Published in RINewsToday on Dec. 30, 2024
After 40 years, a polarized Congress actually worked together on behalf of millions of Americans with public pensions to push through bipartisan legislation repealing two Social Security provisions that would benefit these individuals. Just past midnight in the early hours of Saturday, on Dec. 21, 2024, the U.S. Senate took up S. 597, a companion measure to H.R. 82, the Social Security Fairness Act, repealing unpopular WEP (Windfall Elimination Provision) & GPO (Government Pension Offset) provisions titles in the Social Security program.
The House had overwhelmingly passed H.R. 82, introduced last month introduced by Reps. Garret Graves (R-Louisiana) and Abigail Spanberger (D-VA).
The Senate companion measure, authored by U.S. Senators Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Sherrod Brown (D-OH), overwhelmingly passed without amendment, by a Yea-Nay vote, 76-20 (with Sens. Marco Rubio (R-FL), JD Vance (R-Ohio), Joe Manchin (I-WV) and Adam Schiff (D-CA) not voting) and now goes to President Biden to be signed into law. At press time, H.R. 82 has not been signed and the President has until Dec. 31 to sign or veto the bill.
Before the historic Senate vote, at a Dec. 16 meeting with Patrick Yoes, National President of the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), and Executive Director Jim Pasco met with President-elect Donald J. Trump at his home in Mar-a-Lago, President elect Donald Trump announced his support for the upper chambers’ passage of the “Social Security Fairness Act”— the “FOP’s top priority.”
Earlier this year, Collins and Brown had called on Senate leadership to immediately bring their legislation, which had 62 Senate co-sponsors—above the margin needed for passage—to the Senate floor for a vote. Collins held the first Senate hearing on this policy in 2003 as Chair of the Senate Government Affairs Committee. She, along with the late Senator Dianne Feinstein, first introduced the Social Security Fairness Act in 2005.
Their bipartisan efforts pushed the legislative Social Security fix across the goal line, at the end of the second session of the 118th Congress. For Brown, who lost his bid for re-election in November, passage of S. 597 was a bitter sweet moment for him as he leaves the U.S. Senate after serving as a U.S. senator from Ohio since 2007.
In a Nutshell…
According to Graves, WEP reduces the earned Social Security benefits of an individual who also receives a public pension from a job not covered by Social Security. This financially impacts educators who do not earn Social Security in public schools but who work part-time or during the summer in jobs covered by Social Security, who have reduced benefits, even though they pay into the system just like others, Graves says.
Likewise, the GPO affects the spousal benefits of people who work as federal, state, or local government employees — including police officers, firefighters, and educators — if the job is not covered by Social Security. The GPO reduces by two-thirds the benefit received by surviving spouses who also collect a government pension, added Graves.
According to the National Education Association (NEA), more than 2.8 million public sector employees in 26 states were impacted by GPO and WEP. Educators were affected in 15 of those states, because they pay into their state pension system, but not into Social Security, says NEA.
The WEP currently impacts approximately 2 million Social Security beneficiaries, and the GPO impacts nearly 800,000 retirees.
Rally calls for passage of H.R. 82, gets Majority Senate Leader’s attention
Before Congress left Capitol Hill for recess, Graves and Spanberger, the primary sponsors of H.R. 82, had filed a discharge petition for their Social Security Fairness Act — which secured the required 218 signatures needed to force a floor vote in the U.S. House. On Nov. 12, 2024, a bipartisan majority voted 327 to 74, under suspension of rules to pass the legislation, sending it to the upper legislative chamber for consideration.
A week before the Senate vote on Dec. 21th, the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association along with unions representing fire fighters, teachers, police officers and other public service workers rallied at 11:30 a.m., at the Upper Senate Park at the U.S. Capitol, in pouring rain outside the Capitol, calling for passage of H.R. 82. Joining the rally, Majority Senate leader Chuck Schumer. “I’m here to tell you all today – we are going to call a vote on repealing WEP and GPO,” he said, calling the two Social Security titles “unfair and un-American.”
