Tag Archives for Max Richtman

Senate Finance Panel Begins Discussion on Fixing Social Security

Published in RINewsToday on August 17, 2026

Social Security’s Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund (OASI) is projected to reach insolvency by late 2032, triggering an automatic 22% across-the-board benefit cut if Congress fails to act, according to the 2026 Social Security Trustees Report released June 9. The clock is ticking — fewer than 2,300 days remain.

What would that mean for older Americans? Marc Goldwein, senior vice president and senior policy director of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB), put a dollar figure on the potential impact in his August 5 testimony before the Senate Finance Committee. Acomparable benefit reduction imposed today, he said, would mean an average loss of about $500 a month for beneficiaries.

For a typical newly retired couple, that could translate into an annual loss of roughly $12,000 in Social Security income — a substantial hit for households that depend on the program to pay for housing, food, utilities, health care and other basic expenses. Goldwein’s testimony underscores what the Trustees’ numbers mean beyond the percentages: a future across-the-board cut could have a very real impact on retirees’ daily lives.

Senate Finance Panel Takes Up Social Security’s Future

Just nine days before Social Security’s 91st birthday on Aug. 15, the Senate Committee on Finance held an Aug. 5 hearing, “Exploring Process Approaches for Addressing Social Security Solvency,” to spotlight the program’s looming financial challenges and explore possible legislative approaches. The hearing brought together policy experts and advocacy organizations to discuss how Congress might move toward a solution.

The more than two-hour hearing examined the merits of using a commission versus the regular legislative process. Senators and witnesses also discussed increasing revenue from higher earners, raising or eliminating the payroll tax cap, adjusting benefits, and changing the retirement age.

Chairman Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) opened the hearing by warning that Social Security’s OASI Trust Fund is projected to be exhausted in late 2032. If Congress fails to act, incoming program revenues would be sufficient to pay only about 78% of scheduled benefits, he said.

The last comprehensive congressional effort to address Social Security’s solvency took place more than 40 years ago, culminating in the Social Security Amendments of 1983. Signed by President Ronald Reagan, the bipartisan legislation gradually raised the full retirement age, subjected some higher-income Social Security benefits to federal income taxation and increased payroll taxes to strengthen the program’s finances.

Crapo pointed to the 1983 reforms as an example of how an outside commission might help break legislative gridlock. He also cited his participation in a later bipartisan fiscal commission, commonly known as the Greenspan Commission, whose recommendations ultimately failed to win the support needed to move forward.

Ranking Member Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) challenged the idea of creating another commission, arguing that Congress should take responsibility for solving the problem rather than sending it to an outside panel.

“Instead of ‘talking about talking,’ this body should get to work on finding a resolution to the Social Security solvency challenge and having that debate in public view,” Wyden said.

Crapo responded that the hearing was not intended to promote a specific proposal but to examine a broad range of ideas.

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) pushed back against Democratic criticism that Republicans were seeking to cut benefits, saying Congress needs to be willing to consider different approaches to the problem.

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) took a much harsher view of the program, calling Social Security a “Ponzi scheme” and arguing that money collected from taxpayers has already been spent.

Rhode Island’s Whitehouse Calls for Answers

Rhode Island Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse pressed Republicans for a specific plan to address Social Security’s finances.

“Where’s the Republican proposal? Where is it? It doesn’t exist,”

Whitehouse charged, arguing that Republicans were unwilling to publicly embrace proposals that could result in benefit reductions.

Whitehouse said Democrats have legislation that would make Social Security solvent “for as far as the actuarial eye can see” without cutting benefits.

Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) focused on raising more revenue from higher-income Americans by increasing the amount of earnings subject to the Social Security payroll tax.

Warren noted that the payroll tax currently applies only up to a certain level of earnings, meaning high-income workers pay Social Security taxes on a smaller percentage of their total income than most middle-income workers.

Sanders framed the issue in simpler terms, asking whether wealthy Americans should pay the same percentage of their income into Social Security as firefighters and nurses.

But not every senator framed the debate in partisan terms.

Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) observed that conversations about Social Security often “immediately” become fear-mongering, with the discussion centered on taking benefits away.

