Colleagues,
I am certain you are all very familiar with the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) as it relates to our retirement from MTRS in Massachusetts. It has had negative effects on workers who originally did pay into social security and then switched over to a public pension fund here and in approximately 14 other states. This directly impacts workers who become teachers after a career in the private sector – like many CTE teachers, as well as other public service workers.
There is a bill in Congress, “H.R. 82, the Social Security Fairness Act of 2023, which has been introduced to repeal WEP and GPO. The information from ACTE about a hearing on the bill is copied below. (Just remember that pace passing legislation is very slow in D.C.
We would like to thank our longtime colleague Lisa Sandler for bringing this bill to our attention.
David
House Holds Hearing on Windfall Elimination Provision and Government Pension Offset
On Tuesday, the House Subcommittee on Social Security held a hearing to discuss the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and Government Pension Offset (GPO). Originally developed in order to ensure that workers having non-covered pensions did not receive higher social security benefits provided to long-time, low-wage earners, this provision has had negative effects on workers who originally did pay into social security and then switched over to a public pension fund in approximately 15 states. This directly impacts workers who become teachers after a career in the private sector – like many CTE teachers, as well as other public service workers. H.R. 82, the Social Security Fairness Act of 2023, has been introduced to repeal WEP and GPO.
During the hearing, lawmakers shared their ideas on several initiatives to help simplify social security, to generate more money for the fund, and to ensure truly fair treatment amongst workers who are and are not covered by social security.
Witnesses were divided on whether the repeal of WEP and GPO would solve the countless problems with the current provision, which, as noted by several lawmakers and witnesses, is reflective not of the current workforce but of the intent of lawmakers 40 years ago.
Jason Fichtner, Chief Economist at the Bipartisan Policy Center explained to lawmakers that both WEP and GPO are overly complicated, and that the unfairness is derived in part from the provision itself, and in part from the over-complexity that makes communication with beneficiaries extremely difficult.
Witnesses and lawmakers debated whether the solution is to amend or overhaul the current provisions. Some argued that eliminating WEP and GPO would result in more inequity for the impacted communities, noting that it was created to address an issue that will be left with no solution if the provisions are discarded. Others believe that the solution is to get rid of these provisions and instead work to impose taxes on higher-income individuals to make up for any money lost and provide benefits to lower-income individuals and those with marginalized identities, including women and People of Color.
Despite these differences, lawmakers unilaterally agreed that action needs to be taken. Rep. Pascrell (D-NJ) argued that, “What’s most depressing is that over two million Americans who paid their dues have suffered – police officers, retired first responders, firefighters, teachers – they have seen a reduction in social security benefits.”
Representative Estes (R-KS) later agreed, sharing with the committee that, “Every instance of WEP and GPO negatively impacting a teacher, police officer or public servant is troubling. Simply because of the profession they choose, they are bearing the brunt of a policy’s negative, unintended consequences.”
POSTED BY HANNAH RICHARDS ON 04/19/2024 AT 02:31 PM | PERMALINK
David J. Ferreira
MAVA Communications Coordinator
DavidFerreira