After the rally, Graves quickly issued this statement: “The Senate Majority Leader has called for a vote on our bill H.R. 82 – provided he gets the necessary 60 votes to get it to the floor. More than 60 Senators support our Social Security Fairness Act. In the House we have led the effort for years to build the winning coalition, resulting in the most cosponsored bill – the most popular bill – in the Congress. We defied the odds and fought back sneak attacks to successfully complete a discharge petition that resulted in the first vote in history to repeal the WEP and GPO. The heavy lifting is done. The path to victory could not be clearer. A WEP-GPO repeal could be in the stockings of millions of public service retirees this Christmas. Pass H.R. 82 now,” he said.
GOP lawmakers express concerns over financial impact
In response to a request from Chuck Grassley, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) had provided the Ranking Member of the Senate Budget Committee with its legislative analysis. The findings showed that the elimination of the WEP and GPO, as specified in H.R. 82, would permanently increase outlays for scheduled Social Security benefits—that is, the amounts that the program would pay if it continued to pay benefits as scheduled under current law, regardless of whether the program’s two trust funds had sufficient balances to cover those payments. That increase in Social Security benefits would drive the program’s spending even further above its revenues than it is already projected to be under current law. CBO estimates that the changes will cost nearly $ 200 billion over a 10-year period.
Senators Mike Crapo (R-ID), Grassley (R-IA), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Rand Paul (R-KY) and Thom Tillis (R-NC) and 16 other Republican Senators opposed passage, expressing strong concerns about the bill’s cost. This apprehension reinforced by the recently released CBO analysis.
Citing a CBO analysis of S. 82, the Republican Senators were concerned that the legislative proposal would reduce the Social Security trust fund by an additional $200 billion during the next decade, moving up the insolvency date by six months.
On the Senate floor, North Carolina Republican Sen. Thom Tillis said the bill’s title made it sound like “motherhood and apple pie,” quipping “who could be against Social Security fairness?” But he argued it wasn’t the right approach to address the problem.
However, 29 Republican Senators, including Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA), were not concerned about the CBO analysis, voting for passage of the legislative proposal.
Following the Senate vote, in a video on X, Kennedy stated: “Social Security is not free. People pay into it. The money we “spent” today in this bill – all we did is give it back to the people who earned it. Today was a good day. It was a good day for fairness, it was a good day for the Social Security system, and a good day for the people of Louisiana – even if you aren’t affected by these two unfair provisions of the Social Security Act, all Louisianians I know believe in fairness. Right is right and wrong is wrong, and I think we did the right thing here, and I’m pleased.”
With the dust settling after the Senate vote, after 40 years of trying to fix a Social Security benefits issue impacting public sector workers, Democratic and Republican lawmakers put aside political differences and finally fixed the pressing policy issue.
Celebrating the historic passage
Following the Senate vote for passage of H.R. 82, the National Fraternal Order of Police, International Association of Fire Fighters, National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association, American Federation of Government Employees, American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees, National Rural Letter Carriers’ Association, National Education Association, and Peace Officers Research Association of California applauded this legislation being sent to the president’s desk to enhance the fairness of Social Security to public workers.
U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) commended the passage of the Social Security Fairness Act, legislation he cosponsored to eliminate two policies. “Thousands of Rhode Islanders who receive government pensions but also contributed to Social Security through private-sector employment stand to benefit from the legislation,” he says.
“I’ve worked with my colleague Sherrod Brown for years to pass this legislation in order to ensure that millions of teachers, postal workers, firefighters, law enforcement officers, and other dedicated civil servants get the benefits they have earned, says U.S. Senator Jack Reed. “I’m glad we were able to finally deliver this correction for millions of hardworking Americans and I’m committed to protecting and strengthening Social Security to ensure all Americans are able to retire with the dignity and financial security they have earned,” he said.
Max Richman, President and CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM) called for passage of this bill because it because it removes an unfairness in the retirement system by allowing teachers, firefighters, and police officers (among others) and their families to collect Social Security benefits.