“We’re actually trying to be able to get to a point where no one loses benefits,” Lankford said, noting that the goal should be long-term stabilization.

Lankford acknowledged that having a “grown-up conversation” about stabilizing Social Security’s finances and resolving the problem remains a real challenge.

Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) also called for bipartisan action.  “We’ve got to fix this and that means working together. There’s a lot of great ideas out there. If we would just make this a focus and a priority, we can get something done,” she said.

Their comments underscored a central question facing Congress: Can lawmakers move beyond the political rhetoric surrounding Social Security and find enough common ground to actually fix the program?

AARP: Keep Social Security at the Table

Nancy A. LeaMond, AARP’s executive vice president and chief advocacy and engagement officer, questioned whether another special commission is the best way forward.

“The history of special commissions is littered with very good intentions and failed results,” LeaMond told the committee. She argued that Social Security’s future should be addressed directly by Congress, which has jurisdiction over the program and a long history of tackling difficult Social Security issues.

LeaMond reminded senators that Social Security remains the foundation of retirement security for millions of Americans. She noted that it provides more than half of household income for 43% of older American households and provides at least 90% of income for nearly 12 million Americans age 65 and older.

Social Security’s impact also extends beyond individual beneficiaries, LeaMond said. “Every dollar paid in Social Security benefits generates two dollars of economic activity, supporting 12.2 million jobs and $2 trillion in economic output each year,” she said.

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) acknowledged AARP’s efforts to protect Social Security, including its television advertising campaign warning against benefit cuts. But Grassley urged AARP and other organizations to do more to educate the public about the looming automatic reductions.

“We’ve got to wake this entire nation up to the fact that there’s going to be 22% cuts if we don’t do something right now,” Grassley said.

Goldwein told the committee that Social Security’s financial problems can be addressed if Congress begins the process rather than continuing to delay action.

In his testimony, Goldwein described CRFB’s Trust Fund Solutions initiative, which offers potential approaches for restoring Social Security’s solvency. Among the ideas discussed are changes to the taxation of benefits, expanding the payroll tax base, limiting benefits for some high earners, and encouraging longer workforce participation.

The dollar figure Goldwein cited — an average reduction of about $500 a month under a comparable benefit cut — puts the Trustees’ warning into perspective. For retirees already struggling to keep pace with rising housing, food and health care costs, losing another $500 a month would not be an abstract budget number. It could mean difficult choices between paying bills, buying groceries or filling a prescription.

Charles Blahous of the Mercatus Center also called for Congress to move quickly, arguing that the most important part of Social Security reform may simply be getting the process started before continued delays make the problem harder and more expensive to solve.

Rebecca D. Vallas, CEO of the National Academy of Social Insurance, told the committee that the decisions Congress makes about Social Security will rank among the most important work lawmakers undertake in generations.

Vallas cited a survey of more than 2,200 Americans conducted by NASI in partnership with AARP, the National Institute on Retirement Security and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The survey found that 85% of respondents favored preventing benefit reductions or increasing benefits, even if that would require raising taxes on some or all Americans. Only 15% preferred benefit reductions to tax increases.

Support for raising revenue rather than cutting benefits crossed party, income, education, and generational lines, Vallas said.

A Final Note…

“Social Security is too important to millions of Americans for Congress to take shortcuts or empower fast-track commissions to do their job. This is an opportunity to show that Washington can work, that it can deliver the results that the American people are demanding, and that it can achieve this goal without waiting until the very last minute to act,” says submitted testimony by Max Richtman, President & CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare.

The message from the hearing was clear: Social Security’s financial problems are real, the clock is ticking, and Congress has no shortage of policy ideas.

What remains uncertain is whether Democrats and Republicans can put aside their philosophical differences long enough to agree on a bipartisan solution.

After 43 years and 4 months since the enactment of Social Security reforms in 1983, the stakes are simply too high for millions of older Americans to wait much longer.  Lawmakers must roll up their sleeves and get the work done.

SSA Trustees Report Calls on Congress to Fix Social Security and Medicare

Published in RINewsToday on June 22, 2026

Congress faces the urgent legislative task of ensuring the long-term viability of the nation’s Social Security program. As in previous years, the Social Security Board of Trustees’ 2026 report warns that without congressional action, the OASI and DI Trust Funds will pay full benefits only through 2034. Afterward, payroll tax revenue will cover about 83% of scheduled benefits, highlighting the need for timely Congressional intervention.

