Trump Signs Legislation to Undo Nation’s Banking Rules

Published in the Woonsocket Call on May 27, 2018

On May 22, 2018, The Senior Safe Act, a bipartisan bill authored by U.S. Senators Susan Collins (R-ME) and Claire McCaskill (D-MO) to help protect older American’s from financial exploitation and fraud, passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 258-159 as part of a bipartisan banking reform package after previously passing the Senate in March by a vote of 67-31. President Donald J. Trump’s signed the bill into law rolling back regulatory oversight of the nation’s financial industry.

The Senior Safety Act is part of S. 2155, the “Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief and Consumer Protection Act,” a bill that modified the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act, which was passed by Congress in 2010 to oversee the financial industry after the financial crash and recession of 2008-09.

Protecting Older Investors from Financial Exploitation

Through the watchdog efforts of the Senate Aging Committee, financial exploitation of seniors was identified as a top senior issue to combat. According to the Government Accountability Office, financial fraud targeting older Americans is a growing epidemic that costs seniors an estimated $2.9 billion annually. These frauds range from the “Jamaican Lottery Scam,” to the IRS impersonation scam, to the financial exploitation of seniors through guardianships. Earlier this year a hearing was held to update the public about the committee’s efforts to combat scams targeting older Americans as well as unveil its 2018.

As the Chairman and former Ranking Member of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, Senators Collins and McCaskill introduced the Senior $afe Act last year. Existing bank privacy laws can make it difficult for financial institutions to report suspected fraud to the proper authorities. The Senior $afe Act address this problem by encouraging banks, credit unions, investment advisors, broker-dealers, insurance companies and insurance agencies to report suspected senor financial fraud. It also protects these institutions from being sued for making reports so long as they have trained their employees and make reports in good faith and on a reasonable basis to the proper authorities.

“As Chairman of the Senate Aging Committee, I have been committed to fighting fraud and financial exploitation targeted at older Americans,” said Senator Collins. “The Senior $afe Act, based on Maine’s innovative program, will empower and encourage our financial service representatives to identify warning signs of common scams and help prevent seniors from becoming victims.”

Judith M. Shaw, Maine Securities Administrator and chair of the North American Securities Administrators Association’s Committee on Senior Issues and Diminished Capacity, says that this legislation incentivizes financial service institutions, including those in the securities industry, to train key employees on the identification and reporting of suspected financial exploitation of seniors. “This is a significant and important tool in the ongoing efforts to protect senior investors,” she adds.

Adds Jaye L. Martin, Executive Director of Legal Services for the Elderly, “We know from our proven success with Senior Safe in Maine that education of financial services professionals is a key component to identifying and stopping financial exploitation of seniors. There is no doubt this bill will help prevent seniors all over the country from becoming victims.”

With the passage of S. 2155, Keith Gillies, President of the National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors (NAIFA), said, “The Senior Safe Act provides “much needed protection for older investors and will allow advisors to better protect their clients’ interests.”

“Advisors are often the first line of defense for scammers looking to take advantage of investors,” says Gillies, noting that studies have found older Americans are often a prime target.

The Pros and Cons of S. 2155

Since the Dodd-Frank legislation’s passage eight years ago, 20 percent of small banks have been put out of business, said President Trump and a ceremony where he signed S. 2155 into law. He predicted that the roll back of the costly banking reform regulations, both “crippling” and “crushing” to community banks and credit unions, would stimulate the banking industry to increase lending to businesses.

Banking regulations made it virtually impossible for new banks to be established to replace those that had closed their doors, said Trump, denying small businesses with access to capital. “By liberating small banks from excessive bureaucracy — and that’s what it was: bureaucracy — we are unleashing the economic potential of our people,” said Trump.

Senator Jon Tester (D-Montana) calls the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act a jobs bill, saying “it is a much-needed solution for the folks who power our local economies.”

In an op-ed in the Greater Fort Wayne Business Weekly, Senator Joe Donnelly (D-Indiana) said, “This banking package is reasonable, balanced, and the result of thoughtful negotiation and compromise. It would take measured steps to encourage community financial institutions to boost lending and provide new protections for consumers. And it’s an example of what we can achieve when we work together to break the gridlock in Washington.”

But others strongly oppose passage of S. 2155.

Although S. 2155 has a provision to protect seniors from financial exploitation, Democratic Policy and Communications Committee Co-Chair David N. Cicilline, expressed strong concerns when the Houses passed S. 2155, he jokingly refers to as “the Bank Lobbyist Act.”

