Social Security is in Crisis: We Must Resist Efforts to Change It

Published in Blackstone Valley Call & Times on August 19, 2025

Security will mark its 90th anniversary. On that date in 1935, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the landmark program into law as a safeguard against the “hazards and vicissitudes” of life.

“For a federal program to endure for 90 years and maintain an extremely high level of popularity among the American people is truly extraordinary,” says the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM). “It is an achievement that should be celebrated far and wide.”

Yet this milestone comes amid growing political controversy that could shape the program’s future.

Privatization Concerns Emerge

Just 15 days before the anniversary, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent made remarks that sent shockwaves through the aging advocacy community. Speaking at a Breitbart News–sponsored event, Bessent described President Trump’s newly enacted “Trump accounts” (also referred to as “Child Savings Accounts” or “Child IRAs”) as potentially serving as a “backdoor for privatizing Social Security.” His comments, made during a Breitbart policy panel on the evening of July 30, were quickly picked up by national media outlets.

Bessent elaborated: “If these accounts grow and you have in the hundreds of thousands of dollars for your retirement, that’s a game-changer too.” He suggested that the success and expansion of these individual retirement accounts—created under President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act—could eventually reduce Americans’ reliance on traditional Social Security benefits.

The law, signed by Trump on July 4, creates a new tax-deferred investment account for children under the age of 18, born in the U.S. between January 1, 2025, and December 31, 2028. These accounts are seeded with $1,000 in federal funds and allow additional contributions of up to $5,000 annually from parents, family members, or employers. Structured similarly to IRAs, the funds must be invested in low-cost mutual funds or exchange-traded funds (ETFs) that track a U.S. stock index.

Max Richtman, NCPSSM President and CEO, quickly issued a public response, calling on Trump to denounce Bessent’s suggestion of a “backdoor” to privatization. “President George W. Bush tried it after his re-election in 2004—and failed miserably. The American people didn’t buy it then, and they won’t buy it now,” Richtman said.

He urged the former president to issue a clear and unequivocal statement: “Make a clear, unequivocal statement (as only you can) that your administration will not try to privatize Social Security.”

John Hishta, Senior Vice President of Campaigns at AARP, also issued a statement and condemned Bessent’s comments. “We have fought any and all efforts to privatize Social Security, and we will continue to,” he said. “President Trump has emphasized many times that Social Security ‘won’t be touched,’ and that he is ‘not going to touch Social Security.’ This must include any and all forms of privatization.”

“Privatization is a terrible idea”, says Nancy Altman, President of Social Security Works in a statement, noting that unlike private savings, Social Security is a guaranteed earned benefit that you can’t outlive. “It has stood strong through wars, recessions, and pandemics. The American people have a message for Trump and Bessent: Keep Wall Street’s hands off our Social Security!,” she says.

Following the backlash, Bessent attempted to clarify his remarks in a post on X (formerly Twitter) the next day: “Trump Baby Accounts are an additive benefit for future generations, which will supplement the sanctity of Social Security’s guaranteed payments. This is not an either-or question. Our administration is committed to protecting Social Security and making sure seniors have more money.”

During her Thursday press briefing, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt emphasized that President Trump remains “wholeheartedly committed” to protecting Social Security—even as Bessent’s earlier comments appeared to contradict that position. “What the Secretary of the Treasury was saying—and what this administration believes—is that these Trump newborn accounts, which are an incredibly creative and positive provision in the One Big Beautiful Bill, are meant to help supplement, not substitute, Social Security,” Leavitt told reporters.

Democrats and Advocacy Groups Push Back

Last Thursday, amid hundreds of events scheduled this month throughout the nation to celebrate SSA’s 90th anniversary, the Washington, D.C.–based Social Security Works hosted a press conference to warn against what they called Trump administration efforts to undermine and dismantle Social Security.

Moderator Nancy Altman, President of SSW, opened the Town Hall by emphasizing the importance of celebrating Social Security’s milestone anniversary and the need to protect and defend the program. Throughout the event, Altman introduced each speaker, describing them as champions dedicated to safeguarding Social Security.

