TOPICS
TOPICS
Lawmakers renew battle against pension provisions
An old fight resumed on Thursday when two House lawmakers unveiled legislation that would ease the burden of two Social Security laws that significantly reduce benefits for some public sector retirees.
The bill (H.R. 235), introduced by Reps. Howard Berman, D-Calif., and Howard (Buck) McKeon, R-Calif., would repeal two provisions in Social Security law -- the Government Pension Offset and the Windfall Elimination Provision -- that reduce or eliminate Social Security benefits for federal employees who entered the government before 1984 and are covered by the Civil Service Retirement System. Employees in CSRS do not pay into Social Security and receive a government pension instead.
The Government Pension Offset law cuts the Social Security benefits that some employees -- including widows and widowers -- would have received from their spouses, while the Windfall Elimination Provision reduces benefits for public employees who also worked in private sector jobs where they paid into the Social Security system.
The Social Security Administration estimates that 465,000 beneficiaries are affected by the pension offset. Seventy-seven percent are women, 43 percent are widowed and 75 percent have lost their entire Social Security spousal benefit. SSA data also indicates that about 972,000 beneficiaries are affected by the Windfall Elimination Provision.
Various legislators have introduced bills to repeal or modify the two laws with little success, largely because lawmakers have been unable to find a solution to offset the estimated $81 billion price tag of a full repeal.
The bill's swift reintroduction drew praise from the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association, which has lobbied for more than 25 years to repeal the two provisions. The group pledged to work with lawmakers to ensure action on the bill in the 111th Congress.
"The GPO and WEP arbitrarily eradicate the earned Social Security benefits of far too many public sector retirees," NARFE President Margaret Baptiste said on Thursday. "There is absolutely no legitimate reason for one segment of seniors being denied their Social Security benefits for which full Social Security taxes were paid."
COMMENTS
- Paid maximum social security for over 22 years. The offset is so unfair and unjust. Barney Frank promised to repeal. Always voted Democrat, but not in 2010 if the offset is still in place. We will vote Republican. Bill Gibson Posted October 22, 2009 3:39 AM
- This is in response to June 19, 2009 article by Catherine L. Glass. The "key word" in the WEP is "annuity". If you have already retired from the Federal Government and are drawing an "annuity" you will be effected by the WEP and your social security will be reduced, unless you have worked 30 years under social security. I had worked under social security 21 years prior to joining the Federal Government and I am still working for the Federal Government, therefore, I am not drawing an "annuity". Once I reached "full retirement age" I was entitle to my social security "without" penalty. If I were to ever retire and start drawing my civil service annuity I would be subject to penalty just as everyone else is. So all of you who are still working for the federal government and eligible for social security, keep working, and keep fighting for everyone's rights to "all" their social security. Please help keep this website alive, post your concerns and write your congressional leaders and ask them to support the Bills to repeal WEP & GOP. Hannah Hoopengarner Posted October 2, 2009 1:29 PM
- No bill passing,no more voting democrat.Because this time their no excuse.The results are what democrats have become.Will never vote GOP.But will not vote again,Feinstein always voted with Bush butalway at the last minute.So is this more B S . Taxation with no Representation.Put up or shut up. E Batty Posted June 28, 2009 9:48 AM
