Most notable is the continuing effort to provide relief from Social Security's government pension offset (GPO) law. Briefly, the GPO does not affect all public retirees who apply for spousal benefits from Social Security, but does impact those seeking spousal benefits, who become eligible for their public pensions after June 30, 1983 or fail to satisfy other specific criteria under the federal law.

If a public pensioner is subject to the GPO, then his or her SS spousal benefits will be reduced, dollar for dollar, by two-thirds of their public pension, which may result in zero SS benefits being actually paid out. Estimates place the number of public retirees (federal, state and local), whose Social Security benefits are currently reduced by the GPO, at 266,000.

Recently, the nationwide Coalition to Assure Retirement Equity (CARE), to which the Association belongs, and US. Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA) announced the introduction by the congressman of H.R. 1217. The bill currently has 143 co-sponsors, including Representatives Capuano, Delahunt, Frank, McGovern, Moakley and Olver from the Mass delegation.

H.R. 1217 would eliminate the GPO for public retirees whose pension and spousal Social Security benefits are $1,200 or less. If the pension and Social Security amounts exceed $1,200, then the two-thirds reduction, called for under the current law, is figured on the amount over $1,200.

Other features of H.R. 1217 include an escalator clause so that the $1,200 limit rises with inflation. There is also a provision to insure that no retiree receives less Social Security than under the present GPO law.

According to the Coalition, H.R. 117 is in the House Ways and Means Committee Social Security Subcommittee, chaired by Rep. E. Clay Shaw (R-FL). In the US Senate, a companion bill (S.717) has been introduced by Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) and now is in the Senate Finance Committee.

Members Hurt by GPO Increasing

"We joined this coalition back in '97 because members, particularly widows, were being hurt financially by the GPO." states Legislative Chairman Bill Hill."The numbers affected are unfortunately increasing." Here's just one example.

Jeanne Young, a retired state employee living in Revere and a member of our Association, worked for the Dept. of Correction. She receives a $860 monthly pension from the Commonwealth. Her deceased husband, a retired carpenters' union member, was receiving $970 a month from Social Security.

"Tom passed away in '81 and I began to receive his social security in '96, shortly before I retired from Correction," reports Young. "Only a few months after I retired from the state, I was shocked to receive a letter from the feds telling me I had to pay them back $1,700 and expect to receive a little over $300 (because of the GPO)."

If she was not subject to the GPO, she, like most widows, would be entitled to 100% of her deceased husband's SS benefits ($970). Instead, because of the GPO, she only gets about $370 a month in Social Security benefits as a surviving wife - over $7,200 less each year. From that, $45.50 is deducted monthly for Medicare.

"I can't describe how devastated I was when I learned about the GPO," says Young. "I probably would not have retired from the state if I knew then what a huge chunk would be taken out of my (Social Security) check."