Speakers cited administrative actions such as firing 7,000 employees, closing field offices, and creating a customer service crisis. During the 37-minute press event, prominent Democrats and leaders of progressive advocacy groups argued these steps were part of a deliberate strategy to erode public confidence and justify future benefit cuts or privatization.

They contrasted these actions with proposals to expand benefits and extend the program’s solvency by lifting the cap on taxable income. Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-Vermont), described as a leading champion of earned benefits and author of the Social Security Expansion Act, called Social Security “the most successful federal government program of all time.” This was said to counter claims by critics, like Elon Musk, who have called it a “Ponzi scheme.” Sanders added: “This is a huge fight. We have the American people behind us. Let’s win it.”

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon), Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee and a key figure in the Senate’s “Social Security War Room,” said: “Trump’s so-called promise to protect Social Security, in my view, is about as real as his promise to protect Medicaid—no substance.”

Rep. John Larson (D-Connecticut), Ranking Member of the Social Security Subcommittee of the Ways and Means Committee, urged Congress to expand benefits. He noted that the last major expansion was under President Nixon and that millions of seniors still live in or near poverty.

Former Social Security Commissioner under President Biden, Martin O’Malley, charged, “They’re trying to wreck its customer service so they can turn enough Americans against it—and ultimately get away with robbing it.” He described this as the strategic motivation behind what he called the Trump administration’s dismantling of the SSA’s operational capacity.

Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Michigan), who helped organize the Expand Social Security Caucus and has deep family ties to the creation of both Social Security and Medicare, declared: “I’ll be damned if anybody’s going to take us back to those days,” recalling the poverty and desperation seniors faced before the program’s enactment.

Judith Brown, a Social Security beneficiary, gave personal testimony underscoring the critical role her monthly check plays in her financial survival.

Keisha Bras, Director of Opportunity, Race, and Justice for the NAACP; Molly Weston Williamson, a Senior Fellow with the Center for American Progress Action Fund and an expert on paid leave; and Sarah Francis of Unrig Our Economy rounded out the panel.

A Legacy Under Threat

NCPSSM President Max Richtman warns that while the anniversary is cause for celebration, “we must always defend the program from those who would privatize or outright eliminate it. These forces have been at work ever since Social Security was enacted.”

To educate the public and counter misinformation, NCPSSM has produced a new documentary, Social Security: 90 Years Strong, with funding from AARP. The film tells the story of the program’s creation during the Great Depression and its enduring role for seniors, people with disabilities, and their families.

The documentary features interviews with Senators Tom Harkin and Chuck Grassley, Nancy Altman (Social Security Works), Bill Arnone (formerly of the National Academy of Social Insurance), FDR’s grandson Jim Roosevelt, Tracey Gronniger (Justice in Aging), Kathryn Edwards (Labor Economist), and Giovanna Gray Lockhart (former Director, Frances Perkins Center).

Social Security is often called the “third rail” of American politics—a metaphor drawn from the high-voltage rail powering some trains, where contact can be fatal. In politics, “stepping on the third rail” can mean political death.

“More than 69 million Americans rely on Social Security today and as America ages, we expect at least 13 million more people to rely on it by 2035.” said Myechia Minter-Jordan, Chief Executive Officer at AARP in s July 21 statement announcing the results of a new SSA survey. “For 90 years, Social Security has never missed a payment, and Americans should have confidence that it never will,” she said. 

The survey findings indicate that nearly two in three (65%) retired Americans say they rely substantially on Social Security, while another 21 percent say they rely on it somewhat. In 2020, 63% of retired Americans said they relied substantially on Social Security, jumping from 58% in both 2015 and 2010.

Social Security has strong bipartisan support, too.  The survey found that that more than two-thirds of Americans (67%) believe Social Security is more important to retirees today than it was five years ago. Overall, 96% consider the program important, with broad bipartisan agreement: 98% of Democrats, 95% of Republicans, and 93% of Independents.

The Social Security Trustees’ 2025 annual report, released in June, projects the program’s trust funds will run short of money by 2034. Without action, beneficiaries could face an estimated 19% cut in monthly payments.

Whether lawmakers who support privatization —while keeping their voter base—if they “step on the third rail” by raising the full retirement age or refusing to raise taxes remains to be seen.

