"The Pension Time Bomb": Robert Samuelson says it's ticking in this op-ed for the Washington Post.
Rob Wells in today's edition of the Wall Street Journal reports: "Bush Plan on Pension Funding Hits Resistance at House Hearing." (Subscription required.) Members of the House Ways and Means and Education and Workforce Committee expressed concern that the Bush plan might increase volatility in pension plan funding, causing companies to terminate their plans. The article quotes Rep. Earl Pomeroy (D., N.D.) as saying to administration officials: "Your worker protections are going to protect the workers right out of their pensions."
Also, David Wessel has this op-ed for the Wall Street Journal: "The Politics of Pension Promises." (Subscription required.) Mr. Wessel boils it all down to this:
Tweak the rules to make it easier for companies to make promises, even if that allows them to set aside less money in coming years to back pensions and pretend plans are sounder than they truly are? Or tweak the rules so that companies have to do more to stand behind their promises, including setting aside more money and revealing more financial data to workers?
USA Today provides this op-ed: "Workers deserve to know when pensions are at risk."
Finally, you can read the following testimonies offered yesterday before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Ways and Means, Subcommittee on Select Revenue Measures (via Benefitslink.com):