Tag Archives for Senator Bernie Sanders

Senior Agenda Coalition of RI pushes wealth tax to fund programs for older residents

Published in RINewsToday on June 2, 2025

With the recent passage of the House Republican budget—which cuts some programs and services for seniors, veterans, people with disabilities, and families with children—Sulma Arias, Executive Director of Chicago-based People’s Action (PA), is calling on billionaires and large corporations to finally pay their fair share of taxes.

Senator Bernie Sanders has echoed similar sentiments on the national stage, urging lawmakers to ensure that ultra-wealthy individuals and powerful corporations contribute more equitably to the nation’s economic well-being, rather than shifting the burden to everyday Americans by cutting essential services.

In Rhode Island, Democratic lawmakers are advancing legislation this session that would increase taxes on the state’s highest earners to generate vital revenue for public programs and services.

Proposed Legislation Targets Top Earners

HB 5473, introduced on February 12, 2025, by Rep. Karen Alzate (D-Dist. 60, Pawtucket, Central Falls), was referred to the House Finance Committee. The bill proposes a 3% surtax on taxable income above $625,000—on top of the existing 5.99% rate—targeting the top 1% of Rhode Island tax filers. The surtax is projected to raise approximately $190 million annually and would affect about 5,700 of the state’s more than 500,000 filers. If enacted, the tax would apply to income earned in tax years beginning in 2026 and would not be retroactive.

As of the May 6 House Finance Committee hearing, about 140 pieces of written testimony had been submitted on HB 5473. The committee held the bill for further study, with no additional action yet taken. The proposal remains under consideration as part of ongoing budget negotiations.

A companion bill, S. 329, was introduced in the Senate by Sen. Melissa Murray (D-Dist. 24, Woonsocket, North Smithfield) and referred to the Senate Finance Committee. A hearing on the measure was held last Thursday, and the bill was also held for further study.

As the volume of testimony indicates, the battle lines are clearly drawn. Progressive groups and unions support the legislation, while businesses and business organizations, such as the Greater Providence Chamber of Commerce and the Northern Rhode Island Chamber of Commerce, have voiced strong opposition. Governor Dan McKee has not yet taken a public position on the bills.

The Pros and Cons

Supporters argue that with Rhode Island facing a $220 million budget deficit, HB 5473 and S. 329 could raise nearly $190 million annually to fund critical services, including: K-12 and higher education; health care; housing; public transportation; affordable child care; infrastructure, and programs for older adults

They contend that the proposals would bolster the state’s safety net, particularly in light of uncertain federal funding. A more progressive tax structure, they argue, would make the system fairer by reducing the burden on middle- and lower-income residents. Currently, the top 1% of Rhode Island taxpayers control a disproportionate share of the state’s wealth but, when accounting for sales and property taxes, pay a smaller share of their income than lower-income households.

Opponents, however, warn of unintended consequences. They claim the bills would drive wealthy residents and businesses out of the state, eroding the tax base.Supporters dispute this, pointing to IRS and Stanford University studies indicating that wealthy individuals typically relocate for family or climate-related reasons—not for tax considerations. States like California and New Jersey, they note, have implemented similar surtaxes without experiencing significant outmigration.

Morally, proponents argue, those with more resources have a responsibility to help those with less—especially in a post-COVID era when many low-income families continue to struggle.

Yet critics, including the Rhode Island Public Expenditure Council (RIPEC) along with the Greater Providence Chamber of Commerce, Northern Rhode Island Chamber of Commerce and businesses, warn that such a tax could signal to entrepreneurs and investors that Rhode Island is “business unfriendly.” They contend that higher income taxes might discourage business investment and hiring, harming the state’s long-term economic prospects.

Some opponents cite Connecticut’s experience in the early 2010s, when a handful of wealthy taxpayers reportedly relocated after tax hikes, resulting in noticeable revenue loss. Given that a small number of high earners contribute a significant share of state income tax revenue, even limited outmigration could have an outsized fiscal impact, critics argue.

Skeptics also question whether new revenue will be reliably dedicated to education, infrastructure, and social programs. They point out that in the past, even funds placed in restricted accounts were sometimes redirected to fill budget shortfalls.

