The Press-Dispatch
Issue link: https://www.ifoldsflip.com/i/1472537
I'm getting spouse benefits – What happens to my own? Dear Rusty: I was born in late 1951. When I retired five years ago, I was made aware that my own Social Security benefit was less than half of my husband's SS Benefit. So, I chose to take half of his. What happens to my undis- pensed SS dollars? On the off chance the balance increas- es beyond the amount I am now collecting, can I even- tually switch to my own full SS amount? Signed: Curious Senior. Dear Curious Senior: Much depends on exactly how you claimed your SS benefits five years ago and your age when you claimed. Because you were born in 1951, if you had reached your full retirement age (FRA) of 66 when you claimed SS five years ago and your husband was already collecting his benefits, you had the option to file a "restricted appli- cation for spousal benefits only" which would have en- abled you to collect only your spouse benefit while letting your own benefit continue to grow. But if you were not yet 66 when you claimed, the "restricted ap- plication" wasn't available to you, so you are now re- ceiving your own benefit plus an additional amount to bring your pay- ment to your spou- sal amount. I expect that the latter is the case (that you didn't file a "restricted application", which would mean that your current payment amount consists of two par ts – your personal benefit (from your own lifetime work record) plus a "spousal boost" to bring your payment to your spousal entitlement. Except for the restricted application, Social Security always pays your own benefit amount first and then supplements your own benefit with an ad- ditional amount to give you what you're entitled to as a spouse. Thus, your personal benefits aren't "undispensed" - you're al- ready getting them, plus a spousal sup- plement. Just to complete the picture, if you did file a "restricted application" at age 66, then your own ben- efit continued to grow until you were 70 (at which point it reached maximum). The growth amount would have been 8 percent per year ad- ditional benefit, so at age 70 your own benefit would have been 32 percent more than your FRA amount. If you know what your own FRA benefit amount was, then increase that by 32 percent to see if your own amount is now higher and, if so, contact Social Security to apply for your own high- er benefit. If you don't know what your personal FRA amount was and/or are uncertain if you filed a restricted appli- cation, you'll need to contact Social Security directly to see if you're entitled to any addi- tional amount based on your own lifetime work record. You can contact Social Securi- ty at either the national center (1.800.772.1213) or at your lo- cal office (find the number at www.ssa.gov/locator). If you are currently getting spouse benefits only under a restrict- ed application and your per- sonal benefit is now higher, since you'll soon be 71 you should request six months of retroactive benefits when you switch from the restricted ap- plication to your own benefit. To submit a question, vis- it website (amacfoundation. org/programs/social-securi- ty-advisor y) or email ssadvi- sor@amacfoundation.org. The Press-Dispatch Wednesday, July 6, 2022 C-3 the influential View from the Wing blog puts it: "While Buttigieg is scold- ing airlines over their operational per- formance, he is par tly responsible for the problem and isn't actually doing things within his power to help fix it." He's acting a lot like his boss. In sum, the supply chain problems and high inflation aren't going away because no one in this administra- tion knows anything about logis- tics, business, commerce or fixing things. The Committee to Unleash Prosperity did a Google test to see how often peo- ple search for the term "supply chain problems." Sure enough, the searches weren't too common for any of the 20 years before Biden was inaugurated. Then almost from the month that Biden was sworn in, the number of searches qua- drupled. Coincidence? Perhaps Biden, the man who blames ever yone else for his failed presidency, is the real source of the supply chain problem. Maybe to get the Great Ameri- can economic engine running smoothly again, he needs to be replaced. Stephen Moore is a senior fellow at Freedom Works. speech and religion clauses, Gorsuch wrote, are not "war- ring" with each other. The lower cour ts treated them that way only by relying on the Supreme Cour t's 1971 decision in Lemon v. Kur tz- man, which invited judges to explore the purpose and effect of government actions, as well as make subjective judgments about "excessive entangle- ment" between government and religion. The Lemon decision was so difficult to understand and apply that many courts sim- ply opted to "purge from the public sphere" anything that anyone might think "partakes of the religious." The lower courts in Kennedy's case had relied on Lemon when, in fact, the Supreme Court "long ago abandoned" it, although it never has been formally over- turned. Although relying on Lem- on resulted in pitting the First Amendment's religion clauses against each other, the Supreme Cour t looked instead to "historical prac- tices and understandings" to bring the clauses into har- mony. "An analysis focused on original meaning and histo- r y," Gorsuch wrote, leads to the conclusion that a brief silent prayer, even if others might obser ve it or even be of fended by it, does not amount to the government's endorsing religion. It's important to remember the