Pensioners' Post, Summer 2009

IPERS is prefunded, which means that while members are working they contribute to IPERS for their own future retirements. Contributions from employees and their employers, plus investment income, must be enough to cover the costs of future benefits that IPERS promises to pay.

Pensioners' Post, Winter 1999

IPERS is prefunded, which means that while members are working they contribute to IPERS for their own future retirements. Contributions from employees and their employers, plus investment income, must be enough to cover the costs of future benefits that IPERS promises to pay.

Pensioners' Post, Summer 2000

IPERS is prefunded, which means that while members are working they contribute to IPERS for their own future retirements. Contributions from employees and their employers, plus investment income, must be enough to cover the costs of future benefits that IPERS promises to pay.

Pensioners' Post, Spring 2001

IPERS is prefunded, which means that while members are working they contribute to IPERS for their own future retirements. Contributions from employees and their employers, plus investment income, must be enough to cover the costs of future benefits that IPERS promises to pay.

Pensioners' Post, Fall 2001

IPERS is prefunded, which means that while members are working they contribute to IPERS for their own future retirements. Contributions from employees and their employers, plus investment income, must be enough to cover the costs of future benefits that IPERS promises to pay.

Pensioners' Post, Summer 2002

IPERS is prefunded, which means that while members are working they contribute to IPERS for their own future retirements. Contributions from employees and their employers, plus investment income, must be enough to cover the costs of future benefits that IPERS promises to pay.

Pensioners' Post, Winter 2002

IPERS is prefunded, which means that while members are working they contribute to IPERS for their own future retirements. Contributions from employees and their employers, plus investment income, must be enough to cover the costs of future benefits that IPERS promises to pay.

Pensioners' Post, Summer 2003

IPERS is prefunded, which means that while members are working they contribute to IPERS for their own future retirements. Contributions from employees and their employers, plus investment income, must be enough to cover the costs of future benefits that IPERS promises to pay.

Pensioners' Post, Winter 2003

IPERS is prefunded, which means that while members are working they contribute to IPERS for their own future retirements. Contributions from employees and their employers, plus investment income, must be enough to cover the costs of future benefits that IPERS promises to pay.

Pensioners' Post, Summer 2004

IPERS is prefunded, which means that while members are working they contribute to IPERS for their own future retirements. Contributions from employees and their employers, plus investment income, must be enough to cover the costs of future benefits that IPERS promises to pay.

Differential role of naïve and memory CD4 T-cell subsets in primary alloresponses.

The T cell response to major histocompatibility complex (MHC) alloantigens occurs via two main pathways. The direct pathway involves the recognition of intact allogeneic MHC:peptide complexes on donor cells and provokes uniquely high frequencies of responsive T cells. The indirect response results from alloantigens being processed like any other protein antigen and presented as peptide by autologous antigen-presenting cells. The frequencies of T cells with indirect allospecificity are orders of magnitude lower and comparable to other peptide-specific responses. In this study, we explored the contributions of naïve and memory CD4(+) T cells to these two pathways. Using an adoptive transfer and skin transplantation model we found that naive and memory CD4(+) T cells, both naturally occurring and induced by sensitization with multiple third-party alloantigens, contributed equally to graft rejection when only the direct pathway was operative. In contrast, the indirect response was predominantly mediated by the naïve subset. Elimination of regulatory CD4(+)CD25(+) T cells enabled memory cells to reject grafts through the indirect pathway, but at a much slower tempo than for naïve cells. These findings have implications for better targeting of immunosuppression to inhibit immediate and later forms of alloimmunity.

Inside IPERS and Pensioners’ Post, Winter 2004-2005

I am pleased to send you this special edition newsletter, which includes a fi nancial summary on pages 2 and 3. Providing you fi nancial and performance information refl ects my commitment to accountability. IPERS’ performance continues to be strong, as does the commitment of the Governor, Legislature, employers, members, the Investment Board, the Benefi ts Advisory Committee (BAC), and staff to maintaining a good retirement plan. Unfortunately, IPERS’ good performance and everyone’s commitment does not eliminate the need for a contribution rate increase. There are many reasons for this. We must make up for losses from the recent bear markets. Also, our retirees are living longer; therefore, they are drawing pensions longer.

What makes for peaceful post-conflict elections?

Elections play a crucial role in post-conflict peace and democratization processes as, among other factors, they provide an answer to the question of who is to legitimately rule the country. However, because of the competitiveness arising from their central role in allocating power they can also represent windows of vulnerability where deeply rooted societal conflicts can come to the surface. This working paper focuses on two post-conflict elections (Sierra Leone 2007; Nepal 2008) which, despite perceived high risks, did not result in widespread violence or a return to armed conflict. The aim of these case studies is to identify the factors and measures that may have played an important role in contributing to this outcome. Each of the two case studies first outlines the risks associated with the elections and then analyzes the violence and conflict preventing factors. The paper shows that that the context greatly influences the type of measures that can be taken in such situations, but that there are also some similarities in the two cases studied. In particular, it appears that that the credibility of the elections, largely attributable to a good electoral administration, was an important factor in both Nepal and Sierra Leone. Furthermore, the inclusion of all key stakeholders in decisions regarding key electoral institutions helped to diffuse potential conflict. The study also shows that in both cases the international community played an important role by providing financial, logistical and technical support and by pressuring certain important actors to comply with the rules.