If Rep. Tim Griffin, R-Ark., can pass his bill, members of Congress won’t receive a pension for serving in office. And if he has his way, the federal employee pension system would look like most retirement plans in the private sector.
Those are two huge “ifs.”
On Nov. 18, Griffin, who represents the 2nd District encompassing central Arkansas, introduced the End Pensions in Congress Act. It would apply to every member of Congress who has served less than five years and therefore is not yet vested in the system.
Not surprisingly, he has not been trampled by colleagues rushing to his office to embrace it. As of Nov. 30, the bill had three co-sponsors in the House, none from Arkansas. Spokesmen for Rep. Rick Crawford of the 1st District, Rep. Steve Womack of the 3rd District and Rep. Mike Ross of the 4th District said their bosses are reviewing the bill.
Griffin hopes the provision protecting pensions for congressmen who have served at least five years will help galvanize support for what will be a very difficult sell. It’s doubtful many people run for Congress just to get a pension, but, for newcomers, it would be hard to vote to give such a benefit away.
Independent reporting for Pine Bluff & Jefferson County since 1879.
Griffin says the point isn’t whether members of Congress should receive a pension. “This is not about a moral judgement for me,” he said in an interview. “This is about what we can afford and what we can’t afford.”
Griffin acknowledges that even if the bill became law, it wouldn’t make a dent in the country’s $15 trillion national debt.
But it would give members of Congress added legitimacy to tackle the federal pension system, which, like Social Security, has a very big problem: a lot of beneficiaries but no savings in the bank.
Last year, taxpayers paid $275 billion in retirement and health benefits to support 10 million federal government retirees.
That number will grow a lot bigger in coming years. According to USA Today, the federal pension system has promised $5.7 trillion in benefits, almost as much as the $6.5 trillion promised by Social Security.
In both cases, the government hasn’t saved a dime to pay for future payouts — a practice that would be illegal if done by a private company.
Griffin said the country can’t afford to keep promising federal employees lifetime pensions, a benefit available to few workers in the private sector. He would prefer a federal retirement system that relied on a 401(k) program for civilian employees while providing a pension to military veterans.
Changing the federal pension system would be a huge step, and Griffin is flexible in how to take it. He said current federal government workers who already are vested should keep their future benefits. If it would help pass the bill, he’s willing to expand that to others who have served less than five years.
Griffin deserves credit for bringing up a difficult subject and offering a solution. It’s a bold step just talking about the massive gulf that exists between what the government has promised in retirement benefits and what it can actually pay for.
That gulf exists in large part because members of Congress as well as political candidates have skillfully avoided discussing it for decades. The American people are guilty, too — of choosing to elect politicians who tell them what they want to hear.
But ignoring the problem won’t make it go away — it just will make it harder for future generations to pay for our irresponsibility.
For now, Griffin says he will “push and push and push” to pass the End Pensions in Congress Act.
He’ll have to.
—————-
Steve Brawner is an independent journalist in Arkansas.