Republicans Begin a Legislative Assault on Social Security

Published in Woonsocket Call on December 11, 2016

With the dust just settling after last month’s heated presidential 2016 election, the GOP took over the White House and maintained control of both chambers of Congress. With almost 40 days left before Obama leaves office, an emboldened GOP calls for the repeal of Obmacare and the privatization of Medicare. That said, fixing Social Security is now on their short list of domestic policies to address.

Last Thursday, the long-anticipated political skirmish over how to reform and ensure the fiscal solvency of Social Security began with Ways and Means Social Security Subcommittee Chairman Sam Johnson (TX-03) introducing legislation to drastically overhaul the nation’s most popular social insurance program.

In the Eyes of the Beholder

“For years I’ve talked about the need to fix Social Security so that our children and grandchildren can count on it to be there for them just like it’s there for today’s seniors and individuals with disabilities,” Johnson said in his statement introducing H.R. 6439, the Social Security Reform Act of 2016. “My commonsense plan is the start of a fact-based conversation about how we do just that. I urge my colleagues to also put pen to paper and offer their ideas about how they would save Social Security for generations to come,” he said.

Johnson’s legislative proposal seeks to overhaul the nation’s Social Security program by increasing the retirement age from 67 to 69, this change impacting people born in 1968 who will begin retiring in the mid-2030s. The basic Social Security benefit formula would also become less generous for beneficiaries… except for the poorest beneficiaries. The annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA), using a Chained-Weighted CPI, would put the brakes on generous COLA increases. COLA’s would be cut for those earning over $85,000.

Circling the Wagons to Protect Social Security

Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi came out swing in a statement after Johnson’s threw his bill into the legislative hopper, charging that it would “inflict deep cuts in Social Security benefits.”

“Apparently nothing upsets House Republicans like the idea of hard-working people getting to enjoy a secure and dignified retirement. While Speaker Ryan sharpens his knives for Medicare, Chairman Johnson’s bill is an alarming sign that Republicans are greedily eying devastating cuts to Americans’ Social Security benefits as well,” Pelosi said.

She warned, “Although current retirees and those close to retirement will receive their Social Security benefits, changes are looming with a Trump administration and a Republican-controlled Congress. For younger generations all benefit cut options are expected to be put on the table.”

Rhode Island Congressman David Cicilline calls Johnson’s legislative proposal a “travesty,” warning that it would “destroy Social Security as we know it by slashing the critical benefits that millions of seniors rely on to live their retirement years with dignity.”

According to Cicilline, the last time Republicans tried to eliminate Social Security during the Administration of President George W. Bush, the American people were outraged and rejected it.”

Max Richtman, President and CEO of the Washington-based National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare views Johnson’s Social Security fix legislation introduced as the 114th Congress is wrapping up, “the first salvo in the ‘War on the Working Class.’”

Rep. Johnson will no doubt re-introduce his bill in the next Congress, he predicts.

According to Richtman, Johnson’s legislative proposal cuts Social Security benefits by one third while raising the retirement age from 67 to 69. It seeks to control costs by changing the benefit-computation formula in a way that cuts benefit amounts. Finally, it cuts COLAs, too.

Richtman charges that this Social Security reform proposal would “irreparably harm the nearly 60 million Americans who currently depend on Social Security as well as future beneficiaries.”

“President-elect Trump will have a veto pen. Now is the time for Mr. Trump to re-affirm his campaign promise “not to touch” Social Security and Medicare. So far, he has been uncharacteristically silent on this vital issue. I promise that we will hold him accountable,” says Richtman.

“No one voted for massive cuts to Social Security, nor to end the program as we know it,” says Nancy Altman, founding co-director of Social Security Works, in a response to Johnson’s legislative proposal to radically change Social Security. “The Johnson plan would gradually but inexorably turn Social Security from a program that replaces wages to one that produces essentially one flat benefit, independent of how much a worker contributed,” she says.

“With Republicans in full control of the federal government, these cuts have a real chance of being passed into law. Trump needs to immediately reassure the American people that he will keep his campaign promise and veto this awful bill. He should tweet that immediately,” adds Altman.

The presidential debates and the platforms of the GOP and Democratic party reveal a stark difference as how to each party will fix the ailing Social Security program. Now is not the time to put Social Security on the chopping block. Congress must come together to hammer out bipartisan approaches to ensure the fiscal solvency for the next 100 years. .

Time to Change how Social Security Calculates ‘COLA’

Published in Woonsocket Call on October 23, 2016

On Tuesday, September 18, the U.S. Social Security Administration announced that the nation’s 65 million Social Security beneficiaries will be automatically be paid a minuscule 0.3 percent cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) to their monthly checks in 2017. The average monthly Social Security benefit next year will be $1,360, $5 more than now.

