Tag Archives for Alex Lawson

Just Days Away: Social Security to Announce 2027 COLA Increase

Published in RINewsToday on October 12, 2026

In just a few days, nearly 279,000 Rhode Islanders who rely on Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) will learn how much their monthly checks will increase in 2027 when the Social Security Administration (SSA) announces next year’s cost-of-living adjustment (COLA). Social Security recipients will see the increase in January, while SSI recipients will receive their adjusted payments on Dec. 31, 2026, because New Year’s Day is a federal holiday. The additional income will help them keep pace with rising costs.

Older Rhode Island beneficiaries will be joining 75 million Americans—including roughly 71 million Social Security beneficiaries and between 7.3 and 7.5 million SSI recipients—awaiting this highly anticipated news.

SSA is expected to announce the official 2027 COLA on Wednesday, Oct. 14, following the release of September inflation data by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

According to the Virginia-based The Senior Citizens League (TSCL), the SSA’s COLA for 2026 was 2.8 percent, somewhat higher than the 2.5 percent COLA implemented at the start of 2025. TSCL predicts that the COLA for 2027 will tick up to 3.5 percent.  AARP experts project an even higher COLA increase for 2027 than TSCL estimates, at 3.6 percent.

Congress enacted the COLA provision as part of the 1972 Social Security Amendments, and automatic annual COLAs began in 1975, says SSA, noting that before then Congress could only increase this benefit through special legislation.  The new provision tied COLAs to the annual increase of the Consumer Price Index (CPI-W).

SSA calculates the COLA by comparing the average CPI-W for July, August and September with the average for the same three months of the previous year.  The percentage is rounded to the nearest tenth of one percent and determines the annual adjustment.

With the 3.5 percent projection, the average beneficiary’s monthly benefit increases by $67.90. The current average beneficiary receives $1,940.08 in their monthly Social Security check. With a 3.5 percent COLA, that would rise to $ 2,007.98, estimates TSCL

If TSCL’s calculation holds, the 2027 COLA would land right in the middle of the ranking historically—ranking 19th among all COLA adjustments since the federal government started using its current inflation math in 1977. By comparison, the recent boost seniors received at the start of 2026 was a bit more modest, tying for 27th place.

“The biggest thing we’re watching with the COLA announcement coming are short-term shocks to the economy that push inflation way up or down in the next 30 days. Of the three CPI-W figures used to calculate the COLA, two are already in,” said TSCL Executive Director Shannon G. Benton in a statement releasing the 2027 estimated projections.

“No matter if the COLA announcement comes in slightly higher or slightly lower than our prediction, seniors will probably end up disappointed in the long run,” said Benton, noting that older Americans allocate their budgets differently than people still in the workforce, so inflation hits them differently. The consumer price index (CPI) captures the experience of urban wage earners, which doesn’t represent the average senior’s budget, she adds.

“The COLA only happening once a year puts life on hold for a lot of seniors. When prices rise, they don’t rise next January when your benefit check goes up. They rise right now. We need to consider COLAs that compound quarterly or monthly so seniors can keep up throughout the year when inflation comes in above Federal Reserve targets, like in 2026,” adds Benton.

Advocates Push for CPI-E Index

In a recent AARP Sept. 11 blog post, “Social Security COLA 2027: An Early Look at How Much Payments Could Increase,” writer Deirdre Shesgreen interviewed Rich Johnson, the vice president for financial security at the AARP Public Policy Institute. Johnson emphasized that the organization’s COLA forecast is meant to give older adults a head start on managing their 2027 finances.  “Family budgets have been under increasing pressure because of rising prices,” Johnson noted. “The sooner that we can give them reliable information as to how much their benefits might [increase next year], the sooner they can start planning,” he said.

“Most seniors depend on Social Security for some or all of their income, and the program’s annual Cost of Living Adjustments (COLAs) for inflation help keep them from falling behind,” says Max Richtman, President & CEO, National Committee to Preserve Social Security & Medicare, noting that even the estimated 3.5-3.6% increase will barely be enough for seniors to tread water.

“That’s because the COLA is based on an inflation index that does not account for the impact of inflation on seniors’ true expenses, especially health care costs – which are rising faster than the general inflation rate,” said Richtman, calling for the adoption of the CPI-E (Consumer Price Index for the Elderly).  This CPI index is designed to better reflect older American’s spending patterns.

“What we know is that when the COLA is announced, it will be far too low to make up for the crushing prices everybody is facing right now. But seniors and those on fixed incomes are being crushed the hardest,” said Alex Lawson, Executive Director of Social Security Works.

