To the Editor:

I wanted to take the time to thank you for the article you published on July 12, 2013 regarding  Congressman Joe Pitts ability to harvest a    state pension of $90,867 per year  in addition to his annual Congressional salary of $174,000.

I  appreciated the information you provided and wish to shed additional light on this subject. Mr. Pitts has been collecting a state pension and a Congressional salary since 1997. Both income streams are subject to cost of living adjustments (COLAS). From January 1997 to June 1998 his pension was $82,984.32.  In June 1998. Mr. Pitts’ COLA increased and his  pension increased to $84,527.88. On July 1, 2003, Mr. Pitts benefitted from another COLA and his annual pay out was pumped up to$90,867.48.

Mr. Pitts is quoted in your article as saying that the rate he “paid into the system was  a lot higher than what it is now.” Such a comment might suggest his generous annual pension was the result from Mr. Pitts making higher contributions. This is not the case.

The facts of this matter are that Mr. Pitts’ contributions are no longer part of the state  resources available to pay his or anyone else’s pension. And, upon his retirement in 1997,  Mr. Pitts received a lump sum payment of $210,079.73 from the state pension system. His  lump sum pay out was comprised of his contributions of $154,707.20 and a 4% statutory interest totaling $55,372.53. He, also, received a lump sum payment of $5,351.55 for contributions made when he taught school. The combined lump sum benefit was  $215,431.28.  But unlike traditional 401 (K) defined contribution plans, the state  served as Mr. Pitts’ investment agent and guaranteed a robust rate of return.

When Mr. Pitts began serving in Congress his annual pay was $133,600. Mr. Pitts  pledged that he would only serve for 10 years. If he had retired after 10 years, his last  year’s pay would have been $165,200. However, Mr. Pitts broke his pledge and was rewarded with a $8,800 raise.

Mr. Pitts will also earn a federal pension pension. He was recently elected to his 9th term  just about guaranteeing that he will serve a minimum of 18 years. Each year he serves he gets his annual paycheck, the state pension and, at the same time, increases his future federal pension payment by 2.7% per year up to 20 years. By the end of his 18th year, it appears that Mr. Pitts will qualify for an annual federal pension of over $84,500 per year.

According to your news article, he plans on running for an additional term. Should he  be successful, his federal pension, upon retirement, will grow to almost $94,000 per year.

On his web site, Congressman Pitts says that “jobs are not created by government.  Prosperity isn’t either. Jobs and prosperity are created by risk-taking entrepreneurs,  successful businesses and hardworking Americans.”

Mr. Pitts may wish to amend this quote and include government as place for creating  prosperity for Congressmen. I would think that Congressional Pitts ought to feel most confident in holding himself up as a prime example as a prosperous beneficiary of government.

By the end of his current term, Congressman Joe Pitts will have received approximately $4,650,000 in state pension payments and congressional salary since he “retired” from state government in early 1997.

In addition to a state and federal pension, Mr. Pitts will enjoy free taxpayer subsidized health care for the rest of his life. Which begs the question: Will Mr. Pitts also be eligible  for social security when he retires?

Sincerely,

Eric Epstein, Coordinator
Rock the Capital
4100 Hillsdale Road
Harrisburg, PA 17112
717-635-8615
http://www.rockthecapital.com/

Photo by Simon Bradshaw