What YOU can do to fight back - IFT limit

[oreo]

Isn't Congress in recess again and is it only me that finds it suspicious that the board is putting this out again during a Congressional recess like they did during Thanksgiving? Maybe it's me but I find the timing very interesting.

 

[James48843]

It's not just you. They are intentionally trying to do this at the times that federal employees are LEAST likely to be able to hear about it, and are least likely to be able to fight back.

NEVER, NEVER, NEVER give up your freedom.

NEVER, NEVER, NEVER give up.

 

[Miss_Piggy]

Link for sending free faxes over the Internet: http://faxzero.com/

Other resources for sending faxes over the Internet: http://www.savetz.com/fax/

Disclaimer: I have not tried these myself but there are reviews.

 

[James48843]

Good idea Miss Piggy.

Perhaps we can all send them a fax today. I'll go look and see if it is possible to send up an automated fax link.

 

[Show-me]

I just sent my FAX with Miss Piggy's link. Thank you Miss Piggy! Now let us all do the same.

 

[James48843]

They have violated the Adminstrative Procedures Act- 5 USC 533:
===================================================
Administrative Procedure Act

• UNITED STATES CODE
  • TITLE 5 - GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION AND EMPLOYEES
    • PART I - THE AGENCIES GENERALLY
      • CHAPTER 5 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
        • SUBCHAPTER II - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE

§ 553. Rule making

(a) This section applies, according to the provisions thereof, except to the extent that there is involved -

(1) a military or foreign affairs function of the United States; or​

(2) a matter relating to agency management or personnel or to public property, loans, grants, benefits, or contracts.​

(b) General notice of proposed rule making shall be published in the Federal Register, unless persons subject thereto are named and either personally served or otherwise have actual notice thereof in accordance with law. The notice shall include -

(1) a statement of the time, place, and nature of public rule making proceedings;​

(2) reference to the legal authority under which the rule is proposed; and​

(3) either the terms or substance of the proposed rule or a description of the subjects and issues involved.​

Except when notice or hearing is required by statute, this subsection does not apply -

(A) to interpretative rules, general statements of policy, or rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice; or​

(B) when the agency for good cause finds (and incorporates the finding and a brief statement of reasons therefore in the rules issued) that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.​

(c) After notice required by this section, the agency shall give interested persons an opportunity to participate in the rule making through submission of written data, views, or arguments with or without opportunity for oral presentation. After consideration of the relevant matter presented, the agency shall incorporate in the rules adopted a concise general statement of their basis and purpose. When rules are required by statute to be made on the record after opportunity for an agency hearing, sections 556 and 557 of this title apply instead of this subsection.
​

(d) The required publication or service of a substantive rule shall be made not less than 30 days before its effective date, except -

(1) a substantive rule which grants or recognizes an exemption or relieves a restriction;​

(2) interpretative rules and statements of policy; or​

(3) as otherwise provided by the agency for good cause found and published with the rule.​

(e) Each agency shall give an interested person the right to petition for the issuance, amendment, or repeal of a rule.​

 

[James48843]

FAXED just now:


Reference Federal Register notice, FR Doc. E7-25007 Filed 12-26-07; 8:45 am

Dear Sirs:

Please do not invoke trade limits. Your math is wrong. How much do you think you can save by limiting trades?

More than 2,500 people have already signed the petition at http://tspshareholder.org, telling you that this is WRONG. IN addition, your federal register notice says this will only affect federal employees. This is wrong.
It will affect retirees, U.S. Military service members, as well. And it will affect their spouses and families.

And, contrary to your notice, it WILL affect a substanital number of small entities.
There are 3.8 million shareholders. And there are now dozens of investment conselors and financial professionals, who advise TSP Share Holders about their holdings. Your notice will adversely affect the sales and business of MANY small entities, if the client they support can no longer make moves based on their advice. The affect will be to put many out of business.

Your "Interim Rule" also does not meet the legal requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act, in that there is NO EMERGENCY, and this "Interim Rule" violates 5 USC section 553.

You have not given the legally required 30 day comment period and notice of proposed rule making;

Your rule amounts to a "sanction" against certain participants in the TSP. Under 5 USC Section 558, you may not sanction without conducting a public hearing on the matter, and obtaining public input.

Please retract your Federal Register notice.
Sincerely,

 

[Stoplight]

Just FYI....here is a PDF version of the FR Notice, from the regulations.gov web site....


Stoplight...

