Workers in the public sector are anxiously awaiting a decision from the Senate in the upcoming six weeks, hoping for the passage of a bill that would enable them to access the Social Security benefits they believe they deserve.

Recently, a bipartisan majority from the U.S. House approved the Social Security Fairness Act, aiming to abolish the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and the Government Pension Offset (GPO). These two measures currently cut Social Security benefits for specific retirees who also receive pension payments. The bill is now poised for a Senate vote but must be acted upon by December 31 to avoid expiration.

WEP and GPO together impact nearly three million Americans, including police officers, firefighters, postal workers, and educators in public schools.

“For the past half-century, billions of dollars have been withheld from public employees who earned both a pension and Social Security benefits,” stated Rafael Sanchez, who dedicated 30 years to California’s state workforce before transitioning to a private sector job in Idaho, where he paid into Social Security for three years.

WEP and GPO’s Impact on Social Security Benefits

• The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) reduces Social Security payments for individuals receiving “non-covered” pension income from jobs, typically in the public sector, that did not contribute to Social Security payroll taxes. This reduction can be quite substantial, reaching up to 50% of the pension amount.
• The Government Pension Offset (GPO) decreases survivor or spousal benefits when a person’s pension is non-covered. Although it affects a smaller number of people, GPO can cut Social Security benefits by two-thirds of the pension amount, potentially reducing the benefit to zero if two-thirds of the pension exceeds the Social Security payment.

According to policy experts, these regulations were designed to prevent excessive payments from Social Security for individuals with non-covered pension jobs, as their earnings might appear lower within the Social Security system.

Since Social Security benefits replace a more significant portion of prior earnings for low-wage workers, proponents argued that individuals with substantial government salaries over their careers should not receive the same benefits as long-time low-income workers.

Are WEP and GPO Unjust?

Some critics argue that these rules unfairly disadvantage individuals who have dedicated their careers to public service.

Sara Fischer, aged 65, accepted an early retirement incentive at 44 after 25 years with the federal court system. Aware that she would not be receiving her full pension, she planned to transition into the private sector where she could contribute to Social Security and get benefits based on her earnings.

However, her expectations were dashed. As a result of WEP, Fischer’s Social Security payment will be reduced by approximately $600.

“I don’t expect Social Security to pay me more than what anyone with 11 years of work would earn based on my contributions, but what WEP implies is that despite my contributions, my check gets reduced simply because I was employed in the government. That is the sole reason,” Fischer remarked. She continues to work part-time as a paralegal in Detroit, Michigan.

Additionally, once a person’s Social Security benefit gets cut, they also miss out on the yearly cost-of-living adjustment (COLA), according to Bill Callahan, 67, a retired educator from Middlebury, Connecticut.

“The COLA is calculated after applying the deductions from GPO or WEP… which means we’re losing out every year,” he explained.

For example, instead of receiving a cost-of-living adjustment based on the $839 benefit he would have qualified for without WEP, Callahan’s increase is calculated using the reduced amount after the $480 WEP cut. In 2025, he anticipates a 2.5% raise on just $359, which is nearly $9 a month.

This is less than half of the $21 he would have gained had the COLA been applied to his full benefit prior to the WEP adjustment, and it hardly covers the forthcoming increase of $10.30 for the standard monthly premium for Medicare Part B in 2025, rising from $174.70 in 2024.

“If you forecast this over 20 years of COLA, it’s disheartening,” he lamented.

Is it Feasible to Eliminate WEP and GPO?

The Social Security Fairness Act is projected to cost $196 billion within the next ten years, potentially accelerating Social Security’s insolvency by approximately six months and amplifying automatic benefit reductions when they occur, according to the bipartisan nonprofit Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB).

“These provisions have their flaws, and many reform ideas are being discussed,” stated CRFB President Maya MacGuineas. “However, completely repealing them would be a step in the wrong direction.”

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, recognized for its center-left stance,

A suggested formula aims to determine Social Security benefits in proportion to income from jobs that have contributed to the Social Security system, without hastening its bankruptcy. For instance, if 75% of an individual’s total earnings come from such jobs, their Social Security benefits would equal 75% of what they would have received if all their income originated from these positions.

Is the Social Security Fairness Act likely to be passed by the Senate?

According to The Senior Citizens League, a nonpartisan organization representing seniors, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has not yet scheduled a vote on the Act and must do so by the end of the year. If not, the bill will expire, requiring lawmakers to draft a new one.

YSL News attempted to contact Schumer regarding potential plans for voting on the bill but had not received a response prior to publication.

Currently, the legislation has gained support from 62 senators across party lines, surpassing the necessary 60 votes to overcome a filibuster and pass the law.

Callahan remarked, “They have the votes secured. It shouldn’t be politicized; this is a matter of fairness.”