Federal law requires that trust fund-financed programs such as Social Security and Medicare pay out only as much in benefits as they receive in revenues once their trust fund reserves run out.

According to the Social Security Administration (SSA), about 21% to 22% of the U.S. population currently receives Social Security benefits. The released Trustee’s report notes that at the end of 2025, Social Security paid benefits to more than 70 million Americans: 56 million retired workers and their dependents, 8 million disabled workers and their families, and 6 million survivors of deceased workers. Medicare covered an estimated 69.3 million people.

The Trustees also said that recent congressional actions, including the Social Security Fairness Act and changes to the taxation of Social Security benefits, weakened the program’s long-term financial outlook.

The Social Security Board of Trustees is the group that issues the annual report on the financial health of Social Security’s trust funds — the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance fund and the Disability Insurance fund.

It has six seats:

1.    Secretary of the Treasury — also the Managing Trustee

2.    Secretary of Labor

3.    Secretary of Health and Human Services

4.    Commissioner of Social Security

5.    Public Trustee appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate

6.    Public Trustee appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate

As of the 2026 Trustees Report, the current government-position trustees are:

·         Scott Bessent, Secretary of the Treasury and Managing Trustee

·         Keith E. Sonderling, Acting Secretary of Labor

·         Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Secretary of Health and Human Services

·         Frank J. Bisignano, Commissioner of Social Security

The two public trustee seats are currently vacant

Demographic Changes Strain Social Security Finances

The annual Trustees Report, released on June 9, said several long-term demographic trends strain the financial stability of Social Security, as fewer workers pay payroll taxes into the program to support a growing population of beneficiaries.

Americans live longer and collect benefits for more years, while millions of Baby Boomers continue to retire. Birthrates stay below historical levels, so fewer workers enter the labor force.  Lower levels of immigration increase financial pressure by reducing the number of workers who pay payroll taxes.

The combined Social Security trust funds are currently projected to pay full benefits through 2034. However, the outlook for the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) Trust Fund has weakened slightly. Trustees project OASI reserves will be depleted in late 2032. At that point, revenues are expected to cover only about 78% of scheduled OASI benefits, compared to the overall 83% coverage for all Social Security benefits after combined depletion.

The Trustees Report also notes that Social Security’s disability program remains financially stable. The Disability Insurance (DI) Trust Fund is expected to stay adequately financed throughout the 75-year projection period and pay full benefits without interruption.

Taking a Look at Medicare

Also released on June 9, the 2026 Medicare Trustees Report found that Medicare remains financially stable in the near term but faces significant long-term funding shortfalls caused by rising health care costs and an aging population.

According to the Trustees, Medicare spending will grow faster than revenues dedicated to financing the program. The health care needs of retiring Baby Boomers, growing Medicare enrollment, rising medical costs, and increased spending for services used frequently by older adults—including skilled nursing care, home health care, and hospice services—largely drive this increase.

The Medicare Hospital Insurance (HI) Trust Fund, which pays for Medicare Part A services, is projected to be depleted in the second quarter of 2033—three months earlier than last year’s prediction. After depletion, Medicare Part A would be able to cover about 89% of its costs from incoming revenue. Part A covers inpatient hospital stays, skilled nursing facility services, home health care, and hospice care.

Congress must act within the next seven years to prevent significant reductions in Medicare payments to providers. Addressing the projected shortfall before the 2033 trust fund depletion is essential to avoid an estimated 11% funding gap.

Unlike Part A, Medicare Parts B and D are not expected to face trust fund insolvency because they are financed through a combination of beneficiary premiums and general federal revenues.

Max Richtman, President & CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM), says a range of proposals could help extend the solvency of Medicare’s Hospital Insurance (HI) Trust Fund without reducing benefits.

