|
|
|
Advocate Online
Speaking Out
The Social Security Time Bomb
There’s an unpleasant surprise awaiting
a significant number of retirees from public employment. They could be
facing the mind-numbing reality of the Government Pension Offset (GPO)
or the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP).
The GPO affects retirees who apply for
Social Security benefits earned by a spouse. It provides that retirees
who receive pensions from states that do not pay into Social Security
will have their Social Security benefits cut by two-thirds of their public
pension.
The WEP affects retirees who apply for
their own Social Security benefits. If they are drawing pensions from
public employers that did not pay into Social Security, they will see
their Social Security benefit reduced by almost half. The WEP does not
apply to retirees who were eligible for their public pensions before January
1, 1986, or who have at least 30 years of substantial coverage under Social
Security. But a lot of people meet neither of these exclusions.
The GPO and WEP are patently unfair. Workers
in the private sector are not faced with these reductions. They can collect
the full Social Security benefit no matter what amount of money they receive
from any number of pension plans. These odious provisions are aimed exclusively
at public employees.
The GPO/WEP can be repealed. There are
a number of bills pending in Congress that will eliminate these provisions.
The most promising of these bills have been sponsored in the House by
representatives Howard McKeon (R-CA) and Howard Berman (D-CA) and in the
Senate by Dianne Feinstein (D-CA). The bills are numbered H.R. 2638 and
S. 1523. They will pass if they reach the floor in both chambers. The
votes are there.
We need a sense of urgency from our members.
We can make it happen if we let our congressional delegations know how
important this is to us.
The effort to repeal the government pension
offset and the windfall elimination provisions of the Social Security
Act is bipartisan. Republicans and Democrats support repeal. Let’s
get it on the front burner while we still can. We can prevent an injustice
to surviving spouses and retirees who thought they had earned a full Social
Security benefit. Support NEA’s lobbyists and call your legislators
now to demand action on these unfair laws.
To send an e-mail to your representative
today, go to www.nea.org/lac.
 Gerry
Concannon, an English professor at Massachusetts Maritime Academy, is
secretary of the Massachusetts State College Association. He also serves
on the Thought & Action Review Panel.
|
 |
 |
|
|
I'd like
to say!
As a long-time math educator in a community college,
I want to say how much I enjoy the Thriving
in Academe series in the Advocate.
I am currently president of the American Mathematical
Association of Two-Year Colleges, as well as past
president of the Massachusetts Community College
Council (MTA-NEA), and these topics are being
discussed by my organizations and others across
the country.
Learning theory, assessment,
Problem-based learning, to mention some of the
topics, are well done and right on. I hope you
stick with this great feature.
—Philip
Mahler
Middlesex Community College
Some time ago in the Dialogue
section (Advocate
April 2002), Cathy Crane McCoy argued that
making changes in the tenure system to accommodate
the unique situation of women of child-bearing
age on the tenure track would not be fair. As
a female assistant professor with a small child,
I beg to differ.
Modifications to current practices
in the academy, such as turning off tenure clocks,
building mentorship programs, and providing childcare
programs, would not impede equality in the meting
out of tenure, but rather, in my eyes, facilitate
it.
—Ramani
Durvasula
California State University,
Los Angeles
Share your opinion
Write to the editor at:
Clehane@nea.org
|
|
|
 |
|
|
