Statement on Introduced Bill and Joint Resolutions

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise to speak about the Social Security Fairness Act of 2015, which I am joining my colleague from Ohio in introducing today. This bill would repeal both the windfall elimination provision, WEP, and the government pension offset, GPO. We believe that these two provisions in the Social Security Act unfairly penalize certain individuals for holding jobs in public service when the time comes for them to retire.

The WEP affects individuals who have worked in both the private sector and in public sector jobs for which Social Security taxes were not withheld. For such individuals, the WEP applies a special formula to calculate benefits, reducing them compared to what would otherwise be paid.

The GPO affects retired public employees whose spouses are entitled to Social Security benefits. When these individuals apply for Social Security spousal or survivor benefits, the GPO applies an offset, reducing the Social Security benefit based on the amount of that individual's public pension. In some cases, the spouse will not be entitled to any spousal or survivor benefit because of the GPO.

The WEP and the GPO have enormous financial implications for many of our teachers, police officers, firefighters, postal workers and other public employees. Given their important responsibilities, it is simply unfair to penalize them when it comes to their Social Security benefits. These public servants--or their spouses--have all paid taxes into the Social Security system. So have their employers. They have worked long enough to earn their Social Security benefits. Yet, because of the GPO and WEP, they are unable to receive all of the Social Security benefits to which they otherwise would be entitled.

The impact of these two provisions is most acute in 15 States, including Maine, which have state retirement plans that lack a Social Security component. However, it is important to point out that the GPO and WEP affect public employees and retirees in every state, including our emergency responders, other Federal employees, and postal workers. Nationwide, more than 1/3 of teachers and educating employees, and more than 1/5 of other public employees, are affected by the GPO and/or the WEP.

As of 2013, one and a half million people were affected by the WEP and 615,000 people had their benefits reduced by the GPO. Many more public employees across the country stand to be harmed in the future. Moreover, at a time when we should be doing all that we can to attract qualified people to public service, this reduction in retirement benefits makes it even more difficult for our federal, state and local governments to recruit and retain the public servants who are so critical to the safety and well-being of our families.

What is most troubling is that this offset is most harsh for those who can least afford the loss: lower-income women. In fact, of those affected by the GPO, more than 80 percent are women. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the GPO reduces benefits for more than 200,000 individuals by more than $3,600 a year--an amount that can make the difference between a comfortable retirement and poverty.

Many Maine teachers, in particular, have talked with me about the impact of these provisions on their retirement security. They love their jobs and the children they teach, but they worry about the future and about their financial security.

Roxie Brechlin of Bar Harbor, Maine, is one of many examples of the effect that the GPO and the WEP have on our teachers when they retire. Mrs. Brechlin first began paying into Social Security when she took her first summer job at age 16. After graduation, she continued to pay into Social Security for 18 more years before getting her first teaching job. Mrs. Brechlin worked as a teacher for 23 years, and for 14 of those years she worked full-time at another job during the summer, paying more and more into Social Security each year.

Mr. Brechlin recently contacted my office to explain the effect that the WEP and GPO will have on his wife. Mrs. Brechlin recently retired. When she applied for Social Security benefits, the WEP applied, and her benefit was reduced by two thirds. Mr. Brechlin is more concerned about what would happen to his wife if he were to predecease her. Normally, a widow would be eligible to continue to collect 100 percent of her husband's benefit. Mrs. Brechlin, however, would not be able to collect any survivor benefit, due to the application of the GPO. Not only does this fact worry Mr. Brechlin, he also sees it as unfair.

It is time for us to take action, and I urge all of my colleagues to join us in cosponsoring the Social Security Fairness Act to eliminate these two unfair provisions.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source