Among the options, says Richtman, are raising the Medicare tax rate on earned and investment income above $400,000 from 3.8% to 5%, and closing loopholes that allow some high-income business owners to avoid Medicare taxes by structuring income in ways that escape both payroll taxes and the Net Investment Income Tax (NIIT). NCPSSM also supports redirecting revenue from the 3.8% NIIT—currently deposited into general federal revenues—directly to the HI Trust Fund, he says, noting that the group estimates this change could generate roughly $500 billion over 10 years.

In addition, Richtman recommends building on the prescription drug reforms in the Inflation Reduction Act by expanding Medicare’s ability to negotiate drug prices, accelerating negotiations as more medications are added, and extending inflation-rebate requirements to commercial insurance plans. Savings from these measures, he says, would be credited directly to the HI Trust Fund, further strengthening Medicare’s long-term outlook.

Reactions From Advocacy Groups and Lawmakers

In a statement, AARP CEO Dr. Myechia Minter-Jordan warned that the 2026 projections show Congress still must close a financing gap of nearly 20%, or Americans could face benefit reductions they cannot afford.

“This should be a wake-up call: Congress needs to act. Americans have worked hard and paid into Social Security their entire lives, and they deserve to count on it when they retire,” she said. “They planned for retirement, followed the rules, and now Congress must keep its promise by strengthening, not cutting, Social Security,” Minter-Jordan added, urging lawmakers to work across party lines to strengthen the program.

“The Social Security Trustees Report is a clarion call for Congress to strengthen the program now before the looming depletion of the trust fund becomes a full-blown crisis,” said NCPSSM’s Richtman in a released statement.

“If Congress fails to act, the combined retirement and disability trust fund reserves will run dry in 2034, and beneficiaries will suffer an automatic 17% cut—a scenario few want to see happen. Lawmakers should not wait until the last minute when options become more limited and remedies more costly,” he said.

Richtman also argued that benefit reductions are not necessary to restore Social Security’s financial health and that beneficiaries living on fixed incomes should not bear the burden of strengthening the program.

In a statement, Nancy Altman, president of Social Security Works, likewise emphasized that the Trustees Report demonstrates the consequences of inaction.

“As the Trustees Report plainly states, if there is insufficient revenue, Social Security benefits will be automatically cut,” Altman said.

On June 15, 2026, House Speaker Mike Johnson said during a Louisiana radio interview that Republicans would like to address the growth of mandatory federal spending programs in future budget discussions, including Social Security. He argued that the federal budget is increasingly driven by automatic spending commitments and said that Social Security and other entitlement programs “have to be adjusted and fixed.”

Responding to Johnson’s remarks, Altman argued that some Republican proposals would move Social Security toward privatization, a characterization that supporters of those proposals dispute. She also criticized proposals that would reduce future benefits rather than increase revenues to strengthen the program.

Public opinion surveys consistently show strong bipartisan support for preserving Social Security benefits. Altman argued that proposals to reduce benefits through means testing or other changes would be unpopular with voters and called on congressional candidates to explain how they would address the program’s long-term financing challenges.

During a June 10 morning hearing of the Joint Social Security and Work & Welfare Subcommittee with Social Security Commissioner Frank Bisignano, held in room 1100 at 100 Longworth House Office Building, Rep. Jason Smith (R-MO) noted that Social Security benefits have only been modified twice in 40 years, most recently in 1983, with only minor changes under his chairmanship of the House Committee on Ways and Means in 2025.

“Congress needs to get its act together to address Social Security and the insolvency that’s coming instead of poking blame at other people when it is our duty, our responsibility,” Smith said, urging bipartisan cooperation between Republicans and Democrats to reform the program. He called for the protection of vulnerable populations who depend entirely on Social Security for retirement and a dignified standard of living, particularly in the rural communities they represent.

“This latest report from the trustees is proof that Congress must step up now to protect Social Security before it’s too late. It’s only going to cost more and be more difficult to solve the longer we wait,” said Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) in a statement issued on June 10, outlining his plan to rescue Social Security by creating a sovereign wealth fund independent of the Social Security Trust Fund.

Cassidy joined Sens. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), and Tim Kaine (D-Va.) in issuing a bipartisan statement following the release of the Trustees Report. The senators said that “Congress shouldn’t delay any longer” and urged lawmakers to begin debating and voting on proposals to strengthen Social Security’s long-term solvency.

