Time to Kill Congressional Pensions and Cut Pay

I came across a piece today that resonated with truth.  Anyone familiar with our founding fathers and our American history knows that they intended for those who wanted to serve their country to do so with the intent of actual public service and not because of the profitable and lifetime pensions and perks that have become associated with it.

This particular article highlighted at Human Events was written by Representative Mike Coffman who represents Colorado’s 6th District.

To demonstrate to the American people that we in Congress have skin in the game when it comes to reducing deficit spending and that we intend to lead by example on this matter, we must put an end to pensions for members of Congress. I served my country in both the U.S. Army and in the Marine Corps and I was taught from the beginning of my military career that a fundamental tenet of leadership is to lead by example. I learned that leaders should never ask others to do anything that they themselves would be unwilling to do.

Today, our nation is mired in debt and we in Congress have to make tough decisions to find a way out of this crisis. This will involve asking the American people to make sacrifices related to their reliance on a government that has grown much larger than our economy will ever be able to support. In these extremely difficult economic times, Congress needs to set an example for the country and I think that ending our pension plan would be a good start.

If members of Congress are to be servants of the people, they must not receive a benefit that is now generally unavailable to the average American citizen. It is my belief that our founding fathers envisioned Congress as a citizen legislature comprised of members who were successful on a career path outside their elected federal office and who would not be dependent upon their service in Congress to provide them with a retirement income for the rest of their lives once they leave office.

In September I introduced legislation (House Resolution 2913) that will put an end to the pension plan now available to members of Congress. I am steadily gathering co-sponsors for my bill and I am confident that I will eventually assemble enough support from my colleagues in Congress, given the demands by their constituents for change, to enact this important reform.

We in Congress must vote to end the pension plan and demonstrate to the American people that their elected representatives in Washington understand they are servants of the people and not a political elite exempt from the challenges felt by most Americans today.

The current congressional pension program is a defined-benefit pension plan that pays U.S. representatives and senators 1.7% of their current $174,000 annual salary for every year they serve in Congress for up to 20 years, and an additional 1% for each year served after passing the 20-year mark. Members of Congress are required to pay 1.3% of their annual salary into the pension plan.

Members of Congress can’t participate in the pension plan until they have served at least five years. They are eligible for a pension at age 50 if they have completed 20 years of service, or at any age after completing 25 years of service. For example, if a member of Congress retired after serving for 20 years, he would receive 34% of his salary, or $59,160 per year and, if the had served for 30 years he would receive 44% of his annual salary, or $76,560.

Under my bill, members of Congress will still be required to pay into Social Security and may participate in the defined contribution Thrift Savings Plan (401K), available to all federal employees. My legislation would also honor any retirement benefits already accrued by members of Congress prior to its enactment. In addition, it would reimburse members who will have served for less than five years when my legislation becomes law, for the 1.3% of salary contributions already paid into the pension plan from which they will never collect.

My legislation to end congressional pensions is only one part of my efforts to reform Congress and the federal government. In January, I introduced House Resolution 270 that would cut congressional pay by 10%, reduce congressional office budgets and require federal civilian employees to take a non-consecutive, two-week furlough in 2012. An exception is provided in the legislation for federal employees involved in national security or for reasons related to public safety including law enforcement. The reduction in congressional office budgets was adopted in the debt ceiling agreement in August, but I’m not confident that either of the other two provisions will ever be enacted.

Unlike the prospects for H. R. 270, I am very optimistic about the chances that my proposal to end the congressional retirement system will pass because it clearly addresses part of the overall need to reform the culture of Congress. I believe that the issue of the congressional pension system will be easily understood by the voting public and will rise to a level where members of Congress will be questioned about their position on this legislation in town hall meetings across the country and by challengers during their upcoming re-election campaigns.

My bill also enjoys the support of three prominent taxpayer advocacy groups: Americans for Tax Reform, Citizens Against Government Waste and the National Taxpayers Union have come out to publicly support my legislation. I welcome their efforts to raise awareness about this important issue.

Ending the congressional retirement plan may be little more than a symbolic move toward fiscal responsibility from a leadership perspective, but it will be viewed as important by the American people as a step forward changing the culture of Washington, D.C.

Most people would agree that a big problem in Washington are the career politicians who get comfortable in their seats and are never live back home, find another job after their time of service, and be forced to live under the laws with which they develop and pass.

About The Author: Brittany Pounders is a conservative political commentator, blogger, and freelancer. She is a frequent guest columnist for The Toronto Sun, and can be heard through many different radio and media outlets such as The Blaze Radio Network, The Chris Salcedo Show, The Ed Dean Radio Show, has appeared on The Glenn Beck Show and regularly on cable news channels, including NewsmaxTv, One America News Network, America Trends, and the Fox News with Neil Cavuto. She resides in Texas with her husband and is raising three of the finest little people in the world. Follow her on… Facebook or @LibertyBritt

  • http://www.ergo-pensioensparen.be ERGO

    Seems like a pretty mad system as you describe it here.
    In Belgium we have 4 pillars of pension savings.
    1st is the state pension itself (1.100€ approx).
    2nd pillar is your own pension savings which are with a bank in a fund.
    3rd pillar is through your employer, and
    4th pillar is the risky investment in pension funds.
    Although this seems like a good system, we will witness a decrease in the 1st pillar AND 3rd pillar (as our employer costs are huge.)
    In the end, it’s gonna be dificult for me and my children to have a nice transition from high-end income to our smeasly pensions.