Bill Overview
Title: Susan Muffley Act of 2022
Description: This bill restores the full vested monthly benefits for eligible participants of certain pension plans that were sponsored by Delphi Corporation and terminated as a result of General Motors' bankruptcy in 2009. The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) must recalculate and adjust each plan participant's monthly benefits payment. The PBGC must also apply the recalculation to previously-made monthly payments and make a lump-sum payment for any additional benefits based on the recalculation. The bill establishes and provides appropriations to a fund for the payment of these benefits and specifies how the lump-sum payments are treated for tax purposes.
Sponsors: Sen. Brown, Sherrod [D-OH]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals in Delphi Corporation pension plans impacted by 2009 bankruptcy
Estimated Size: 18000
- The bill targets individuals who were part of certain pension plans sponsored by Delphi Corporation.
- Delphi Corporation declared bankruptcy, impacting employee pensions when GM went bankrupt in 2009.
- The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) had taken over these pensions, but not all benefits were paid out.
- The legislation seeks to restore the full vested monthly benefits for eligibile participants.
Reasoning
- The population primarily affected by the Susan Muffley Act of 2022 is a subset of individuals whose pensions were impacted due to the bankruptcy of Delphi Corporation, specifically those who were part of certain pension plans that faced reductions or were partially unmet. This narrows the affected group largely to former Delphi employees, who are expected to be mostly located in the United States.
- The policy allocates substantial funding to restore these pensions, which would significantly improve the wellbeing of those directly affected, particularly older individuals who rely on fixed incomes in retirement.
- Given the limited budget and target group estimate of 18,000 people, it's crucial to simulate a mix of interviews capturing different demographic and socioeconomic profiles, including those not affected directly by the policy but who may be aware of similar situations or have related opinions on pension reforms.
Simulated Interviews
Retired Engineer (Lansing, Michigan)
Age: 70 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could really help me and my family.
- I've struggled to make ends meet with my reduced pension.
- Restoring our benefits feels like the right thing to do after what happened.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 3 |
Retired Finance Manager (Troy, Michigan)
Age: 68 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Since the bankruptcy, my financial security has been in limbo.
- Getting those benefits back would mean a world of difference for my retirement plans.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 4 |
Maintenance Worker (Dayton, Ohio)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The reduction in benefits has made life tough.
- This policy could help provide some long-overdue relief.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 2 |
Retired Factory Supervisor (Flint, Michigan)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I know friends who are affected and could use these restored benefits.
- Pension security is crucial for retirees like us.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Retired Auto Worker (Detroit, Michigan)
Age: 72 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a good step towards addressing the issues caused by the bankruptcy.
- Wish I could benefit, but happy for those who will.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Retired HR Specialist (Cleveland, Ohio)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My retirement savings were affected by the pension cuts.
- Restored benefits would ease financial stress.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Retired Accountant (Columbus, Ohio)
Age: 58 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The restoration of benefits would help me maintain my living standards.
- I've had to make significant lifestyle adjustments since the pension changes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Retired Mechanical Engineer (Akron, Ohio)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policy seems beneficial for those in my network affected by the bankruptcy.
- Having a stable pension is essential for retirement security.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Retired Electrician (Kokomo, Indiana)
Age: 66 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Since the pension cuts, my wellbeing has decreased substantially.
- This act promises a much-needed return of benefits.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 2 |
Retired Quality Control Inspector (Toledo, Ohio)
Age: 63 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've been waiting for something like this to reverse the damage done.
- Restoring the pension would secure my financial future.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $600000000 (Low: $500000000, High: $700000000)
Year 2: $300000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $350000000)
Year 3: $300000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $350000000)
Year 5: $300000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $350000000)
Year 10: $300000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $350000000)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $1000000000)
Key Considerations
- Availability of full benefit packages could significantly improve the financial stability of the affected individuals.
- The execution of lump-sum payments requires precise calculation and potentially complex adjustments to existing PBGC processes.
- Tax implications of receiving lump-sum payments need to be clearly communicated to beneficiaries.
- The additional costs could put a strain on the PBGC unless fully funded by the appropriations outlined in the bill.