Overview:
Senate Bill 12-80 proposes reducing retirement benefits for Palauans who choose to reside outside the country. In this opinion piece, Hadleen Medalarak argues that retirement security is a matter of fundamental fairness and dignity, asserting that decades of earned contributions should not lose their value simply because a retiree crosses international borders.
WHY I OPPOSE SENATE BILL 12-80: RETIREMENT BENEFITS SHOULD NOT DEPEND ON WHERE YOU LIVE.
I respectfully oppose Senate Bill 12-80 insofar as it proposes reducing the retirement benefits of Palauans who choose to reside outside Palau.
I believe this legislation raises a fundamental question of fairness that deserves serious consideration by our Senators and the people of Palau:
If a Palauan employee makes the same contributions, works the same number of years, and qualifies for the same retirement benefits, what is the justification for paying that retiree less simply because of their country of residence?
How does relocating overseas erase decades of employment, contributions, and service to our country?
Let us remember that Social Security is not a government handout. It is a social insurance system supported by contributions from employees and employers, established to provide financial security during retirement.
People relocate for different reasons. Some move to be with their children and families. Others move because of healthcare needs, economic circumstances, or the desire to spend their retirement years somewhere they can better afford to live.
Should these personal circumstances become grounds for reducing benefits they have already earned?
I recognize that the long-term financial sustainability of our Social Security System is important. We must protect it for present and future generations. However, financial challenges should be addressed through responsible management, sound investments, actuarial assessments, and sustainable reforms—not by automatically placing a greater burden on retirees who live abroad.
If the system is facing financial difficulties, the public deserves transparency about its financial condition, projected liabilities, and the actual justification for this proposed reduction.
Our retirees should not be divided into categories of those who remain in Palau and those who choose to live elsewhere. Their years of contributions do not become less valuable when they cross international borders.
Retirement security is about dignity, fairness, and honoring the contributions people have made throughout their working lives.
I urge our Senators to carefully reconsider Senate Bill 12-80 and examine whether this proposed policy is fair to the very people whose contributions helped build our Social Security System.
WHERE YOU CHOOSE TO LIVE AFTER RETIREMENT SHOULD NOT DETERMINE THE VALUE OF THE BENEFITS YOU EARNED THROUGH A LIFETIME OF WORK.
SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS MUST OUTLIVE BENEFICIARIES, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
Hadleen Medalarak