Congress and Social Security Benefits.

[Immanuel]

The following post came from another thread but it made me think of a question I had always been afraid to ask:

It's funny Wry said "No to Social Security". He was a California government worker who never paid into Social Security while employed there. Had his own pension no kid will ever see.

How can any Democrat who NEVER paid into the system have the gall to accuse others of not supporting Social Security?

One fourth of all public employees from numerous states have never, and will never pay into the Social Security system.

I believe all Americans should pay into the system, but Democrats will not make a significant chunk of their voter base share that burden.

Suppose a man works in the real world for 40 years earning full Social Security benefits, be they as nominal as they are, and then is convinced by so-called friends to run for Congress and wins. My understanding is that Congressmen are not eligible and do not pay into the Social Security system, does he then lose his social security benefits or is he still entitled to his benefts, but as a Congressman his wages are not taxed?

Anyone know the answer to that for sure?

Immie

 

[uscitizen]

He already paid in and can draw out as can most of congress. They just do not acrue anything while in congress.
This was all just a smoke and mirrors thing to make us think congrespersons are noble honest creatures.

IN reality it just exempted congress from having to pay SS.

 

[Immanuel]

He already paid in and can draw out as can most of congress. They just do not acrue anything while in congress.
This was all just a smoke and mirrors thing to make us think congrespersons are noble honest creatures.

IN reality it just exempted congress from having to pay SS.

Thanks and that was what I thought but I was not sure about it.

Immie

 

[Care4all]

hey immie, this might help answer some of your concerns...
snopes.com: Congressional Pensions

snopes.com

Origins: This piece about Congressional pensions and Social Security contributions has been circulating in various forms since at least April 2000. Virtually all of it is outdated, inaccurate, or misleading:

* It is not true that Congressmen do not pay into the Social Security fund. Since 1984 they have been required to pay into Social Security just as most everyone else does. (A few odd exceptions to the Social Security program still exist, both inside and outside of government, but not for members of Congress.)

* It was true prior to 1984 that Congressmen did not pay into the Social Security fund because they participated in a separate program for civil servants (the Civil Service Retirement System, or CSRS), but that program was closed to government employees hired after 1983:
In 1983, Public Law 98-21 required Social Security coverage for federal civilian employees first hired after 1983 and closed the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) to new federal employees and Members of Congress. All incumbent Members of Congress were required to be covered by Social Security, regardless of when they entered Congress. Members who had participated in CSRS before 1984 could elect to stay in that plan in addition to being covered by Social Security or elect coverage under an 'offset plan' that integrates CSRS and Social Security. Under the CSRS Offset Plan, an individual's contributions to CSRS and their pension benefits from that plan are reduced ('offset') by the amount of their contributions to, and benefits from, Social Security.

* It is not true that Congressmen "continue to draw their same pay, until they die." The size of their pensions is determined by a number of factors (primarily length of service, but also factors such as when they joined Congress, their age at retirement, their salary, and the pension options they chose when they enrolled in the retirement system) and by law cannot exceed 80% of their salary at the time of their retirement.

* It is not true that Congressmen "paid nothing in on any kind of retirement," and that their pension money "comes right out of the General Fund." Whether members of Congress participate in the older Civil Service Retirement System or the newer Federal Employees' Retirement System (FERS), their pensions are funded through a combination of general tax provisions and contributions from the participants. Members of Congress in the FERS plan must pay 6.2% of their salaries (up to the Social Security wage base of $108,600) into Social Security, as well as 1.3% of their full salary into the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund.

Additional information:
Congressional Pensions Congressional Pensions
(C-SPAN)
Retirement Benefits for Members of Congress Retirement Benefits for Members of Congress
(United States Senate)
Retirement Benefits for Members of Congress Do Members of Congress Pay Social Security Taxes?
(National Taxpayers' Union)

Last updated: 5 September 2009

The URL for this page is snopes.com: Congressional Pensions

Urban Legends Reference Pages © 1995-2009 by Barbara and David P. Mikkelson.
This material may not be reproduced without permission.
snopes and the snopes.com logo are registered service marks of snopes.com.


Sources:

Purcell, Patrick J. "Retirement Benefits for Members of Congress."
Congressional Research Service. 28 October 2008.

