Citizens' Daily Lobby

Not only does Tim Griffin find his own pension to be unnecessary, he’s also looking hard at yours, if you happen to work for the public.  In passing up his future Congressional pension, he noted that taxpayers already pay too much for government.  ”I would add that during these times of record deficits and debt, we are duty bound to reassess the sustainability of taxpayer-funded pension programs, and I plan to be a leader on this issue.”

Unlike your average public-school educator, fireman, policeman, or postal service worker, Mr. Griffin can probably afford to make this sacrifice.  The Center for Responsive Politics reports an income of $497,810 for Mr. Griffin in 2009. He plans to term-limit himself, so he should have plenty of working years left once he leaves Congress to fund his retirement through the private sector.  What he’s calling for however, is an end to or restriction of pensions for those who give their entire working life to the greater public good, and who do not make enough income to independently fund their retirement.

Seen in another light, the gesture is even more sinister.  Salary and pensions for members of Congress exist so that service in Congress will not be limited to those who can afford to give up their jobs for years at a time.   It’s a mechanism to help equalize the playing field for the little guys.   Mr. Griffin is advocating putting Congressional service out of reach for most of us.

If only Mr. Griffin had limited himself to graciously declining to accept a pension, due to his own privileged position in society and earning potential,  his move would be laudable.  In making the gesture a platform for his own and his party’s anti-public service platform, he betrays the deeply rooted cynicism that really motivates him.