His concerns come as Census Bureau figures show that the poverty rate among Americans aged 65 and older rose from 9.4 percent in 2020 to 15.4 percent in 2025, according to the Supplemental Poverty Measure, which accounts for medical expenses and other living costs.

“And still Republican proposals, when we see them, include provisions to cut back on the COLA, which is just a cruel benefit cut. We need to expand Social Security, increase benefits, raise the COLA, and pay for it by having billionaires pay the same rate on all of their income into Social Security. Just like the rest of us do,” argued Lawson.

Improving SSA’s Benefit Calculation Formula

TSCL advocates for the Social Security 2100 Act, legislation championed by Congressman John Larson (D-Connecticut), first introduced in 2017 and reintroduced in 2026.

Lawmakers reintroduced this legislative proposal to provide long-term relief to seniors losing buying power due to high inflation.  The bill would raise benefits by 2%, set the new minimum benefit to 125% of the Federal poverty line, change the COLA calculation to the CPI for the Elderly (CPI-E), and improve the benefits calculation formula, said TSCL.

“Although the Social Security 2100 Act is unlikely to pass in the current Congress, it should.  The bill is the gold standard for Social Security reform and accomplishes the majority of changes older Americans want to see in the program,” says TSCL’s Benton in a statement released on July 14. “The reality is that poverty is increasing rapidly among American seniors, who make up the fastest-growing portion of the homeless population. Adjusting the minimum benefit to above the Federal poverty line would almost certainly slow this trend, although more holistic efforts may be required to stop it entirely,” she says.

Countdown to 2024 elections heating up about what to do about Social Security

Published in RINewsToday on November 27, 2023

The political clock is ticking. It’s 340 days before the upcoming presidential elections and control of Congress and the White House are up for grabs.  As education, abortion, foreign policy, immigration, crime are emerging as upcoming campaign issues, fixing Social Security and Medicare are also on the voter’s radar screens, too.  

As the Democrats call for expanding and shoring up the existing Social Security Program (by introducing H.R. 4583, Social Security 2100 Act and S. 393, Social Security Expansion Act and other legislative proposals), Republicans are calling for changes in the program including looking at raising the eligibility age for full-time retirement, possible means-testing, and adjusting benefits for higher income earners.

The Nov. 9th Republican debate was not reassuring for younger taxpayers who are counting on collecting the Social Security benefits they earn with every paycheck, says Max Richtman, President and CEO, National Committee to Preserve Social Security & Medicare. Two of the GOP presidential hopefuls promised, in effect, to cut Social Security for future beneficiaries,” he said. 

However, former President Donald J. Trump, who didn’t participate in this debate, has warned the other candidates not to make cuts in Social Security and Medicare benefits. While he opposes raising payroll taxes to ensure the fiscal solvency of these programs, he doesn’t provide specific proposals as how to do this. 

Presidential GOP candidates call for fixes to an unsustainable Social Security system 

According to Richtman, Nikki Haley claimed that Social Security is going “bankrupt,” and she would raise the retirement age for workers who are now in their 20s, and also means-test benefits. Chris Christie also said he would raise the retirement age and eliminate benefits for higher earners, essentially converting Social Security into a safety net program, instead of an earned benefit. 

“Governor Christie and Ambassador Haley fail to recognize that future generations of retirees will rely on their Social Security benefits even more than today’s seniors do — and that means testing would cut deep into the heart of the American middle class,” says Richtman.  “Ron DeSantis — to his credit — promised not to cut Social Security, but demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding of the program’s finances by perpetuating the myth that the government is ‘stealing’ from the trust fund,” he added.

On Oct. 25, the newly sworn in Republican House Speaker, Mike Johnson (R-LA) sent a message to his caucus calling for Social Security and Medicare reforms to be made by a debt commission to tackle changes being targeted for these programs. Richtman warns that this approach is “designed to give Congress political cover for cutting Americans’ earned benefits.”  In response, the Biden Administration described such a commission as a “death panel” for Social Security.

Over six years ago, Congressman Johnson (now newly elected House Speaker) called for cuts to Social Security. According to Independent News Network, Meidas Touch Network, in a 2018 speech before the American Enterprise Institute, as incoming chair of the Republican Study Committee, he called for cuts in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.  He viewed these programs as “essential threats” to the American way of life, even suggesting that the government might cease to exist if they continued to be fully funded the way they are now. 

