Return to Article: Lawmakers renew battle against pension provisions
-
89849
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.
-
88368
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.
-
81504
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.
-
80799
I am retired federal 12 years. I work full-time in the private sector now. Am I reading some of these comments right? Are people saying that if they work full-time they draw full social security? I know I certainly do not. Mine is cut by 2/3.
-
78719
Thank you again Rep. McKeon. I have been following your Bills that have been introduced on this WEP and GOP law for several years. I spoke at length with one of you staff members about two years ago. She was wonderful. I have been working for this repeal for eight years. I wrote and mailed more than 500 letters in 2006 and continued to write every year to new members of congress. This is what it will take to get this message across to the few "stubborn" legislators that are still holding out and not getting this bill passed. We have already gotten rid of one Senator in my district because she would not support her voters on this bill. This is what it will take to get the bill passed "vote out the 'non-believers'". If you are affected by this, as I am, you have a responsibility to join the "forces" and fight. If you do not get involved, you have no one to blame but yourself when you social security check comes in at about half of what you are trully due to have. I have worked for 21 years in private industry and am on my 27th year in civil service. I am of full retirement age and receive "all" of my social security benefits and "all" of my salary (which is quite good). I'm here for the "long Haul" until this bill is passed. I can not afford to lose half of my social security on what annuity I would receive if I did retire. I am entitle to "all" of my social security and intend to draw it as long as I can breath and walk and go to work. Don't forget to include President Obama in your letter writing campaign. When he was a Senator in Illinois, he signed on to support the bills introduce by Rep. McKeon. There was a website in 2007 that keep us up to date as to how each legislator voted, 2008 was "kinda dead" because of the elections. Time to "crank up the heat again". This could be OUR year. Thank you again Reps McKeon and Berman.
-
78418
I never had a civil service job or worked as a teacher. I wish I had been able to be as fortunate.
Reading through the comments, I envy the fact all of you at least do have your retirements. If I were in your same shoes, I'm sure I would feel the same way you do about not being able to collect from social security you paid into.
I paid into social security too when I was able to work. Now that I'm not able to, they won't let me collect my small little check so I can receive my medicare card a few years early. I am saddened and outraged to have paid all I did into the system, now I can get nothing. I have no retirement, no spouse to collect off of, just a rental that cost lots of money to keep the renter paying. How long the renters can keep paying is up in the air with this economy though; this isn't a sure income forever and ever.
At least all of you have really good health insurance, and most of you have had every summer off too, and again you do have your retirements. I again was not fortunate enough to have that, due to many disabilities. Now I receive nothing, and am told it is a 3 to 4 yr waiting list to even have a hearing for my social security & medicare card. Also, on top of everything else, a doctor who could help me prove my case decided to destroy my medical files without asking me. I've found out that is OK for him to do, and so now I can't even prove my disability. I have nothing to lose and all to gain, so I will venture on with my case, but I'm feeling more doubtful all the time, I run into nothing but roadblocks. My social security check would be really small, yet I cannot get mine either.
Yet, Bob Hope collected his with all the money he had. McCain is collecting from all kinds of different government programs. The list goes on, they are allowed to do this.
I feel I should be entitled to my social security more so since I don't have any retirement, spouse, or much of any other income. The cases are not judged on a case by case bases though, it's usually the ones who have the most money from all sources who collect social security. They don't need it and get it.
-
78084
TO: Ron Rondomanski Posted May 5, 2009 3:36 PM
In addition to raising the ceiling on SocSec taxation the cost of repealing the GPO and WEP, estimated to be $62-$67 billion over the next 10 years*, could be fully covered by eliminating just a small fraction of the well-documented "tax gap" resulting from failure to enforce current tax laws. I believe the war in Iraq costs that much every six months.
*That estimate is about a 4% increase over current benefit expenditures.