Aging Programs and Services at a Crossroads

“Rhode Island stands at a crossroads,” warns Carol Anne Costa, Executive Director of the Senior Agenda Coalition of Rhode Island (SACRI). With a projected $220 million deficit and potential federal cuts to programs such as Medicaid, SNAP, and services provided by the Office of Healthy Aging, Costa insists that passing HB 5473 and S. 329 is essential to preserve and expand supports for older adults and people with disabilities.

“Most of our state’s older residents are not wealthy,” Costa notes, citing Census data showing that one in four older households earns less than $25,000 annually, and 45% earn less than $50,000. Only about 8% of older households earn more than $200,000.

In FY 2023, 27,535 Rhode Islanders aged 65 and older were enrolled in Medicaid, which funds the majority of long-term services not covered by Medicare. In addition, 14% of older adults in the state relied on SNAP benefits to help cover food costs.

Costa argues that revenue from the proposed surtax could ensure continued funding for these essential programs and expand the Medicare Savings Program. Such an expansion could save low-income seniors and adults with disabilities up to $185 per month in Medicare Part B premiums—money they need for food, housing, and transportation.

While critics warn of wealthy residents fleeing Rhode Island if taxes increase, Costa cites a comprehensive report by the Economic Progress Institute refuting this claim. “In fact, the data suggests the opposite,” she says. “Higher-income tax filers are moving into Rhode Island more than they are leaving.”

Costa also points to Massachusetts as a real-world example. After voters approved a 4% surtax on income over $1 million in 2022, the number of Massachusetts residents with a net worth over $1 million increased from 441,610 to 612,109 by 2024, according to an April report from the Institute for Policy Studies and the State Revenue Alliance.

Business Community Pushes Back

At the House Finance Committee hearing, Laurie White, President of the Greater Providence Chamber of Commerce, voiced strong opposition to the proposed tax.

“Our views reflect those of thousands of local businesses statewide,” she said. “Rhode Island is already in fierce competition with neighboring states to attract and retain businesses, residents, and talent.”

White warned that the surtax would send the wrong message, particularly as Rhode Island invests in high-wage sectors like life sciences and technology. “Tax burden is a key factor in business decisions, and an increase in personal income tax would significantly reduce Rhode Island’s appeal,” she stated.

House GOP Minority Leader Michael W. Chippendale (R-Dist. 40, Coventry, Foster, Gloucester) echoed White’s sentiments: “Taxing people who have worked hard and become prosperous is an insult to the American dream. We shouldn’t be punishing success—we should be creating an economic environment where everyone can thrive. Driving away high-income residents with more taxes is backward thinking.”

Chief of Staff Sue Stenhouse confirmed that the entire 10-member House Republican caucus stands united in opposition to the surtax.

The Washington, DC-based Tax Foundation also weighed in. In written testimony on S. 329, Senior Policy & Research Manager Katherine Loughead stated that if the surtax were enacted, Rhode Island would move from having the 14th-highest to the 8th-highest top marginal state income tax rate in the nation—excluding the District of Columbia. She warned that this could make Rhode Island less attractive to high-income earners than even Massachusetts.

So What’s Next?

Costa maintains that taxing the wealthiest residents may be both a necessary and viable solution to protect the state’s safety net amid budget shortfalls and looming federal cuts.

However, with HB 5473 and S. 329 still being held for further study, it remains unclear whether they will be included in the final state budget.

“As we approach the final weeks of the session, there is no shortage of meritorious proposals that affect state resources,” said House Speaker Joseph Shekarchi (D-Dist. 23, Warwick). “The uncertainty of the federal funding picture and the numerous holes in the Governor’s proposed budget complicate both balancing this year’s budget and planning for the unknown. I continue to keep many options on the table for this challenging task.”

Stay tuned—SACRI and other aging advocacy groups are watching closely to see what options will be considered by the House Speaker when he releases FY 2026 state budget to address funding for programs and services that support Rhode Island’s growing older population in this difficult fiscal year.

To read submitted emails and testimony on S. 329, go to https://www.rilegislature.gov/senators/SenateComDocs/Pages/Finance%202025.aspx.