“Ten years ago, Wall Street’s recklessness brought our economy to the brink of collapse. It has taken Rhode Island years to recover. In many ways, we are still recovering.,” noted Rhode Island’s Congressman representing District 1. “The Dodd-Frank financial reform law ended the worst of the Big Banks’ excesses. It established the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and gave working people a voice against the most powerful corporations in our country,” he said, noting that the passing of S. 2155 has reversed this progress.

It’s a massive giveaway to the wealthy and the middle class is getting screwed. This is a raw deal for working men and women. The American people deserve A Better Deal,” Cicilline said.

Max Richtman, president and CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, warns that with the deregulation of banks, the GOP “are still gunning for Social Security under the guise of entitlement reform.”

Richtman predicts the passage of S. 2155 and it’s signing into law “makes another financial crisis more likely.”” He asks, “How fair is it to ask workers to be responsible and save when the government strips away protections intended to keep our savings secure?”

“Retirees’ Social Security benefits must be preserved because, at least for now, they are the only thing workers can depend on after the next financial crash,” says Richtman.

The Senior $afe Act was endorsed by organizations, including AARP, the North American Securities Administrators Association (NASAA), the Conference of State Bank Supervisors (CSBS), the Credit Union National Association (CUNA), the National Association of Federally-Insured Credit Unions (NAFCU), the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC), the National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors (NAIFA), the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA), the Insured Retirement Institute (IRI), Transamerica, and LPL Financial.

A Storm Cloud Looms Over Older Americans Month

Published in Woonsocket Call on May 13, 2018

Two years after President John F. Kennedy had formally designated May as “Senior Citizens Month” at a meeting of the National Council of Senior Citizens in 1963, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Older Americans Act into law, formally declaring May as Older Americans Month. When Kennedy first proclaimed May as Older American’s Month, there were just 17 million Americans who had reached age 65. According to the recently released 2017 Profile of Older Americans, one in seven Americans are 65 or older, and just two years from now, this this demographic group’s numbers will skyrocket to 56 million people.

Nothing but Empty Words

Since Kennedy’s inaugural proclamation, all presidents have proclaimed the month of May as Older American’s Month. Not surprisingly President Donald J. Trump recently proclaimed May as Older Americans Month, too, calling upon “all Americans to honor our elders, acknowledge their contributions, care for those in need, and reaffirm our country’s commitment to older Americans this month and throughout the year.”

Trump even touted his Administration’s priorities on fighting on the behalf of the nation’s older Americans. “The Department of Justice, for example, is focused on protecting seniors from fraud and abuse. My Administration is also committed to protecting the Social Security system so that seniors who have contributed to the system can receive benefits from it. We are also dedicated to improving healthcare, including by increasing the quality of care our veterans receive through the Department of Veterans Affairs and by lowering prescription drug prices for millions of Americans.”

But do Trump’s words in his April 30th resolution to proclaim May as Older Americans Month, match his past political actions. Not so.

Just almost three months ago the President released his 2019 budget and this fiscal blueprint did not show a commitment to aging programs and services.

Draconian Cuts in 2019 Trump Budget

Although Trump’s 2019 budget proposal was “Dead on Arrival” on Capitol Hill, as reported in my February 18, 2018 Commentary, his budgetary wish list of cuts would have been devastating to many programs and services for older Americans, as detailed by a policy analysis performed by the Washington, DC.-based National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM).

Trump’s budget included $1.4 trillion in Medicaid cuts, $490 billion in Medicare cuts, and repeal of the Affordable Care Act. Breaking his campaign promise not to touch Social Security, Trump called for steep cuts up to $64 billion from the Social Security Disability Insurance program.

Trump’s budget proposal also called for over $500 billion in cuts to Medicare, many of these savings coming from cuts to Medicare providers and suppliers. This was another campaign promise broken.

Trump’s budget cuts would have drastically impacted Medicare’s spending on prescription benefits and beneficiary costs, too. It would save $210 million over 10 years by eliminating the cost-sharing on generic drugs for low-income beneficiaries.

Not surprisingly, Medicaid was not immune to Trump’s 2019 budget cuts. He called for changing the structure of the program into either a per capita cap or Medicaid block grant, with a goal of giving states more flexibility of managing their programs. Through 2028, the president’s budget would cut $1.4 trillion from the Medicaid program through repealing the Affordable Care Act, and restructuring the program.