Yours in fairness, ~ R ~
-
78020
Until now, AARP has chosen to not take a stand on these issues. I just sent a Fax to the new CEO of AARP, as follows:
A. Barry Rand, CEO AARP National Office 601 E. Street NW, Washington, DC 20049
Fax #: 1-202-434-7710
Dear Mr. Rand;
As you know, two bills have recently been presented to our legislators, one to the House (H.R. 235) and one to the Senate (S.484). These bills, if passed, would repeal two unjust laws that have financially disadvantaged teachers for decades. The Windfall Elimination and the Government Pension Offset Provisions are discriminatory towards teachers.
They dictate that teachers may not collect social security from deceased spouses, or collect social security at levels other participants in the system do - even when they paid into social security from another job prior to, or during their teaching career. These discriminatory laws also impact the pool of qualified people who may enter teaching; they discourage people from entering teaching because many would lose previously earned social security.
The involvement of AARP is vital to repealing these provisions that penalize educators and public service employees in fifteen states. For that reason, there is no justification for entangling the straightforward matter of repealing these unfair offsets with any other Social Security issues.
AARP has an obligation to help make sure no educator or public sector employee loses benefits they or their spouses have earned. Please let me know specifically what you are doing to achieve the long-overdue elimination of the GPO and WEP.
Cordially, [my signature]
-
78019
Have you contacted YOUR Members of Congress through the Toll Free #'s of The Capitol Hill Switchboard: 1-877-851-6437, 1-800-828-0498, or 1-800-614-2803?
Did you ask for the office of your Senator or Representative [you needed to dial again for each different one]?
When you asked what the Representative's position on H.R.235 or the Senator's position on S.484 is, what were you told?
Then, regardless of whether you got a yea or nay, did you TELL THEM you want that elected official to take the necessary steps to get the bill on to the floor of the House or Senate for debate and vote?
Take a moment to tell us about it with a post, here.
If we all do our part rather than relying on someone else to do it, we can make it happen.
TAKE ACTION - GET INVOLVED!
-
76842
Someone above said "don't hold your breath" as the government can't afford to repeal the GPO/WEP. Like ha ha ha! Does Obama care how much of "your" money he spends? So then, why not spend just a bit more of our Grandkid's money and approve the repeal.
-
74044
Please send me the latest news on the Governmet Pension Offset. I am a civil service retiree.
I need to be able to benefit from some of the money my husband paid into Social Security to help pay my bills and pay for medication, and household expenses. I am not an extravagant person and only buy what is needed at this stage of my life. With sky rocketing food and gas prices and the plummeting of invested savings has made what I need and what I can afford a real challenge.
Any information you can share would be greatly appreciated.
c taylor
-
71197
I became a victim of WEP because the SSA would not respond to my inquiries about the program before I was effected. I receive a $315 federal retirement and for that I got a $690 reduction in Social Security. The SSA will not respond to letters regarding this theft.
Any federal employee should hire an independent attorney to determine what effect this or other programs may have on them when they retire. Retirement counselors are paid by the Federal government and do not represent the interests of the employee and will mislead them. Michael Shipley, an attorney for OPM asserts that OPM has the right to use "misinformation" to mislead employees.
-
70700
Folks, Complaining about your plight, here, accomplishes absolutely nothing. It's up to YOU to contact your Members of Congress to urge them to take action on H.R. 235. The Toll Free #'s to The Capitol Hill Switchboard are: 1-877-851-6437, 1-800-828-0498, or 1-800-614-2803. Ask for the office of your Representative. When answered, you'll probably be asked something to verify that you're a constituent. After that ask what the Reps position on H.R. 235 is. Then, regardless of yea or nay, TELL THEM you want your Rep to take the necessary steps to get the bill on to the floor for DEBATE and VOTE.
You have to make those contacts though. Also write Letters to the Editors of your newspapers. If needed, I'll give a 'boiler plate' to use. That's how this inequity can get moved forward. But, GET INVOLVED - TAKE ACTION! After doing so, come back to this site and give us your experience[s]. Tell us what happened.
-
69670
I retired 5 years ago, and receive a pension from the Kentucky Teachers' Retirement System. Because I did not have Social Security taken from my paychecks, my right to receive my husband's survivor benefits are denied due to the GPO. Our children and I did without that money he contributed to Social Security all those years he worked too. The ridiculous part is, though, should I go back to teaching full time and put my pension on hold, being 66, I can then receive 100% of his Social Security benefits. How crazy is that?!? I don't need the money while I'm working, I need it when I'm retired, for heaven's sake!
