According to Shaw, "the bill replaces the WEP with an individualized calculation of Social Security worker benefits based on an individual's entire work history, his or her earnings subject to Social Security taxes, and the same basic benefit formula used for all other workers."

However, after an extensive review, the Association has determined that this new formula does not come close to replacing the reduction applied to one's Social Security benefit under the current WEP law. Instead of using the traditional formula to calculate the benefit, Shaw's plan uses a new calculation that averages the wages over the course of one's entire work history (including time as MA public employee). After applying the standard benefit calculation to the average monthly total of one's income, the actual benefit to be paid to the retiree is based on the percentage of one's full-time work history that was spent under Social Security.

For example, a retiree, who averaged $20,000 annually during their 40 plus years of work, earned 30% of that total under Social Security. If the WEP was repealed, he would receive about $450 in Social Security each month. Because of the WEP, he receives only $200 a month - a whopping 55% reduction in his SS benefits. Under Shaw's proposal, the retiree would only receive about $266, meaning that he still loses over 40% of his Social Security (approximately $185 out of a potential $450).

"Congressman Shaw is trying to take the pressure off the House Leadership by moving a bill out of his Committee. The problem is that this bill does nothing for folks living under the GPO and it falls far short of a meaningful change for members hit by the WEP," said Association President Ralph White. "We owe it to our members to fight for their best interests. Everyone has been working too hard and have come too far for us to settle for a pittance.

"A retiree, who (like the one in the example above) spent their career not only in public service but also in the private sector making an average living, has lost over half their Social Security due to the WEP. Mr. Shaw's plan restores less than a quarter of what has been taken away. I would say this is a step in the right direction... a start, but certainly not a solution that we can live with."

Members, affected by the GPO, may be left wondering why a bill only changing the WEP law has advanced. While the House Leadership seemingly has shifted its focus to the WEP, there is no shortage of support within the House and Senate for the GPO repeal.

"Congressional leaders addressed the WEP first for a handful of different reasons. First off, a compromise, like Shaw's, is less expensive than a GPO repeal. Second, since the WEP affects the benefit based on a retiree's own work history under Social Security, members of Congress have been more willing to address the problem," explained Association Legislative Liason Shawn Duhamel. "Don't get me wrong though, both issues are of equal importance to the Association. One issue is not being favored over the other."