To read written testimony submitted on HB 5473, go to https://www.rilegislature.gov/Special/comdoc/Pages/House%20Finance%202025.aspx.

Modest Social Security COLA increase seen as chump change by some

Published in RINewsToday on October 16, 2023

Last week, the Social Security Administration (SSA) announced that Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits for more than 71 million beneficiaries will increase 3.2% in 2024, about $59 per month starting in January. The 2024 payment declined from last year’s 8.7%, but that had been the highest in four decades. And, its higher than the average 2.6% increase recorded over the past 20 years.

The Social Security Act determined how the cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) is calculated. Enacted on August 14, 1935, the Act ties the annual COLA to the increase in the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) as determined by the Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics.

More than 66 million Social Security beneficiaries will see that COLA increase 3.2% beginning in January 2024, and increased payments to approximately 7.5 million people receiving SSI will begin on December 29, 2023. (Note: some people receive both Social Security and SSI benefits).  

“Social Security and SSI benefits will increase in 2024, and this will help millions of people keep up with expenses,” observes Kilolo Kijakazi, Acting Commissioner of Social Security in an Oct. 12 statement announcing this year’s COLA increase.

According to SSA, some other adjustments that will also take effect in January of each year are based on the increase in average wages. Based on that increase, the maximum amount of earnings subject to the Social Security tax (taxable maximum) will increase to $168,600 from $160,200.

Advocacy groups on aging talk turkey about COLA

“The annual COLA is a reminder of Social Security’s unique importance. Unlike private-sector pension plans, whose benefits erode over time, Social Security is designed to keep up with rising prices, noted Nancy Altman, President of the Washington, DC-based Social Security Works (SSW), in response to SSA’s COLA announcement.  

“Retirees can rest a little easier at night knowing they will soon receive an increase in their Social Security checks to help them keep up with rising prices,” said Jo Ann Jenkins, AARP chief executive. “We know older Americans are still feeling the sting when they buy groceries and gas, making every dollar important,” she added, stressing that Social Security has been the foundation for financial security for hundreds of millions of retirees. “SSA’s COLA announcement shows that it’s continuing to deliver on this promise,” she says.  

However, Max Richtman, President and CEO, National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare charges, “While we are grateful that Social Security is the only major retirement program with a built-in cost-of-living adjustment, the current formula for determining COLAs is inherently flawed. SSA’s current COLA formula doesn’t truly reflect the increase in prices for the goods and services that beneficiaries rely on.”

According to Richtman, the 3.2% 2024 COLA only represents a modest $59 increase in the average monthly benefit for retired workers, and that’s before deducting the projected increase in the 2024 Medicare Part B premium of about $10 per month. Because of this the average retirement beneficiary will receive a net COLA of about $50. 

Richtman notes, “That is not enough for a tank of gas or half a week’s worth of groceries in many states. The net COLA will barely cover one brand-name prescription co-pay for some patients.”  

Last year, Richtman noted that the COLA of 8.7% was unusually high, the highest in some 40 years. But post-pandemic inflation was also at record highs, he said, noting that historically, COLA’s have been relatively low. In fact, the COLA has been ZERO; three times since 2009.  

“Seniors deserve an accurate COLA formula that accounts for the impact of inflation on their living costs. That is supposed to be the entire purpose of a COLA. The current formula measures the impact of inflation on urban wage earners and clerical workers. How is that a reasonable formula for seniors? Seniors have different spending patterns than urban wage earners & clerical workers,” asks Richtman.  

Richtman notes that seniors spend more than other age group on expenses like housing, long-term care, and medical services. “We strongly favor the adoption of the CPI-E (Consumer Price for the Elderly) for calculating COLAs. The CPI-E would more accurately reflect the impact of inflation on the goods and services seniors need, he believes. 

The CPI-E is included in both major pieces of legislation to expand and protect Social Security that have been introduced in this Congress: Bernie Sanders’ Social Security Expansion Act and Rep. John Larson’s Social Security 2100 Act.  We have endorsed both of those bills as part of our commitment to boosting Social Security for current and future retirees. It’s past time for Congress to act,” says Richtman. 

