
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: FRIDAY, January 14, 1994                   TAG: 9401260016
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A8   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: AL J. GOLATO
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

RETIREES' BENEFITS ARE NOT `WELFARE'

IN THE Dec. 19 editorial, ``The welfare of entitled Americans,'' the case was made for considering ``welfare reform as part of a national reappraisal of entitlements generally.'' However, your editorial, with its sweeping definition of what constitutes ``welfare'' does a great disservice to older Americans who've ``earned'' and contributed toward their retirement benefits.

Playing fast and loose with billion-dollar figures, your editorial raced to the conclusion that ``The real budget-busters are entitlement transfers to the middle class,'' including the earned retirement benefits of federal and military retirees.

The National Association of Retired Federal Employees, with some 500,000 members nationwide and 20,138 members in Virginia, takes strong exception to the lumping of ``earned'' entitlements in with public-policy-driven entitlements. There's a clear and concise difference.

The retirement benefits of federal workers are paid for, earned and work-related. In effect, they're deferred compensation for past services. This earned entitlement should not and cannot, in all fairness, be equated with government benefits granted or given based on need or for some other policy purpose.

For federal retirees, inflation-protected annuities and health insurance are part of an implied employment contract with their former employer - the United States government. These earned retirement benefits are distinctly different from programs fully funded by taxpayers, such as farm subsidies, Aid to Families with Dependent Children, food stamps, and other public-policy-driven entitlements.

Clearly, there's a need to tackle the federal budget deficit. Toward that end, there should be welfare reform, with an emphasis on cost-effective programs to care for the neediest Americans and to promote self-reliance for those able to work. Toward that end, health-care reform should move forward. Federal outlays for Medicare and Medicaid can be greatly reduced with the enactment of health-care reforms. Toward that end, there should be honest and open debate on public-policy priorities and their cost.

However, deficit reduction shouldn't be used as an excuse to unfairly characterize the paid-for, work-related annuities earned by federal retirees. Your editorial did just that.

Al J. Golato is national vice president of the National Association of Retired Federal Employees in Washington, D.C.

by CNB