According to AARP, 153,349 Rhode Islanders received Social Security checks as of the end of 2014. Also, 22 percent of Rhode Island retirees depend on their Social Security check for 90 percent or more of their income. That’s chump change, not a lot of money for Rhode Island retirees to buy groceries, gas, or even catch up on their bills.

The federal agency detailed other changes that we can expect, too. Beginning in 2017, the amount of your earnings subject to the Social Security tax increases from $118,500 to $127,200. It’s estimated that this tax change impacts about 12 million of the 173 million people who pay into the retirement system.

Next year’s Social Security COLA increase is the smallest in a decade and comes after no increase in 2016 (zero increases also occurred in 2010 and 2011). Seventy percent of Medicare beneficiaries are protected by a hold-harmless rule, which keeps Social Security benefit payments from decreasing because of increased Medicare Part B premiums. However, 30 percent of Medicare beneficiaries (including high wage earners, those enrolled in Medicare and not yet receiving Social Security, and newly enrolled in Medicare) could see cost increases in their Medicare Part B premiums that cover their visits to doctors and hospitals. The increased premium costs will be deducted directly from their Social Security check.

Chump Change COLA Won’t Pay Bills

Responding to the federal government’s disappointing COLA announcement, AARP CEO Jo Ann Jenkins, whose Washington, DC aging group represents 37 million members, charges in a statement that one major domestic issue ignored by presidential debate moderators and one that demands attention from candidates is the future of Social Security.

“Over the last five years, Social Security COLA’s have remained small or nonexistent at 1,7 percent or lower, even though every cent can matter to beneficiaries and their families. After last year’s zero COLA, this year’s announcement doesn’t offer much help to the millions of families who depend on their Social Security benefits. As prescription prices skyrocket and Medicare premiums and other health costs increase, many older Americans have understandable concerns. Along with many groups, AARP has also asked Congress to ensure that Medicare premiums and deductibles don’t skyrocket next year,” says Jenkins.

Adds Max Richtman, President/CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM), “No one can say with a straight face that providing the average senior with an additional four dollars a month will come even close to covering the true cost of living that retirees face. The average senior spends more than $5,000 a year on healthcare costs alone. A $4 Social Security COLA doesn’t even make a dent in covering rising costs for seniors.”

Richtman asserts that next year’s tiny COLA increase only continues the trend of historically low cost-of-living adjustments for retirees. “Over the past eight years, the current COLA formula has led to average increases of just over 1%, with three of those years seeing no increase at all. For the average senior, the 2017 COLA will mean an extra $4.00 per month which would barely cover the average cost of one Lipitor pill, a prescription drug frequently prescribed to seniors,” he says.

Richtman notes, “I’ve asked seniors at town hall meetings around the country how many of them think the COLA represents their true cost of living — laughter is always the response. We should move to a COLA formula that takes a more accurate measure of seniors’ expenses, which is a CPI for the elderly. The CPI-E has been in the experimental phase since 1982. It’s time to finish the job by fully funding the development of a more accurate COLA formula.”

Congress Must Legislatively Fix COLA Formula

In media releases, Rhode Island lawmakers call for tweaking how Social Security calculates Social Security COLAs.

Democratic U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, who sits on the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging, calls next year’s Social Security COLA increase an “insult.” He says, “For the fifth year in a row, Washington’s outdated formula has resulted in zero or next to zero cost of living adjustment for Social Security benefits. For the fifth year in a row, Rhode Island seniors will have to stretch their budgets to cover the rising cost of the basics, like food, housing, bills, and prescriptions. They didn’t bargain for this when they paid into Social Security over a lifetime of hard work. Congress needs to change the way we calculate Social Security COLAs.”

Adds, Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI), “This is completely unacceptable. The method for calculating cost of living adjustments is completely broken and fails to reflect the costs of gods and services seniors buy in Rhode Island and across the country.”
The Rhode Island Congressman calls for the Republican House Leadership to seriously consider pending legislation that will ensure that cost of living adjustments reflect the goods and services Rhode Island seniors actually buy. “Speaker Ryan should immediately bring the Protecting and Preserving Social Security Act to the floor so we can replace this outdated method for calculating cost of living adjustments with a model that actually meets the needs of Rhode Island seniors,” said Cicilline.

During the last Congress, the Senate and House controlled GOP have consistently kept legislative proposals from being considered that were crafted to bring needed reforms to the nation’s Social Security and Medicare programs. A newly elected Democratic President and a Congress controlled by Democrats might just be the political fix necessary to finally do the job that is ensuring the financial long-term solvency of these two domestic entitlement programs

Winning the Votes of Older Women

Published in Pawtucket Times on October 10, 2016

On Oct. 7, Washington Post reporter David Fahrenthol’s story broke detailing a three minute video of GOP Presidential candidate Donald Trump wearing a hot microphone during a 2005 bus ride with former-host Bill Bush, of “Access Hollywood” to the set of “Days of Our Lives” where the real estate mogul had a walk on cameo on the soap opera. The video captured Trump saying “And when you’re a star they let you do it. You can do anything …Grab them by the p—y. You can do anything” and crudely describing his failed attempts to seduce a woman while being recently married.