-
68106
Like Kathy I work and recieve full SS benefits. That's right,even though I am working full time and receiving a very good salary I am also collecting my husband's FULL social security benefits.
However, when I retire with a very small pension from the same state that is now paying me a good salary those social security benefits will be reduced to almost nothing.
In other words, as soon as I need the SS it will be taken away. Of course, my solution is to work as long as I can and save those SS payments for the day I retire.
Doesn't seem fair does it? Because I am lucky enough to be healthy and able to work I receive full social security benefits while someone who retires because of poor health has their SS benefit reduced by the GPO.
Solution: Repeal the GPO/WEP. Pay for the repeal by denying benefits to people who work (at least set a wage cap.) Or--perhaps those of us who work in states most affected by the GPO/WEP should convince our retirement boards to convert our retirement checks into paychecks--they could call us "consultants" or "Experienced Personel On-Call."
-
67805
I finally feel that this will pass(hope).My husband fought in W.W.11 and served in Anzio,Salerno,Italy,etc. I worked for 42 years to survive and the now you penalize me!I am a widow and not well.I hope and pray ,the money that was deducted will return and can be used to stimulate the system.Thank You
-
67427
Having become a recipient of my EARNED British pension, I discovered that my EARNED US social security was cut by 40%. What the hell does that do for a country and its new president that is trying to restore honesty and trust in the world? Didn't Mr Obama promise to repeal the despical offsets?
-
66590
When I retired in 2007, just short of age 70, my SS Income was drastically reduced due to Civil Service benefits. I did not agree with the determination made on my claim and I requested reconsideration. It was denied. My reasons were: My pre-March 2007 Social Security benefit is an earned benefit under the rules in effect during the time period earned, and should not be reduced simply due to my earned Civil Service benefit - also earned under the rules in effect when service commenced. If I had been employed under Civil Service during the combined employment period, my benefit would be significantly greater than the combined benefits before March 2007. My increased income was due to working my way thourough college and obtaining 3 college degrees, and saving and investing my income. In addition to denial of benefits, due to my level of income, I have had to pay a surcharge on my Medicare insurance premiums. The proposed reduction reflects a betrayal of trust and a lack of fairness and integrity in the retirement systems. Where is the justice in this situation, especially in view of current bail-out efforts?
-
66323
This new bill, number H.R. 235, replaces the previous bill H.R. 82 which had over 300 cosponsors. It expired, though, at the end of the 110th do nothing Congress.
ACTION NEEDED: It's up to YOU to contact your Members of Congress immediately and urge them to cosponsor H.R. 235 - the new Social Security Fairness Act. Concentrate on Members who cosponsored last year's bill, as well as all newly elected Members of Congress.
THE GOAL: Rebuild the cosponsor list as quickly as possible to show momentum and convince congressional leaders to take action on the bill. After doing so, come back to this site and write about what happened.
Most importantly, though, GET INVOLVED! Complaining about your plight, here, accomplishes absolutely nothing.
-
66315
Legalized theft! Yep, time to repeal these ridiculous laws. Guess "the law of unintended consequences" applies here....
-
66312
If corporations are being bailed out --- what will become of everyday people who paid into Social Security - and do not receive it. As a retired classroom teacher, I am sorely rritated at the unfairness of the WEP and GPO.
In addition, I am the surviving ex-spouse of a Vietnam veteran. My children and I had enough hardship having a father and spouse serve active duty in a war. Then to not receive his Social Security because I am a retired classroom teacher, is an affront to decency.
Had I retired from P.G.&E , or some other private company - I would receive the money our family contributed to Social Security - no problem. This simply does not make sense.
I ask for an answer --- When will GPO and WEP be repealed?? I've been writing letter for years -- and receive little except the acknowledgment that this is an unjust situation. There seems to be sufficient money for the pentagon to stockpile more weapons than can ever be used, weapons to bomb the hell out of other countries, and not money to pay deserved, paid for benefits to retired classroom teachers.