Slashing SSA benefits through a Debt Reform Commission

“That is why these commissions have been rightly described as ‘death panels’ for Social Security and Medicare. It is unfortunate and disappointing that one of the Speaker’s first priorities is creating a mechanism intended to slash programs that American workers pay for in every paycheck, fully expecting the benefits to be there when they need them,” says Richtman, charging that the House Speaker “clearly wishes to break this compact with the American people.”

“Congress should address Social Security in the sunlight, through regular order, as it always has,” said Nancy Altman, President of Social Security Works, and former top assistant to Alan Greenspan on the 1983 commission. “The only reason to create a fast-track, closed door commission is to overthrow the will of the American people by cutting their hard-earned benefits. Anyone who supports this commission is supporting benefit cuts.”

In a Nov. 13 correspondence to Congress, Jo Ann C. Jenkins of the Washington, DC-based AARP, also opposes the creation of s debt commission.  She strongly disputes the GOP’s claim that Social Security is a driver of the annual deficits or national debt, stressing that the program is self-financed.

According to Jenkins, 90% of the retirement program is financed through payroll contributions from workers and their employers.  Around 4% of its funding comes from federal income taxes on some Social Security benefits and 5.4% comes from interest earned on U.S. Treasury bonds held by the Social Security Trust Funds.

“Any argument that claims that Social Security is a driver of the national debt – simply because it receives interest from the U.S. Treasury bonds- is disingenuous,” says Jenkins, noting that U.S. Treasury bonds are of the world’s safest investments.

Alex Lawson, Executive Director of the Washington, DC-based Social Security Works, agrees with Richtman’s assessment of House Speaker Johnson’s ongoing approach to Social Security and Medicare. “The Louisiana Congressman recently joined the vast majority of his caucus to vote for a commission designed to fast-track cuts to Social Security and Medicare behind closed doors”, notes Lawson. 

“As Chair of the Republican Study Committee from 2019-2021, Johnson released budgets that included $2 trillion in cuts to Medicare and $750 billion in cuts to Social Security,” says Lawson. This includes raising the retirement age, decimating middle class benefits, making annual cost-of-living increases smaller and ultimately moving towards privation of Social Security and Medicare,” he notes.  

With Johnson pushing for the creation of a debt commission, over 100 organizations have become co-signers on Nov. 8 correspondence to Congress opposing the legislative proposal.   

Aging groups begin to mobilize

While the Social Security Trust Fund Report, released in April 2023, warned that Social Security funds will become depleted in 2033, making the program totally insolvent in 2034 when beneficiaries could only receive about 80 percent of their scheduled benefits, the cosigners say the program’s projected short falls are “manageable by size and still a decade away, are fully understood.” 

“In this Congress alone, several legislative proposals that do just that have been introduced with numerous cosponsors. The only reason to make changes to Social Security via a closed-door commission is to cut already modest earned benefits — something the American people overwhelmingly oppose  — while avoiding political accountability, say the co-signers. 

“Congress already has a process to confront the federal debt. That process is known as reconciliation. Revealingly, Social Security cuts are excluded from the reconciliation procedure, because, as previously stated, the program is totally self-funded, cannot pay benefits or associated costs without the revenue to cover the costs, has no borrowing authority, and, therefore, does not add a penny to the deficit. Consequently, if a debt commission with jurisdiction over Social Security were to be formed, its purpose would be clear: to cut its modest benefits, while avoiding political accountability,” warn the cosponsors.

But the shortfall is real

In an article in Money magazine, the writer notes, “Taxpayer funds cover the bulk of Social Security payments, but if the program’s reserves run dry, beneficiaries would face immediate 20% cuts to their checks come 2034. Any decrease to Social Security payments would likely be extremely unpopular, considering they’re a major source of retirement income for tens of millions of people.” According to a new report from the ​​American Academy of Actuaries, the longer the issue is put off, the harder it will be to address the looming shortfall.

The Third Rail of national politics 

According to AARP research, “85% of older Americans, regardless of party, strongly oppose targeting Social Security and Medicare to reduce federal budget deficits. Specifically, the survey found that 88 percent of Republicans, 79 percent of Independents, and 87 percent of Democrats strongly oppose cutting Social Security. Similarly, 86 percent of Republicans, 80 percent of independents, and 88 percent of Democrats said they strongly oppose cutting Medicare.”

Washington insiders consider Social Security to be the “third rail of a nation’s politics”, a metaphor coming from the high-voltage third rail in some electric railway systems. Stepping on it usually results in electrocution and the use of the term in the political arena refers to “political death”.

