[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 32 (Thursday, March 13, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2285-S2286]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 7--RELATIVE TO COST-OF-LIVING ADJUSTMENTS
Mr. SARBANES (for himself, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Warner and Mr. Akaka)
submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to
the Committee on Governmental Affairs:
S. Con. Res. 7
Whereas over the years, Federal employees and retirees have
regularly been forced to bear a disproportionate share in
connection with deficit reduction: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives
concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that cost-of-
living adjustments for Federal retirees should be paid
beginning in January of each year, as current law prescribes,
and should not be delayed, whether as part of a budget
agreement or otherwise.
Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I am pleased to submit along with
Senators Mikulski, Warner, and Akaka, this sense-of-the-Congress
resolution. It is a simple resolution which clearly states that it is
the sense of the Congress that Federal retiree COLA's should not be
delayed.
After 3 years of having their cost-of-living adjustments delayed,
Federal retirees finally saw equity restored this year when their COLA
adjustment became effective in January instead of April. Federal
retirees should continue to receive their COLA on time, in line with
all other Federal cost-of-living adjustments.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, the average Federal
retiree would lose an estimated $915 over the next 5 years if a three-
month COLA delay is reinstated. To many of our Nation's more than 2
million Federal retirees, this can mean a significant difference in the
calculation of their yearly living expenses.
Further delaying Federal retiree COLA's would, in my view, set a
dangerous, unfounded precedent where cutting or altering Federal
retiree and employee benefits to effect cost savings becomes an all too
regular and accepted practice.
Mr. President, Federal retirees have served this Nation with the
expectation that the benefits they have earned will be excluded from
the pressures of achieving arbitrary budgetary targets. Disparate
treatment of COLA recipients goes against longstanding congressional
policy that for more than 25 years has ensured COLA equity for all
retirees, and I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this
important resolution.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, today I am joining with my
colleagues, Senator Sarbanes, Senator Warner, and Senator Akaka to
submit a very important resolution. Our resolution states a simple
fact--federal retirees should not be singled out for delays in their
cost of living adjustments.
As my colleagues know, 1997 was the first year since 1993 that
Federal retirees received a timely COLA. Their COLA's were delayed
until April for the last 3 years as part of the 1993 deficit reduction
plan. They were willing
[[Page S2286]]
to accept this delay because they knew that they would have to do their
fair share to help us control the budget deficit. Many of them said to
me, ``Senator, I'm willing to tighten my belt another notch to help
this country, as long as everyone else is asked to do the same.''
Now we have a situation where retirees are being asked to tighten the
belt again. Except this time they are being singled out for special
treatment. We have proposals to delay Federal retiree COLA's for
another 4 years. I don't think that's right --it's not fair and its not
equitable. I think all COLA's--Federal, military, and Social Security
should be paid on time. They should be reliable and they should be
accurate. We owe our seniors, our Government retirees, and our military
retirees nothing less.
I am very disturbed by the recent trend of promises broken to Federal
employees, and retirees. I believe that promises made should be
promises kept. When Federal employees signed up for service, they
agreed to defer some compensation until retirement. They knew that they
would make less salary than in the private sector, but they also knew
that they would have a stable benefits package of health insurance,
life insurance, and retirement. If we delay their COLA's again we are
telling them--sorry, we did not exactly tell you the truth when you
signed up for service. We are telling them that they cannot rely on the
benefits that they planned their retirements around.
I do not think this is the way we should run our Government, and it's
not the way we should treat our Government retirees. I am working to
make sure we honor our commitments, and I urge all my colleagues to do
the same and support this resolution.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise today as a cosponsor of legislation
expressing the sense of Congress that Federal retirement cost-of-living
adjustments [COLA's] should not be delayed.
I join with my colleagues Senator Sarbanes and Senator Mikulski of
Maryland, and Senator Akaka of Hawaii in opposing President Clinton's
fiscal year 1998 budget proposal to delay Federal retiree cost-of-
living adjustments [COLA's].
It was a matter of great satisfaction to me that the balanced budget
proposal approved by the Congress in 1995 provided for full CPI-based
COLA's for Federal retirees each January through the year 2002. That
legislation was vetoed by President Bill Clinton on December 6, 1995.
The President has once again indicated his lack of support for COLA
equity by submitting his fiscal year 1998 budget proposal including
delayed Federal retiree COLA's. It is my intention to strenuously
oppose the President's inequitable COLA policy whenever possible. I
will be looking to the Federal retiree community for support in this
effort as the fiscal year 1998 budget process continues.
Federal retirees must be treated equitably in terms of cost-of-living
adjustments [COLA's] and income security. You may recall that in 1986,
I was an original cosponsor of the COLA equity amendment, landmark
legislation which guaranteed equal COLA treatment for all participants
in Government retirement programs--Social Security, civil service, and
military. From that point until President Clinton's Deficit Reduction
Act of 1993, full CPI-based COLA's were provided for all retirees each
January 1.
Regrettably, President Clinton's 1993 budget departed from the policy
of COLA equity in that a series of COLA deferrals were put in place for
civil service, and military retirees. As you know, Social Security
recipients were not affected. What you may not know is that last year,
I sponsored legislation which was enacted into law to at least retain
COLA equity for the military and civil service. A damaging proposal had
surfaced to further delay civil service COLA's to help fund military
COLA's, an unworkable and unfair proposition. I vigorously opposed it
and fought for its defeat.
It is time once again to stand and oppose this COLA inequity for
Federal retirees. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution to
restore equity for all retirees.
____________________