[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 30 (Wednesday, March 10, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2586-S2588]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           SURVIVOR BENEFITS

  Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, I thank the floor manager. It has been 
a long day, and perhaps we have made some progress and the hour is a 
little late. I am going to speak just on two amendments of mine that I 
will offer and which will be voted on tomorrow.
  I will take the time tonight to speak at some length about these 
amendments because our time will be so limited, unfortunately, because 
of the rules under which we are operating.
  Before I do, let me restate for the record that I intend to vote 
against this budget. It is not a budget that will put America on the 
right course. This is a budget that will turn a stream of red ink into 
a raging river that will threaten to wash away Social Security, and 
this is according not to the Democratic spin room or Democratic 
operatives, this is according to Alan Greenspan, who testified before 
the Budget Committee last week and basically said because of the 
choices President Bush and the Republican leadership are making in this 
budget, adjustments will have to be made to Social Security.
  He could have gone on to say--and I am sure he will in further 
speeches--that adjustments are going to have to be made to education 
and the Federal contribution to education. We are going to have to make 
adjustments to housing initiatives in this country, and we are going to 
have to make adjustments to the contributions we make to colleges and 
universities because if this budget goes into law, the country will 
basically be on a course to bankruptcy because the debt is rising so 
high.
  We have been attacked by terrorists. We have a war now that is 
costing us hundreds of millions of dollars. We have passed a major 
education initiative that the President himself said he wanted to fund, 
and the economy has, in many instances, tanked, contrary to all of our 
hopes and expectations.
  Yet the plan is for tax cuts every day, always deeper and greater, 
which is threatening to wash away a lot of things that are important to 
people in this country. One of the things we cannot fix because of this 
blind adherence to tax cuts for people who earn over a million dollars 
is a survivor benefit for our military personnel.
  There are a lot of issues for which we could fight. I want to show 
this document. It is from the Military Officers Association: Fighting 
for Fairness. The public is going to have a hard time believing this, 
so I am going to try to go over it as simply as I can. In 1972, our 
Government promised the spouses of people in the military--now, most of 
the spouses would be women but not all of them would be women. Most are 
women. Our Government promised them if they would contribute a certain 
amount of money into a special fund, after the member of the service 
passed away, they could provide a nest egg for their spouses. These are 
spouses, and everyone is familiar with this. These women--millions of 
them--move every 2 years, generally. They move themselves, their 
children, and most do it with a smile and joy on their face because 
they are committed to helping the country, and they are supporting 
their husbands who are protecting us every day.
  We promised to give them what we call a survivor's benefit. But we 
have failed to live up to that promise. We have, instead, said even 
though we said we would do that, we decided to save money so we could 
give money, as the Senator from Oklahoma said, to the millionaires who 
need tax cuts in this country. We said instead of making the promise to 
these individuals, we have another priority, and that is to give people 
who make over a million dollars tax cuts because they need it. But we 
cannot give spouses of the people in the military their full benefit.
  It gets worse because the document we gave them actually doesn't 
mention the offset. I am going to submit it because I want to make it 
clear that this is the document our military signed, and it will be 
read for the Record. Nowhere in here did it talk about an offset. An 
offset is, when the spouse gets to be 62 years of age, instead of 
receiving the benefit that her husband put aside specifically for her, 
thinking that

[[Page S2587]]

he was doing a good thing to help protect her in her old age because 
she moved every 2 years and she has had to live under tremendous 
pressure--when you move every 2 years, I think people would understand 
it would be hard to keep a career going in the right direction and 
continue to increase your earnings, if you did want to work outside of 
the home. Maybe you could manage to get a minimum-wage job or 
something, but it would be very hard to develop a career when you have 
to move every 2 years. She did. These women did. Then they signed a 
document that said they would receive this benefit, and, lo and behold, 
they were told after they were in their sixties and their husbands had 
died, after their husbands served 20 and sometimes 30 years in the 
military protecting us and giving us the advantages, that the thousands 
of dollars they were counting on were not there.