Putting Social Security on the Ballot

The Trustees’ Report makes it very clear that Social Security and Medicare are not facing an immediate financial crisis. Both programs will continue paying benefits for years to come. However, these reports also warn Congress that delaying action will make the eventual policy solutions more difficult to achieve and potentially more disruptive.

Many Republican proposals focus on slowing future benefit growth through measures such as raising the retirement age, modifying cost-of-living adjustments, or expanding means testing, while many Democrats favor increasing revenues by requiring higher-income Americans to contribute more into the system.

Over a year ago, lawmakers introduced a major bill to rescue Social Security and Medicare. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) introduced the Medicare and Social Security Fair Share Act (S. 1690) to ensure both programs remain stable in the future. The plan raises money by closing tax loopholes for ultra-wealthy Americans, but it completely shields anyone making under $400,000 a year from paying higher taxes. Representative Brendan F. Boyle (D-PA) brought the exact same bill to the House floor at the same time.

Legislative proposals, such as Whitehouse’s, to adjust the taxable wage cap or apply payroll taxes to certain forms of investment income have also been offered as ways to ensure Social Security’s fiscal solvency.

A new voter education campaign is highlighting the financial challenges facing Social Security. Led by NCPSSM’s Richtman, the “Social Security is on the Ballot” initiative aims to build public support for legislative solutions, including Sen. Whitehouse and Rep. Boyle’s proposed Fair Share Act, to help secure funding for the program.

There are many issues competing for voters’ attention this year,” explains Richtman, “But few will have such a profound effect on your future. Voters should insist [at the ballot box] that the fundamental promise of Social Security be preserved – as the program is strengthened for the future,” he said.

This multi-faceted campaign will encompass social media, short web videos, special editions of our “You Earned This” podcast and radio show, mailings, and grass-roots engagement/activism.

For over 70 million older Americans who rely on their Social Security and Medicare benefits, the Trustees’ Reports deliver a very clear message: Congress must act sooner rather than kicking the proverbial can down the road (as it usually has). As the projected trust fund depletion dates draw closer, lawmakers will need to work across the aisle to strengthen these programs and ensure they remain financially sound for current beneficiaries and future generations.

___

For a copy of the 2026 Social Security Trustees Report, go to The 2026 OASDI Trustees Report

For a copy of the 2026 Medicare Trustees Report, go to 2026 Medicare Trustees Report

House Lawmakers Must Not View Aging as a Partisan Issue

Published in RINewsToday on March 30, 2026

The Leadership Council of Aging Organizations (LCAO), representing 69 national groups dedicated to the well-being of seniors, is urging Congress to support H. Res. 1013, a bipartisan resolution introduced by Reps. Seth Magaziner (D-RI) and Maria Elvira Salazar (R-FL), which would reestablish the Permanent House Select Committee on Aging (HSCoA). Reestablishing this  committee strengthens House congressional oversight, crucial for meeting the needs of a growing older population.

The original HSCoA served as the House’s investigative panel to spotlight aging issues until 1993, when it was dismantled at the end of the 102nd Congress as part of a budget reduction that cut $1.5 million in funding. From 1974 to 1993, the committee fostered bipartisan collaboration to address a myriad of issues affecting older Americans, expanding its membership from 35 to 65 as its political influence grew.  While the House allowed its committee to expire over 30 years ago, the U.S. Senate continues to operate a Special Committee on Aging.

Today’s aging policy challenges now demand bipartisan solutions and comprehensive, coordinated action. The reestablishment of the HSCoA is a necessary, nonpartisan step to addressing these urgent policy needs.

Working Closely with Standing Committees

“Jurisdiction over many programs affecting seniors is spread across multiple standing committees, making it difficult to fully address problems that do not fit neatly into one category,” said Max Richtman, president of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare and chair of LCAO. “The nation faces intergenerational challenges, including increasing strain on family caregivers and a persistent retirement security crisis, which demand forward-looking solutions. A select committee with broad jurisdiction is uniquely positioned to address these issues.”

In a March 16 LCAO endorsement letter, Richtman emphasized that a reestablished committee would be active and engaged—holding field hearings, convening teleconferences, and incorporating community perspectives directly into policymaking.

