Federal Pensions: Not What They Used to Be

The authors accuse federal-pension defenders of using tactics of obfuscation. The article is itself a supreme example of such practice. It deliberately fails to mention sacrifices already made by civil-service retirees through reduced and delayed COLA's. Also, the statement that the new FERS (federal employees) system is nearly the same as the previous civil-service retirement system is blatantly false. It would take an article of similar length in order to correct all the errors.

The Concord Coalition, of which the authors are members, constantly attacks federal retirement systems even though they are not the cause of the budget deficit. Their favorite target, Social Security, is entirely self-supporting, yet they want to reduce its benefits in order to prop up other unfunded programs. Retirees have enough problems. The Congressional Research Service, which the authors treat with such disdain, is a far more accurate and unbiased source of information.

Richard Whitehead Merritt Island, Fla.

Your letters are welcome. For publication they must be signed and include your address and telephone number. Only a selection can be published and none acknowledged. Letters should be addressed to ''Readers Write'' and may be sent by mail to One Norway St., Boston, MA 02115, by fax to 617-450-2317, or by Internet E-mail (200 words maximum) to OPED@RACHEL.CSPS.COM.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
QR Code to Federal Pensions: Not What They Used to Be
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today