A significant number of Congress members, including Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), are set to retire without pursuing re-election next year, leading to an estimated taxpayer expense of around $38 million annually in pension benefits.
The unexpected announcement of Greene’s retirement, along with the substantial pension Pelosi will receive after nearly four decades of service, has spotlighted some lesser-known benefits for former lawmakers and has reignited discussions about abolishing the program altogether.
“I can’t quite determine her motivations, but it seems calculated to secure her benefits,” remarked Demian Brady, vice president of research at the National Taxpayers Union Foundation, referring to Greene’s timing for leaving the House.
Under federal regulations, Congress members become eligible for pensions only after five complete years in office. Brady noted that Greene, who took office on January 3, 2021, and plans to retire on January 5, 2026, strategically chose her retirement date to qualify for this eligibility.
“It’s not like she’s served that long,” Brady added. “So, while it won’t be a massive pension, it’s still a little more money coming her way.” According to Brady’s calculations, Greene will qualify for an annual pension of $8,717 when she turns 62, which is deemed on the lower end in comparison to others.
Overall, Greene’s total lifetime pension benefits could exceed $265,000, he suggested.
Meanwhile, Pelosi’s pension, given her extended tenure and salary increases from her role as Speaker of the House, is projected to be around $107,860 annually upon her retirement in 2027.
In 2022, the retirement benefits for former members surpassed $38 million, as per the latest public records. The average pension under the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) was reported to be $45,276, while a different pension plan, which is no longer open to new members, averaged $84,504 among its participants.
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), an ally of Greene and a proponent of eliminating Congressional pensions, noted that while Greene is entitled to these benefits, it’s a system that requires reform. “House members don’t have the option to opt out of FERS; it’s a tricky situation,” he explained.
Massie expressed his intention to “soon reintroduce” legislation to suspend House member eligibility for the FERS program and make participation optional for Congress members. “If lawmakers want retirement savings, they should manage that through a 401(k)-style plan rather than relying on taxpayer money once they’re out of office,” he commented. “Addressing excessive government spending means Congress ought to lead by example.”
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, a former Congressman, reiterated his pledge in 2013 not to accept pension benefits, emphasizing that he aimed to embody the citizen legislator envisioned by the Founding Fathers. Following Greene’s retirement announcement, he voiced support for ending the benefits system altogether.
“I understand others may choose differently,” DeSantis stated recently on social media, stressing the importance of reform for all. He also pointed out that lawmakers can build retirement savings through a different program, the Thrift Savings Plan.
“How many private sector workers enjoy both pensions and 401(k)s? It’s time for Congress to abolish these pensions,” he demanded.
Brady, a pensions expert, acknowledged that existing members pose the greatest challenge to pension reform. “Career politicians are particularly resistant; they’ve dedicated decades to public service and obviously want that pension,” he noted.
While he doubts Greene’s retirement timing will lead to immediate reforms, he believes it has raised significant awareness about the pension system for Congress members. Both Greene and Pelosi did not respond to inquiries regarding this matter.