Support from LCAO’s member organizations underscores that the passage of H. Res. 1013 is a national priority, not a narrow concern. As Richtman noted, the nation’s largest aging coalition is calling for the immediate reinstatement of the House Aging Committee.

Reestablishing the committee would also restore balance to Congress’s approach to aging policy, notes LCAO’s endorsement letter. In recent years, the Senate’s Special Committee on Aging has played a vital bipartisan role in highlighting issues such as elder abuse, scams and fraud, high prescription drug costs, the impact of COVID-19, financial pressures on retirees, and the growing crisis of social isolation. The House lacks a comparable legislative panel—an absence that becomes more significant as the population continues to age.

Without a dedicated body to examine the full scope of aging policy, critical issues risk fragmentation, oversight gaps, and delays. In the past, HSCoA hearings provided a forum for bipartisan debate and dialogue, helping bridge philosophical political divides and enabling standing committees to advance informed legislative solutions.

On January 21, 2026, lawmakers introduced H. Res. 1013 and referred it to the House Rules Committee. As of this writing, the resolution remains in committee, awaiting hearings, markup, or a floor vote.

“It is too hard to be a senior in the United States, and Congress has a responsibility to do more for today’s growing population of older Americans and future generations,” said Rep. Magaziner, the bill’s primary sponsor. “Reestablishing the Select Committee on Aging would create a dedicated forum to address these challenges and help ensure Americans can retire with dignity.”

“America’s seniors built this country, and they deserve more than gratitude—they deserve action,” added Rep. Salazar, an original cosponsor. “From rising health care costs to housing and long-term care, their challenges are too important to be buried in bureaucracy. This committee would provide focus, coordination, and accountability, and deliver meaningful solutions so seniors can live with security and purpose.”

As a cosponsor, Rep. Gabe Amo (D-RI) supports bringing back the HSCoA.  “With rising costs, threats to Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, and scams targeting older Rhode Islanders, it is essential that we deliver real solutions for America’s seniors,” says Amo.

As Co-Chair of the Stop Scams Caucus, Rep. Amo introduced the STOP Scams Against Seniors Act to ensure investigators have the resources needed to protect seniors from losing their life savings and to help them retire with dignity. “I supported reestablishing this committee in the 118th Congress, and I remain committed to elevating the voices of seniors in the legislative process,” he says.

Can a Bipartisan Proposal Pass in a Divided House?

“AARP supports exploring the restoration of a House Aging Committee to help encourage bipartisan dialogue and elevate issues important to older adults,” said Debra Whitman, AARP’s chief public policy officer.

AARP Board Member Bob Blancato, former staff director of the House Subcommittee on Human Services, highlighted the strategic importance of AARP’s backing. “AARP’s support gives bipartisan weight to the resolution and can motivate lawmakers across the aisle to consider it,” he said.

Blancato called restoring the committee a “sound policy decision,” noting that the growth of the older population makes action urgent. “The sheer increase in the number of older adults since 1993 is reason enough,” he said, pointing out that the oldest baby boomers are now turning 80. “President Donald Trump, the oldest sitting president in U.S. history, turns 80 on June 14, 2026,” he added.

He also noted that a single vote in 1993 eliminated HSCoA and several other committees as part of an effort led by House Democratic leadership to reduce government spending. Blancato suggested the resolution could pass in today’s Republican-controlled House if lawmakers see it as politically advantageous, adding that Rep. Salazar, a Republican, could play a key role in building support.

Still, Blancato acknowledged uncertainty about how effective a modern version of the committee might be. “It’s a dicey question—it depends on the issues they take on,” he said. However, he emphasized that a reestablished committee could play a crucial role by holding hearings on Social Security reform proposals from both parties.

Rep. Magaziner’s effort to secure a Republican cosponsor reflects the kind of thoughtful, collaborative leadership our country needs—especially as America’s older adult population continues to grow at an unprecedented rate, says aging advocate Vincent Marzullo, a former federal civil rights and social justice administrator. “By working across party lines, he is helping to refocus national attention on a myriad of pressing challenges facing older Americans,” he says.