In addition - if citizens are late with taxes - they are fined and may also be imprisoned. Do I have the privilege to fine the government for unpaid benefits. As of May of 2009 - it will be 4 years of withheld payments. at approximately $15,000 per year, we are looking at $60,000 of benefits withheld --- will I get to charge the government interest ??? Can I begin to withhold $15,000 per year on my taxes - as a loss -- until the law is repealed?
I am 68 and 1/2 and must work. I live simply and I don't contribute much to the economy because without the above S.S. benefit --- I don't have much to spend.
I request that the Social Security WEP and GPO be repealed as soon as possible. We want the best and the brightest people to teach our children and then teachers are unfairly penalized.
DOES NOT COMPUTE !!!
I REQUEST A REPLY.
Sincerely, Marcela Ries Retired California Teacher
-
66309
I had 48 qtrs. of SS before going to work for CS. After turning full age to draw SS I did get it full for 1 year while still working for CS. After I retired from CS the WEP kicked in and cut what I now receive from SS a little less than half. I retired from CS with 39 years & 3 months of service, so I don't get to bad of a retirement. I'm not complaining about what I get in fact I'm very thankful considering what people in the private sector receive. When I got the CS job I thought I had died and gone to heaven, I didn't know how good CS employees had it until I became one. You won't hear any complaining from me.
-
66289
Who do I sent my support. I am a widow who has not been elligible for benefits. I began receiving widow benefits because I am working but will not receive when I retire. I could not get any benfits when I lost my husband and was 60 years of age because I made to much money is what the SS office told me. Since I am full age I began receiving, but will not when I retire the end of this year.
-
66286
My husband retired from the Navy and died 4 years later from injuries received in Viet Nam. I immediately received SBP. As I neared retirement (31 years under CSRS), I learned that my SBP would be reduced by 80%. My husband died for this country and yet -- when I need it most to live out the rest of my life, I can only get 20% of my widow's share of his retirement. please note, it is not 20% of his retirement. The reduction has nothing to do with need for no matter how large or small the CSRS check, I still lose 80% of my widow's benefit. Thank goodness it only took 20 years for the VA to agree his death was caused by injuries in VN. At that time, I gave up the 20% to receive a death benefit from the VA. I retired because of poor health so I have no possibility of earning extra money.
-
66284
12 Jan 08
It seems nearly unanimous (except for the response from "rooster") that a change neesd to be made. We are "preaching to the choir" and, instead, need to focus our energy on contacting our Representatives and Senators about this issue. It has been coming up for years and I wonder if this is being introduced so that the sponsors can show us they are doing somenting when, in fact, they couldn't care less. - Prove me wrong!
-
66273
This new bill, number H.R. 235, replaces the previous bill H.R. 82 which had over 300 cosponsors. It expired, though, at the end of the 110th do nothing Congress.
ACTION NEEDED: It's up to YOU to contact your Members of Congress immediately and urge them to cosponsor H.R. 235 - the new Social Security Fairness Act. Concentrate on Members who cosponsored last year's bill, as well as all newly elected Members of Congress.
THE GOAL: Rebuild the cosponsor list as quickly as possible to show momentum and convince congressional leaders to take action on the bill. After doing so, come back to this site and write about what happened.
Most importantly, though, GET INVOLVED! Complaining about your plight, here, accomplishes absolutely nothing.
-
66270
Don't hold your breath, the Federal Government cannot afford to pass this legislation, not now, not ever. I do understand the gross unfairness, however. Folks impacted by these circumstances are having family financial assets (that could accrue if saved, for their children, etc.) taken away from them because of who their spouses worked for or for "working for the federal government," neither reason is an acceptable one in defense of the Federal Government reappropriating these dollars to other discretionary spending of the federal government. I am impacted by this too, but am also very familiar with the federal financial situation too. This legislation is window dressing by Congress, they know it doesn't stand a chance. Merely "constituency placation."