Before the Senate vote, NCPSSM announced its opposition of any amendment that diluted this legislation or cut Social Security benefits in any way — including raising the retirement age. The Washington, DC-based Social Security advocacy group circulated a letter to all 100 U.S. Senators before the vote on Dec. 21, opposing any efforts to raise the retirement age.
According to Richtman, nearly 3 million public sector employees are on the verge of being able to receive the Social Security benefits they’ve earned — thanks to the United States Senate.
“We supported this bill because it removes an unfairness in the system by finally allowing teachers, firefighters, and police officers (among others) and their families to collect full Social Security benefits. Many of our own members and supporters made it clear that they want the WEP & GPO repealed,” says Richtman.
“The Senate vote delivers us to the doorstep of a long-sought goal — to restore fairness to a system that has worked incredibly well for nearly 90 years to provide American workers with basic financial security,” says Richtman.
According to a statement issued by National Education Association, Martha Karlovetz estimated that these discriminatory laws have cost her more than a hundred thousand dollars since 1995, when she retired from teaching at the Parkway School District outside St. Louis, Missouri. And if her husband had passed away before her, the laws would have meant that Karlovetz would have received only $14 per month in survivor benefits, even though her husband paid Social Security taxes throughout his 40-year career at McDonnell-Douglas/Boeing.
“The repeal of GPO and WEP is truly a historic win for all public employees and their families,” said Karlovetz. “These unfair provisions have taken a great toll. I have lost well over $110,000 in benefits earned in the 15 years I worked and paid into Social Security before becoming a teacher in Missouri, a GPO-WEP state. Now that we have helped achieve this victory, educators like me can breathe easier. For some, this is truly life-changing,” she says.
With the 119th Congress fast approaching, Congressional lawmakers must work together to fix a financially ailing Social Security Program. Just like they did to pass bipartisan legislation to right a wrong affecting millions of retirees and public sector workers.
To see Nov. 8 CBO correspondence to Sen. Grassley as to impact of S. 82 on the Social Security program, go to https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2024-11/60876-HR82.pdf
To download a CRS report that details Social Security beneficiaries affected by both the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and the Government Pension Offset (GPO), to https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R45845
Tag Archives for Senator Jack Reed
Nursing home workforce crisis deepens with minimum staffing standards
Published in RINewsToday on February 13, 2023
“The long-term care industry is enduring the worst workforce crisis in its history, in Rhode Island, and across the country. Although providers are committed to recruiting and retaining staff to provide quality care for residents, despite our best efforts, many nursing homes have fallen short of the staffing ratio set by the RI Department of Health,” notes James Nyberg, Executive Director of the East Providence-based Leading Age Rhode Island (LARI), representing nonprofit providers of aging services.
“We are extremely concerned about the impending fines that will be imposed on nursing homes here in Rhode Island as a result of our state’s existing nursing home minimum staffing ratio statute,” said Nyberg. Because of staffing ratio mandates, “the industry would have faced fines of over $11 million, in just one sample quarter (April – June 2022), since over 70% of nursing homes are not in compliance,” he said.
“While April-June was a sample, the fines go into effect for July-September and we will receive a similar notice in just a few weeks, with only 10 days to pay the fine,” says Nyberg, stressing that these fines will only increase going forward if nursing homes are unable to meet the minimum staffing ratio.
Nyberg calls on the Rhode Island General Assembly to rescue Rhode Island’s nursing homes and provide relief from these penalties by delaying them and exploring an alternative approach to support the efforts of nursing homes to meet the ratio. He warns that the current fine-based approach is excessive and counterproductive and will lead to reduced access to care and threaten the survival of the state’s nursing homes.
Nyberg points out that the current workforce shortages are already preventing nursing homes from filling open positions, limiting new admissions, and forcing organization closures (five nursing homes have already closed since the COVID pandemic began). These challenges are also resulting in backlogs at hospitals, which are unable to discharge patients due to reduced capacity in nursing homes.
