Home | GPO and WEP | EYE OPENERS
Take Action Now | Petition | Newsletters
“ NO SENIOR LEFT BEHIND”
JULY 4, 2003 – NEWSLETTER
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
John Boehner, R Ralph Regula, R
Patrick Tiberi, R Deborah Pryce, R
Rep. Stephanie Tubbs-Jones is a member of the Subcommittee on Social Security and is the latest Ohio delegate to cosponsor HR 594. Thank you for your support. The remaining non-cosponsor Members of Congress from Ohio are all Republicans. Gov. Taft, R. has also ignored our letters seeking support.
As of June 30th. 243 Members of Congress have signed on as cosponsors of HR 594, McKeon/Berman. The next step is to get the bill to the floor of the House of Representatives. WE HAVE WORKED so hard to get the majority of congress to vote for us that we need to send a strong motivating message requesting that the bill be allowed to come OUT OF COMMITTEE or it will die as all the other bills have.
The population of each U. S. Congressional district is approximately 600,000. With 243 Congresspersons cosponsoring HR 594, one could say that the representatives of 145,800,000 people support repeal of HR 594.
LITIGATION
UPDATE
The law firm is still conducting research on the constitutionality of the
passage of GPO and WEP. It is our understanding that they are looking at
violations to the 1st, 5th. 10th. and 14th Amendments to the U. S.
Constitution. We have received additional case history from other states and
have forwarded all material to the law firm. We would encourage others to
continue to pursue independent legal options and of course continue to call and
write Members of Congress requesting the prompt passage of HR 594.
THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT
“The original ACT provided only retirement benefits to the worker. The 1939 Amendments added two new categories of benefits payment to the spouse and minor children of a retired worker survivors benefits paid to the family in the event of the premature death of the worker. This change transformed Social Security a retirement program for individuals to a family-based economic security program”.
“The Story
of the COLAS: Most people are aware that there are annual increases in Social
Security benefits to offset the effects of inflation on fixed income. These
increases known as Cost-of-Living Adjustments (COLAs) are such an accepted
feature of the program that it is difficult to imagine Social Security without
them. In 1972, the law was changed to provide beginning in 1975 for automatic
annual COLAs based on the annual increase in consumer prices. No longer do
beneficiaries have to wait and no longer does inflation drain value from Social
Security”
A Brief History of Social Security SSA No 21-059, August 2000
The
Government Pension Offset (GPO) effective January 1982 is completely opposite to
the original intention of the 1972 amendment. The same rule applies when the
State grants a yearly cost-of-living to prevent an inflation drain value from a
retiree’s State pension. However, a retiree is penalized each time a State COLA
is granted because 2/3s of the increase is subtracted from the beneficiary’s
Social Security. Is the Federal government stepping on the States right?
Many retirees paid Social Security and also paid into a State Pension Fund. They
paid into a Public Pension fund and by law are entitled to their spouse’s Social
Security. A widow will most often take her husbands Social Security because his
lifetime contributions are greater. This is the same rule that applies to wives
who either never worked are divorced or do not have their own 40 credits as
required by Social Security to receive benefits. When a husband begins to
receive his Social Security his wife is eligible to receive one half of his
benefits even if she does not have her own earned 40 credits required by Social
Security. On the other hand in many cases the retiree has earned Social
Security benefits that she forfeits when she takes her husbands Social
Security. If a woman marries more than once and remains married for 10 years to
the same man she is entitled to receive the highest Social Security benefits
from any of her husbands. His Social Security benefits are available to any
woman he marries.
Throughout the years each new amendment to the Social Security Act has always
served to the benefit of a retiree. Has the Government Pension Offset changed
that philosophy?
