Tag Archives for NAACP

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.

Bush will fight to Privatize Social Security

Published in Senior Digest on January 2005

The Bush administration and aging groups are about to battle over the privatization of Social Security.

More than four years ago, the 16-member Presidential Commission divided evenly between Republicans and Democrats, voted unanimously to send its 165-page final report to the Bush White House. The charge of the commission was to develop a road map to reform the nation’s Social Security program.

With the commission kicking off the Social Security reform debate by releasing this report in December 2001, the federal panel called for three approaches to change the 70-year-old federal program.  All the recommendations involved personal accounts, with a premise that workers’ investments would yield higher retirement benefits.

With President Bush keeping control of the White House and the GOP retaining control of Congress, Social Security is again under attack and the debate is expected to heat up.

According to recent Business Week On-Line article by Richard S. Dunham, Bush will begin to sell the partial privatization of Social Security by launching a “marketing blitz.”

“Advisors say the president, who sees private accounts as essential to his ownership society agenda, is determined to make retirement reform his top domestic priority for 2005,” Dunham wrote.

According to Dunham, Bush’s “three-phase sales plan” started with his Dec. 12 radio address Bush followed by calling for privatization of Social Security at his economic summit on Dec. 16.

Phase Two, a $ 40 million broadcast advertising campaign underwritten by nation’s corporations will tout the economic benefits of allowing workers to put a portion of their payroll taxes into investment accounts and the negative impact of inaction.  Dunham wrote Phase Three would give the public the specifics.

A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll found that Bush had his work cut out for him to sell the public. Results showed people are skeptical about any changes to Social Security, and that the public believes it is a bad idea to let workers risk their Social Security taxes in the stock market.

Critics are quick to pounce on Bush for his calls for radical changes to Social Security. They charge that the securities industry which heavily supported Republican candidates in the last election, would benefit financially under the president’s plan.

“Wall Street and big business are seated at the conference table-where are the voices of seniors?” asked Barbara Kennelly, president and chief executive officer of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare.

“This seems like a repeal of the president’s Social  Security Commission, where privatization wasn’t debated. It was a foregone conclusion – and that is a sure path to bad public policy,” she said in a prepared statement released after the White Houe Economic Conference.

Furthermore, Kennelly said that “a carefully orchestrated conference can’t hide the fact that privatizing Social Security may result in cuts in benefits and will dismantle Social Security, while dramatically increasing our nation’s debt.”

Just blocks away at the National Press Club, a diverse coalition of groups held a press conference on the day of Bush’s economic summit. The assembled groups, including the AFL-CIO, NAACP, National Organization for Women (NOW), disability groups, and the Alliance for Retired Americans, announced their strong opposition to Bush plan.

Those groups are part of the Campaign for America’s Future, which intends to mobilize opposition in every congressional district throughout the nation to Save Social Security benefits that would be slashed by the president’s plan.

At the news conference, George J. Kourpias, president of the 3 million plus member Alliance for Retired Americans,” told the crowd that the Social Security system is not broke or in the dire trouble Bush would have American’s believe.

“Let me remind those naysayers who conspired not to save Social Security but to bury it, that Social Security hasn’t missed a paycheck in almost 70  years, Kourpias said.

“With some changes designed to strengthen and secure the program, Social Security is well positioned to keep delivering monthly checks to millions of Americans for decades to come.”

Adds, NOW President Kim Gandy, “Social Security is not in trouble. George Bush is in trouble. More than half of elderly women would live in poverty without the benefits of this guaranteed insurance program. This destructive proposal is effectively economic violence against women- he’s risking our livelihoods to satisfy Wall Street donors and corporate cronies.

AARP President Marie Smith is also weighing in on the privatization issue by placing an open letter to 33 million plus members, on the nonprofit group’s Web site

Smith counters Bush’s statements that Social Security is in danger of going broke. Changes do not have to be drastic, she says. “Creating private accounts would only weaken Social Security and put benefits at risk for future generations.”

Smith estates that a new Social Security system would cost the nation as much as $2 trillion or more in benefit cuts new taxes or more debt.

In Rhode Island, a quick poll of the state’s Democratic U.S. senators and congressmen indicate that they oppose Bush’s retirement policy gamble. (Republican U.S. Senator Lincoln Chafee’s position could not be obtained). While each oppose the concept of privatization, the lawmakers are waiting to see the specific legislative proposals that will be introduced.

But even with Bush pushing for a major Social Security overhaul, only a bipartisan coalition of congressional lawmakers can either strengthen the existing Social Security program or scrap it through privatization.

It is crucial for seniors to send a message to Bush and the Republican congressional leadership that it’s time to go back to the drawing board to examine other approaches to strengthen America’s most popular domestic program.