Although the 3.2% COLA is well above the 2.6% average over the past 20 years, a newly released retirement survey released on Oct. 12, 2023, by The Senior Citizens League (TSCL) indicates that seniors are pessimistic about their financial well-being in the upcoming months and very concerned about growing calls on Capitol Hill for Social Security cuts. Sixty-eight percent of survey participants report that their household expenses remain at least 10 percent higher than one year ago, although the overall inflation rate has slowed. This situation has persisted over the past 12 months.

According to TSCL’s latest retirement survey, worry that retirement income won’t be enough to cover the cost of essentials in the coming months is a top concern of 56 percent of survey respondents. Social Security benefit cuts are an even bigger concern, ranked as the number one worry by nearly 6 out of 10 survey participants, or 59%. Over the past year, benefit cuts and trims have affected a large percentage of older Americans low-income households, individuals who can least afford them.

A year ago, TSCL warned that higher incomes due to the 5.9% and 8.7% COLAs in 2022 and 2023 could potentially affect eligibility for low-income assistance programs such as SNAP and rental assistance. Earlier this year, federal emergency COVID assistance for SNAP (food stamps) and Medicaid also ended. Surveys conducted in 2022 and this year suggest that significant numbers of lower-income older households have lost access to some safety net programs over the past 12 months, the survey finds.

A Final Note…

Social Security plans to start notifying beneficiaries about their new COLA amount by mail starting in early December. Individuals who have a personal “my Social Security account” can view their COLA notice online, which is secure, easy, and faster than receiving a letter in the mail. People can set up text or email alerts when there is a new message–such as their COLA notice—instead of waiting for them in my Social Security.

People will need to have a “my Social Security account” by November 14 to see their COLA notice online. To get started, visit www.ssa.gov/myaccount.

Information about Medicare changes for 2024 will be available at www.medicare.gov. For Social Security beneficiaries enrolled in Medicare, their new 2024 benefit amount will be available in December through the mailed COLA notice and my Social Security’s Message Center.

For details about SSA’s 2024 Changes, go to: https://www.ssa.gov/news/press/factsheets/colafacts2024.pdf.

Social Security must be key issue in 2024 Presidential Election

Published in RINewsToday on July 17, 2023

Last Wednesday, 178 House Democrats, (90% of the House Democratic caucus) led by Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.) introduced  H.R. 4583, the “Social Security 2100 Act of 2023.” The 108-page bill would expand Social Security’s benefits, with no cuts, and keep the system fiscally strong for decades to come. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut) has introduced the companion measure in the upper Chamber.

In May, to drum up support, enthusiasm, and attention for H.R. 4583, Larson, House Ways and Means Social Security Subcommittee Ranking Member, was joined by House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-,New York), Ways and Means Committee Ranking Member Richard Neal (D- Massachusetts) and other House leaders to announce the upcoming introduction of Social Security 2100.

“10,000 Baby Boomers a day become eligible for Social Security, making the point of acting now even more urgent, says Larson. “I am proud to be joined again by a majority of my Democratic colleagues to introduce Social Security 2100, and again, ask my Republican colleagues, whose legislation we’ve included, to join us in helping uplift the 65 million Americans who rely on it. Including lifting 5 million Americans out of poverty, providing 23 million a tax cut, and making sure that Americans are able to get the essential benefits that allow them to pay rent, buy groceries, and fill their prescriptions,” he says.

“It’s important that the Social Security benefits that working Rhode Islanders have earned keep up with the cost of living, and that’s exactly what H.R.4583 – Social Security 2100 Act will accomplish. Unfortunately, extreme Republicans in the House are trying to cut Social Security instead of strengthening it. But I am determined to fight for Rhode Island’s seniors in Congress to ensure they receive the benefits they’ve earned,” says Congressman Seth Magaziner (D-R.I.), a sponsor of the legislative proposal. 

H.R. 4583: The Nuts and Bolts

On July 12, 2023, H.R. 4583 was introduced and referred to the House Ways and Means, Education and Labor, and Energy and Commerce Committees, being introduced in the lower chamber that day.

According to a legislative fact sheet, H.R. 4583, the legislative proposal would increase and expand essential benefits to Social Security beneficiaries. Larson’s legislation would:

•   Increase benefits 2% across the board for all Social Security beneficiaries for the first time in 52 years.  

