Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 28, 2007
Restoring Pension Promises to Workers Act - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to require the inclusion in gross income of all income previously deferred under a nonqualified deferred compensation plan if an employer maintaining such a plan fails to meet certain participation, vesting, and minimum benefit requirements.
Amends the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) to: (1) deny ERISA pension plan administrators the right to recover overpayments made to plan participants and beneficiaries in cases of hardship or insignificant amounts; (2) impose a three-year limitation period for bringing any action to recover an overpayment; (3) prohibit the elimination of accrued pension plan benefits during corporate mergers and acquisitions; and (4) establish in the Department of Labor an Office of Pension Participant Advocacy to protect pension plan participants.
Amends federal employee personnel provisions to: (1) entitle former spouses of federal employees who die before establishing a valid claim for an annuity to 55% of such deferred annuity or a lump-sum payment; (2) permit divorced spouses of federal employees to collect court-awarded retirement benefits when such employees are first eligible to retire (currently, only available at the time the employee actually retires); (3) entitle certain former spouses of retired federal employees divorced prior to September 14, 1978, to a survivor annuity; and (4) give priority to a surviving spouse of a federal employee in the distribution of balances in a Thrift Savings account, unless such spouse consents to the designation of another beneficiary.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze S.1725 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.1725 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.1725 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.1725 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.