“We are working with numerous stakeholders on various initiatives to develop a pipeline of workers, but the simple fact is that it will take time. In addition, as you know, the industry has faced years of underfunding from Medicaid, which pays for the majority of nursing home care. This has made recruiting and retaining workers more difficult than ever,” says Nyberg.
John Gage, President of the Rhode Island Health Care Association (RIHCA) agrees with Nyberg’s assessment of the nursing home workforce. “Nursing homes across the nation are facing an historic labor shortage as the direct result of chronic Medicaid underfunding and the devastating impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the workforce, he says, noting that the state’s nursing home workforce is down 20% since the start of the pandemic, with 2,000 workers lost from Jan. 2020 to June 2022. Nationwide, the nursing home workforce is down 210,000 workers.
According to Gage, Rhode Island’s staffing mandate, while well-intentioned, will siphon tens of millions of dollars from resident care. In the first year of full implementation of the state’s minimum staffing mandate, RIHCA estimates that facilities will be fined upwards of $60 million. “These fines will imperil care, not bolster it,” he warns.
Without legislative action, Rhode Island nursing homes will be fined an estimated $11 million on or about February 28, 2023, because of their inability to attract workers to meet the mandate from July 1, 2022, through September 30, 2022, Gage charges. “There are simply not enough available workers to fill the open staff positions, and resources are scarce. Nursing homes will be devastated by these fines. Facilities will reduce admissions, backing up hospital referrals and clogging hospital beds. More nursing facilities will close – five have already closed since the beginning of the pandemic,” he predicts.
Gage asks, “Who will care for Rhode Island’s frailest elders?” To recreate a minimum staffing mandate in nursing homes on the federal level would be a huge mistake, especially given the historic workforce crisis here in Rhode Island and nationwide,” he says.
Gage’s comments echo concerns expressed by another group of US Senators in Jan. 20 correspondence (https://www.tester.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/1-20-23-Nursing-Home-Staffing-Mandate-Letter-FINAL.pdf) sent to CMS by Senators John Bourasso, Jon Tester, and eleven other US Senators. They caution the agency that a one-size fits all mandate would undermine access to care for patients, and they encouraged CMS to work with Congress on tailored solutions that address the workforce challenges facing nursing facilities.
At the federal level
Just days ago, U.S. Senators Bob Casey (D-PA), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Aging, and Ron Wyden (D-OR), Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, called on the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator Chiquita Brooks-LaSure to encourage the federal agency to establish minimum staffing standards in nursing homes to ensure high-quality care for nursing home residents. In Feb. 10 correspondence, Casey and Wyden, along with Senators Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Cory Booker (D-NJ), and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) urged CMS to advance the agency’s ongoing study to determine adequate staffing requirements in nursing homes.
“We appreciate the work that CMS has undertaken to promote safety and quality in nursing homes and applaud the Biden-Harris Administration’s commitment to protecting our nation’s seniors,” said the senators in Feb. 10 correspondence, urging CMS to “bring this work to completion.”
“In our view, that means continuing the agency’s ongoing study to determine the level of staffing that is necessary to ensure safe and high-quality care for nursing home residents, developing an evidence-based and actionable proposal for mandatory minimum staffing levels, and a robust and transparent process—including direct stakeholder engagement— that will allow for further discussion and fine-tuning of requirements before the proposal is finalized,” wrote the senators.
The senators noted that studies have shown a correlation between inadequate staffing levels and lower quality of care. More recent studies have demonstrated that higher nurse staffing ratios mitigated the effect of COVID-19 outbreaks in nursing homes and resulted in fewer deaths. A recent Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General report examining the high level of COVID-19 infections in nursing homes also pointed to the need for the establishment of minimum staffing requirements.
In the correspondence, the senators cite the Social Security Act, which requires skilled nursing facilities to “provide 24-hour licensed nursing service which is sufficient to meet nursing needs of its residents,” including the services of a registered nurse at least 8 consecutive hours per day, 7 days a week. The letter commends CMS for working to update this vague standard that has led to substantial variation in staffing levels and quality of patient care across facilities.
