WEP-GPO Debate Enters a New Stage as the Clock Winds Down - The Hill
As noted in yesterday’s headline post on this website, the rush to obtain a Senate vote on the bill to repeal Social Security’s Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and Government Pension Offset (GPO) is hitting some roadblocks. The latest, as explained in a post today by The Hill’s Alexander Bolton, involves pressure from Senate conservatives to include program reforms that would mitigate the cost of the intended reforms, estimated to be in the neighborhood of $200 billion. Click here to read the Bolton post, which summarizes Sen. Rand Paul’s (R-Ky.) positions calling for amendments to address the incremental program cost.
The controversial nature of the WEP-GPO repeal initiative has generated substantial news coverage this year, with quite a bit of contradiction in viewpoints on the fairness of these provisions. Our research here at the AMAC Foundation has made it clear that there is a general misunderstanding about the logic behind these two provisions. As part of our mission to provide relevant, impartial education to seniors on matters affecting their well-being, we contributed information intended to ensure clarity for those wishing to take a position on this issue. The rules are controversial, to be sure, and there are two sides to the argument. For this reason, our Social Security Advisory Service has heavily researched the origin of these two troublesome provisions and has offered a publication (WEP and GPO: To Repeal or Not?) to help clarify the matter. We also conducted a public webinar presenting thoughts on the subject. A recording of the webinar can be viewed on the Foundation website here. As the webinar title suggests, the intent is to provide the background needed to take an informed stance.