 

[Art2007]

I HAVE CALLED THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM. ISN't IT ODD THAT THEY ARE CLOSED UNTIL THE VERY DAY THIS TEMPORARY RULE TAKES AFFECT??!!!!

WHAT AN AMBUSH! TRYING TO AVOID CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT!

HOWEVER IN AN EMERGENCY, YOU CAN SEND AN EMAIL TO A STAFFER THAT MAY BE HELPFUL.

I AM TRACKING THAT NOW.

STRONGLY RECOMMEND YOU CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN OR SENATOR's LOCAL OFFICE IMMEDIATELY.

 

[Art2007]

I have sent the following email to the House Committee on Government Reform which has TSP overshight. I can;t do it all myself so I would suggest someone contact the Senate Government Affairs Committee by phone: Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affiars, Leslie Phillips Communications Director(202) 224-2627. THis is the only number I could find and would be a starting point.

This TSP ambush was timed to avoid Congressional oversight since they do not come back until the day the rule goes into effect.

Here is a sanitized version of the email I sent. The word IMPORTANT must be in the subject line.

Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2007 5:50 PM
To: tania.shand@mail.house.gov
Subject: IMPORTANT
Importance: High

Ms. Shand:

I called the committee and they told me to contact you. I am a U.S. federal employee stationed overseas. My phone number is 011-49-XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX. I also have a internet phone at 1-XXX-XXX-XXXX..

I am alarmed that my federal retirement plan administrator at the Federal Thrift Savings Board has proposed emergency rules that take effect almost immediately (January 7th) with no coordination with the Congress. This move could cost thousand of federal employees huge losses in their federally managed retirement accounts. It affects the entire federal workforce and our military men and women in the United States military.

Most importantly, they are singling out a minority of participants for “special treatment.” This abuse of the federal rule making process with no oversight by Congress is unacceptable and smacks of dictatorship. This affects tens of thousands of people and it also restricts members of the United States military. The Thrift Savings Plan is the federal equivalent of a conventional 401K plan and is one of the largest retirement funds in the world worth billions of dollars.

See:
[Federal Register: December 27, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 247)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 73251-73252]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr27de07-1]

I would appreciate your help.

Although I am 6 hours ahead of Eastern time, I am available to discuss this issue with you.

Regards,

(NAME)
Federal employee of the United States Army proudly serving overseas.
-------------------
Suggest you send something similar by email......

 

[RPM]

This is a great letter. I would also add that the proposed rule does not contain a clear, impartial and transparent way of how the Board identifies the 3000 that they are sending the letter to, therefore it could be misused and arbitrary. At the very least, there needs to be a very clear set of criteria that need to be demonstrated for each of the Fed Empl that the Board is sending the letter to. This will put the burden on the board to demonstrate the case for EACH and EVERY employee who will receive a letter.

I have sent the following email to the House Committee on Government Reform which has TSP overshight. I can;t do it all myself so I would suggest someone contact the Senate Government Affairs Committee by phone: Senate Community on Homeland Security and Government Affiars, Leslie Phillips Communications Director(202) 224-2627. THis is the only number I could find and would be a starting point.

This TSP ambush was timed to avoid Congressional oversight since they do not come back until the day the rule goes into effect.

Here is a sanitized version of the email I sent. The word IMPORTANT must be in the subject line.

Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2007 5:50 PM
To: tania.shand@mail.house.gov
Subject: IMPORTANT
Importance: High

Ms. Shand:

I called the committee and they told me to contact you. I am a U.S. federal employee stationed overseas. My phone number is 011-49-XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX. I also have a internet phone at 1-XXX-XXX-XXXX..

I am alarmed that my federal retirement plan administrator at the Federal Thrift Savings Board has proposed emergency rules that take effect almost immediately (January 7th) with no coordination with the Congress. This move could cost thousand of federal employees huge losses in their federally managed retirement accounts. It affects the entire federal workforce and our military men and women in the United States military.

Most importantly, they are singling out a minority of participants for “special treatment.” This abuse of the federal rule making process with no oversight by Congress is unacceptable and smacks of dictatorship. This affects tens of thousands of people and it also restricts members of the United States military. The Thrift Savings Plan is the federal equivalent of a conventional 401K plan and is one of the largest retirement funds in the world worth billions of dollars.

See:
[Federal Register: December 27, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 247)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 73251-73252]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr27de07-1]

I would appreciate your help.

Although I am 6 hours ahead of Eastern time, I am available to discuss this issue with you.