“Achieving the shared goal of ensuring quality care in nursing homes nationwide is a complex undertaking, says LeadingAge’s Ruth Katz, senior vice president, policy. LeadingAge is an association of nonprofit providers of aging services, including nursing homes.
“As our Get Real on Ratios proposal highlights, a number of conditions must be met in advance of any mandate implementation,” suggests Katz. “The senators correspondence to CMS is a promising development; it covers many of the same points as our Get Real on Ratios proposal – a recognition of the critical need for adequate reimbursement; that one size does not fit all, and that workforce shortages will need to be addressed with additional support. Without addressing these, staffing mandates are impossible. We look forward to continuing our discussions with Congressional leaders on this critical issue so that older adults and families can access much-needed care and services,” she says.
“The Senior Agenda Coalition of RI fully supports the need to develop national staffing standards to ensure quality care is provided to nursing home residents across our nation. It is important to note that Rhode Island has been a leader in this area. For many years our state has required 24/7 RN coverage in nursing homes and in 2021 the legislature passed the Nursing Home Staffing and Quality Care Act that includes staffing standards,” says Maureen Maigret, Policy Advisor to Senior Agenda Coalition of RI. “Now we must work to address workforce shortage issues and ensure that adequate government resources are provided especially through Medicaid payments so the standards can be met, and our critical direct care workers receive competitive living wages in order to keep them working in long term care,” she adds.
As the House Leadership hammers out the FY 2024 budget, it is crucial that adequate Medicaid funding is allocated to allow nursing homes to attract the necessary staff to meet the state’s minimum nursing standards that it codified into law. We must address this policy problem now rather than just kick the can down the road.
AARP Rhode Island calls on Congress to act on lowering high drug costs
Published on March 14, 2022 in Rhode Island News Today
On the day before the Washington, DC-based AARP’s March 8th launch of its new ad campaign showing the impact of Congress’s failure to act on prescription drug prices, AARP Rhode Island State Director Catherine Taylor, Volunteer State President Marcus Mitchell and Volunteer Lead Federal Liaison Dr. Phil Zarlengo joined Rhode Island US Senators Jack Reed and Sheldon Whitehouse for a virtual news conference highlighting the need for Congress to act now to slash rising prescription drug costs.
During the 26 minute and 45 second event, AARP Rhode Island, representing 132,000 members, delivered a petition signed by more than 16,114 Rhode Islanders, calling for Congress to act now and stop unfair drug prices. AARP has called for fair drug prices for years and supports legislation that passed the House in November, which would allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices, put a cap on out-of-pocket costs that older adults pay for their prescription drugs and impose penalties on drug companies that raise prices faster than the rate of inflation.
“Americans are fed up with paying three times what people in other countries pay for the same drugs. More than four million people across the country, including more than 16,000 here in the Ocean State, are joining AARP to demand lower prices for prescription drugs,” said Taylor in a statement announcing the petition being delivered to Reed and Whitehouse. “There will never be a better time to lower drug prices than the historic opportunity in front of Congress. Now is the time to get it done!” Taylor says.
Big Pharma makes billions from high drug costs
“Big Pharma is making billions while seniors and taxpayers are suffering,” says AARP State President Mitchell, noting that just last month Big Pharma raised the prices of 800 prescription medications.” People are sick and tired of paying three times for prescription drugs what people in other countries are paying for these drugs, “It’s outrageous and unacceptable,” Mitchell said.
According to Mitchell, “if consumer prices had risen as fast as drug prices during the last 15 years, gas would cost $12.20 a gallon and milk would cost $13 a gallon.” This gives perspective to this issue, he said.
“Big Pharma is trying again to scare lawmakers and members of AARP and everyone else with misleading claims to stop Medicare to negotiate prices, charged Zarlengo. “We, at least, know the truth. The truth is by allowing Medicare negotiation [of prices], that process will help seniors during these times of inflation by lowing their prices of drugs and putting more money in their pocket,” he said.