  It gets worse. In addition to not funding this for our military 
families, we do fund, as the Federal Government, if you work for the 
Federal Government in civilian employment and you take out a policy for 
your spouse, you do not have the same offset. So we have the very 
unfair and terribly unjust situation today where if you are a spouse of 
a military person, and you have moved every 2 years, your spouse has 
protected the country for the last 30 years, and you get to be 62, you 
do not receive that full benefit because we need to save money to cut 
taxes for people who make over $1 million. That is the situation.
  My amendment, which I am going to ask be voted on tomorrow, would fix 
that situation. I do not think it is going to be adopted, but I am 
going to offer it anyway because I want my colleagues on the other side 
to be on the record saying the choice they make is not to fix this 
situation which will cost us approximately $2 billion because we cannot 
afford it. We can afford $2.6 trillion in tax cuts, but we cannot 
afford $2 billion to help our military families.
  I am not going to vote that way, but some people will, and they can 
explain it to the thousands of retirees in their States. I am not sure 
how.
  For the record, under the civil service retirement system, the 
percentage of survivor benefits, people receive 55 percent; the Federal 
employee retirement system receives 50 percent, but not the widows and 
widowers of people who served in the military. I do not understand it, 
and nobody in Louisiana understands it because we continue to increase 
the military budget. I know, because I voted for every increase in the 
military budget since I arrived in the Senate 7 years ago. I voted for 
billions of dollars because I believe in a strong military.
  I do not know how not living up to your promises to people in uniform 
to help them protect their spouses helps us to strengthen our military. 
If anybody knows, maybe they can communicate that to me because I do 
not know.
  I am hoping when we vote on this amendment tomorrow, perhaps we can 
find some money in this budget to take care of this situation. I 
understand the House has acted. I also understand a bill has been filed 
by the Senator from Maine, a Senator for whom I have a great deal of 
respect, Ms. Snowe. It is a bipartisan effort. I am hoping maybe we can 
find some money in this budget to make some adjustments for the 
survivors benefit plan.
  I ask unanimous consent to print in the Record a letter that was 
recently printed in the Washington Times that outlines this situation, 
and also the actual document our families signed that leads them to 
believe they are going to get this benefit.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

               [From the Washington Times, Feb. 23, 2004]

                   Survivor Benefit Plan Needs Reform

       Dear Sgt. Shaft: The Fleet Reserve Association (FRA) is 
     urging all 66 members of the House and Senate budget 
     committees to include funding in the 2005 budget resolution 
     for legislation (S. 1916 and H.R. 3673) that eliminates the 
     drastic reduction in Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) annuities 
     that now adversely impacts survivors of military personnel 
     who are 62 and older.
       The current program provides 55 percent of SBP covered 
     retired pay for younger spouses--however, the amount 
     decreases to 35 percent of retired pay when survivors become 
     eligible for Social Security. Many retirees and their spouses 
     were not fully aware of this reduction when they enrolled in 
     the program in the early 1970s. As a result, many believe 
     they were betrayed by having been asked to sign an 
     irrevocable contract to pay lifetime SBP premiums.
       Sen. Mary L. Landrieu, Louisiana Democrat, introduced the 
     Military Survivor Benefits Improvement Act of 2003 (S. 1916), 
     which would eliminate the SBP offset over a 10-year period. 
     Companion legislation (H.R. 3673) to do the same was 
     introduced by Rep. Jeff Miller, Florida Republican, in the 
     House.
       The Fleet Reserve Association, the oldest and largest 
     organization dedicated to enhancing pay and benefits for 
     enlisted members of the U.S. Navy, Marine Corps and Coast 
     Guard, was instrumental in the enactment of the military SBP 
     program in 1972, which was designed to improve the Retired 
     Servicemembers Family Protection Plan. Participants were 
     responsible for paying 60 percent of the costs, while the 
     government was to subsidize the remaining 40 percent.
       But today's SBP program looks nothing like its FRA 
     predecessor, and its intended value has been greatly 
     diminished by the Social Security offset as well as decreased 
     contributions from the federal government.
       Today, military retirees pay for more than 80 percent of 
     SBP costs, while the government picks up only about 19 
     percent of the costs. By way of comparison, the federal 
     government subsidizes its civilian survivor benefit plans--
     Federal Employees Retirement System and Civil Service 
     Retirement System--at 33 percent and 48 percent, 
     respectively.
       Probably the greatest disparity between the two plans is 
     beneficiaries in the federal civilian programs do not 
     experience the same offset incurred by military SBP 
     beneficiaries when they reach the age of 62. It is 
     unconscionable that the men and women of our armed forces and 
     their families continue to sacrifice at a time when they are 
     in their greatest need.
       FRA is grateful to Rep. Miller and Mrs. Landrieu for their 
     leadership in campaigning to restore equity and credibility 
     to this vital program. FRA is again referencing the need for 
     SBP reform in its testimony before Congress this year.
       We urge those who wish to help reform this unfair and 
     debilitating law to visit the association's Action Center at 
     http://www.fra.org/action/index.html, click on ``Urge Your 
     Elected Official to Support Funding for SBP Reform 
     Legislation'' and send a prewritten e-mail to their 
     congressional representatives.
           Joe Barnes
           National Executive Secretary
           Fleet Reserve Association
       Dear Joe: I echo your praise and support of S. 1916 and 
     H.R. 3673. I also commend Mrs. Landrieu and Mr. Miller for 
     spearheading this vital legislation.

