[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 4]
[House]
[Pages 5071-5072]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                       GOVERNMENT PENSION OFFSET

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk with my 
colleagues on a very controversial provision within the Social Security 
Protection Act which the House will be considering on the floor 
tomorrow. This legislation includes a number of important provisions to 
defend Social Security against fraud and abuse, and ensure that 
disabled beneficiaries are protected.
  Unfortunately, this legislation fails to offer any protections to an 
equally important population: public employees who suffer at the hands 
of an unfair provision known as the government pension offset. In 
States where some public employees are not covered by Social Security, 
such as Texas, the government pension offset reduces spousal benefits 
by two-thirds, and, in some cases, eliminates these benefits 
altogether.
  This provision unfairly penalizes public servants such as 
schoolteachers, firefighters, and police officers who educate our 
children, protect us from harm, and care for us during emergencies. 
This is a particular burden for widows, especially our public school 
teachers who had planned their retirement benefits thinking they would 
receive a full spousal benefit, because their spouses did pay into the 
Social Security trust fund. The only way they can escape this unfair 
penalty is by working their last days in a job covered by Social 
Security and their retirement system.
  Unfortunately, so many school districts and some law enforcement 
agencies in Texas do not have both their pension plan plus Social 
Security. Unfortunately, the legislation we are considering tomorrow 
would prevent teachers from using this benefit, forcing them to work 5 
more years in order to receive a full spousal benefit. In other words, 
they would have to leave their jobs at the school district which may 
not be part of the Social Security system, because in 1983 Congress 
allowed public employees not to be included, to then work for a school 
district that is both under the teacher retirement system in Texas and 
Social Security for 5 years.

[[Page 5072]]

  We should not punish teachers by stripping away this right unless we 
address the underlying problem, the unfair government pension offset, 
the GPO. The widow's benefit is vital to many individuals in my 
district, especially public school teachers, who have worked their 
whole lives trying to educate our children. It is not by their choice 
that they happen to work in a school district that does not pay Social 
Security; it is school district decisions by the board Members.
  I have received literally hundreds of phone calls and messages from 
constituents who are hurt by this provision. They planned their 
retirement thinking that they would receive a pension benefit or 
spousal benefit if their husbands or wives die.
  Let us be clear: Most of the impact of this provision is on women. At 
the time they chose their profession, teaching may have been the best 
opportunity for females; but they retire, to find that they are not 
eligible for their husband's benefit, their widow's benefit, because 
they receive a public pension that was not covered under Social 
Security. By that time, it is too late.
  I could give many examples of people who have worked many years 
teaching our children, working as a custodian in our school districts, 
or helping serve food to our children whose husband passed away and 
they find out, well, sorry, you do not pay Social Security, even though 
your husband did all those years, and now you do not receive but a very 
small amount, or none, of Social Security widow's benefits.
  H.R. 743, that is on the floor tomorrow, will make it harder for 
teachers and other public servants to get the benefits they deserve, 
but it does nothing to address the unfair system that created this 
situation in the first place.
  I encourage my colleagues to stand up for public servants by opposing 
this legislation tomorrow, and to work instead to eliminate the 
government pension offset, the GPO. I am a strong supporter of 
legislation introduced by my colleagues, the gentlemen from California, 
Mr. McKeon and Mr. Berman, which would eliminate the government pension 
offset and the windfall elimination provision, another quirk in Social 
Security that hurts public employees. That is legislation we should be 
considering tomorrow, but we are not.
  I know my colleague, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Jefferson), 
has been a champion on this issue and is planning on introducing 
legislation which would provide a remedy for the government offset. We 
should consider these bills before we consider H.R. 743.
  I urge my colleagues and the leadership to act on these bills and 
finally solve the government pension offset problem.

                          ____________________