H.R. 235 would amend title II of the Social Security Act to repeal the Government pension offset and windfall elimination provisions.
Detailed Summary
Social Security Fairness Act of 2009 - Amends title II (Old Age, Survivors and Disability Insurance) (OASDI) of the Social Security Act to repeal: (1) government pension offset requirements applicable to husband's and wife's insurance benefits, widow's and widower's insurance benefits, and mother's and father's insurance benefits with respect to OASDI payments; and (2) windfall elimination requirements with respect to computation of an individual's primary insurance amount.
Status of the Legislation
Latest Major Action: 1/7/2009: Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Points in Favor
Current GPO and WEP rules take away Social Security rights that people earned because someone in their family served in public service jobs outside of the system. For example, a wife who never worked would get 50% of her husband's retirement benefits. However, if she worked as a librarian in many states, she would get none of these benefits. In another case, a coal miner turned fire fighter might be denied most of his own Social Security retirement benefits earned in the mines, because his later employer chose not to participate in Social Security.
Overall, it discourages people from taking a career in public service, or tracks them between covered and non-covered employers. Former teachers in one school district cannot afford to serve in another district, making it harder to fill needed positions everywhere.
Points Against
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)
Visitor Comments
PGJ
July 21, 2009, 11:31pm (report abuse)Many of you may have watched the news videos about two fire fighters risking their lives by saving a family from their
burning SUV. These men as well as police offers, who risked their lives in order to save lives, will never collect social security because of the GPO/WEP
To ..., JR, and CRT how great it is that you are able to read, write, and express yourselves because of teachers who dedicated their lives in teaching not only you, but your children and grandchildren. To top it off, you are more than likely earning more than they are!! All I can say is you are a bunch of ingrates!!
Government and public employees do no want your money!! All we want is what we and our spouses paid into the Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance. It is what it is an insurance! Do you three understand or do you need to go back to school. Also, for your information, government employees under the old retirement, the government did not provide 401(k) unlike the private sector.
1of2
PGJ
July 21, 2009, 11:32pm (report abuse)Can you ..., JR. and CRT survive on your social security alone without your 401(k)? I think not!! Just like we cannot survive on our government pension alone!!
Mimi Glueck
July 22, 2009, 11:41am (report abuse)I support HR 235 & S484, two bills that repeal the WEP/GPO. In other states teachers get benefits that paid for, but not in California. It is an unfair situation. Please correct it.
J. R. Phipps
July 22, 2009, 4:18pm (report abuse)When I went to work for the Federal Government I was told that I would receive Social Security and after I had 14 years of service they told me I was not going to get it. How would you feel if you were told that you would not get your Social Security?
JR
...
July 22, 2009, 10:19pm (report abuse)PGJ,
Do you suppose these folks, as wonderful as they are, have actually paid into social security? If not, then why would you expect them to collect more than they deserve? Same old crap - throw up some totally unrelated BS to throw the discussion off track.
PGJ
July 23, 2009, 12:01am (report abuse)...,
No, I do next expect them to collect social security if they did not pay into it. Social Security is based on ones lifetime earnings. If there were no earnings, of course there would be no social security benefits and we all know that and do not expect or question it. My comment, for your information, specifically mentioned fire fighters, police officers, government employees, and teachers because they are public employees who may have held or will hold jobs in the private sector. Specifically fire fighters and police officers who may have held other jobs prior and who may get injured on the job and therefore will no longer be able to work in their profession. You must know also, that not everyone stay on one job in ones lifetime.
Government and public employees do no want your money!! All we want is what we and our spouses paid into the Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance. It is what it is an insurance!
...
July 23, 2009, 12:58am (report abuse)Then perhaps you could be a bit clearer and less emotional in the future.
And you will all get social security if you paid in, just not more than you deserve.
PGJ
July 23, 2009, 10:55am (report abuse)And because of the GPO/WEP, we are not getting social security.
