And why does this NOT surprise me?....

[Laurie]

Here is something I received in my email which I think makes for interesting reading. It seems I'm in the wrong biz.

Social Security

This is worth reading, short and to the point!

Our Senators/Congressmen do not pay into Social Security, and, therefore they do not collect from it. Social Security benefits were not suitable for them. They felt they should have a special plan. Many years ago they voted in their benefit plan. In more recent years, no congress person has felt the need to change it. After all, it is a great plan. For all practical purposes, their plan works like this:

When they retire, no matter how long they have been in office they continue to draw their same pay until they die-except it may be increased from time to time by the cost-of-living adjustments.

For example, former Senator Bill Bradley (New Jersey) and his wife may be expected to draw $7,900,000.00 over an average life span, with Mrs. Bradley drawing $275,000.00 during the last year of her life.

Their cost for this excellent plan is "0," nada, zilch. This little perk they voted in for themselves free to them.

You and I pick up the tab for this plan. Our tax dollars at work!

Social Security, which you and I pay into every payday for our own retirement, with an equal amount matched by our employer, we can expect to get an average of $1,000 per month. Or, we would have to collect our benefits for 68 years and 1 month to equal the Bradley's benefits. Imagine for a moment that you could structure a retirement plan so desirable, a retirement plan that worked so well, that Railroad Employees, Postal Workers, and others who were not in the plan would clamor to be included.

This is how good Social Security could be, if only one small change was made. That change would be to jerk the Golden Fleece Retirement Plan out from under the Senators/Congressmen. Put them into the Social Security plan with the rest of us.

Watch how fast they fix it!!!

If enough people receive this maybe a seed will be planted, and maybe good changes will evolve.

Don't forget our girl, Hillary Rodham Clinton, thanks to the infinite wisdom of New York State voters, now comes under this Congressional Retirement Plan.

Talking about the Clintons, it's common knowledge that, in order for her to establish NYS residency, they purchased a million house in upscale Chappaqua, NY. Makes sense. Now, they are entitled to Secret Service protection for life. Still makes sense. Here is where it becomes interesting!! A residency had to be built in order to house the Secret Service agents.

The Clinton's now charge the Secret Service rent for the use of said residence and that rent is just about equal to their mortgage payment, meaning that we, the tax payers, are paying the Clinton's mortgage and it's all perfectly legal.

[Laurie]

I'm not surprised no one responded. You are all "one of them, aren't you?"

[JBMoney]

http://www.snopes2.com/inboxer/outrage/pensions.htm


Origins: This piece has been circulating on the Internet since April 2000. So much of it is outdated, inaccurate, or misleading, it's difficult to know where to begin.


* It is not true that Congressmen do not pay into the Social Security fund. They pay into the fund just as everyone else does.

* It was true prior to 1984 that Congressmen did not pay into the Social Security fund because they participated in a separate program for civil servants (the Civil Service Retirement System, or CSRS), but that program was closed to government employees hired after 1983.

* It is not true that Congressmen "continue to draw their same pay, until they die." The size of their pensions is determined by a number of factors (primarily length of service, but also when they joined Congress, their age at retirement, their salary, and the pension option they chose when they enrolled) and by law cannot exceed 80% of their salary at the time of their retirement.

* The figures given as an example for Senator Bradley ($7,900,000 over the course of his and his wife's lifetime, culminating in a top payout of $275,000) are simply outrageous figures with no basis in reality. There is no conceivable way Senator Bradley could draw anywhere near that amount of money though his pension plan.

* It is not true that Congressmen "paid nothing in on any kind of retirement," and that their pension money "comes right out of the General Fund." Whether members of Congress participate in the older Civil Service Retirement System or the newer Federal Employees' Retirement System (FERS), their pensions are funded through a combination of general tax provisions and contributions from the participants. Right now, members of Congress in the FERS plan must pay 1.3% of their salary to FERS and 6.2% in Social Security taxes.

* As of 1998, the average annuity for retired members of Congress was $50,616 for those who retired under CSRS and $46,908 for those who retired under FERS. Not bad, but not the highway robbery this piece makes it out to be.

[jhans]

The first few times I received this kind of email I got mad and forwarded it on. I then realized that 99% of them were bogus. At this point, I no longer believe any email that I receive of this nature. In some cases, on my own I can find facts that are misleading or false. If I can’t, I’ll research the subject online and within a few minutes I will almost always find out that the email is bogus. In only a few cases have I found an email to be legitimate. My mother used to receive several of these re-circulated emails a week and forward them to me. Eventually, I started replying to everyone on the list with an explanation of what was bogus in the email. After a while I began receiving emails back that thanked me for setting them straight and that they would research it before they sent out such an email in the future. While I continue to receive bogus emails, I have not received any from my mother or her friends for several months.