We’ll see.

AARP Rhode Island pushes its 2024 legislative agenda

Published in RINewsToday on February 12, 2024

Standing in front of an AARP backdrop in the Rhode Island State Room at the State House, last week AARP Rhode Island hosted a 34 plus minute press conference plugging the “aging” group’s 2024 legislative agenda. The nonprofit organization, representing 125,000 members, unveiled its four priority issues: to increase temporary care giver insurance to caregivers, to boost the availability of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs); to create a program to allow employees to save for retirement; and to eliminate the state’s income tax on Social Security. 

Gov. Dan McKee, House Speaker K. Joseph Shekarchi (D-Dist. 13, Warwick), Senate Majority Leader Ryan W. Pearson (D-Dist. 19, Cumberland, Lincoln), State Treasurer James Diossa, came to support AARPs efforts advocacy efforts, backing its four priority legislative issues. 

“AARP’s mission is to empower people to choose how they live as they age,” said State Director Catherine Taylor, in her opening remarks.  At the event, she called on lawmakers to pass AARP Rhode Island’s legislative agenda. 

Taylor took this opportunity to share the results of the 2023 AARP Rhode Island Vital Voices survey that reveals that Rhode Island residents age 45+ overwhelmingly would choose to remain in their own communities and own homes as they grow older. “In order for this to be a reality, Rhode Islanders must have financial security in retirement, affordable and accessible housing options, and access to resources that enable them to take care of those they love,” she said. 

Let us take a look at AARP Rhode Island’s legislative priorities for this year.

Boosting the State’s Housing Production 

With the strong support of House Speaker K. Joseph Shekarchi (D-Dist. 13, Warwick), one of nine Democratic cosponsors of H. 7062, it is expected that House leadership will send the approved committee bill to the floor this week for a vote. The legislative proposal would boost the state’s housing production by allowing a homeowner to develop Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) on their property.

ADUs, sometimes referred to as in-law apartments or granny flats, backyard cottages, or secondary units, allow seniors to downsize enabling them to live independently and age in place in their communities. The bill was written in collaboration with AARP Rhode Island, and is one of the aging group’s primary legislative policy goals. 

H. 7062, introduced by Rep. June S. Speakman (D -Dist. 68, Bristol/Warren), chairwoman of the House Commission on Housing Affordability, would boost the state’s housing production by making it easier for homeowners to develop ADUs on their property. It would give the property owner the right to develop an ADU within the existing footprint of their structures or on any lot larger than 20,000 square feet, provided that the design complies with local building code, size limits and infrastructure requirements. 

Sen. Victoria Gu (D-District 38, Westerly, Charlestown, South Kingstown) will shortly submit a Senate ADU companion proposal but has yet to drop it into the legislative hopper. One Senator noted that there will be technical differences between the House and Senate ADU proposals which will have to be ironed out. 

Assisting employees to save for retirement – Secure Choice

Rep. Evan P. Shanley (D-Dist. 24, Warwick, East Greenwich), throws H 7121, The Rhode Island Secure Choice Retirement Savings Program, into the legislative hopper. The bill would establish a convenient, low-cost voluntary retirement savings plan for working Rhode Islanders.

According to AARP Rhode Island, about 40 percent of Rhode Island private sector workers, about 172,000, ages 18 to 64 in 2020 were employed by businesses that do not offer any type of retirement plan.

The retirement savings program, administered by the office of the General Treasurer, would see retirement savings accumulated in individual accounts for the exclusive benefit of the participants or their beneficiaries. The bill would see no fiscal impact on the state’s budget.

H 7121 has been referred to the House Finance Committee for consideration. A companion measure (S 2045) has been introduced in the Senate by Sen. Meghan E. Kallman (D-Dist. 15, Pawtucket, Providence).

Under Shanley’s legislative proposal, the General Treasurer, who serves as the custodian of state funds for the Rhode Island government, would be charged with collecting contributions through payroll deductions and investing these funds in accordance with accounting best practices for retirement saving vehicles. The elected official would also be responsible for setting minimum and maximum contribution levels in accordance with contribution limits set for IRAs by the Internal Revenue Code. The law would become effective for ALL eligible employers within 3 months of the opening of the program enrollment following a phased implementation period. 