-
66268
In my opinion the point has been accurately made that the WEP and the Government Offset are unfair to individuals who have made the necessary payments into the Social Security system but are not allowed to collect because they were federal employees. It is also unfair, in my opinion, to require federal retirees to pay into the Social Security system when they are not allowed to receive any benefits when they retire from those jobs. It's like donating money to a system, that some say, is actually cheating you. One could also say this is a form of discrimination. Webster's dictionary defines "discriminate" as "to act on the basis of prejudice". Isn't that what's happening here? Are we being treated differently from others? The government is not supposed to favor one gender, race, religion, etc. over another but it's duty is to treat all citizens the same. I don't necessarily feel like I'm being treated the same as my neighbor who is allowed to receive all of his/her social security benefit, though we both paid in our 40 quarters, just because I'm a federal employee and they are not.
-
66256
How is it fair that my neighbor's wife gets 50% of his Social Security (SS)? He's getting 100% of his SS plus his private company retirement. His wife never worked outside of the home.
I will get my CSRS retirement. If my husband who is covered under SS dies I get nothing from him. If I retire and go to work outside of Government I will pay into SS and get nothing back.
I remember when the Military retired and went to work for the Fed it was considered double-dipping and their Fed pay was offset by the amount of their retirement. That was unfair too and was eventually repealed.
It's long past time to repeal the WEP and GPO.
-
66246
It is about time that these provisions are repealed. They were never fair in the first place. If they don't provide CSRS retirees with the full SS benefit then they should refund the full amount, including the employer contribution. They can put it into a 401K or IRA.
-
66242
This unfair and unjust law also effects those that did have to pay soc. sec. taxes on foreign employment.Even though both pensions together, will be less than if I had paid into the us system all my working career, my soc.sec. will be reduced because of the wep! Also an unintended consequence of this stupid law.
-
66238
It makes absolutely no sense to me why receiving a Federal pension under CSRS should justify a reduction in SS benefits. I qualified for SS with 45 quarters before beginning my Federal career. If I hadn't worked for 30 years since to receive a CSRS pension, I would have had 30 more years under SS. Since the pension benefit under both systems depends on years of service, one benefit should not offset the other. This is a stupid and unfair law that discriminates against Federal employees and should be changed immediately.
-
66229
The WEP and GPO should be repealed because they unfairly penalize workers who should get their earned retirement benefits. In my case, I have worked for the Department of the Interior my entire career, yet I will be hit by the WEP because I switched from CSRS to FERS when the changeover occurred in retirement systems around 1986/87. When I changed (FERS was promoted as a better system to us young workers at the time)I did not realize that I would lose part of my FERS social security payment when I retire because I will get a small payment computed under CSRS (I worked 6 years under CSRS, and now have 22 years under FERS). It is ridiculous that I will be penalized when I retire, even though I have worked continuously for the Federal Government and have never worked in the private sector.
-
66213
We that are caught in this catch 22 are being wronged by the present system, I paid into both the SSA and CSRS systems and should be able to get full benefits from both systems. The WEP is not allowing me and others in this situation to receive our full benefits.
-
66203
I am 44 years old and have been working since I was 14. 25 of those 30 years I paid into SS. At age 40 I retired from law practice (I was not one of the "rich" lawyers, trust me) and began teaching. Because I will receive a pension from teaching, I have effectively forfeited my SS. I would be satisfied just to get back my contributions so that I can invest them--my teacher retirement will not be enough because of the late date at which I began teaching.
-
66202
I also worked in the private sector long enough to pay fully into SS before entering Federal Service. Since I only had 22 years Federal Service when I retired, my retirement, of course, was much less than if I worked my whole career there. The reduced SS I receive in no ways equals what I would be receiving if I had worked all those earlier years in Federal Service and not paid into SS. I have been waiting 10 years for WEP to be eliminated. Hope this time it gets done!!!
-
66178
Well then, if WEP/GPO are repealed will any downward adjustment be made to the fact that a CSRS retiree gets as much as 60-70% of their salery for life. This large % has to do with the fact that CSRS do not qualuify for SS, and now they may qualify.
If Wep/GPO are repealed then FERS folks need a positive adjustment to their maximum of 30-40% depending on length of service.
It works both ways here folks. Just another reason to NOT have 2 seperate retirement systems.
BTW with so few CSRS folks left why bother.