Mel
July 28, 2009, 3:53pm (report abuse)Social Security retirement is a defined benefit plan...you get what Congress defines, not what your have "earned". SS was meant to provide a govt pension for all, WEP and GPO were amendments that recognized there are other govt pensions that arn't from SS. Spousal benefits have always been the greater of your spouse's or your own SS benefit. The 1980s change just included non SS govt pensions the same as SS. And the pension adjustment just corrects for the weighting factor on low wages that were assumed to be the only wages in SS benefit calcs. I do not support repeal, and I have a retired teacher for a spouse and a working teacher for a son.
...
July 29, 2009, 9:42am (report abuse)PJG,
The WEP does not wipe out social security, just reduces it to what it should be. If you don't really understand it perhaps you shouldn't comment on it.
...
July 29, 2009, 9:43am (report abuse)Mel,
While what you say is true, these folks don't want to hear the truth. All they want is more than they deserve.
Joe #
July 29, 2009, 5:41pm (report abuse)Mel, When you pay for something do you expect to receive benefit? That is all that we ask. We paid and we want to receive what we paid for! Otherwise, refund my money!
...
July 30, 2009, 8:40am (report abuse)Joe #,
An excellent idea. You can take the few thousand dollars you paid in and go buy - what? Maybe a clinker? Real smart. But if it will stop the whining I'm all for a refund for you. It certainly won't hurt the trust fund at all.
PGJ
August 3, 2009, 9:26pm (report abuse)....
Per your comment "The WEP does not wipe out social security, just reduces it to what it should be. If you don't really understand it perhaps you shouldn't comment on it."
..., for your information the "E" in WEP is for Elimination. Your are not affected by the GPO/WEP so you really do not understand and perhaps you should not comment on things your are ingnorant of.
...
August 7, 2009, 10:30am (report abuse)The "Elimination" piese is to make sure you don't receive more than is fair. You will still receive social security, if you are eligible, just not more than you deserve. And bu the way, I am actually reduced by 10% on my benefit because I draw a teacher retirement and only had 28 years substantial earnings under social security. So I guess perhaps I do know something about it. So now your ignorance is showing.
DMC
August 13, 2009, 2:24pm (report abuse)What is all the hostility about here? Seems to me the primary issue is one of "fairness". My SS survivor's benefit is based upon my deceased husband's earnings under the SS system...nothing more and nothing less. Following his death, I was RECRUITED to teach in a state university and was told I could be vested in their pension after five years of service. At no time was I told that 2/3's of that would be taken away because I would be a widow receiving my husband's SS benefits. Such an injustice would not even be on the radar if I had remained in my prior position with an employer sponsored retirement plan. Of course, all the SS I paid in over the years doesn't even enter into the equation here.
SS benefits are based on the years paid into the system. If we go to work for another govenment agency, and do not pay additional money into SS, then our SS benefit will not increase. Why should that affect the benefits rightly earned at another public service government agency?
srk
(logged in user) August 14, 2009, 8:47pm (report abuse)Mel and PJG clearly do not understand the effects of WEP/GPO. I worked in business for 22 years before going into teaching. If I retire at 60, with 15 years in teaching, I will get $1500 a month for my CALSTRS retirement. I would have received about $1,000 from Social Security, but will lose 2/3s of that with the offset. If my husband dies (after putting into SS for 40 years), I am NOT ENTITLED TO ANY SPOUSAL BENEFITS. In effect, I have to pay about $2,200 per month to the government FOR LIFE because I will not receive that money. I am only asking for the SS benefits that I have invested in for 22 years. So PJG, please stop saying that I want more than I have earned or am entitled to. No wonder the attrition rate for new teachers is 50%. The lucky ones find out about WEP/GPO before they feel they are trapped in a career that demands 65 to 70 hours a week work, for which one receives pay for 35 hours, and lose half of our earned retirement.
PGJ
August 15, 2009, 2:22pm (report abuse)srk,
You have it all wrong. I am with you. I too, am not getting SS because of the offset. It is ... (Mr. Negativity) that is saying we want more than we have earned or are entitled to. I have written my Congressman and President Obama regarding the repeal of the GPO/WEP and I urge that you do the same, if you have not done so.
PGJ
August 15, 2009, 2:30pm (report abuse)srk,
I failed to mention to you in my previous comment that I was quoting ...'s comment. If you will look
it was in quotation marks. So again, I am 100% with you.
~ Richard ~
August 17, 2009, 12:38pm (report abuse)DMC, srk and PGK. You are what this issue is all about. Dunderheads like triple dot are of the opinion that "what's mine is mine and whats yours is mine" is the equation of fairness. We're pushing a rope uphill - no question about it. Contact your elected officials to tell them you expect them to take the necessary steps to get this issue on to the floor for debate and vote. Even dot-to dot should'nt object to that.
JD
August 24, 2009, 8:15am (report abuse)For those of you concerned with the GPO you should ask your congressfolk to seperate this legislation into two parts. The WEP is unlikely to ever be repealed and it is holding back any possibility of GPO repeal.
Piquonian
August 25, 2009, 10:52am (report abuse)I worked very hard for many many years and paid into SS. Now I work for the State and they want to penalize me when I retire by taking away part of my SS benefits!! Stop this now!!
...
August 25, 2009, 12:09pm (report abuse)Easy answer - Don't retire.
PTS
(logged in user) August 25, 2009, 6:31pm (report abuse)For comprehensive information on WEP and GPO and to see what you can do view www.socialsecurityfairness.com
PTS
(logged in user) August 25, 2009, 6:36pm (report abuse)Retirement is a 3 legged stool. You need your pension, social security and your personal investments. Wall Street has ransacked our investment portfolio and social security is denied if we worked in public service as well as private. Let's be fair with those who have worked two or more jobs to earn their social security retirement benefits!
...
August 25, 2009, 6:50pm (report abuse)PTS,
Just how do you come to the conclusion that social security is denied for those who work in public service? There MAY be an offset, depending on how many years the individual worked in the private sector. The WEP is being fair. If you really understood the problem then perhaps you wouldn't make such silly statements.
ddc
August 27, 2009, 10:49am (report abuse)Let me put it this way. I stayed home and took care of a family for ten years while my husband paid into Railroad Retirement (SS), "our" pension plan. I then went to work for the USPS (CSRS). If I had worked those ten years...let me rephrase that...if I had worked "outside the home" I would now be retired at 80% of my base instead of 60%. So being a stay at home mom/homemaker is costing me approximately $10,000 per year. Is that fair? I'm being severely penalized for taking care of my family. My husband died before retiring, our kids are all grown so he contributed for 34 years and nobody he knows is able to benefit. Is that fair?
jk
August 31, 2009, 10:15am (report abuse)If you have not read the article in AARP this month, go to www.aarpmagazine.org
and read under personal finance ( money)
"Boost Your Income!"
A line from the article "Every year, retirees pass up a whopping $10.1 BILLION in Social Security benefits.
See how some are getting more than their fair share while we get a penalty.
If you have not already called your reps in Washinton this should inspire many calls.
~ Richard ~
August 31, 2009, 3:47pm (report abuse)I am disgusted that, until now, AARP has chosen to not take a stand on these issues. So, I sent a Fax to the new CEO. You can read by going back to my post dated: May 18, 2009, 1:17pm
...
September 1, 2009, 12:46am (report abuse)Yay Richard, looks like your outrage got something done. NOT!
doris
September 8, 2009, 7:16pm (report abuse)I am awidow as of april I have a federal pension but my problem is I was born in 1924 hense the notch act tthat gives me no ss. Doesn't seem fair to me.
PGJ
September 8, 2009, 7:32pm (report abuse)To read more of Congressman Keven Brady's asinine statements go to www.house.gov/.../rsc/.../Brady--GPO%20Loophole%20Factsheet.pdf - Similar. This guy is an idiot and need to be voted out of office.
PGJ
September 8, 2009, 7:49pm (report abuse)If unable to view above website, Google House of Representatives and in box Search house.gov type in repeal gpo. On the next screen (PDF) Quick Reference Guide click on view.