Trump’s budget proposal also calls for the elimination of the Older Americans Act Title V Senior Community Service Employment Program (SCSEP). The program, funded at $400 million in FY 2017. provides job training to nearly 70,000 low-income older adults each year.

Community Services Block Grants ($715 million), the Community Development Block
Grant ($3 billion) and the Social Services Block Grant ($1.7 billion) programs were also targeted to be eliminated. Some Meals on Wheels programs rely on funding from these federal programs, in addition to OAA funding, to deliver nutritious meals to at-risk seniors.

Trump also called for the elimination of funding to the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, cutting assistance for heating and fuel costs to low income seniors. It would have also eliminated funding for The Senior Corps programs including the Retired and Senior Volunteer Program, Foster Grandparents and Senior Companions. These programs enable seniors to remain active and engaged in their communities, serving neighbors of all ages, with the benefit of enhancing their health and wellbeing.

Finally, research into cancer, Alzheimer’s Parkinson’s and other diseases affecting older persons would be negatively impacted with $ 46 million in funding cuts to National Institute on Aging at the National Institutes of Health.

Also reported in my December 10, 2018 Commentary, Trump and the GOP-controlled Congress successfully passed the Tax Cut and Jobs Act, that was projected to add $1.5 billion to the nation’s deficit over the next decade. Under the 2010 “pay-as-you-go” law, that triggers automatic spending cuts to domestic programs when the nation’s deficit increases, the GOP’s sweeping tax plan (that Trump strongly supported) would have triggered automatic spending cuts to federal programs, including a $25 billion cut to Medicare in 2018 alone. But vigorous lobbying by AARP and NCPSSM, along with a long-list of other aging, health care and union groups, narrowly averted the draconian cuts by convincing the House and the Senate to waive them as part of a temporary spending bill to prevent a government shutdown.

Strengthening Federal Assistance to Seniors

When President Johnson signed the Older Americans Act into law on July 14, 1965, to raise the awareness of the problems facing seniors and to honor them, he formally proclaimed the month of May as Older Americans Month.

This year’s Older Americans Month is celebrated in every community across the nation as Medicare, Medicaid and Older Americans Act programs are under fierce legislative attack by President Trump and the GOP-controlled Congress.

With the 2018 mid-term elections just six months away, older voters can send a message to Capitol Hill – Strengthen Social Security, Medicare, and the Older Americans Act, expand Medicaid, and bring back health insurance to millions of Americans who lost their coverage because of the Republican tax plan that repealed key provisions of Obamacare.

With a Democratic-controlled Congress, next year’s theme for the Older Americans Month, might be “Strengthening Federal Assistance to Seniors.”

House Fails to Pass GOP’s Balanced Budget Amendment

Published in Woonsocket Call on April 15, 2018

Following the recent passage of the $ 1.3 trillion omnibus government spending bill and the massive GOP tax cut bill that added more than a $1 trillion to the nation’s despite economic growth, and with midterm elections looming, the House GOP leadership quickly acted to tackle the spiraling nation’s deficit by bringing H.J. Res. 2, a balanced budget amendment (BBA), to the floor for a vote. Simply put, the amendment requires that total annual outlays not exceed total annual receipts. It also requires a true majority of each chamber to pass tax increases and a three-fifths majority to raise the debt limit.

House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), introduced H.J. Res. 2, which he notes is nearly identical to text in legislation that passed the House in 1995, but failed in the Senate by one vote. This would be the Virginia Congressman’s last chance to push for passage of a BBA because he is not seeking re-election at the end of this term.

Last October. House Speake Paul Ryan (R-WI) agreed to vote on Goodlatte’s BBA, in exchange for conservative votes from the Republican Study Committee, chaired by Mark Walker (R-NC), on a procedural budget measure needed for Republicans to move forward on tax reform.

BBA Gets Thumbs Down by House Lawmakers

As expect, the House GOP’s BBA was defeated by a vote of 233 to 184, falling far short (by 57 lawmakers) of the two-thirds vote required for passage of an amendment under the Constitution. Six Republicans voted against it while only seven Democrats voted for it. But, the GOP’s BBA had little chance of becoming law because the required support of two-thirds in the Senate and Democratic Senators unified in their opposition, and finally the requirement that 38 states ratify the constitutional amendment.

“Our extraordinary fiscal crisis demands an extraordinary solution. We must rise above partisanship and join together to send a balanced budget amendment to the states for ratification.

