The comprehensive Social Security reform legislation with the best chance of passing Congress faces opposition from Republicans calling for more targeted changes to the program.
In the first
Rep. John Larson, a Democrat from Connecticut who is the chair of the subcommittee, reintroduced the
At the hearing, the bill’s opponents pointed out that studies, including
“If we wish to fix Social Security, we can only do so together,” Biggs said. “That means a mix of tax increases and benefit reductions. Both sides need to swallow some policies they dislike to achieve a bigger win for Americans.”
Although Biggs said he favors “substantial targeted Social Security benefit increases that would eliminate poverty in old age,” he argued that there “simply isn't any evidence of a large-scale retirement crisis” that supports the idea of boosting benefits across the board. Republicans speaking on the panel echoed his concerns.
Noting that Social Security and military death benefits enabled his mother to raise him and 11 older siblings after his father died, Reed praised Larson for his “courage and leadership” in taking on comprehensive reform. Still, he argued that temporary hikes in benefits in the bill would raise its cost over time if made permanent and that the higher rates for the top-earning workers would only leave cuts or taxes on middle-class employees on the table in the future.
“We share the same goal — ensuring that those who have paid into these important programs have security against disability and old age,” Reed said. “So while I cannot support this bill, I am happy to work with Chairman Larson to get some real, permanent, targeted reforms enacted into law.”
With albeit slim majorities in the House and the Senate and President Biden in the White House, the Democrats aren’t giving up the idea of major legislation. Besides getting support from nearly all of the 221 Democratic members of the House, more than 140 organizations have lined up behind the Social Security 2100 Act, according to Larson. He and Reed took time to recall the late Sen. Bob Dole’s leadership during the last major reform of the program in 1983, although Larson says it’s been 50 years since Congress boosted benefits.
“Five million seniors are living in poverty in the wealthiest nation in the world,” Larson said. “This is not something that the president can do through executive order or something that the Supreme Court will adjudicate. It's the responsibility of Congress. And that responsibility starts with this committee. And the time to act is now.”
Other witnesses expressed a similar sense of urgency. The largest
“It's time for Congress to act, to lift those from the bottom, to bring people up to a decent standard of living so that their children and grandchildren are not being stifled from opportunities because they have to take care of mom and dad or grandpa or grandma,” Roach said.
On the other side, Reed agreed with Biggs’ assessment that the legislation doesn’t currently have enough votes to pass the House or the Senate, arguing that Democrats would be moving the bills forward if they had enough votes to do so. Congress has a little bit more than a decade before the exhaustion of the trust fund and subsequent cuts of an estimated 24% to all benefits if it fails to make any reforms to the program, Reed noted.
“The longer we wait to fix this, the more draconian the solution is going to look,” Reed said. “For those on the left, that could mean bigger and more painful benefit cuts. And for those on the right, even more devastating tax increases that will harm workers, employers and make it that much harder for our kids and grandkids to find success.”
