| 
		It's time for U.S. Congress to debate Social Security reform in the 
		light of day
		 Send a link to a friend 
		
		 [May 06, 2022]  By 
		Mark Miller 
 (Reuters) -Social Security has never failed to make its benefit payments 
		since the mailing of monthly checks began in 1940, but most Americans 
		these days are worried about the future of the program.
 
 Who can blame them? Social Security’s two trust funds are projected to 
		run dry in 2034, and the program would be able to pay only 80% of its 
		obligations to retirees and disabled workers at that point. Politicians 
		don’t exactly generate confidence when they make irresponsible - and 
		wrong - comments claiming that Social Security is going bankrupt or 
		running out of money.
 
 The result is public skepticism and concern. Forty-two percent of 
		working Americans tell Pew Research Center pollsters https://pewrsr.ch/3FeMCBa 
		that they doubt they will receive any benefits from Social Security. An 
		equal share thinks they will receive a benefit, but at a reduced level. 
		(https://pewrsr.ch/3FeMCBa).
 
 The Social Security trustees have been projecting this shortfall since 
		the early 1990s, but the U.S. Congress has failed to act. What we need 
		is a full, public debate on reform legislation - and an actual vote by 
		lawmakers. The window is open for that to happen this year - the 
		Democratic Party has developed an internal consensus on legislation that 
		addresses the solvency problem, and also expands benefits modestly. It 
		controls both legislative chambers - at least for now.
 
 
		
		 
		The Social Security 2100 Act is supported by 202 House Democrats - in 
		other words, nearly the entire party caucus. The bill probably cannot 
		jump the hurdle of a Republican filibuster in the U.S. Senate, but it is 
		imperative to get everyone in Congress on the record with a vote on this 
		issue.
 
 “People have got to know where you stand,” said U.S. Representative John 
		Larson, a Connecticut Democrat and chief sponsor of the legislation.
 
 EXPANDED BENEFITS
 
 The Social Security 2100 legislation would close 52% of the long-term 
		shortfall, according to an analysis by the Social Security actuaries. It 
		would push the trust fund depletion date back to 2038 by adding new 
		payroll taxes to wages over $400,000 - currently, taxation stops at 
		$147,000. Earlier versions of the bill restored solvency for 75 years by 
		also gradually increasing payroll tax rates, but that has been 
		eliminated to reflect President Joe Biden’s campaign pledge not to raise 
		taxes on people with incomes below $400,000 per year.
 
 The bill does recognize the need to expand benefits, which can help 
		address rising income inequality, and racial and gender gaps in 
		retirement security. The COVID-19 pandemic has widened those gaps. 
		What’s more, Gen-Xers and Millennials are likely to fare even worse than 
		boomers and today’s seniors when they reach retirement. This is the 
		result of factors including escalating higher-education costs, 
		staggering student debt burdens, wage stagnation, soaring housing costs 
		and the decline of traditional defined benefit pensions.
 
 Social Security 2100 includes a modest 2% across-the-board boost in 
		benefits, and it would shift the annual cost-of-living increase to a 
		more generous formula. It also includes targeted benefit increases such 
		as a new minimum benefit level for very low income seniors, and improved 
		benefits for widows and widowers.
 
		
            [to top of second column] | 
              
            
			 
            
			An American flag flutters in the wind next to signage for a United 
			States Social Security Administration office in Burbank, California 
			October 25, 2012. REUTERS/Fred Prouser/File Photo 
            
			
			 
It also would provide caregiver credits that increase benefits for people who 
take time out of the workforce to care for dependent family members. And it 
would repeal the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and Government Pension 
Offset (GPO), which currently penalize many people who work in the public 
sector. 
			 
What would Republicans do to solve the Social Security problem if they take 
control of Congress next year? 
			 
Earlier versions of Republican reform plans have called for benefit cuts in the 
form of higher retirement ages and means testing. U.S. Senator Rick Scott, a 
Florida Republican, recently set off a small firestorm with a proposal to sunset 
all federal legislation every five years - an idea that at least in theory would 
require regular reauthorization of Social Security and Medicare. He also wants 
every American to pay income taxes - no matter their level of income.
 Republicans have also made clear that they prefer to handle Social Security 
reform behind closed doors. Senator Mitt Romney, a Utah Republican, has proposed 
the ironically named TRUST Act, which would create a closed process for 
legislators to propose changes to the Social Security and Medicare trust funds, 
culminating in an up or down vote process.
 
 This approach is a favorite play for lawmakers looking to keep their 
fingerprints off unpopular legislation - bills emerge from faceless, bipartisan 
committees. The last time it was attempted for Social Security was the 
unsuccessful Bowles-Simpson commission, which proposed a range of unpopular 
benefit cuts in 2011 that would have impacted middle-class seniors.
 
 Fighting to improve Social Security would fulfill a promise that Biden made as a 
presidential candidate, and it could energize voters. Public opinion polling has 
consistently shown strong public support for maintaining current benefit levels, 
even if new taxes are needed.
 
 
 
New polling by Data for Progress shows that increasing benefits would make a 
large chunk of independent voters more likely to support Democratic candidates 
for Congress this fall. The idea of shoring up Social Security polls extremely 
well with middle-class Americans: 63% of those without a college degree tell Pew 
pollsters that Social Security finances should be a top priority for Congress 
and the president.
 
 This is a battle worth fighting in 2022.
 
 The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters.
 
 (Writing by Mark MillerEditing by Matthew Lewis)
 
				 
			[© 2022 Thomson Reuters. All rights 
				reserved.]This material may not be published, 
			broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.  
			Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |