Bill Overview
Title: Members of Congress Pension Opt Out Clarification Act
Description: This bill allows future Members of the House of Representatives to opt out of the Federal Employees Retirement System, an option currently available to Members of the House who began serving before September 30, 2003, and all Senators. In addition, it permits Members of Congress who opt out to continue to participate in the Thrift Savings Plan.
Sponsors: Sen. Braun, Mike [R-IN]
Target Audience
Population: Members of the House of Representatives globally (current and future)
Estimated Size: 435
- The bill directly impacts Members of the House of Representatives entering office after the enactment of this bill.
- There are currently 435 members of the U.S. House of Representatives and elections are held every two years, so almost all members change over a period of a few cycles.
- Not every member of Congress will opt out, but they will nonetheless be affected by having the choice.
- The Thrift Savings Plan is a retirement savings plan for federal employees including members of Congress.
Reasoning
- The target population for the policy is Members of the House of Representatives. However, the policy may indirectly affect other stakeholders such as federal employees involved in managing congressional benefits and the taxpayer. Therefore, we need to simulate interviews with different stakeholders.
- Budget limitations make it impractical to have direct, large-scale financial impacts on a broad segment of the population outside Congress. The key focus will be on the decision-making behaviors of congress members who will opt out and how it affects their financial planning.
- The policy primarily provides flexibility in retirement planning for congress members, potentially reducing government expenditure on retiring congress members, giving them more autonomy in handling their retirement savings through the Thrift Savings Plan.
- Considering the budget limitations ($5,000,000 for year 1 and $41,000,000 over 10 years), the financial impact on each congress member is minimal, focusing more on long-term personal financial strategy rather than immediate monetary benefits.
- Congress members are relatively few in number compared to the overall U.S. population. Hence, their direct quantitative impact on wellbeing isn't vast in terms of direct financial benefits from the policy to the general public. Most impact would be qualitative in terms of policy satisfaction and autonomy in personal financial decisions.
Simulated Interviews
Congress Member (California)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The option to opt-out provides flexibility, which I appreciate.
- I intend to analyze my finances critically before making a decision to opt-out.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Congress Member (Virginia)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This doesn't affect me directly, but newer members will have some tough choices.
- This policy will make them engage in more personal retirement planning early on.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Congress Member (Texas)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I feel empowered to manage my future more actively.
- Opting out could be a good move if I plan wisely.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Congress Member (New York)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm glad newer members have more choices.
- It does not change my situation significantly.
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 |
Congress Member (Illinois)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having the choice impacts my long-term planning in a positive way.
- I like the flexibility to tailor making decisions that benefit me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Retired Congress Member (Florida)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is interesting but has no effect on me.
- Active members might find it beneficial for personal financial reasons.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Congress Member (Texas)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm very intrigued by this opportunity.
- This gives me a chance to align my career with long-term financial interests effectively.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Congress Member (Georgia)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I like the autonomy this policy gives me.
- Opting out could be a strong step towards personal fiscal responsibility.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Congress Member (Washington)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Ensuring my future financial security is a priority.
- The option adds to my decision-making process.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Congress Member (Pennsylvania)
Age: 59 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is more relevant to new members than to me.
- It's good they have additional options though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $8000000)
Year 2: $4000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $7000000)
Year 3: $4000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $7000000)
Year 5: $4000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $7000000)
Year 10: $4000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $7000000)
Year 100: $4000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $7000000)
Key Considerations
- The bill allows opt-outs, potentially reducing the number of participants in federal pension plans, thereby reducing long-term government obligations.
- Monitoring and managing opt-out choices may lead to additional administrative overhead or costs.
- Savings depend on the number of members that opt-out and could result in significant cost savings for the government over time.