Me and the OPM
(Office of Personel Management)
Dear Concerned Citizen,
Thank you for your recent e-mail concerning U.S.
Senate Bill 2532. While this legislation you reference only applies to same-sex
domestic partner benefits, OPM’s concern would be the same if one were to also
add opposite-sex domestic partners to the legislation as Senator Collins of
Maine has urged.
The concerns OPM has expressed about potential fraud
under S.2532 center on how the defined benefit retirement plan for Federal
employees would be administered. Marriage, for instance, cannot be dissolved
without legal action, which has consequences and can create significant spousal
retirement benefit/survivor annuity obligations that can be judicially enforced.
Under this bill, the only action a Federal employee would need to take to
terminate a retirement benefit to a domestic partner is a signed statement of
dissolution. OPM would then be required to rely on such a statement without a
formal legal proceeding and determination this could increase the possibility for
fraud and put our fiduciary responsibilities to benefit recipients and taxpayers
at greater risk.
Dear Mr. Secretary
Thank you for your response.
Has it occurred to you that amendments could be offered to the bill that
would address your concerns about fraud?
Fraud, after all, is an issue in any program, and so safeguards and
penalties always have to be devised to reduce the possibility of the occurrence
of fraud.
Please note, that the option of marriage is not yet an option to gay
couples.; So, under the 14th amendment, don't you think that you have some
responsibility to ensure that all couples are treated equally under the
law?
Of course, marriage, as it is now constituted in American law, is an
intrusion of religion into government policy, and is thus, clearly, a violation
of the 1st Amendment. But that may be another issue.
Kindest Regards,
Jimmy Horowitz
Dear Concerned Citizen,
Thank you for your recent e-mail concerning U.S.
Senate Bill 2532. While this legislation you reference only applies to same-sex
domestic partner benefits, OPM’s concern would be the same if one were to also
add opposite-sex domestic partners to the legislation as Senator Collins of
Maine has urged.
The concerns OPM has expressed about potential fraud
under S.2532 center on how the defined benefit retirement plan for Federal
employees would be administered. Marriage, for instance, cannot be dissolved
without legal action, which has consequences and can create significant spousal
retirement benefit/survivor annuity obligations that can be judicially enforced.
Under this bill, the only action a Federal employee would need to take to
terminate a retirement benefit to a domestic partner is a signed statement of
dissolution. OPM would then be required to rely on such a statement without a
formal legal proceeding and determination this could increase the possibility for
fraud and put our fiduciary responsibilities to benefit recipients and taxpayers
at greater risk.
Dear Mr. Secretary
Thank you for your response.
Has it occurred to you that amendments could be offered to the bill that
would address your concerns about fraud?
Fraud, after all, is an issue in any program, and so safeguards and
penalties always have to be devised to reduce the possibility of the occurrence
of fraud.
Please note, that the option of marriage is not yet an option to gay
couples.; So, under the 14th amendment, don't you think that you have some
responsibility to ensure that all couples are treated equally under the
law?
Of course, marriage, as it is now constituted in American law, is an
intrusion of religion into government policy, and is thus, clearly, a violation
of the 1st Amendment. But that may be another issue.
Kindest Regards,
Jimmy Horowitz