Reaction came swiftly to Trump’s locker room banter with Bush. “No woman should never be described in these terms or talked about in this manner. Ever,” said Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, who was doing damage control to keep woman voters from voting Democrat. The leaked video has also resulted in a number of Republican Senate and House candidates running in November to withdrawal their endorsements of Trump.

This is horrific,” Democratic Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton said on Twitter, noting a link to the Washington Post article. “We cannot allow this man to become president.”

The embattled Trump initially issued a statement and later a video to try to defuse the controversy and get his flailing campaign back on track 30 days before the November presidential election.

Many political pundits believe that Trump’s off-the-cuff comments that are derogatory to woman, a powerful voting block who decide elections, might just block his chances of becoming the next occupant of the White House.

Women’s Campaign Issues

One day before the politically damaging Washington Post article appeared detailing Trump’s lewd comments in a leaked video, AARP, the nation’s largest aging advocacy group, released survey findings highlighting issues of importance to women voters ages 50 to 69 in key battleground states.

“Older women voters – particularly women of the Boomer generation — could help decide the 2016 presidential election,” said AARP Executive Vice President Nancy LeaMond. “Yet many of their real concerns are being ignored and their questions overlooked in a largely issueless campaign. The candidates still have an opportunity to talk to these women about the issues that matter to them.”

The 27 page report, Women Voters Ages 50 +: Economic Anxieties, Social Security, and the 2016 Election, says that heading into this year’s presidential election, Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton has a whopping 15 point lead (48 percent) over the GOP’s standard bearer Donald Trump (33 percent) among woman over age 50. The findings also indicate that older woman favor Democrats running for Congress by a narrower margin (47 percent are inclined to vote for a Democrat while 36 percent inclined to vote for a Republican).

AARP’s survey results noted that majority of woman age 50 and over believe that Clinton will do a better job than Trump in addressing family caregiving (Clinton, 57 percent; Trump, 27 percent), education (56 percent; 31 percent), environment (55 percent; 29 percent) and health (53 percent; 35 percent). The Democratic presidential candidate is also perceived by older woman as having a slight advantage over Trump in controlling government spending and controlling the budget deficit (44 percent; 43 percent).

“It’s the Economy Stupid”
Plus Retirement Issues

As to the economy, the majority of the older woman respondents across these 15 battle ground states worry about pocketbook issues such as prices rising faster than their income (61 percent) and having to pay too much in taxes (54 percent. Four in ten (41%) worry about having prescription drug expenses they cannot afford. Women with lower household incomes are especially likely to worry about these pocketbook issues.

Also, the AARP survey found that many women also worry about retirement security, including their ability to care for themselves as they age (45 percent), not having financial security in retirement (41 percent), and whether Social Security will be there when they retire (38 percent). These retirement-related issues are of particular concern to women with lower household incomes.

Additionally, most women (53 percent) say that the nearly 25 percent cut in Social Security benefits that would result from not addressing the solvency of Social Security would impact them, including 32 percent who say it would impact them “a lot.”

Fixing Social Security is a key issue to older woman voters. The AARP survey noted that the vast majority of women voters ages 50+ (72 percent) say that the next president and Congress should address Social Security immediately.

Most women (67 percent) also favor giving a caregiver credit in calculating Social Security benefits to people who take time off from work to care for loved ones, says the report.

Social Security is flying under the radar screen of the voter. The survey findings noted that few women say that they have heard about the candidates’ plans for Social Security. About one in three (34 percent) say they have seen or heard anything from Clinton, and even fewer (20 percent) say that they have seen or heard anything from Trump.

The AARP survey found that over 54 percent of the respondents are currently, or have been, a family caregiver providing unpaid care to an adult loved one. More than eight in ten (85 percent) women voter’s ages 50+ think it is important for the presidential candidates to talk about how they would support family caregivers who provide unpaid care to aging parents or spouses or other adult family members.

Finally, four in ten (41 percent) women are not confident that they will be able to cover the cost of care for an aging or elderly parent, spouse, or other family member.

Women: A Powerful Voting Block

According to the Center for American Women in Politics, “In recent elections voter turnout rates for women have equaled or exceeded voter turnout rates for men. Women, who constitute more than half of the population, have cast between four to seven million more votes than men in recent elections.“

Only weeks will tell if embattled Trump can overcome the political backlash generated from his locker room banter degrading woman, political insiders predicting that the gender vote gap might just historically widen.

AARP’s survey findings provide sound advice to Clinton and Trump and congressional candidates who are scrambling for last minute votes, especially from married women, younger millennials and women living in the nation’s suburbs. The women’s voting block might just surely tilt the election to a candidate in many legislative districts.