Julyl 2003 Newsletter

In one of my previous newsletters I said Congress sees the Social Security Surplus as their “Pot of Gold”. The following quotes are just a few examples from the 26 pages in the Citizens Against Government Waste—2005. I love their line “too many members of congress believe that the United States Treasury is their own personal ATM.”

“Creating a Job for a Constituent”

Rep. Elton Gallegly, R-CA explains why he put his wife, Janice, on his staff payroll at $2,600 a month. “I think it’s important that she have a little more independence and not feel like she has to depend on me if she needs a couple hundred dollars or if she wants to buy something”. (did you at least smile?) 4-17-05

“Political Donors Give from Beyond the Grave”

Dozens of political donors are reaching beyond the grave to support candidates and parties, setting up their estates to continue giving campaign money long after their deaths. Presidential and congressional candidates and political parties have collected just over $1.3 million from at least 100 deceased donors since 1991. Cincinnati Enquirer 10-29-05

While seniors struggle to pay for the rising cost of medicine, heat and gas members of Congress use “ear marking” inserting pork in bills at the last minute increasing the expenditure of the legislation. Sen. McCain (R-AZ) noted the recent highway bill had 16,140 ear marks. “This is corruption beyond my comprehension”. Tell our representatives we DO NOT RESPECT THESE TACTICS. What we need from Congress is help from cutting Medicare. Remind them we paid into Medicare and Social Security for years and expect the funds to be there in our retirement. WE do not need “pork projects” that are paid from the surplus.

The Senate will be voting on additional money for the Home Energy Heat Assistance program. Please call your Senators and ask them to help low income families. If the GPO/WEP has placed you at or below the poverty level you can apply for help. The number in D.C. is 1-800-928-8626.

While Congress was home I wrote the same letter to Rep. Strickland, who wants to be the next Ohio governor and Rep. Brown who is running for the Senate. Part of the letter said, “While we appreciate your support for H R 147 many bills have been introduced in previous years to modify or repeal the GPO/ WEP but have died at the end of every congressional session. I am proposing a plan I hope you both will consider before you leave the House. Retirees would like to see you, Rep. Brown,(Rep. Strickland) along with the other Ohio cosponsors approach Rep. McCrery and insist that the will of the voters in our DEMOCRACY be respected and allow the H. R. 147 out of the subcommittee. I hope your legislative aide will bring this letter to your attention and your campaign manager will see the value and uniqueness of the suggested plan to practice the art of representation. Very often I remind our members when a politician asks for your vote, ask for his/her vote first. In my next newsletter, I plan to mention this letter and I hope to include your response.”

When I did not hear from either office I called and left a message. Then I called D.C. and talked with Michelle Dallafior, in Rep. Strickland’s office and Ed Walz with Rep. Brown. Both were interested in my proposal and when I receive anything from them I will include it in the next newsletter. PLEASE call your “rep” and encourage them to join the group from Ohio and get H R 147 moving.

On January 18^th I had a 45 minute conference with my representative, Rep.Jean Schmidt. She kept her promise after winning and cosponsored H R 147. She is very interested in trying to do more for us. I loaded her with five years of information and said the plane ride back to D C would go quicker if she read the material. I know she plans to take some action and I will let you know when it materializes.

So how did we end up with these two unfair laws? Here are excerpts from a report Reesa McMurtry, National Association of Retired Federal Employees, put together in the summer of 2004.

”NARFE has worked tirelessly for over 26 years to repeal or reform the Government Pension Offset (GOP) and approximately 21 years to repeal or mitigate the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP). Few NARFE members at the time were affected, as they had already retired, and active federal workers were not contemplating the losses they would incur five or more years in the future. With little opposition from constituents, few members of Congress had concerns with the political fall-out from the provisions. It was not until the mid-80’s when annuitants began to feel the loss of anticipated Social Security that calls for modifications and repeal began to be heard.

Rep. Al Ullman (D-OR) chairman of the Ways and Means committee introduced the bill H.R. 9346 on September 27, 1977. This was the GPO bill to reduce the Social Security spouse or survivor benefits of government retirees dollar-for-dollar against their own earned annuity. This bill was referred to the House on October 12, 1977 and the next day it was referred to the committee on Post Office and Civil Service, which reported to the House on October 17^th .An amended version of the bill passed the House on October 27^th and was placed on the Senate calendar on the following day. An amended version passed the Senate on November 4^th and was quickly scheduled for conference. Agreement was reached and conference reports were filed in the Senate and House by mid-December. Following an adopted vote 189-163 in the House, 56-21 in the Senate, the measure was sent to the White House where President Carter signed it into P.L. 95-216 on December 20, 1977.

