Home | GPO and WEP |
Take Action Now | Petition | Newsletters
April , 2003 - NEWSLETTER #2
HR 594 McKeon/Berman bill to repeal both the GPO and WEP has 183 cosponsors.
“Great efforts are being made to recruit teachers who have work experience that would benefit America’s students. These professionals are far less likely to leave the boardroom for the classroom if their retirement benefits are reduced.” Rep. McKeon.
“Employees in the private sector can contribute both to Social Security and their company’s pension plan. When they retire, their Social Security benefits are not offset just because they also receive a pension. It is unfair to hold public employees, whose salaries are often lower than private sector employees, to a different standard.” Rep. Berman.
MEMBERS OF CONGRESS REPRESENTING OHIO RESIDENTS
WHO HAVE NOT COSPONSORED HR 594 or S 349 TO REPEAL GPO & WEP
George Voinovich, R Mike DeWine, R
Steve Chabot, R Rob Portman, R
Michael Turner, R Michael Oxley, R
David Hobson, R John Boehner, R
Stephanie Tubbs Jones, D Patrick Tiberi, R
Deborah Pryce, R Ralph Regula, R
Please contact them the third week of each month to repeal GPO & WEP.
REP. ROB PORTMAN, Second District, Ohio
Assistant Majority Whip, Chairman-House Republican Leadership, and member- Committee on Ways and Means. The following quote is from a letter that he addressed to Eileen Ryan about the “totalization agreement” with Mexico. “The House Ways and Means Committee and the House Judiciary Committee have directed the General Accounting Office (GAO) to provide Congress information on the possible effects of this totalization agreement. We are telling GAO to provide us with an accurate price tag. In addition, we want to make sure that any such agreement does not benefit aliens working illegally in the U.S. and will not be used to pay fraudulent disability claims.”
LETTER TO ROB PORTMAN, from Ken Moore sent March 29, 2003
“Three years ago I looked at the GPO and WEP as a non-partisan issue. Both parties could support it because it was the fair and moral position to take. In the 107th Congress Democrats supported change/repeal to GPO and WEP at a three to one ratio over Republicans.
Recently Republicans failed to understand the “loophole” issue in HR 743 with Section # 418 included.
What part of the GPO and WEP don’t most Republicans understand?
“You continue to quote $50 billion over 10 years. But never look at the fact that OASDI income amounted to $627 billion in 2002 and that repeal of the GPO and WEP in 2002 dollars amounts to $1.3 (WEP) and $1.6 (GPO), or a total of $2.9 billion, just 0.0046%. Please remember that these dollars are ours, not yours. The benefits were stolen from us under false pretenses and without proper notice or evaluation of the consequences.”
MORE POLITICS
Q: Which party took Social Security from an independent fund and put it in the general fund so that Congress could spend it?
A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the Democratic-controlled House and Senate.
Q: Which party put a tax on Social Security?
A: The Democratic party.
Q: Which party increased the tax on Social Security?
A: The Democratic Party with Al Gore casting the deciding vote.
Q: Which party decided to give money to immigrants?
A: That's right, immigrants moved into this country and at 65 got SSI
Social Security. The Democratic Party gave that to them although they
never paid a dime into it.
Comment The items listed above indicate that both political parties are guilty of tampering with Social Security and it will take both parties to correct past mistakes. Let us hope that wisdom will return to Congress.
OHIO RETIRED TEACHERS ASSOCIATION (ORTA) – Spring 2003
ORTA Legislative Agent Cathy Burner listed the Legislative Guidelines for 2003 in The ORTA QUARTERLY. “Item #6, Continue to oppose mandatory participation in Social Security in all public pension systems, including STRS Ohio, and item #7, Work to eliminate the Government Pension Offset (GPO) and Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) Social Security formulas.”
A SPECIAL REQUEST FROM EILEEN
If you live in Adams County, Ohio and have a story about either the GPO or WEP, send a letter to Eileen with your story. Send it to the address on this letterhead. Thanks for your help.
RETIREMENT FOR MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
“Members of Congress participate in either the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) or the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS), depending on the date they entered federal service. Members who first entered Congress after 1983 (which is most all of us now) are covered under FERS. Importantly, all Members of Congress have been covered under Social Security since January 1, 1984 and pay FICA taxes. Members also contribute to their own pension plans. Members of Congress are covered under one of four different retirement arrangements.
First for those members who entered Congress before 1983:
1. Full coverage under both CSRS and Social Security.
2. The “CSRS Offset” plan, which includes both CSRS and Social Security, but with CSRS contributions and benefits reduced by Social Security contributions and benefits.
Then for those who came after 1983:
1. FERS plus Social Security (most of us); or
2. Social Security alone (if someone chooses to opt out of FERS).”
Rep. Portman’s letter does state that Members of Congress pay into their Social Security account through FICA payroll deductions. It is also interesting to note that Members of Congress will retire with both FERS and Social Security benefits. If Congress works for us, and not against us, why is it possible for them to retire with more than one public pension? This also begs two questions; are their Social Security benefits subject to the GPO or WEP reductions? And, at what age are they eligible to receive both FERS and Social Security benefits?
Note: The above was first printed in our December 2002 Newsletter.
REP. BOB NEY 18TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT – OHIO
Rep. Bob Ney has recently signed on as a cosponsor of HR 594, McKeon/Berman bill to repeal both GPO and WEP.
The following are excerpts from a letter to Ken Moore, March 20,2003.
“Like you, I believe that the Government Pension Offset (GPO) should be eliminated.
“I also believe that the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) should be eliminated. That is why I have continually supported and co-sponsored legislation that would eliminate it. As you may be aware, the WEP was enacted to prevent people with highly compensated government service and brief, relatively low paid Social Security covered employment from having their Social Security benefits calculated under the more favorable formula used only for retirees with the lowest Social Security earnings.
“Unfortunately, instead of simply making sure retirees with the lowest earnings are covered by the more favorable, WEP often ends up penalizing retirees with slightly higher earnings. It does this by requiring some retirees benefits to be calculated using a formula that assumes they have much higher earnings over the entire course of their careers, a formula that yields substantially lower Social Security benefits. This has proved to be a great hardship to thousands of retirees who have dedicated their lives to public service and counted on receiving a fair Social Security payment each month during their retirement years.” Emphasis added.
Home | GPO and WEP |