Eileen M. Ryan June 2003
An Economic Plan
TAX CUTS + GPO/WEP == ECOMOMIC SUCCESS
Cost seems to be the most frequent reason used by Congress to justify why it is not feasible to repeal the GPO/WEP. There is or there should be NO COST to repeal the GPO/WEP. The retiree paid Social Security and also paid into a State public pension fund or paid into a public pension fund and by law is entitled to their spouse’s Social Security. However the thirst Congress has shown for spending has eroded the taxes retirees paid into Social Security. “From 1964 to 2001 Congress borrowed $700 Billion from the Social Security Surplus. None of these monies have been repaid to the Social Security Fund”. Congressional Budget Office.
June 2003 we learned the Congressional Budget Office and the General Accounting Office estimated to repeal the GPO/WEP would cost $51.7 billion for ten years. Here is the positive analysis. In ten years the victims of the GPO/WEP will lose $51.7 Billion OR the repeal will put $51.7 Billion in OUR hands to spend and return into OUR economy. When billions of our tax dollars are sent to foreign countries it is to improve their economy. Why can’t intelligent compassionate members of Congress see this logic?
FINANICAL LOSS to OHIO and THE COUNTRY
The state of
Ohio in 2002 lost an estimated $341.7 million as the result of the GPO/WEP. For
example, Helen, a retired government worker loses $550 per month or $6,600 per
year. The financial crisis in Ohio resulted this year (2003) in a penny sales
tax increase plus taxes on other services or products. California has made
recent headlines describing their financial deficits. Fifty-Four percent of
their government workers fall under the GPO/WEP law. Think of the millions they
could contribute into their economy if only the repeal became a reality.
FINANICAL LOSS to SOCIAL SECURITY
“We strive to process the reports we receive from the beneficiaries as quickly
as possible in order to minimize the amount of overpayment. Sometimes these
reports are delayed and as a result, this increases the amount of overpayment.”
Diane Garro, Acting Deputy Commissioner, Legislation. Each year the State grants
a retiree a cost-of-living increase. The amount must be reported to Social
Security and 2/3s is subtracted from the retiree’s SS benefit check. If there is
a delay by Social Security in reporting this information the result could be
hundreds and often thousands of dollars in an overpayment that a retire must pay
back to SS. It takes a SS worker about 11/2 hours to process a routine payment
change at $18.00 per hour the cost is $27.00. An overpayment adds another hour
increasing the SS cost to $45.00 per hour plus benefits. The national estimate
of SSA spouse and widow beneficiaries affected by the GPO/WEP as of December
2001 is 176,000. The Annual Statistical Supplement, 2002.
In Ohio the average cost-of-living for a retiree in the State Employees
Retirement System is approximately $18.72 per month, two-thirds of that is
$12.48. Is this a cost effective program for Social Security? The Social
Security fund will remain solvent if allowed to increase revenues via FICA and
investments, Congress stops “borrowing” from the surplus and a completely
separate Trust Fund is established outside of the General Treasury Fund.
RETIREMENT
== EMPLOYMENT
Frequent comment from retirees, “I can’t afford to retire.” Rosemary, in Toledo
“In my school there are at least three of us who would retire immediately if the
GPO/WEP was repealed.” When a retiree receives their earned SS benefits that
money will go into the economy. Also with retirement the school will hire
replacement workers who will earn, spend and add towards improving the economy.
When Congress passed the GPO/WEP they saw this as one way to increase the Social Security solvency. We are told the program will lack funds by 2013 and the “baby boomers” will add to the insolvency of Social Security. Perhaps Congress needs to rethink their decision and realize to deny public employees their earned Social Security will not keep the fund healthy.
The United
States gives out $13.3 Billion of our tax dollars in direct foreign aid
annually, $2.4 Billion to third world countries, and $1.4 Billion to the United
Nations.
June 2003 USAID will spend $2.4 Billion in the next 18 months in the Food Basket
Distribution Center in Basra, Iraq.
Congress rarely passes a bill without attaching a “pet pork project” in the
millions.
Do all these monies come from the General Treasury where our Social Security
taxes are also held?
If President Bush sees a tax cut as one way to put money in the hands of the
American people to spend and improve the economy = Congress needs to include the
American public workers by repealing the GPO/WEP and put money in the hands of
the seniors to spend and improve the economy!