       Dear Sgt. Shaft: I agree totally that the SBP program is a 
     huge injustice for widows of military retired persons. I had 
     10 years of active duty plus 14 years in the Reserves, 
     retiring as an 0-6. It has been a long time since I have seen 
     a write-up of the actual SBP provisions, so I do not 
     understand how it affects me and my wife. Where can I find a 
     good description?
       From the synopses I have seen so far, we would have been 
     better off to take the dollars and put them toward an annuity 
     policy instead of wasting them on the SBP program.
           Harry J. Wander
           Col., AUS, Retired
       Dear Henry: For starters, I suggest that you visit a few of 
     the military organization Web sites, such as the Military 
     Officers Association of America at www.moaa.org, the Non 
     Commissioned Officer Association, www.ncoausa.org, or the 
     Fleet Reserve Association at www.fra.org.

 Dear Sgt. Shaft: Isn't it funny: If Congress wants a pay 
     raise, it's processed with no problems. For those of us ``who 
     paid the price'' for our country (to keep Congress intact), 
     there's always some delay.
           Michael G.
           Virginia
       Dear Michael: The Defense Finance and Accounting Service 
     (DFAS) has announced that computer reprogramming has 
     progressed faster than expected and they have made concurrent 
     disability payments (CDP) to about 150,000 eligible retirees 
     on Feb. 1. Those whose CDP will be delayed another month or 
     two include those who divide their retired pay with a former 
     spouse, medical disability retirees who will have their 
     offset only partially eliminated by the new law change, and a 
     few other special situations.
       DFAS officials believe that they will be able to provide 
     payment for all of these retirees no later than the April 1 
     paycheck.


      section vii--information on the survivor benefit plan (SBP)

       Definition of Dependent Child. A dependent child must be 
     unmarried and:
       a. Be under 18 years of age.
       b. Be between ages 18 and 22 and pursuing a full-time 
     course of study and/or training in a high school, trade 
     school, technical or vocational institute, junior college, 
     college, university, or comparable recognized educational 
     institution (See item e below.)
       c. Be a child of your present or of a previous marriage, 
     adopted, or a step, foster, or recognized natural child who 
     has lived with you in a regular parent-child relationship and 
     as indicated in a and b above or d below.
       d. Be incapable of self-support because of a mental or 
     physical incapacity which existed before the 18th birthday, 
     or was incurred before age 22 while pursuing a full-time 
     course of study of training. (See item e below.)

[[Page S2588]]

       e. If your child(ren) is (are) defined by item b or d 
     above, an affidavit to that effect signed by the registrar or 
     physician, respectively, must be furnished to Retired Pay 
     Operations, USAFAC.
       Definition of natural person with insurable interest. Any 
     person who can reasonably expect financial benefit from you 
     while you live may be considered as a natural person with an 
     insurable interest. This person may be any close relative 
     such as a child not dependent upon you for support, or a 
     close business associate. If person named is not more nearly 
     related than cousin, attach a statement of Proof of Financial 
     Benefit.


        secion viii--monthly cost and amount of survivor annuity

       Spouse only (no eligible children). Cost of coverage is 
     2\1/2\ percent of the first $300, plus 10 percent of any 
     designated retired pay in excess of $300. If coverage is 
     elected for a dependent child acquired subsequent to 
     retirement, cost of coverage will be increased. The increase 
     in cost is effective the first day of the month following 
     eligibility of such child. (See c. below.)
       Spouse and eligible children. The cost of coverage will be 
     2\1/2\ percent of the first $300 of the base amount plus 10 
     percent of the remainder plus a slight additional charge for 
     children's coverage that will vary depending on your age, 
     your wife's age, and the age of your youngest child. The 
     additional charge should generally be about one-half of one 
     percent of the amount of retired pay designated. (See c 
     below.)
       If your spouse becomes ineligible through divorce, 
     annulment or death, no cost is due for any month in which 
     there is no beneficiary. If you remarry, the cost will be 
     reinstated the first anniversary of the date of remarriage, 
     unless child is born of that marriage prior to the first 
     anniversary date.
       Eligible children only (no spouse). The cost of coverage 
     will vary depending on your age and the age of your youngest 
     child but should generally be about 3 percent of the amount 
     of retired pay designated.
       Cost reduction--children. When all children cease to be 
     eligible for an annuity, the additional cost for child 
     coverage shall stop. The reduction in cost is effective the 
     first day of the month following that in which the last child 
     ceases to be eligible for an annuity.
       Natural interest person. Cost of coverage is 10 percent of 
     full retired pay, plus an additional 5 percent of full 
     retired pay for each full five years that your age exceeds 
     that of the natural interest person. The total cost may not 
     exceed 40 percent of retired pay.
       Annuity--Spouse and/or eligible children. Full coverage 
     provides an annuity of 55 percent of retired pay. Reduced 
     coverage provides an annuity of 55 percent of reduced amount 
     elected.
       Annuity--Natural interest person. The annuity payable is 55 
     percent of retired pay remaining after cost of coverage has 
     been subtracted.
       Cost-of-Living Increase (CLI). The cost is subject to 
     change based on CLI's in retired pay. Annuities paid to 
     survivors of deceased members are also CLI adjusted.
     CONTINUATION OF ITEM 10, SECTION IV.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                      SOCIAL
                     NAME (LAST, FIRST, MI)                        DATE OF BIRTH   SECURITY NO.    RELATIONSHIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                data required by the privacy act of 1974

