The Washington Post

New Simpson-Bowles plan could revive earlier proposals on fed worker benefits

Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction Members of the deficit reduction commission in 2011: Left,  Erskine Bowles, Alan Simpson, Alice Rivlin, Sen. Pete Domenici.  (The Washington Post/Melina Mara)

The new Simpson-Bowles deficit reduction initiative put forward Tuesday as a potential route out of Washington’s budget thicket could revive several items in the original Simpson-Bowles plan that would have a significant impact on federal employee benefits.

The new document, from Erskine Bowles and former senator Alan Simpson, calls for “modernizing civilian and military health and retirement programs” and for “reforming cost-sharing” in health care. But it does not provide much detail.

The original report, issued in late 2010, similarly said that federal employee retirement benefits were out of line “with standard practices from the private sector” and recommended creating a task force to review potential changes. Those included basing benefits on the highest five consecutive salary years rather than the current three years; not paying inflation adjustments until age 62 and paying a onetime partial catch-up at that age; and requiring employees to pay into the retirement fund as much as the government pays, an increase of about 5 percentage points in the employee share.

The original also recommended a change in the cost-sharing arrangement in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program that over time could shift more of the costs onto the enrollee. In the current system, the government pays about 70 percent of the total premium. Under the recommended voucher-type system, the government would pay a dollar amount that would rise annually, but likely by less than the average hike in premiums.

That was suggested as a test for possibly making a similar change in the Medicare premium formula.

The new document explicitly repeats the original plan’s call for switching to the “chained” Consumer Price Index to adjust various benefits for inflation. Under the original plan, federal retirement annuities would be among the affected programs. That index would produce adjustments about 0.3 percentage points a year less than what the current index yields, according to a Congressional Budget Office analysis of an earlier proposal.

American Federation of Government Employees Union president J. David Cox urged Congress to reject the new initiative. “It seems that Bowles and Simpson will not stop until federal employees lose almost half of their retirement benefits, until hundreds of thousands of federal employees are thrown out of work, and millions of Americans either never retire or are poorer and more insecure in retirement because the Social Security and Medicare benefits which they paid for, and on which they hoped to rely, are slashed,” he said in a statement Tuesday. Bowles and former senator Simpson were co-chairman of the president’s bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform.

In a statement from the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association,  president Joseph A. Beaudoin said: “It is just wrong to place so much burden on such a small group of hardworking Americans. To preserve the vital services they provide our country, we urge Congress to stop squeezing every last dime out of our federal workers before it damages the strength of our federal workforce.”

The original report also had recommended a three-year freeze on federal salary rates, which paved the way for enactment shortly afterward of a law denying general federal pay raises in 2011 and 2012. The freeze was later extended by a temporary budget measure that expires late next month. A 0.5 percent raise will be paid in April unless blocked; the House passed a bill last week to prevent that raise, but the measure’s prospects in the Senate are uncertain.

The Freddie Gray case

Please provide a valid email address.

You’re all set!

Campaign 2016 Email Updates

Please provide a valid email address.

You’re all set!

Get Zika news by email

Please provide a valid email address.

You’re all set!
Show Comments
New Hampshire has voted. The Democrats debate on Thursday. Get caught up on the race.
The Post's Philip Rucker and Robert Costa say...
For Trump, the victory here was sweet vindication, showing that his atypical campaign could prevail largely on the power of celebrity and saturation media coverage. But there was also potential for concern in Tuesday's outcome. Trump faces doubts about his discipline as a candidate and whether he can build his support beyond the levels he has shown in the polls.
The Post's John Wagner and Anne Gearan say...
Hillary Clinton, who was declared the winner of the Iowa caucuses last week by the narrowest of margins, now finds herself struggling to right her once-formidable campaign against a self-described democratic socialist whom she has accused of selling pipe dreams to his supporters.
People have every right to be angry. But they're also hungry for solutions.
Hillary Clinton, in her New Hampshire primary night speech
I am going to be the greatest jobs president that God ever created.
Donald Trump, in his New Hampshire primary victory speech
Upcoming debates
Feb. 11: Democratic debate

on PBS, in Wisconsin

Feb 13: GOP debate

on CBS News, in South Carolina

Feb. 25: GOP debate

on CNN, in Houston, Texas

Campaign 2016
See results from N.H.
Most Read



Success! Check your inbox for details.

See all newsletters

Close video player
Now Playing

To keep reading, please enter your email address.

You’ll also receive from The Washington Post:
  • A free 6-week digital subscription
  • Our daily newsletter in your inbox

Please enter a valid email address

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Please indicate agreement.

Thank you.

Check your inbox. We’ve sent an email explaining how to set up an account and activate your free digital subscription.