On March 3, 1983 the House and Means Committee Chairman Dan Rostenkowski (D-IL) introduced H.R. 1900 known as the “Social Security Act Amendments of 1983” this bill was “to assure the solvency of the Social Security Trust Funds, to reform the Medicare reimbursement of hospitals, to extend the Federal supplemental compensation program, and for other purposes. We know that “other purposes” included in Title 1 –Part B the creation of the WEP and in Title 11 –Part C the reduction of the GPO from a dollar –for-dollar offset to two-thirds offset. This bill was reported to the House on March 9, 1983 and the same day an amended version was adopted. On March 23^rd a further amended version passed the Senate, and the next day a conference committee reached agreement and filed their report which was adopted by both the House and Senate. The House vote was 243-102 (Republicans voted 80-48 and Democrats voted 163-54, the Senate voted 58-14 (Republicans 32-8/Democrats 26-6) in favor of the conference report. Pres. Reagan signed the amendments into P.L. 98-21 on April 20, 1983. It took only forty-seven (47) days for major changes in the Social Security Act, including the Windfall Elimination Provision to go from the House to the federal statue book.

It is time for members of both parties to address the unfairness of these two offsets and get them to the floor of the House and Senate for a vote.”

Please note when these bills were passed members of Congress were not paying Social Security and my guess they would have been affected by the GPO/WEP. In 1984 Congress passed the legislation that allows them to pay Social Security and receive both SS and their retirement.

Our good friend Sue in Maine sent in the following. The new House Majority Leader, John Boehner released the following statement praising the Steering Committee’s selection of Rep. Howard McKeon for Chairman of the Education & the Workforce Committee. How will this influence his repeal bill H.R. 147 only time will tell. Rep. Boehner has never supported any of the bills and when I wrote him in January he responded not to the information I sent but explained the goal of the Social Security Act.

Barbara in Cincinnati sent in the following. Alan Sloan, Newsweek wrote about the president’s 2007 budget quietly including plans for privatization. “On page 321 of the budget proposal you see the cost:

$630.533 for the five years after that for a seven year total of $712.144 billion.”

In my last newsletter I reported Rep. McCrery introduced H R.3304 “to stop Congress from spending Social Security surpluses on other Government programs by dedicating those surpluses to personal accounts.” Is there a quiet plan to ignore Democracy and force “totalization” on U. S. citizens?

If we do nothing else we must call our senators plead- beg- pledge- they definitely will not get your vote IF they vote for this legislation amnesty to illegal immigrants. This would mean millions of illegals can receive OUR Social Security benefits. The SSA states billions could be drained from the fund.

RES 50: By Rep. Goode, 2-17-05 Cosponsors 35. Referred to the House subcommittee. Expresses disapproval by Congress of the totalization agreement between the United States and Mexico Signed by the Commissioner of SS and the Director General of the Mexican S S Institute, June 24, 2004

RES 20: Rep. Haywood 1-4-05---cosponsors 40 Expressing disapproval of the House of Representatives of the SS totalization agreement between the United States and Mexico

How can the President cut our benefits and how can Congress allow it to happen? Remind them their first responsibility is to the American taxpayer and not to those who have broken our laws. WE pay their salaries, WE pay their health care WE pay their retirement and Social Security and WE value our votes and will use our votes wisely. My goal: I hope you will get really angry and start calling their offices at home and D.C. Make a list of how you want them to vote on every issue send it to your “rep.” and ask for a specific answer to every question. (Example should foreigners own our ports?) We are all tired of this fight BUT if we do not get angry (be polite) and demand our benefits I shudder to think of the consequences. The President is asking Congress for $75,000 million to push Democracy in Iran and $25 million to push Democracy in Syria. Those funds will come from our Social Security surplus and future benefits or from taxes our families work and struggle to pay. DEMOCRACY BEGINS AT HOME----the Good Old U.S.A.

A senior couple went out for breakfast sat down and the waitress told them the “Senior Special” was two eggs, hash browns and toast for $1.99. “Sounds good the wife said but I do not want the eggs.” The waitress replied “I will have to charge you $2.99 because you are ordering a la carte. You mean I have to pay for not taking the eggs” she asked? The wife thought for a moment then said I’ll take the eggs. The waitress asked how you want the eggs. The wife replied “Raw and in the shell” she took the eggs home!! The moral: Don’t mess with seniors. We’ve been around the block more than once.