[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 138 (Thursday, September 7, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1721]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


             INTRODUCTION OF THE PUBLIC PENSION PARITY ACT

                                 ______


                          HON. BRUCE F. VENTO

                              of minnesota

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, September 6, 1995
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, our Nation's public servants have had a long 
and difficult year. Public employees have been asked to increase their 
pension contributions in exchange for smaller annuities and to make 
other financial sacrifices in the name of deficit reduction. Last 
spring, some Federal employees working in the Murrah Building in 
Oklahoma City made the ultimate sacrifice while performing their jobs. 
The time has come to show some support for our public servants, the men 
and women who work hard to provide needed services for the American 
people.
  Today, I am reintroducing the Public Pension Parity Act, legislation 
I first introduced in the 98th Congress to rectify a serious tax 
inequity that our retired public employees continue to face. America's 
public retirees deserve positive action on this bill.
  As you know, Mr. Speaker, most of our public-sector retirees receive 
a pension in lieu of the Social Security benefits received by private-
sector retirees. Social Security benefits are fully tax exempt for 
individual private-sector retirees earning as much as $25,000 per year, 
and couples earning up to $32,000. There is no corresponding tax 
exemption for public-sector retirees, who are effectively being 
penalized by the Internal Revenue Code for their years of public 
service.
  My legislation, the Public Pension Parity Act of 1995, would amend 
the Internal Revenue Code so that a public retiree could deduct that 
portion of his or her governmental pension equivalent to the maximum 
level for Social Security retirement benefits so long as the individual 
or couple stays under the same gross income limitations I stated 
earlier. The bill also includes an offsetting provision to prevent 
overly generous tax exemptions for those with incomes above these 
thresholds or who collect both public and private annuities.
  The principle of fairness underlies this bill; public-sector retirees 
should be treated in the same manner as private-sector retirees for 
purposes of taxation. It is fundamentally unfair to continue to tax the 
retirement benefits of public employees differently than the Social 
Security retirement benefits of private-sector employees. For this 
reason, I urge my colleagues to join me this year in supporting the 
Public Pension Parity Act to correct the significant inequity in the 
tax treatment of public-retiree benefits. It is time to reaffirm our 
support for those who dedicate their careers to public service.
  Mr. Speaker, I would also submit a copy of the Public Pension Parity 
Act for the Record.


                          ____________________