Next November, can the GOP politically survive stepping on the third rail by targeting the nation’s most popular social welfare programs (Social Security and Medicare) for adjustments to reduce the federal budget deficit? When the dust settles after November, 2024 elections, we’ll see if younger voters, who have the most to economically lose, view Social Security and Medicare as a key issue influencing their vote and “untouchable.”

We’ll see. 

Medicare to negotiate select drug prices with Big Pharma, lists first 10 drugs

Published in RINewsToday on September 4, 2023

While critics are attempting to go through the courts to put the brakes on allowing Medicare to negotiate and set drug prices, last week, the Biden administration announced its list of 10 drugs that will be subject to price negotiations mandated by the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).  

Earlier this month, more than 70 groups and a petition signed by 150,000 individuals called on Merck & Co., Bristol Myers Squibb Company, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Astellas Pharma US, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, to drop their lawsuits to block the drug price negotiation provisions from taking place, and several organizations filed an amicus brief in support of the Biden administration’s historic law. 

With President Biden signing the IRA into law in Aug. 2022, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) began hammering out the regulations by issuing on March 15, 2023 its initial guidance for its Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. At that time, CMS had received over 7,500 comments on its initial guidance from consumer and patient groups, drug companies and pharmacies.  On June 30, 2023, the federal agency released its revised guidance detailing the requirements and parameters for the program. With the publishing of the listing of 10 drugs on August 29, 2023, for the first time, Medicare is now able to move forward in negotiating prices directly with drug companies, with the goal of lowering prices on some of the costliest prescription drugs. 

According to CMS, the selected 10 drugs accounted for $50.5 billion in total Part D gross covered prescription drug costs, or about 20%, of total Part D gross covered prescription drug costs between June 1, 2022, and May 31, 2023, which is the time period used to determine which drugs were eligible for negotiation. The negotiations with participating drug companies begin now until 2024, and any negotiated prices will become effective beginning in 2026. Medicare beneficiaries taking the 10 drugs covered under Part D selected for negotiation paid a total of $3.4 billion in out-of-pocket costs in 2022 for these drugs.

It’s a Long Wait…Lower Prices to Take Effect Jan. 2026

CMS will publish any agreed-upon negotiated prices for the selected drugs by September 1, 2024; those prices will come into effect starting January 1, 2026. In future years, CMS will select for negotiation up to 15 more drugs covered under Part D for 2027, up to 15 more drugs for 2028 (including drugs covered under Part B and Part D), and up to 20 more drugs for each year after that, as outlined in the IRA.  CMS will provide opportunities for public comment at patient-focused listening sessions in Fall 2023.

“For far too long, pharmaceutical companies have made record profits while American families were saddled with record prices and unable to afford life-saving prescription drugs,” says Secretary Xavier Becerra, of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). “Although drug companies are attempting to block Medicare from being able to negotiate for better drug prices, we will not be deterred,” she pledges. 

With the announcement of the first drugs selected for Medicare drug price negotiation, CMS Administrator Chiquita Brooks-LaSure noted it marked a significant and historic moment for the Medicare program. ”Our goal with these negotiations is to improve access to some of the costliest drugs for millions of people with Medicare while driving competition and innovation,” she said.

Adds Meena Seshamani, MD, PhD, CMS’s Deputy Administrator and Director of the Center for Medicare, “Promoting transparency and engagement continue to be at the core of how we are implementing the new drug law and the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program, and that is why we set out a process for the first round of negotiation that engages the public throughout.” 

“No one should have to choose between paying for lifesaving medication and other basic necessities, like food and housing,” says Rep. Seth Magaziner, representing Rhode Island’s Congressional District 2.  Nearly 191,000 Rhode Islanders are enrolled in Medicare Part D and could be eligible for cost savings that results from CMS’s negotiating with drug makers, he says, noting that.  Rhode Island seniors paid an average of $6,022 in out-of-pocket costs per year for one of the drugs selected for Medicare Price Negotiations.  These drugs are used to treat some of the most common diseases like diabetes, heart disease, arthritis, blood clots, and cancers.   

But PhRMA and U.S. Chamber of Commerce express strong concerns over imposing government price controls on the price of medications.  

CMS’s release of 10 drugs selected for negotiation “is the result of a rushed process focused on short-term political gain rather than what is best for patients,” says PhRMA) President and CEO Stephen J. Ubl. “Many of the medicines selected for price setting already have significant rebates and discounts due to the robust private market negotiation that occurs in the Part D program today,” he claims.

