Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Alabama House and Senate at odds over funding for state and education retirees

Reading Time: < 1 minute

The Alabama Senate was embroiled in a heated debate on Wednesday over a bill that would provide much-needed funds for retired state and education employees. The bill, HB 201, sponsored by Rep. Steve Clouse, aimed to create a process for future benefit increases for state and education retirees, who have not seen a cost-of-living adjustment in benefits since 2007.

The bill had previously passed with a vote of 33-1 after the Senate adopted a substitute allowing direct appropriations to the fund from the Legislature. However, the House rejected the changes in a 102-0 vote, sending the bill to a conference committee for further discussion.

The debate on the Senate floor was intense, with concerns raised by Senate budget chairs Sen. Greg Albritton and Sen. Arthur Orr. Albritton argued that a trust fund could grow in assets, while a cost-of-living adjustment could lead to increased expenditures.

Sen. Clyde Chambliss, who handled the bill in the Senate, faced criticism for offering a substitute that focused on bonuses rather than the original mechanism for benefit increases. Despite the opposition, the bill was eventually adopted with a vote of 33-1, with Albritton as the sole dissenting vote.

Sen. Rodger Smitherman and Sen. Merika Coleman voiced their support for the bill, emphasizing the importance of providing for retirees. The debate also touched on the potential revenue from gambling, which could have alleviated the need for such discussions.

In the end, Rep. Clouse expressed his willingness to continue discussions on the bill in conference, highlighting the ongoing efforts to secure benefits for retired employees.

Taylor Swifts New Album Release Health issues from using ACs Boston Marathon 2024 15 Practical Ways To Save Money