Regards,

(NAME)
Federal employee of the United States Army proudly serving overseas.
-------------------
Suggest you send something similar by email......

 

[Art2007]

Leslie is not available at the Senate Committee. You can try (202) 224-4751. It is after 6 PM here and I got to go back to work!

 

[Talltimber]

Sorry to say it but it is clear the TSP needs new management. The board and senior staff is not serving their customers, following regulations, or treating their customers with respect.

They are blaming systemic problems on a minority of the population, using them (us) as a scape goat to avoid looking for, and solving the systemic problems.

Just what about a poll that has 90% of the customers/respondents saying there actions are a bad idea don't they understand?

 

[Minnow]

It's obvious to me that no member of the TSP Board wishes to have his or her judgment questioned. The minutes of their meetings and their interviews indicate they are nothing more than pseudo-politicians interested in taking credit for the low administrative costs of the TSP and yet when they find that trading costs MAY (and I use this term with all due caution) be increasing ever so slightly, they choose to single out participants who are doing nothing more than using the TSP in a way that is perfectly legitimate -- a way that some of these board members OK'd not so long ago.

This sort of quasi-procedural end run around the democratic process is a real red flag and will be pointed out in the class action lawsuit that I'm sure is coming from our numbers. I have sent the letters and e-mails (not as many as most of you mind you but some) and I applaud everyone's effort and I'm sure there is more we all can do. But up against this type of opposition and their tactics, I imagine that we will have to do something I personally detest and that is line the pockets of lawyers on both sides of the argument. It's a shame that it will probably come to this. Just my 2cents. Please let me know when the lawyers are asking for their retainers. ** I haven't given up I just smell a rat with their method of operation and I think we all saw this coming.**

 

[Show-me]

Sorry to say it but it is clear the TSP needs new management. The board and senior staff is not serving their customers, following regulations, or treating their customers with respect.

They are blaming systemic problems on a minority of the population, using them (us) as a scape goat to avoid looking for, and solving the systemic problems.

Just what about a poll that has 90% of the customers/respondents saying there actions are a bad idea don't they understand?

Yes, well said.

 

[wv-girl]

It's obvious to me that no member of the TSP Board wishes to have his or her judgment questioned. The minutes of their meetings and their interviews indicate they are nothing more than pseudo-politicians interested in taking credit for the low administrative costs of the TSP and yet when they find that trading costs MAY (and I use this term with all due caution) be increasing ever so slightly, they choose to single out participants who are doing nothing more than using the TSP in a way that is perfectly legitimate -- a way that some of these board members OK'd not so long ago.

This sort of quasi-procedural end run around the democratic process is a real red flag and will be pointed out in the class action lawsuit that I'm sure is coming from our numbers. I have sent the letters and e-mails (not as many as most of you mind you but some) and I applaud everyone's effort and I'm sure there is more we all can do. But up against this type of opposition and their tactics, I imagine that we will have to do something I personally detest and that is line the pockets of lawyers on both sides of the argument. It's a shame that it will probably come to this. Just my 2cents. Please let me know when the lawyers are asking for their retainers. ** I haven't given up I just smell a rat with their method of operation and I think we all saw this coming.**

I agree with you that they are using underhanded tactics. Maybe we should also call for an independent audit to really get to basics. If they would be this "political" about the announcement WHAT ELSE are they manulipating? We have asked for 'proof' of these alleged price increases but they have yet to provide them. Maybe we can find lawyers who work on contingency and make the the govt pay the costs when they lose?

 

[James48843]

Call your Union, if you are lucky enough to have one.

Demand that they start to pay attention.

Demand that they fight back.

(P.S.- YOU are the Union. I have been in contact with my Union president, and am trying to be delegated as the Union's lead person on this fight.).

 

[tsptalk]

I faxed mine to Thomas K. Emswiler at 202.942.1676. Was that correct? Thanks.

http://faxzero.com/

 

[James48843]

Yes, that is the correct fax number and person to send your comments in opposition to the federal register notice.

Here is a link to what the federal register notice says, for anyone who missed it this morning:

http://www.tsptalk.com/mb/showpost.php?p=139640&postcount=310

Click on this faxzero link , and send them a fax stating why you are opposed to the limits. DO IT NOW.

TO: Thomas K. Emswiler at 202.942.1676


Thanks

 

[fedgolfer]

I sent a fax as well. James, thanks for organizing a stance. Truly appreciated.