-
66175
I'm retired under CSRS, and worked part time jobs in addition to my Fed job. I worked full time before and now, paying full Social Security. Because I'm CSRS, my Social Security payments don't count the same as Bill Gates or Donald Trump. They get full benefits in addition to their pensions. If I get full credit for my payments it's a windfall. I agree with the concept above, full credit or SSI exempt in private industry.
-
66170
I fully agree with what Greg said. The issue is that you have earned this benefit under the same provisions as required of all americians. If you have earned a benefit you should receive it.
I encourage all of you to email your Congressman on this issue. I emailed mine yesterday asking him to support this legislation H R 235.
-
66162
I'm a CSRS employee, I earned my social security credits while working in the private sector prior to working for the government. It feels very unfair that I won't be able to receive my full social security benefits when I have earned them. I think the lawmakers need to take a hard look at who social security is paying - individuals that haven't paid into the system - doesn't seem to be right!
-
66135
I retired from the Federal Government and now work in the private sector. I am required to pay Social Security, which I will never be able to use. It is like throwing money down the drain. I am not sure what is going on with CSRS regarding Social Security, but I would like for CSRS retirees to be exempt from paying Social Security unless they are able to receive benefit - especially spousal benefits due to the death of a husband or wife and not offset their Government retirement. However, If we are required to pay - we need to reap the full benefits without taking a cut in our retirement. Hope you are able to get this passed.
-
66129
I have worked for the government for 25 years, of those I have been under a CSRS offset for over 13 years, I now pay a large amount of money into Social Security, but although I pay into both systems I am told htat once I am able to draw SS that my federal retirement will be decreased-seems very unfair as I pay into both systems, why shouldn't I be able to draw both?
-
66123
Denial of earned benefits is the issue. The price tag is moot. If the price tag can be justification, then all social security benefits should be reduced because the entire social security fund is not self-sustaining at its current revenue/pay-out rate.
-
66110
GPO and WEP have been so unfairly applied to those with government pensions. I don't know what lawmakers were thinking when they originally passed these laws - it appears to be an unbelievable, unfair attack on the public servant, because they won't earn Social Security unless they have second careers that earn them the benefits. In those instances they will have paid Social Security on those wages. The repeal is the only honorable, ethical solution out there!
-
66108
This benefit was counted upon for survival during retirement. When FERS was beginning nothing was said about the loss of Social Security in the CSRS System.
WEP/GPO is the most devastating thing that was ever done to Federal Workers.
Elimination is way overdue.
-
66107
Thank goodness this is being addressed. I will retire with a CSRS annuity. I worked in the private sector before coming to the IRS and will be eligible for Social Security as well. However, I will be penalized in receiving about 1/2 of my SSA benefits, because I an under CSRS. If I had stopped working altogether in 1983, I would be eligible for full benefits instead of 1/2. I certainly hope this passes
-
66105
I worked 48 years and am still working - half (24 years) in government and the other half (24 years) for private companies that I paid into social security. Because of the current law, social security bens are reduced significantly for me. This puts a severe hardship on me. I am planning on working another 10 years since I cannot live on my retirement in this economy.
I am glad they are going to take this action and pray it will be approved and go into law so me and others can get the full benefit we should be entitled to since we paid into the social security system.
Thanks for keeping us informed.
-
66102
I have been working for Civil Service for 35 yrs and before that I work private sector and have my 40 qtrs SS. I started drawing my SS when I turned 65 and as long as I keep working I get my SS. When I retire it stops. I am a GS7 and want to retire but can't because I will lose my SS benefit. My husband died in Aug. Please pass this bill.
PROMO RIGHT: EVENTS
UPCOMING WEBINARS
NOVEMBER 18
Speed bumps for Teleworking: What are they and how to avoid them?
DECEMBER 3
Achieve Program Success: Unlock the Management Information in Your Data
DECEMBER 10
Practical Transparency: Applying Exchange Networks for Mission Results
PROMO RIGHT: DIRECTORIES
Post a Comment
To post a comment, you must provide a name and a valid e-mail address. Messages must be limited to 400 words. By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although Government Executive does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.