“Rep. Magaziner’s bipartisan initiative also underscores a shared commitment to dignity, respect, and opportunity for seniors, adds Marzullo, who serves on the Congressman’s senior advisory council, calling a bipartisan approach a constructive path to addressing the needs of aging communities nationwide.

Robert Weiner, former chief of staff of the HSCoA under the late Chairman Claude Pepper (D-FL), now director of an ongoing op-ed writing group recruiting young journalists, which won the National Press Club President’s Award, noted that similar resolutions have been introduced in six previous congressional sessions. He said bipartisan support—including from Rep. Salazar, a member of the House Problem Solvers Caucus—could improve the resolution’s chances for passage.

However, Weiner argued that attracting Republican cosponsors should not be difficult. “Historically, Republicans have received strong support from older voters,” he said. “Bipartisan sponsorship should help overcome partisan resistance,” he believes.

Given that Rep. Salazar is a Republican member of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus, Weiner agrees that it is now time to urge the Problem Solvers Caucus to endorse and become cosponsors of H. Res. 1013. “The Aging Committee has always been bipartisan, with House leaders including not only Pepper and  Ed Roybal (D-CA)as chairs, but supportive ranking minority members, including then House members — later Senators — Charles Grassley (R-IA), William Cohen (R-ME), and John Heinz (R-PA),” notes Weiner. He added that the passage could depend on political timing. “It can and should be a shared victory,” Weiner said. “If not this year, then next year.”

A Call for Support

It is time for the Tallahassee, Florida–based Claude Pepper Foundation to step forward and formally endorse H. Res. 1013. The Foundation’s mission—to advance the ideas, values, and public policy legacy of the late Sen. Pepper, ensuring they remain part of contemporary American discourse—aligns directly with the purpose of this bipartisan resolution.

At its core, the Foundation educates federal and state policymakers and advocates for initiatives that enhance the quality of life for all Americans. H. Res. 1013 embodies that commitment. Endorsing this measure would not only honor Sen. Pepper’s legacy but also reinforce the Foundation’s leadership in shaping policies that address the needs of a growing aging population.

The bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus, established in January 2017 as an outgrowth of the No Labels organization, was created to foster cooperation across party lines on key policy issues. Nearly evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans, the caucus has demonstrated that consensus-driven policymaking is both possible and necessary.

During the 119th Congress, the Problem Solvers Caucus endorsed 12 legislative proposals. Notably, however, none directly addressed aging programs or services. As an original cosponsor of H. Res. 1013, Rep. Salazar is well-positioned to urge the caucus’s co-chairs—Representatives Brian K. Fitzpatrick (R-PA) and Tom Suozzi (D-NY)—along with their colleagues, to make this resolution their 13th endorsed proposal.

Addressing the needs of older Americans should never be viewed as a partisan issue. Reestablishing the House Select Committee on Aging is a practical, bipartisan step that lawmakers from both parties can and should strongly support.

Restoring the committee is essential—not only to revive a once-vital congressional institution, but also to ensure that today’s Congress is now equipped to meet the evolving needs of the nation’s rapidly aging population.

LCAO member organizations endorsing H. Res. 1013 include AARP, Justice in Aging, CWI Works, Inc., Alzheimer’s Association, Village to Village Network, Gerontological Society of America, Network of Jewish Human Service Agencies, Meals on Wheels America, International Association for Indigenous Aging, APWU, Retirees Department, Service Employees International Union (SEIU), PHI, LeadingAge, Aging Life Care Association, National Adult Day Services Association (NADSA), Post Acute and Long Term Care Medical Association, National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys (NAELA), National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM), National Council on Aging, USAging, Mairead Painter, CT State Long Term Care Ombudsman,  National Adult Protective Services; and National Association of Nutrition and Aging Services Programs (NANASP), among others.

Read the full resolution here https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-resolution/1013/text

Rep. Magaziner’s one-minute floor statement calling for the passage of H. Res. 1013 – see it here: https://youtube.com/watch?v=IygZGcwnFPg&si=MLAAdY6QctiXd1TF

To read LCAO’s endorsement of H. Res. 1013, go to https://www.lcao.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/LCAO-Chairs-Letter-Endorsing-H.-Res.-1013.pdf.