Caring for Caregivers

Senate Majority Whip Valarie Lawson (D-Dist. 14, East Providence) and Rep. Joshua J. Giraldo (D-Dist. 56, Central Falls) have introduced identical bills in their chambers that would expand Rhode Island’s Temporary Caregiver Insurance (TCI) program from six weeks to 12. It also increases weekly dependent’s allowances from $10 to $ 20 or 7% increase of benefit rate whichever is greater. That would bring the Ocean State in line with other states and allow new parents more time for parental leave and caregivers more time to care for a critically ill family member.

S 2121 and its House companion measure, H 7171, would also expand the definition of critically ill family to include grandchildren, siblings and “care  recipients,” defined as individuals for whom the employee is a primary caregiver.

According to AARP Rhode Island, the state’s unpaid family caregiver labor force totals 121,000, providing 113 million care hours per year.

The United States is one of only six countries in the world, and the only wealthy country, without guaranteed parental leave, according to the Bipartisan Policy Center. In recent years some states, like Rhode Island, have stepped up to offer their own programs.

According to a statement released announcing the introduction of S 2121, Rhode Island became the third state in the nation to offer paid parental leave in 2013 when legislators created the TCI program. TCI, which is paid for through payroll deductions, allows new parents to take six weeks of paid leave to bond with and care for their child. It also allows individuals to take this time to care for a seriously family member. That can prove vital for a working adult who needs to care for their spouse after a surgery or a terminally ill parent.

Since 2013, however, many other states have surpassed Rhode Island’s leave offerings. Currently, 11 states and the District of Columbia offer paid parental leave, with two additional states set to offer it beginning in 2026. Most offer 12 weeks, while Rhode Island offers the least amount of time at just six weeks, says the statement.

Finally, it was noted that individuals on TCI in Rhode Island receive 60% of their normal salary. Of the ten states that offer similar programs, most workers receive at least 80%. In Massachusetts, workers receive 80% of their salary for 12 weeks. Workers in nearby Connecticut receive 95% of their salary for 12 weeks.

Cutting Taxes 

According to AARP Rhode Island, more than one in five Rhode Island residents, that’s 230,018, receive Social Security benefits.  These payments inject more than $ 4 billion into the state’s economy every year.

But Rhode Island is one of 9 states that tax Social Security beneficiaries, says AARP Rhode Island. The state tax on Social Security undermines the purpose of the retirement program, charges the state’s largest aging group, estimating that this program has lifted 50,000 Rhode Islanders 65 or older out of poverty from 2018 through 2020.

Three Senate bills and one House bill have been introduced so far.   

S 2061, introduced by Deputy Minority Whip Sen. Elaine J. Morgan (R-Dist. 34, Charlestown, Exeter, Hopkinton, Richmond, West Greenwich), identical to a bill introduced last year, aside from the effective date would allow a modification to federal adjusted gross income for all Social Security income for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2025.

Sen. Mark P. McKenney (D-Dist. 30, Warwick) has introduced S 2158 and House Deputy Majority Whip Mia A. Ackerman (D-Dist. 45, Cumberland, Lincoln) just submitted H 7588. These identical bills would gradually phase in modifications to the federal adjusted gross income over a four-year period for Social Security income, from 25% up to 100%, beginning on or after January 1, 2025.

And, Sen. Walter S. Felag, Jr. (D-Dist. 30, Bristol Tiverton Warren) legislation, S 2058, would increase the federal adjusted gross income threshold for modification for taxable social security income. This act would also amend references to the federal adjusted gross income as it pertains to modification of taxable retirement income from certain pension plans or annuities.

To watch AARP RI’s legislation reception, held Feb. 8, 2024l, go to https://capitoltvri.cablecast.tv/show/214?site=1.

For obtain the results of the 2023 AARP Rhode Island Vital Voices survey, go to:

https://www.aarp.org/research/topics/life/info-2022/aarp-vital-voices-surveys-older-adults-2022-2024.html – and scroll down to “Rhode Island”