Eileen M. Ryan May 2003
COST TO
REPEAL GPO & WEP
Members of Congress have quoted figures from the Congressional Budget Office
that changing or repealing the GPO and WEP would cost $51.7 billion over ten
years. They use this as an excuse to hide behind when discussing repeal of GPO
and WEP. There are no more hiding places. On June 18, 2003 the House passed HR
8, Death Tax Repeal Permanency Act, by a vote of 264 – 163. HR 8 will reduce
the Treasury by $162 billion over the next ten years. Here are a number
interesting comparisons relating to HR 8 and HR 594.
HR 8 had
209 cosponsors when it left the Ways and Means Committee.·
·
HR 594 has 243 cosponsors and is still in a subcommittee (Rep. Shaw).
HR 8 was
approved by Republicans 223 (85%) and Democrats 41 (15%).·
·
HR 594 is supported by Democrats 3 to 1.
HR 8 will
cost $162 Billion over 10 years.·
HR 594 will return $51.7·
Billion to public service retirees over 10 years.
The IRS
reported that 52,000 people paid estate taxes in 2000.·
The·
SSA reported that 729,234 people lost benefits in 2000 due to GPO and WEP.
HR 8 will
help the wealthiest citizens.·
HR 594 will help the rest of·
us.
What is striking about the above comparison is that cost was not an issue in passage of HR 8, nor was the number of affected people the issue, the only issue was whether or not the controlling political party was supporting the bill. When your Congressperson or Senator mentions cost as a reason to not support HR 594, remind them that HR 8 will cost three times as much as HR 594 over 10 years. And, fourteen times as many people will benefit from HR 594 than from passage of HR 8.
The permanent repeal of both the estate tax (HR 8) and the GPO & WEP (HR 594) are directed to improve the lives of retired workers and their families. Both should pass on their own merits. Why HR 594 is contested over political ideology is in our opinion ludicrous, short sighted, unfair and immoral.
CONGRESSMAN
RON PAUL, TEXAS
“The greatest threat to your Social Security retirement funds is Congress
itself. Congress has never required that Social Security tax dollars be kept
separate from general revenues. In fact, the Social Security trust fund is not
a trust fund at all. The dollars taken out of your paycheck are not deposited
into an account to be paid to you later. On the contrary, they are spent
immediately to pay current benefits, and to fund completely unrelated federal
programs. Your Social Security administration account is nothing more than an
IOU, a hopeful promise that enough younger taxpayers will be around to pay your
benefits later.
”This unconscionable system allows Congress to raid Social Security revenues for every conceivable pork spending project. Unless we change the spending culture in Washington, your retirement dollars will never be secure. At the very least, Congress needs to pass legislation requiring that Social Security revenues be spent only for payment of benefits.”
Source, excerpts from Rep. Paul’s Texas Straight Talk – A Weekly Column
AUTUMN IN
D.C.
What would everyone think of trying to stage some type of massive lobby day or
lobby week in DC in mid September, right after the August recess? Everyone will
be back in DC, with the memories of their nagging constituents in their minds,
and should be very receptive. At that time there should be even more
co-sponsors on board as a result of the time spent "back home".
Sue Shaw, Penobscot, Maine
PAST
NEWSLETTERS
Past Offset/Windfall Newsletters are listed in our web page,
www.dingomt.com/ssoffsetlaw.
If for some reason you are unable to open future Newsletters or need to
reference a past edition, just go to the web page and it will be displayed.
Mark Ryan does an excellent job in maintaining the web page. Please note his
creativity.
The
Newsletter
Ken and Eileen have contributed ideas, messages and tirades in the Newsletter
for your reading pleasure. Please feel free to send us your own messages for
future publications. Keep your articles focused on GPO and WEP, keep them short
and to the point. If we can’t cut-n-paste the message, or we don’t get the
point, or whatever, we might or might not reprint your message. We maintain
editorial control.
Home | GPO and WEP | EYE OPENERS