 

[Charles Stucker]

He already paid in and can draw out as can most of congress. They just do not acrue anything while in congress.

No, just like a retired schoolteacher will be told they have a government pension (teacher retirement) and thus are ineligible to withdraw even though every Summer they took a second job (to make ends meet) and paid SS taxes on that job, they will never get SS.
Unlike the teacher retirement the Congressman has a golden parachute for his retirement package.

 

[MalibuMan]

I worked in the private sector for 15 years paying into SS. I then got a job working for a county government where I don't pay into SS any longer. I still have my SS benifits, however every year I work for the government my SS benifits decline. Which is crazy stupid. I mean, I have paid into SS all those years, and if I'm at the county long enough I may not see any SS benifits.

 

[Immanuel]

I worked in the private sector for 15 years paying into SS. I then got a job working for a county government where I don't pay into SS any longer. I still have my SS benifits, however every year I work for the government my SS benifits decline. Which is crazy stupid. I mean, I have paid into SS all those years, and if I'm at the county long enough I may not see any SS benifits.

Thanks for the info.

That doesn't sound fair to me. You've paid into SS, why should the county interfere with your federal benefits?

Is your county's retirement plan really good?

Immie

 

[MalibuMan]

My retirement isn't bad. I would say it is better than SS. The county as nothing to do with it, it is a federal thing.

 

[Immanuel]

My retirement isn't bad. I would say it is better than SS. The county as nothing to do with it, it is a federal thing.

Anything is better than Social Security, but if you are going to be taxed for it or were, you should be able to receive some benefit from it.

Immie

 

[MalibuMan]

my retirement isn't bad. I would say it is better than ss. The county as nothing to do with it, it is a federal thing.

anything is better than social security, but if you are going to be taxed for it or were, you should be able to receive some benefit from it.

Immie

no shit! Lol

 

[rightwinger]

my retirement isn't bad. I would say it is better than ss. The county as nothing to do with it, it is a federal thing.

anything is better than social security, but if you are going to be taxed for it or were, you should be able to receive some benefit from it.

Immie

no shit! Lol

There is windfall benefit legislation because your overall Social Security benefit makes it look like you were a low income earner

 

[PatekPhilippe]

The following post came from another thread but it made me think of a question I had always been afraid to ask:

It's funny Wry said "No to Social Security". He was a California government worker who never paid into Social Security while employed there. Had his own pension no kid will ever see.

How can any Democrat who NEVER paid into the system have the gall to accuse others of not supporting Social Security?

One fourth of all public employees from numerous states have never, and will never pay into the Social Security system.

I believe all Americans should pay into the system, but Democrats will not make a significant chunk of their voter base share that burden.

Suppose a man works in the real world for 40 years earning full Social Security benefits, be they as nominal as they are, and then is convinced by so-called friends to run for Congress and wins. My understanding is that Congressmen are not eligible and do not pay into the Social Security system, does he then lose his social security benefits or is he still entitled to his benefts, but as a Congressman his wages are not taxed?

Anyone know the answer to that for sure?

Immie

Once you earn your required points or credits for a SS pension it can never be taken away from you...ever. Oh wait....it can be taken away from you by Congress through legislation...like what they are doing right now by raising the retirement age on post baby boomers...and telling us that we will only get about 75% of our benefit if we're lucky...because after 2017 Social Security receipts from workers will not cover payments to beneficiaries and then the SSA must begin to cash out Treasury bonds given to them by Congress when they stole our money to fund their pork barrel projects and give free healthcare to illegal aliens.

 

[Old Rocks]

Last I heard the point at which SS would be reduced to 75% if nothing is done, was 2041. Given the economic downturn, it might be a couple of years earlier. A simple fix, put SS taxes, the portion that the worker pays, 6.2%, on all income. SS is funded for the foreseeable future.

 

[Care4all]

it was 2049-to2051 as the estimate of when SS goes in the red, falls 20%-25% short....it could be 2041 now with the crappy economy...even if NOTHING is done to revise it...those collecting will get 75-80% of what was promised to them.....