facts of this case. A coach knelt by himself, after a game ended and ev- er yone else was tending to their own business, to offer a silent prayer lasting less than a minute. The school district claimed that the First Amend- ment required it to ignore his rights and fire him because someone might have seen him kneel and might have thought the school district approved of this. That view, Gorsuch wrote, is "a sure sign that our Es- tablishment Clause juris- pr udence has gone of f the rails." In his 1973 dissenting opin- ion in Roe v. Wade, then-Jus- tice William Rehnquist wrote that "the Court's opinion will accomplish the seemingly impossible feat of leaving this area of the law more confused than it found it." That charge had long applied to the court's decisions involving the reli- gion clauses. Once the court started ig- noring what those clauses originally were intended to mean, it started inventing its own versions, with new tests or standards popping up and then fading away, and similar cases being decided with op- posite results. The Supreme Court's deci- sion in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District is a helpful step in sorting out the mess. Thomas is a senior legal fellow for the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies. CRIMINAL DOCKET Pike Circuit Court Terr y L ynn Loveless charged with attempted mur- der, attempted intentional kill- ing of another, a level 1 felony; arson, a level 4 felony and con- finement, a level 6 felony. Jared P. Kugler charged with unlawful possession or use of a legend drug, a level 6 felony; possession of con- trolled substance, class A misdemeanor; leaving the scene of an accident, a class B misdemeanor; operating a vehicle while intoxicated en- dangering a person, a class A misdemeanor and operating a vehicle while intoxicated with a prior conviction within seven years, a level 6 felony. CIVIL DOCKET Pike Circuit Court Synchrony Bank sues Don- ald Moss, Jr., on complaint for civil collection. Synchrony Banks sues Gar y Sloan on complaint for civil collection. Mariner Finance LLC. sues Terr y Loveless on complaint for civil collection. Heights Finance Corp. sues Rebecca Horton on complaint for civil collection. Citibank NA sues Dick Abell on complaint for civil collection. Ar vest Central Mortgage Co. sues Chad Mitchell Cov- ey and Tonya Fisher on com- plaint for mortgage foreclo- sure. In re: the marriage of Ra- chel Spruell and Kaleb Spru- ell. In re: the marriage of Jacob King and Haylee King. In re: the marriage of Melis- sa J. Willis and Sean R. Willis. SMALL CLAIMS Pike Circuit Court Patoka Valley Apartments sues Miranda Ham and Deb- orah Blessinger on complaint. Centel Investments sues Brandy Sue Bota and Aaron L. Bota on complaint. Christina D. Johnson sues Bradley Neuhoff and Dave Neuhoff on complaint. TRAFFIC AND MISDEMEANOR Pike Circuit Court Kayla M. Wilson charged with operating a vehicle with a blood alcohol content of 0.15 percent or more, a class A mis- demeanor. Amy L. Houchin charged with possession of marijuana, a class B misdemeanor. INFRACTIONS Pike Circuit Court Dieu Noel Son Alerte charged with driving while suspended. Hayleigh D. Hatch charged with speeding in a 70 mph zone. Lena J. Miller charged with speeding. Brandon J. Dagrosa charged with speeding in a 70 mph zone. Lara R. Beck charged with speeding in a 55 mph zone. Jonathan J. Hernandez charged with speeding. Samuel J. Hockenberr y charged with speeding. Erick G. Hernandez charged with speeding. Dieulaine Jean-Baptiste charged with seat belt viola- tion. Rangel Year Bandomo charged with failure to obey signs and markings. Brittany S. Sullivan charged with speeding. Muhammad T. Siddiqui charged with speeding in a 70 mph zone. Jonathan J. Hammer charged with speeding in a 70 mph zone. Joshua L. Bennett charged with speeding in a 70 mph zone. Kelsi N. Stevenson charged with speeding in a 70 mph zone. Jaydin A. Pendley charged with speeding. Victoria A. Gee charged with speeding in a 70 mph zone. Boyd A. Toler charged with speeding in a 55 mph zone. Jared D. Maners charged with passing in a no passing zone. Kyle M. Buttr y charged with speeding in a 70 mph zone. Mohammad I Mufti charged with speeding in a 70 mph zone. Kristopher J. Schomer charged with speeding in a 70 mph zone. Alexander M. Phan charged with speeding in a 70 mph zone. Mason J. Montgomer y charged with speeding in a 70 mph zone. Joshua M. Herndon charged with speeding in a 70 mph zone. Troy M. Myers charged with speeding in a 70 mph zone. Kevin K. Roy charged with speeding in a 55 mph zone. Valencia P. Gray charged with child restraint violation and speeding in a 70 mph in zone. Susan S. Carroll charged with speeding in a 70 mph zone. Madison C. Periman charged with speeding in a 70 mph zone. Jacob R. Englert charged with seat belt violation. Rogelia R. Galvez charged with speeding in a 55 mph zone. Sean P. Roberts charged with speeding in a 70 mph zone. Nicah D. Steimel charged with disregarding a stop sign. Aver y D. Sheetz charged with speeding in a 70 mph zone. Court Report Social Security Matters By Rusty Gloor COURT Continued from page 2 SUPPLY Continued from page 2 Free ride night at Jefferson Township Ruritan Celebration Naida Cassida enjoys a ferris wheel ride during free carnival ride night at the Jefferson Township Ruritan Celebration. Alex Himsel is all business behind the wheel of his motor car on a ride at the Fourth of July celebration. Kynleigh Lueken hangs on tight as she rides the Ferris wheel at Otwell.