I urge all my colleagues to join me in supporting this amendment and in freeing our children and grandchildren from the burden of a crippling debt they had no hand in creating, so they can be free to chart their own futures for themselves and for their own posterity,” Goodlatte said during the House floor on Thursday evening.

During the four-hour debate, House Republican Conference Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), asked Congress to balance its budget like typical families do. She said,“Families across the country sit down at their kitchen tables every month and make tough decisions to balance their budget so that they can make ends meet. Just like American families, the federal government should spend within its means. A Balanced Budget Amendment, which requires a two-third majority in both chambers of Congress to pass, is a needed and important mechanism to restore fiscal discipline. “

On the House Floor, Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi called the BBA “a brazen assault on seniors, children and working families – the American people we were elected to protect.”

“Make no mistake, this GOP con job has nothing to do with fiscal responsibility. It is not balanced in terms of money because of their GOP Tax Scam that’s placed us in a bad spot fiscally and it’s not balanced in terms of values,” says Pelosi, noting that GOP fiscal responsibility comes down to “ransacking Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security and breaking our nation’s sacred promise of dignity and security for seniors and families.”

Before the House vote on the BBA, Darrell M. West, vice president and director of Governance Studies at the Washington, D.C.-based the Brookings Institution, stated “I would be surprised if the bill made it through Congress.” He added, “It’s hypocritical for Republicans to support a balanced budget amendment after they cut taxes by $1.5 trillion and added significantly to the federal deficit. Voters will see through that and understand the vote is about scoring political points and not making good public policy.”

House Lawmakers Bombarded with Opposition Letters

Days before the House vote the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM), AARP expressed opposition to the passage of the BBA by sending a letter to the Hill, urging House lawmakers to reject the GOP’s constitutional amendment. Hundreds of aging, health care, educational, unions, and business groups were cited in the April 12, 2018 issue of the The Congressional Record as opposing the amendment.

Max Richtman, NCPSSM’s President and CEO, wrote House lawmakers warning that a BBA would unravel the nation’s social safety net by making gigantic entitlement cuts by blocking benefit payments from the Social Security and Medicare Part A trust funds because “all federal expenditures, including these earned benefits, would have to be covered by revenue collected in the same year. “

A BBA would also force Congress to make huge spending cuts to Medicare Parts B, C and D, Medicaid, and many other social safety net programs for seniors, to rein in the nation’s deficit and pushing lawmakers to make “massive new tax cuts.,” says Richtman.

“While the balanced budget amendment did not dictate any particular approach to deficit reduction, by altering established Congressional voting procedures it would have increased the likelihood that the fiscal policies adopted in coming decades would favor the well-off at the expense of middle- and low-income Americans. The amendment would have required a two-thirds vote of the full membership of the House and Senate to raise taxes. Spending cuts, by contrast, would continue to require only a majority of those present and voting and could be passed on a voice vote,” observed Richtman.

Finally, Richtman noted that the risk of a federal government default would increase because a BBA requires a three-fifths vote of both the House and the Senate to raise the national debt limit, rather than the current simple majority.

AARP Executive Vice President Nancy LeaMond also expressed opposition to the BBA in a letter to House lawmakers charging that the amendment would impact the solvency of Social Security and Medicare, “subjecting both programs to potentially deep cuts without regard to the impact on the health and financial security of individuals.” Programs that provide meals or heating assistance to low income seniors would also see available resources diminish, she predicted, she said.

The lack of a dependable Social Security and Medicare benefit [if a BBA was passed] would be devastating for millions of Americans. Social Security is currently the principal source of income for half of older American households receiving benefits, and roughly one in five households depend on Social Security benefits for nearly all (90 percent or more) of their income. Over 50 million Americans depend on Medicare, half of whom have incomes of less than $24,150. Even small fluctuations in premiums and cost sharing would have a significant impact on the personal finances of older and disabled Americans,” said LeaMond.

Midterm Elections Just Six Months Away

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) predicted early this week that the annual government’s deficit is projected to be $ 1 trillion next year. And the nation’s $21 trillion debt would skyrocket to 33 trillion by 20028. With the midterm elections just six months away, combined with the CBO’s recently released economic analysis, the Republican party’s image as being the fiscally responsible political party is now shattered.

Even controlling both chambers of Congress and with President Donald Trump in the White House, GOP lawmakers must now look for political issues that may resonate with their constituents. Further attempts to dismantle Socials Security and Medicare may not be the way to go.