Maxwell Frost: “Mr. Speaker, it makes no sense to me to reduce the Social Security of a retiree simply because the spouse of that person…”

“Mr. Speaker, it makes no sense to me to reduce the Social Security of a retiree simply because the spouse of that person happens to be a teacher or firefighter or police officer. These jobs are not high-paying jobs. Those who chose this path have done so because they want to make life better for all of us. And what do we do? We deprive them of a significant portion of their hard-earned retirement benefits just because one spouse works for a government entity instead of a private company. That is just wrong. I urge a no vote on the previous question. If the previous question is defeated, I will offer an amendment to the rule that will do two things. First, it will strike Section 418, the portion of the bill that prevents certain public employees from receiving the full amount of their deceased spouse's Social Security survivor benefits, benefits to which they are otherwise entitled. It will also add to the base bill, H.R. 743, the text of H.R. 594, the Social Security Fairness Act which will once and for all eliminate the pension offsets that so unfairly diminish all the retirement benefits of our valued public employees.”