...
September 9, 2009, 4:20pm (report abuse)Why, because you don't agree with him? Give me a break.
PGJ
September 9, 2009, 7:51pm (report abuse)... Yes because I not only do not agree with him, but also because he is 100% wrong. He is also an idiot just like you!!!!
...
September 10, 2009, 12:29am (report abuse)Tut tut, there. Now you are simply falling back on the loser's tactic of namecalling. Perhaps you can be more specific about Brady's shortcomings.
wilemut
October 8, 2009, 2:52pm (report abuse)It sounds like 235 is making headway. This was posted on September 9 on CRTA Fresno website:
http://www.crtafresno.com/?p=75
HR2145 is another that seems to be stuck in Ways & Means. I also had the misfortune of working for a community college in CA that didn't take out FICA and now I'm paying for it. Before 1983 it didn't matter. Now these scumbags are trying to recoup what they lost with all the double- and triple- dippers. That's not my fault. As I mentioned on the other comments site for 2145, write and call your congress people. All our griping and grousing here will not do any good! I wrote Kurt Schrader and finally got an answer from his aide. He didn't tell me a thing that I didn't already know, but who knows? He did say to contact the person who introduced the bill and urge them to move it forward. Each congress has over 6,000 bills out there, so we need to get heard. Just do it!
!!!
October 16, 2009, 1:31am (report abuse)Here's a headline for you. A bill just like this one has been introduced each session of congress for several sessions now. And it never gets out of committee. That should tell you what the legislators think about the whole thing. You are micturating into the wind if you think this is ever going anywhere.
County Worker
October 18, 2009, 1:12pm (report abuse)I paied in to SS and should recieve my fair share, and I should recieve all of my share and not have it go to someone who never work and is sucking the system dry. I support HR 235
Mark
October 24, 2009, 2:06am (report abuse)www.ssfairness.com is the ONLY grassroots organization working FOR all public service employees in the 15 affected states. We are building coalitions with disparate organizations across the country to "educate and unite" public service employees about WEP/GPO! Go to www.ssfairness.com then send the address to all public service employees you know. If YOU are affected you must act!
baddaddy
October 29, 2009, 8:26pm (report abuse)I just attempted a search for H.R. 235 on the Library of congress Thomas website and did not find it. Every time that I have tried previously, I was able to find it. I know this attempt in the past, it aways have died in a committee or sub-committee. I had hopes that Dempcrats would do something this time. Expecially since the bill had so many co-sponcers. My congress people just tell me it's in commettee. Little hope. It's time to contact our president.
Frank Randazzo
November 1, 2009, 5:49pm (report abuse)Restore our rights as retired Federal Employs to our Social Security Benefits paid into this program. As it is we can only receive 40% of 100%. Mar. Ronald Reagan is the jerk who took away our rights in The Social Security Act of 1983.
How many retirement benefits did he receive when he retired? This is unfair to the little guy.
Steve Barnes
November 16, 2009, 3:16pm (report abuse)As I read these inputs I see that many are misinformed as to what has taken place. If you work for a government or privet sector job and do not pay into SS, then you have no right to draw any SS. But what about the people who not only worked one job but worked two or more jobs in their life and paid into SS. I worked for a local goverment job for 30 years and paid into my own retirement plan and not SS because we had a choice to eithr pay SS or not. My work hours were 24hrs on duty and 48hrs off duty.This gave me time to work full time on another job. I worked another job for 25 years and paid into SS on this job. I was told that if I paid into SS and had 40 quartys paid in that I could draw my SS that I paid. Now I'm being told that because I didn't pay into SS on my other job that I can't draw but 1/3 of whats due to me. I don't want anything that I don't deserve, but if I paid for it then I think I should get it!! I can't help I wasn't lazey and worked two jobs.!!??
Poor Steve
November 18, 2009, 3:22pm (report abuse)You will get exactly what you deserve and not one cent more. You are the one who is misinformed about how the WEP works and why. Maybe you should do some reading before you start whining.