For More Information:
NEA Communications 202 822-7200

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 24, 1999

NEA supports legislative relief for Social Security offset
'grossly unfair to retired women,' says Weaver

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Reg Weaver, vice president of the 2.4-million member National Education Association (NEA), today urged Congress to enact legislation filed by Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA) that would limit the government pension offset provision of Title II of the Social Security Act. In a prepared statement, Weaver said:

"The pension offset is grossly unfair to a narrow class of individuals, most of whom are retired women. More than a third of teachers and education employees are not covered by Social Security. It is unconscionable that those who survive their spouses should see their retirement incomes reduced by thousands of dollars just because they are public employees.

"Right now, a school secretary with a government pension of $600 and a $645 monthly Social Security survivor benefit loses an amount equal to two-thirds of that pension -- $400 a month -- from the Social Security survivor benefits her husband worked all his life to provide. A retired bank teller with a private pension of $600 per month gets to keep all of her Social Security survivor benefits. Why should one retiree receive $1,245 per month, and the other only $845 per month, just because she worked as a public employee? By guaranteeing retirees the first $1,200 of combined benefits, the Jefferson proposal will strike a strong blow for equity.

"The offset provision has the harshest effect on those who can least afford it: lower-income women. These women have worked hard for years, and they should not be punished at the most vulnerable time of their lives in such an unfair fashion. Their spouses should be able to expect their survivor benefits to be there for their partners, and any fair-minded person would agree.

"Right now, some 200,000 individuals are losing an average of $3,600 a year because of the pension offset provision. That can mean the difference between paying the rent or being forced onto the street. It can mean the difference between fending for oneself or forced eligibility for food stamps and other even more costly forms of public assistance. But ultimately, it is the difference between what is right and what is patently wrong. I urge Congress to enact the Jefferson proposal, and to stop punishing people whose only transgression is a life spent serving the public."