1 Reply by DMG

(4 replies, posted in General Comments Regarding PACT)

"interested parent"  PLEASE don't give up hope!  First and foremost, Kay Ivey is not the only one responsible.....you need to include Lucy Baxley and the current and previous PACT Board members.

Baxley changed or allowed to be changed the wording in the contracts....albeit, "will provide" means the same as "guarantee"....but that one change gives non-thinkers the fodder in their attempts to separate the pre-95 and post-95 contracts.

Each PACT Board member has a responsibility to work with the colleges and universities as well as the legislators with a goal of insuring the program remains on sound financial footing......to date, there appear to have been NONE that fulfilled this requirement of their appointed position.

I don't know who your "insiders" are.....but they are either wrong or simply unaware of the facts surrounding our misfortune.

Again.....We all PRE-PAID for four years of college......this IS a legal and binding contract...... ALL PACT contracts must be honored.

Help us all......contact your legislators.  FREQUENTLY!

Go to forum: General Comments Regarding PACT

2 Topic by DMG

(6 replies, posted in General Comments Regarding PACT)

One of the new proposed rules will force cancellation of your PACT contract if your son or daughter receives a full scholarship.....apparently partial scholarships are not included.  What happens if the scholarship is lost?  Now you will have no scholarship and no PACT benefits.  My son would not be in school if he did not receive his scholarship.  HAVE THEY LOST THEIR MINDS????

Could this possibly be a ploy to force the legislature to act on fixing the program before the fall 2010 semester?  Would they be that stupid?  We have already been told the fund has enough monies to run for several years.

comments?

Go to forum: General Comments Regarding PACT

3 Reply by DMG

(9 replies, posted in General Comments Regarding PACT)

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

Go to forum: General Comments Regarding PACT

4 Reply by DMG

(12 replies, posted in General Comments Regarding PACT)

The simple truth is that this IS an obligation of the state.  How (and when) the state chooses to fund it is another issue.  The money is there, somewhere.

Everyone seems to hang the moon on the RSA's "evaluation".  Guess what?  Their funds lost more than the PACT program and Bonner's leadership has not been flawless.  The difference is the funds are guaranteed by the state.

As for Marc Reynolds, I think his comments are at best..... hurting the program.  He needs to engage his brain before he speaks. With the snippets already being released by the RSA to date, does anyone think the evaluation is really going to be helpful to the PACT program?

Go to forum: General Comments Regarding PACT

5 Reply by DMG

(9 replies, posted in General Comments Regarding PACT)

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.

Go to forum: General Comments Regarding PACT

6 Reply by DMG

(12 replies, posted in General Comments Regarding PACT)

I have no problem with a lottery.....but I do agree associating the PACT with it would be a bad choice

Go to forum: General Comments Regarding PACT

7 Reply by DMG

(9 replies, posted in General Comments Regarding PACT)

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.

Go to forum: General Comments Regarding PACT

8 Reply by DMG

(2 replies, posted in Committee Discussion Forum)

With the football season approaching, maybe now is a good time for "US" to attend any alumni business meetings and address the members about how important the PACT program is toward funneling students to the school?  Have the alumni contact the University and ask for help in securing some type of state guarantee.....and yes, this may mean freezing tuition rates or capping the amount o annual increases.

Go to forum: Committee Discussion Forum

9 Topic by DMG

(0 replies, posted in General Comments Regarding PACT)

I am having a great deal of trouble believing that an "unbiased" review of the program will be provided to the Governor and the Legislature by the RSA.

As many of you know that attended the May PACT Board meeting, Bradley Byrne stated that Paul Hubbert was the greatest impediment to getting a legislative "fix" done in the last session.  Now, the "soundness" of the program will be evaluated by the RSA of which Hubbert sits on the Board, as does Kay Ivey.

Bronner has already commented that they would manage the funds if the state agreed to make up any annual shortfalls as needed (i.e. - guarantee).  One of his minions (Marc Reynolds) stated in May that "parents and citizens could have a financial role to play in keeping the program afloat."   HELLO..... Who the heck does he THINK has been keeping it afloat?

Now, we have Reynolds spouting off that the program has a "grim prognosis".....Because it has lost 50% of its value.....That apparently is incorrect.  The Loss was 34% .....RSA's OWN funds lost 35%.   But their program is fine....IT IS GUARANTEED.

I am beginning to think this is just a way for the RSA to have more "seed" money to invest as they want.  I am just not sure how many more golf courses and hotels we really need in Alabama....

If the RSA KEEPS trashing the program, more and more are going to drop out and that will inevitably spurn more lawsuits....is that what we want?

The only positive I see from last week's news is the statement posted on this website by Folsom. 

By the way, do we really spend 30 million a year in management fees?

Go to forum: General Comments Regarding PACT

10 Topic by DMG

(1 replies, posted in General Comments Regarding PACT)

When is the last day of the legislative session? Lets pick a date or dates and meet in Montgomery to make them understand that the PACT program MUST honor their promises.

Go to forum: General Comments Regarding PACT

11 Topic by DMG

(3 replies, posted in Legislators You Believe Support Pact)

From a historical perspective, when Gov. Folsom joined with then-State Treasurer George Wallace, Jr. in developing the program, it was set up as a guaranteed tuition program based on a very conservative investment philosophy. ..........

Go to forum: Legislators You Believe Support Pact

12 Topic by DMG

(4 replies, posted in Legislators You Believe Support Pact)

Thank you very much for your email.  I am working very hard to solve this problem and have been in touch with the Director of the PACT Program almost on a daily basis.  Hopefully we will reach a solve soon.

Sincerely,

Senator Larry Dixon

Go to forum: Legislators You Believe Support Pact

13 Topic by DMG

(0 replies, posted in Legislators You Believe Support Pact)

I will do everything I can to see that the PACT meets its obligations.
Ben Brooks

Go to forum: Legislators You Believe Support Pact

14 Topic by DMG

(0 replies, posted in Legislators You Believe Support Pact)

Thank you for your email concerning the future of Alabama's PACT program.  Please know that even in spite of the economy, most Alabama Legislators agree with me that this program is part of the good faith and credit of the state of Alabama and that the legislature will go out of it way to uphold the integrity of the program.  Rest assured that I will do everything I can to ensure your investment will be upheld.

Ted Little

Go to forum: Legislators You Believe Support Pact