Photo credit: www.cnbc.com
As Congress works diligently to avert a government shutdown, the Senate is preparing to take up legislation aimed at increasing Social Security benefits for certain public sector employees.
This legislation, known as the Social Security Fairness Act, may see modifications if some Senators succeed in pushing through amendments.
The primary goal of the Social Security Fairness Act is to eliminate long-standing provisions known as the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and the Government Pension Offset (GPO). The WEP reduces Social Security benefits for workers who receive pension benefits from jobs where they did not contribute to Social Security. Similarly, the GPO lowers benefits for spouses and widows or widowers who also draw governmental pensions. Collectively, these provisions impact approximately 3 million individuals.
The proposal has garnered enthusiastic backing from groups representing teachers, firefighters, police personnel, and various other government employees who have faced cuts in their benefits.
“It’s unjust to penalize individuals for earnings outside of a system when they have contributed and rightfully earned those benefits,” remarked John Hatton, vice president of policy and programs at the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association. “For 40 years, we have been advocating for this to be repealed.”
The bill enjoys significant bipartisan support, having passed in the House by a substantial majority of 327 votes last November.
Recent Senate votes have also reflected strong bipartisan support, with a vote on Wednesday showing a 73-vote majority on a motion to proceed with the bill, followed by another favorable vote on Thursday.
Experts predict that the Senate may be poised for a final vote soon, which could happen in two ways: either with amendments that adjust the original terms or without any alterations at all.
Potential Amendments Could Include Retirement Age Adjustments
The Social Security Fairness Act is projected to cost around $196 billion over a decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
This price tag raises concerns as the Social Security trust funds, which are essential for administering benefits, face imminent depletion. Current forecasts suggest that the trust fund dedicated to retirement benefits could run out in nine years, leaving only 79% of benefits payable.
Some senators have voiced reservations about the financial implications this bill could have on the program. For example, Senator Rand Paul from Kentucky, who opposed advancing the bill in the Senate, stated he plans to propose an amendment aimed at counterbalancing these costs by gradually raising the retirement age to 70, aligning it with shifts in life expectancy. The current full retirement age for individuals born in 1960 or later is set at 67.
“It is unreasonable to consider legislation that simultaneously undercuts the fairness of Social Security and jeopardizes its financial strength,” Paul noted in a recent statement. “By adjusting the retirement age to better reflect life expectancies, my amendment could yield nearly $400 billion in savings.”
Relevant Insights on Personal Finance:
Here are answers to popular inquiries regarding the Social Security Fairness Act.
Widespread concern among 73% of workers regarding the sustainability of Social Security benefits.
Many workers find early retirement to be an unexpected development, according to studies.
As of Friday morning, six amendments have been introduced to the bill, as noted by Emerson Sprick, the associate director of economic policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center.
Some proposed amendments seek to modify rather than entirely repeal the WEP and GPO provisions. One such amendment, introduced by Senators Ted Cruz from Texas and Joe Manchin from West Virginia, aims to formulate a more proportional approach to calculating benefits for those affected. This proposal draws from Texas Republican Joe Arrington’s Equal Treatment of Public Servants Act and has support from policy analysts and the Bipartisan Policy Center.
In contrast, advocates for social security reform urge for a more comprehensive overhaul that includes tax hikes to fund increased benefits.
“We’re keen on facilitating progress, but our primary preference is that any changes be part of a broader Social Security reform initiative,” said Dan Adcock, director of government relations and policy at the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare.
Importantly, if amendments are approved, the revised bill would need to return to the House for further consideration.
“We hope it doesn’t come to that, as it could introduce complications, particularly with the impending discussions on the continuing resolution to avert a government shutdown,” Adcock added.
Senate’s Next Steps Toward a Final Vote on Original Legislation
The path forward for this legislation largely depends on Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer from New York, who has the authority to decide whether to allow amendments to the bill.
Alternatively, Schumer might opt for a streamlined process, permitting amendments while also enforcing time limits on their debate. However, Sprick expressed skepticism about the likelihood of amendments being accepted at this stage.
The prevailing expectation is that Senator Schumer may run down the clock, opting not to consider amendments and instead move directly to a final vote, possibly either late tonight or early tomorrow.
While opponents could seek to disrupt the voting process, it is unlikely they would succeed in halting it altogether, according to Hatton. Moreover, there is optimism that those Senators who supported advancing the bill will also endorse it in its final stages.
“I remain hopeful that this legislation will pass; it’s more a question of timing than of viability,” Hatton asserted.
Source
www.cnbc.com