How People Voted
 |
 |
29% For, 71% Against
Take Action
  |
Alert Your Friends and Colleagues |
  |
Write Your Representative in Congress |
| Save & Share | |
 |
del.icio.us |
 |
Digg |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Yahoo! |
H.R. 2988, The Government Pension Offset Reform Act (5 comments ↓ | 3 wiki edits)
- This item is from the 110th Congress (2007-2008) and is no longer current. Comments, voting, and wiki editing have been disabled, and the cost/savings estimate has been frozen.
H.R. 2988 would amend title II of the Social Security Act to provide that the reductions in Social Security benefits which are required in the case of spouses and surviving spouses who are also receiving certain government pensions shall be equal to the amount by which two-thirds of the total amount of the combined monthly benefit (before reduction) and monthly pension exceeds $1,200, adjusted for inflation.
()
Learn More
Trackback URL: http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/trackback/110_HR_2988.html
RSS Feeds for This Bill
Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)
Visitor Comments
len
The bill should be passed to eliminate WEP. It is almost impossible to live on SS retirement benefits. By allowing non-reduced SS benefits it gives seniors to make ends meet. That extra three or four hundred dollars a month is a life saver.
G Pap
A pension rule that should be changed. It is the way Government Pension Offset is handled with Social Security. The impact of the rule is, predominantly, to strip women of their Social Security checks, under the assumption that the husband's Government Pension covers it. I am not objecting (much) to the rule itself, BUT to the fact that the offset could be taken out of either the OPM check or the Social Security check,but it is always taken from SS. The spouse under Social Security has no choice. She (mostly she) should have a choice. To preserve her individuality, and in recognition of her own labors, she should be allowed to get her own check. OPM should be able to reduce the Government Pension by the offset if the couple so desire. The result is the same to the Treasury. This approach preservers spouses dignity as an individual, rather than just an appendage. Small change in a rule written clearly by old men would have very symbolic impact.
gp
A pension rule that should be changed. It is the way Government Pension Offset is handled with Social Security. The impact of the rule is, predominantly, to strip women of their Social Security checks, under the assumption that the husband's Government Pension covers it. I am not objecting (much) to the rule itself, BUT to the fact that the offset could be taken out of either the OPM check or the Social Security check,but it is always taken from SS. The spouse under Social Security has no choice. She (mostly she) should have a choice. To preserve her individuality, and in recognition of her own labors, she should be allowed to get her own check. OPM should be able to reduce the Government Pension by the offset if the couple so desire. The result is the same to the Treasury. This approach preservers spouses dignity as an individual, rather than just an appendage. Small change, in a rule written clearly by old men, would have very positive symbolic impact.
Richard Haverkamp
I served as a teacher and school administrator in Texas for 30 years. For over 45 years I worked at both full time and part time jobs at which I paid social security taxes. When I reached age 62, I began drawing social security which was reduced by two-thirds. My social security has nothing to do with my teacher retirement. I paid the money into social security and I should draw the full amounts of benefits based on the taxes I paid into the Social Security System. This inequity needs to be fixed.
Beverly Byron
I am a retired civil service employee and widowed. My husband paid into the social security program for years and the money came out of our budget, repeat OUR budget, not just his budget. As a spouse, the offset pension has striped me completely of any social security benefits from my husband. This as a minimum for the last 8 years has decreased my income 12,000.00 a years. this bill and the windfall bill should be completely repealed and let us receive our money that we as families paid in.
you don't have a probelm with bailing out companies , financial or auto, plus i know of many receiving social security not americans.
please right this wrong done to the federal employee to include the state employees, teachers, etc.