The House finally appears set to repeal the WEP and GPO
Lawmakers in September successfully triggered a discharge petition to force a vote on legislation to get rid of the controversial tax provisions affecting some feds’ retirement benefits.
Lawmakers in the House finally seem set to pass legislation to repeal two controversial tax provisions that affect some federal retirees’ annuity benefits, despite an attempt this week to derail the vote.
Last September, Reps. Garret Graves, R-La., and Abigail Spanberger, D-Va., obtained the 218 signatures required for a discharge petition to force a floor vote on the Social Security Fairness Act (H.R. 82), a measure that would eliminate Social Security’s windfall elimination provision and government pension offset. Prior to the petition drive, the bill already had more than 300 cosponsors.
The windfall elimination provision reduces the Social Security benefits of retired federal employees who spent a portion of their careers in the private sector in addition to a federal, state or local government job where Social Security is not intended as an element of their retirement income, such as the Civil Service Retirement System. And the government pension offset reduces spousal and survivor Social Security benefits in families with retired government workers.
Members of the ultraconservative House Freedom Caucus orchestrated an unusual play on the House floor during a rare election night, 5 p.m. pro forma session that resulted in killing, at least for now, a broadly popular bill that was set to hit the floor as soon as next week.
Reps. Garret Graves, R-La., and Abigail Spanberger, D-Va., had successfully rounded up the 218 signatures needed for a discharge petition to bypass GOP leaders and bring up bipartisan legislation that would repeal two long-standing provisions docking Social Security benefits for certain retirees. They were set to make their move as soon as Tuesday night by triggering a two-day clock to bring to the floor the special rule for immediate consideration of the bill.
With 330 co-sponsors, including now-Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., who was one of the first to affix his name early in the 118th Congress, passage of the measure was all but guaranteed. GOP leaders were mulling simply bringing it to the floor under suspension of the rules next week, which skips a rule vote but requires two-thirds of members present and voting to pass.
The successful discharge petition requires House Speaker Mike Johnson, himself a cosponsor of the bill, to call the measure up for a floor vote when Congress returns to Washington. The measure appears on a list of bills that House leadership wants to pass under suspension of the rules, a fast track that requires the support of two-thirds of lawmakers, next week, despite an unsuccessful ploy to stall the bill’s momentum by two D.C.-area conservatives this week.
On Election Day just after 5 p.m., Reps. Bob Good, R-Va., and Andy Harris, R-Md., the former and current chairs of the House Freedom Caucus, respectively, held a pro forma session on the House floor in which Good requested unanimous consent to table the legislation—effectively killing the bill. The exchange was first reported by Roll Call.
But the gambit has apparently failed for two reasons. First, as a House parliamentarian could be heard informing Good and Harris on the House floor, unanimous consent requests must be cleared first with the House speaker and House Minority Leader.
And secondly, while the Freedom Caucus members moved to table the Graves and Spanberger’s bill, the discharge petition requires the speaker to schedule a vote on the rule governing the bill’s consideration on the floor. Indeed, the measure is at the top of the House’s list of bills to be considered under suspension of the rules next week, last updated an hour after the pro forma session.
It remains unclear how the measure would fare in the Senate, where companion legislation has the support of 63 senators but languished in committee since its introduction last year. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the measure would cost $196 billion in additional Social Security benefit outlays over the next decade.