       Authority: Public Law 92-425, EO 9397 as amended.
       Principal Purpose(s): Used by members retired on or before 
     13 August 1981, to enroll in the Survivor Benefit Plan or 
     increase previously elected coverage.
       Routine Uses: Uniformed Services review form for 
     completeness, validate and record level of participation.
       Disclosure Is Voluntary: However, the information 
     transmitted in this form is necessary to administer the above 
     law. Without it, retirees could not change their previous 
     elections.
       Under this law you have a choice to either participate or 
     not to participate in the Survivor Benefit Plan. If you 
     choose to participate, you have a further choice as to what 
     type of coverage you desire. Under one option, only a SPOUSE 
     is to receive a survivor benefit annuity, under another 
     option, only a CHILD or CHILDREN are to receive annuity 
     payments, and under a third option a CHILD or CHILDREN plus a 
     SPOUSE are to receive annuity payments.
       To assist you in making your election whether to 
     participate, data are shown below to permit you to determine 
     your actual participation costs. PLEASE note that the 
     ``COST'' shown below is based on the provision of the law 
     whereby only the SPOUSE is to receive a survivor's annuity 
     and this annuity, equal to 55% of your gross retired pay, is 
     the maximum annuity for a spouse. Costs for providing annuity 
     benefits to children where there is no spouse or for benefits 
     to children in addition to the benefits for a spouse, have 
     not been computed. Costs for any optional provision of the 
     law may be approximated using the formula provided in the 
     Retired Army Bulletin. Actual cost of annuities will be 
     actuarially computed in each case as required.
       If your retired pay exceeds $300 per month, the cost of 
     Survivor Benefit Plan to you is arrived at by charging 2\1/
     2\% against the first $300 of your retired pay and 10% of any 
     amount over $300. This will provide for a maximum annuity 
     equal to 55% of your gross retired pay. If you wish to 
     provide for a survivor's annuity which is less than the 
     maximum permitted, you may do so. To accomplish this you must 
     specify the amount less than your gross retired pay, but in 
     NO case less than $300, to which the 55% is to be applied to 
     determine the amount of the annuity. In the event your 
     monthly retired pay is $300 or less, the cost of providing 
     your survivor with 55% of your full retired pay (no lesser 
     amount is permitted) is 2\1/2\% of your retired pay.
       If you are currently participating in the Retired 
     Serviceman's Family Protection Plan (RSFPP), the cost of your 
     coverage is shown below for informational purposes. The law 
     gives you three (3) options as a present participant in 
     RSFPP. These options are: (1) continue RSFPP and not join 
     Survivor Benefit Plan, (2) drop RSFPP and join Survivor 
     Benefit Plan, and (3) continue RSFPP and join Survivor 
     Benefit Plan to provide a total survivor annuity not to 
     exceed 100% of your retired pay, calculated at the time of 
     election in the new program. Under this third option you may 
     reduce the amount of coverage under RSFPP as you see fit.
       If you retired prior to 21 September 1972, you have one 
     calendar year in which to elect to participate in the Plan.
       If you retired within 180 days after enactment of the 
     Survivor Benefit Plan you have 180 days from your date of 
     retirement as shown below to elect NOT to participate in the 
     PLAN. Unless you specifically elect NOT to participate, you 
     are considered in the PLAN and cost deductions will be made 
     from your retired pay at maximum coverage.
       Your election form is enclosed You should keep this letter 
     with your copy of the election form on the reverse for your 
     records. Your spouse and/or children, or natural person with 
     an insurable interest (which is explained in the Retired Army 
     Bulletin) should be informed of your election. The separate 
     election form must be completed, signed, sealed, and mailed. 
     It should be noted that a pre-addressed return envelope which 
     requires no postage is enclosed
       If you have not received a copy of the special issue of the 
     RETIRED ARMY BULLETIN, a copy should be requested from the 
     Retired Pay Division, U.S. Army Finance Support Agency, 
     Indianapolis, IN 46249. You request should include your 
     signature, your SSAN, and an address to which the Survivor 
     Benefit Plan information can be sent. To assure earliest 
     coverage or non-coverage for your beneficiaries, the election 
     form should be completed and mailed promptly.
  Ms. LANDRIEU. I thank the Chair for consideration of that amendment 
at the appropriate time.

                          ____________________