“Giving a single government agency the power to arbitrarily set the price of medicines with little accountability, oversight or input from patients and their doctors will have significant negative consequences long after this administration is gone,” warns Ubl.

Furthermore, “insurance companies and their Pharmacy Benefit Managers may further restrict access to medicines through increased utilization management, higher copays and more restrictive formularies, notes Ubl.

USCoC also expresses strong concerns over HHS’s move to impose government price controls on medications. While USCoC is supportive of affordable medications, it warns that an implementing government price controls scheme is both “counterproductive and will restrict access to critical medicines, delay treatment for patients, and jeopardize the search for new lifesaving cures,” says Executive Vice President and Chief Policy Officer Neil Bradley. 

“In its rush to implement the IRA’s price control scheme, the Biden administration failed to examine the likely negative side effects of the policy, charges Bradley.

Celebrating a Sweet Victory

“The negotiated drugs list is a watershed moment for medicine affordability. Drug corporations pretend this is a catastrophe, but I would rather see that money in seniors’ pockets than Big Pharma’s,”  says Peter Maybarduk, director of the Access to Medicines program at Public Citizen

“Drug corporations, in crude arrogance, are suing to limit price negotiations under the IRA. But the list shows instead how important it is to expand those negotiation powers. Several monopolized drugs that are expensive for Medicare today are exempted from price negotiation, and will remain expensive,” predicts Maybarduk, explaining that for a many-years long grace period after a drug first comes to market. “During those years, drug makers will exploit patent monopolies with minimal checks on profiteering. That profiteering period is even longer for biologics, which comprise some of the most exorbitantly priced drugs,” he says. 

“This is an historic day in the effort to lower prescription drug prices for seniors.  The Biden administration has released the names of the 10 life-saving drugs that will be subject — for the first time ever — to price negotiation between Medicare and Big Pharma,” stated Max Richtman, President and CEO, National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare.

According to Richtman, the Inflation Reduction Act provides for this reform, in addition to a $2,000 out-of-pocket cap for patients’ Medicare Part D drug costs and penalties for drug-makers who hike prices above the rate of inflation. Medicare price negotiation alone is expected to save seniors and taxpayers billions of dollars in drug costs over next the decade.

“This is a sea change in the government’s ability to lower prescription drug prices for older Americans, who all too often are compelled to ration medications or forgo filling prescriptions because of soaring costs. NCPSSM has fought for Medicare to be empowered to negotiate prices for some twenty years now,” adds Richtman., noting that the next step is to enlarge the number and type of medications subject to negotiation, to deliver maximum relief to seniors on fixed incomes.   

“Allowing Medicare to negotiate prices for these first 10 drugs will finally bring much needed access and relief to American families, particularly older adults. We cannot overstate how monumental this law is for older Americans’ financial stability and overall health, said AARP Executive Vice President and Chief Advocacy and Engagement Officer Nancy LeaMond. 

“The big drug companies and their allies continue suing to overturn the Medicare drug price negotiation program to keep up their price gouging. We can’t allow seniors to be Big Pharma’s cash machine anymore. AARP will keep fighting to protect Medicare negotiation from any efforts to undo or weaken it, so all older Americans can afford their lifesaving medicines,” Says LeaMond.

And Alex Lawson, Executive Director of Social Security Works, says CMS’s listing of 10 drugs are among the most outrageously priced drugs on the market, calling these drugs, “Pharma’s prized cash cows.”

“This is just the beginning,” says Lawson, predicting that within a decade, Medicare will have the power to negotiate lower prices on well over 100 drugs. “That’s a huge win for seniors and people with disabilities,” she adds, noting that it is the biggest legislative defeat Big Pharma has ever suffered – and it won’t be the last.

Final Note…

Vincent Marzullo, who serves on the Board of the Senior Agenda Coalition of RI as well as a member of Congressman Magaziner’s Senior Advisory Committee, says that despite CMS’s  announcement of the 10 drugs to be negotiated, consumers won’t realize a penny in savings until January 2026, 28 months from now. “Unfortunately, urgency seems not to be a feature of the Inflation Reduction Act at least when we will get lower priced prescriptions,” he says.

View a fact sheet from the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE) at: https://aspe.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/705b9c384d493e442a1d4004905cf8ae/ASPE-IRA-Drug-Negotiation-Fact-Sheet.pdf.

More information on the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program is available at https://www.cms.gov/inflation-reduction-act-and-medicare/medicare-drug-price-negotiation.