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Last I heard the point at which SS would be reduced to 75% if nothing is done, was 2041. Given the economic downturn, it might be a couple of years earlier. A simple fix, put SS taxes, the portion that the worker pays, 6.2%, on all income. SS is funded for the foreseeable future.

Why is it that tax increases are the only solution liberals can come up with?

Repeal Lyndon johnson's law that allows Congress to take Social Security money and put it in the general fund. THAT will make social security solvent FOREVER and allow for yearly increases regardless of inflation.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

it was 2049-to2051 as the estimate of when SS goes in the red, falls 20%-25% short....it could be 2041 now with the crappy economy...even if NOTHING is done to revise it...those collecting will get 75-80% of what was promised to them.....

This is a very liberal estimate....the CBO is quite generous in it's estimations and has clearly been shown to wrong on several occasions...especially after getting their ass chewed out by the sitting President for not towing the party line.

Now if we look at the Trustees report...you know...the EXPERTS on the SS funds....they say there will be ZERO bonds left in 2041. What does this mean? It means that ALL Social Security payments, Medicare payments, Medicaid payments will be funded strictly from the budget with NO INCOME from Treasury Bonds....only taxes collected from workers. By law Congress is then allowed to reduce benefits to 75% of what they are today. What does this mean in the short term...7 years from now...the current holdings of Treasury Bonds held by the SSA will begin to have to be cashed in to make the monthly payments to beneficiaries WITHOUT taking money from the budget. Those Bonds will be completely gone by 2041....this means SS is in the RED. This also means that Congress has just lost about 200 billion dollars a year in it's receipt of revenue for the budget beginning in 2017. Where will this shortfall be made up?

Why do you think the current President is going to raise taxes on all Americans when he let's the Bush tax cuts expire? Why do you think Obama wants this healthcare bill passed? It generates hundreds of billions of dollars in new taxes!!!! Why do you think Obama want's "cap and trade"? It generates a HUGE amount of tax revenue!!! The government has become what we have feared for 200 years. It no longer represents the best interests of the country and has infact become "The Hydra". Cut one head off...and 2 more appear.

All this info came from Factcheck.org...go there and read it.

 

[froggy]

The following post came from another thread but it made me think of a question I had always been afraid to ask:

It's funny Wry said "No to Social Security". He was a California government worker who never paid into Social Security while employed there. Had his own pension no kid will ever see.

How can any Democrat who NEVER paid into the system have the gall to accuse others of not supporting Social Security?

One fourth of all public employees from numerous states have never, and will never pay into the Social Security system.

I believe all Americans should pay into the system, but Democrats will not make a significant chunk of their voter base share that burden.

Suppose a man works in the real world for 40 years earning full Social Security benefits, be they as nominal as they are, and then is convinced by so-called friends to run for Congress and wins. My understanding is that Congressmen are not eligible and do not pay into the Social Security system, does he then lose his social security benefits or is he still entitled to his benefts, but as a Congressman his wages are not taxed?

Anyone know the answer to that for sure?

Immie

Why would you you worry about s.s., taxpayers would be keeping you up while in office and after your out.

 

[rightwinger]

The following post came from another thread but it made me think of a question I had always been afraid to ask:

It's funny Wry said "No to Social Security". He was a California government worker who never paid into Social Security while employed there. Had his own pension no kid will ever see.

How can any Democrat who NEVER paid into the system have the gall to accuse others of not supporting Social Security?

One fourth of all public employees from numerous states have never, and will never pay into the Social Security system.

I believe all Americans should pay into the system, but Democrats will not make a significant chunk of their voter base share that burden.

Suppose a man works in the real world for 40 years earning full Social Security benefits, be they as nominal as they are, and then is convinced by so-called friends to run for Congress and wins. My understanding is that Congressmen are not eligible and do not pay into the Social Security system, does he then lose his social security benefits or is he still entitled to his benefts, but as a Congressman his wages are not taxed?

Anyone know the answer to that for sure?

Immie

Your first mistake was believing anything Titanic Sailor posts. Congress has paid into Social Security since 1984

 

[Full-Auto]

Congress has paid into Social Security since 1984



lol yes with tax payer money

 

[rightwinger]

Congress has paid into Social Security since 1984



lol yes with tax payer money

It is taken out of their pay......just like you