Zarlengo gave the two Rhode Island Senators a message from Rhode Island seniors: “Don’t let Pharma win this time, lets lower drug prices now.”
“We hear you loud and clear,” said Senator Reed, responding to the over 16,000 signees of AARP’s petition. “Congress must address this issue of drug pricing. The system continues to force families into untenable choices between their health and other basic needs. One of the simplest things to do is to allow the federal government to negotiate drug prices for Medicare beneficiaries. I have been urging administrations, both Republican and Democratic for more than a decade to do this,” he noted.
“The VA already does this,” said Senator Whitehouse told his fellow panelists and those tuning in to the March 7 news conference. “And there is a big discrepancy in what the Veterans Administration (VA) pays for drugs and what Medicare pays for drugs. We have a reconciliation bill still in the Senate; it’s something Democrats can pass with only 50 votes. The bad news is that we need all 50 members to agree on the reconciliation measure and that has proven difficult. I hope we can agree on a package that all 50 of us can sign off on… and finally, finally, finally give Americans the drug pricing relief that they need. AARP is incredibly important in this fight. All your members make a difference. Thank you for stepping up yet again,” he said.
AARP fights Big Pharma on television and with digital advertising
In AARP’s new ad campaign, Larry Zarzecki, a retired law enforcement officer with Parkinson’s Disease who was forced to sell his home in order to afford his medications, returns to the airways as a spokesperson for AARP, illustrating the impact of the high cost of prescription drugs on seniors. The retiree first shared his story in an AARP ad three years ago, but Congress’ failure to act means he has had no relief from the high cost of his treatments. As he says in the new ad, “I shouldn’t have to decide between my home or my medicine because Congress refuses to act. I’m tired of waiting for Congress.”
AARP’s seven-figure ad buy includes television and digital advertising in the DC area, and television in Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, New Hampshire, New York, Nevada, and Pennsylvania.
Responding to AARP’s new ad campaign, AARP Rhode Island’s Taylor said: “Larry Zarzecki was forced to sell his home in order to afford his medications. He is but one example of Congress’ failure to act. No one should have to give up a home in order to pay for over-priced prescription medicines. She called on Congress to put a stop to “spiraling price increases” by giving Medicare the authority to negotiate with pharmaceutical companies for lower prices.
“If the Veterans Administration can do so – paying roughly half as much for brand name prescription drugs as does Medicare Part D – then why can’t Medicare?” says Taylor. “For a decade, Big Pharma has spent more on stock buybacks and dividends than on research and development; it’s outrageous that drug makers are charging Americans three times what people in other countries pay for the same drugs and justifying it with lies and scare tactics that simply don’t hold up,” she added.
AARP has called for lower drug prices for years and is urging the Senate to pass legislation that would allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices, put a cap on out-of-pocket costs that older adults pay for their prescription drugs and impose penalties on drug companies that raise prices faster than the rate of inflation.
“Americans are sick and tired of Congress’ broken promises to bring down the price of prescription drugs,” said Nancy LeaMond, AARP Executive Vice President and Chief Advocacy & Engagement Officer announcing the launching of this ad campaign. “As Americans pay more and more for many consumer goods, Congress has an historic opportunity to lower drug prices and help seniors like Larry to afford their medications and other essentials,” she said.
It’s time to act NOW
According to AARP, without congressional action, pharmaceutical companies will continue to set high prices for prescription drugs and raise them without any warning or justification. The Washington, DC based advocacy group representing 38 million members recently released a report showing that 75 of the 100 brand name drugs with the highest total Medicare Part D spending have already increased their list prices in the first month of 2022.
During the State of the Union, President Biden called for Congress to bring down the price of prescription drugs as a way to help consumers manage rising prices. The House of Representatives passed several prescription drug measures as part of the Build Back Better Act in November, but the Senate has yet to pass similar legislation.
It’s time for the Senate to put the welfare of the nation’s seniors first by passing legislation to put the brakes to spiraling prescription drug costs. This will be a hot campaign issue in the upcoming mid-term elections, just 230 days from now.
Herb Weiss 