• Improve the Cost-of-Living Adjustment (COLA), so it reflects the inflation actually experienced by seniors.

• Increase benefits to boost lower income seniors.

• Improve benefits for middle-income widows and widowers from two-income households.

• Restore student benefits up to age 26, for the dependent children of disabled, deceased, or retired workers.

• Increase access to benefits for children living with grandparents or other relatives.

• Repeal the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and Government Pension Offset (GPO) that currently penalize many public servants.

• End the 5-month waiting period to receive disability benefits.

• Increases benefits by an additional 5% for the most elderly and those who have been receiving disability benefits the longest, those beneficiaries who have been receiving benefits for 15 years or more.

 • Provide caregiver credits to ensure that people (mostly women) are not penalized in retirement for taking time out of the workforce to care for children or other dependents.

• End the disability benefit cliff, replacing it with a gradual offset for earnings.

• Cut taxes for 23 million middle-income beneficiaries.

• Correct an unintended flaw in how Social Security benefits are wage-indexed, to prevent benefits from dropping (a “notch”) if the wage index decreases.

• Ensure that these benefits do not result in reduced Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments or a loss of eligibility for Medicaid or CHIP.

• Combine the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) and the Disability Insurance (DI) Trust Funds into one fund to ensure seamless benefit payments.

• Provide the Social Security Administration with resources to improve customer service.

Social Security 2100 Pays for These Benefits by:

• Ensuring millionaires and billionaires pay their fair share by applying FICA to earnings above $400,000.

H.R. 4583 would pay for strengthening the Social Security Trust Fund and pay for the enhanced benefits by having millionaires and billionaires pay their fair share by applying FICA to earnings above $400,000, with those extra earnings counted toward benefits at a reduced rate. The bill closes the loophole of avoiding FICA taxes and receiving a lower rate on investment income by adding an additional 12.4% net investment income tax (NIIT) only for taxpayers making over $400,000.

Social Security advocates call for passage

“By re-introducing his revised Social Security 2100 Act, Congressman John Larson once again defies the media narrative that ‘no one in Washington has the courage’ to address the program’s future,” says Max Richtman, President and CEO, of the Washington, DC-based National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, noting that the legislation extends the solvency of the Social Security trust fund for decades while also providing American seniors with an expansion of benefits.  Larson tackles the funding of the expansion of benefits by asking high earners to begin paying their fair share into the program, says Richtman. 

“At a time when House Republicans have proposed cutting benefits by raising the retirement age and other means — Congressman Larson offers a commonsense, fair, and forward-looking plan.

Not only is the Social Security 2100 Act wise policy, but it’s also overwhelmingly popular with voters across the political spectrum,” says Nancy Altman, President of Social Security Works and Chair of the Strengthen Social Security Coalition.

As the debate over Social Security heats up before the 2024 Presidential election, Altman charges that the nation’s media  refuses to “take Democratic plans to protect and expand Social Security seriously, and fails to call out Republicans for their unwillingness to state what they are for, not just what they are against.”

“Reporters are implicitly dismissing these bills because they cannot pass the House and Senate without Republican support. Instead of pressuring Congressional Republicans to introduce their own legislation, the mainstream media provides the Republicans with the cover they seek by claiming that both parties are avoiding action on Social Security” says Altman.

According to Altman, earlier this year President Joe Biden used the presidential bully pulpit at the State of the Union address to call out Republicans for their plans to cut Social Security and Medicare, forcing them to take these program cuts off the table during the debt ceiling negotiations. “If Biden champions a plan that expands benefits with no cuts, while requiring those earning over $400,000 to pay more, the mainstream media will be unable to ignore it,” predicts Altman. 

Congressional strategies regarding Social Security

On the same day that Larson introduced his legislation, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, held a hearing, “Protecting Social Security for All: Making the Wealthy Pay Their Fair Share,”  on his legislation, S. 1174, the Medicare and Social Security Fair Share Act.  A companion measure was introduced in the House by Congressman Brendan F. Boyle (D-Pennsylvania), Ranking Member of the House Budget Committee.

