tuition freeze?

As for the ponzi scheme, for the last few years I would agree that it has been just that.....new contract purchaser monies paying for current enrollees

  • Registered: 04-17-2009
  • Posts: 16

Re: personal responsibility

About out-of-state tuition payments...my daughter went to an out of state school her first year. PACT only pays the average tuition of Alabama schools for out of state students. I don't have the exact amount handy but the tuition PACT  paid for us to that university was a very small amount compared to what it pays now at Auburn. They saved a lot of money on her that year by paying so much less.

As far as "personal responsibility" goes, tenrocdoc says it all well. And I've already gone off on another thread here where someone did the "you're stupid and inferior for trusting PACT" thing, so I won't do it again. But I do believe Alabama government will never improve as long as its citizens are happy to look the other way when they're not the people who were wronged.

  • Registered: 06-28-2009
  • Posts: 9

Re: personal responsibility

DMG - because we do not have any elected or appointed officials in Montgomery that want to take responsibility for any actions.  In addition, the lobbyist for the AEA and the universities have much influence on “our” legislature.  They could force the colleges to accept PACT students by simply telling them that they accept the students or the amount will be deducted from state contributions and given to the student for tuition payments.  The state cannot deny responsibility for the excessive tuition increases in this state or failure of the board to properly align contributions to the excessive tuition increases.

However, in a new twist, a candidate for treasurer, Jeremy Sherer,   wants to convert PACT accounts to 529 accounts.   No problem with this if they also give me the fifteen percent interest income on my account for the past fifteen years.  Of course even at an interest rate of fifteen percent (APR) for the previous fifteen years the state will not have fulfilled their obligations for my contract.  So, I suppose I do have a problem his proposal even if the state paid interest earned on the account.

It appears the board can honor all contract obligations or they go on trial for a PONZI.