At the July 12th Senate Budget Committee hearing, Whitehouse explained that his legislation would bring enough revenue from the wealthiest to ensure that Social Security benefits will be paid and on time for the next 75 years and beyond.

“Right now, the cap on Social Security contributions means a tech exec making $1 million effectively stops paying into the program at the end of February, while a schoolteacher making far less contributes through every single paycheck all year,” says Whitehouse at the hearing. “That’s not fair, and my Medicare and Social Security Fair Share Act would fix that by requiring contributions to Social Security on wages above $400,000,” said the Rhode Island Senator.  

Whitehouse stressed the importance of Social Security to his Rhode Island constituents, by mentioning their comments and thoughts. 

 “I rely on my Social Security as my only source of income.  I would find it impossible to continue to live independently if Social Security were changed, reduced or eliminated.  Social Security benefits were a contract between the federal government and its citizens,” said Robert of Pawtucket.

Another Rhode Islander, Antonella of North Providence, said: “I would be very sad and depressed if there were any cuts to Social Security.  I just get by as it is.” And Laurel of Pawtucket said that without Social Security, she “would have to go back to work and probably have to work until I die.” 

Earlier this Congress, Senators Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) introduced their own bill, S. 393, the Social Security Expansion Act (Whitehouse is an original cosponsor).   The Sanders-Warren bill would expand benefits by $ 2,400 each year while fully funding the program for the next three-quarters of a century and beyond.

As to the GOP position on Social Security, the House Republican Study Committee released a plan to cut Social Security by $718 billion over 10 years.  This plan, endorsed by three-fourths of the  House GOP Caucus), would also raise the retirement age to 69 (for everyone who is currently 59 and younger), which would effectively cut benefits by an estimated 13 percent every year and especially harm low-income workers.  It would also reduce benefits for future beneficiaries who earned a “higher salary” before retirement. Also, only “modest adjustments” to the Social Security program as it operates would be made but it doesn’t clarify the changes.

It is important to note that three fourths of the House GOP caucus endorse the RSC budget, making cuts to Social Security and Medicare.

According to SSW’s Altman, while Democratic proposals (Larson, Whitehouse and the Sanders- Warren proposals) to expand Social Security and Medicare are popular with Democratic, Republican and independent voters, Republican politicians have chosen to not co-sponsor any of these bills.

My final thoughts…

Polls show that Social Security and Medicare, two of the nation’s largest social safety net programs, are extremely popular. According to a poll released in March 2023 by the Associated Press and NORC Center for Public Affairs research, 79% of Americans are opposed to reducing the benefits that Social Security beneficiaries receive.  As to raising Social Security’s eligibility age from 67 to 70, 75% of American’s were against it.

Another poll released last March found that nearly 9 in 10 Americans say they oppose reducing spending on Social Security or Medicare, according to polling from Axios.  

The Congressional debate on financially shoring up Social Security and expanding benefits is of   extreme interest to 66 million older and disabled people (175,840 beneficiaries in Rhode Island), who rely on monthly payments from the program.  But the Social Security debate must include America’s younger generations, too. 

With 477 days left before the 2024 presidential elections, expanding Social Security and making the program fiscally sound and to ultimately be available to Gen Exers (1965 to 1979), Millennials (1980 to 1994), Gen Z (1995-2012) and Gen Alpha (2013 to 2025) must become a key election issue. Social Security beneficiaries and America’s younger generations must call on Congress to expand Social Security benefits and ensure its fiscal viability for every generation.  “Keep Your Hands Off Social Security” must be the powerful message they send to all presidential and congressional candidates before the upcoming 2024 presidential election.     

To review the text of Larson’s H.R. 4583, “Social Security 2100: A Sacred Trust Act,” go to https://larson.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/larson.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/final-2023.07.11-text-of-social-security-2100-act.pdf.

To watch a video of Larson’s May press conference announcing the upcoming introduction of H.R. 4583, the Social Security 2100, go to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WO8QYRRQ-UQ.

Here is a copy of RSC’s FY 2024 Budget, Protecting America’s Economic Security https://hern.house.gov/uploadedfiles/202306141135_fy24_rsc_budget_print_final_c.pdf.