Before the year ends, there may be time for the Social Security Fairness Act to pass the Senate. The plan, which passed the House of Representatives with little opposition, is an attempt by both parties to remove two clauses that are lowering millions of Americans’ Social Security income.
The Government Pension Offset (GPO), which adjusts Social Security spousal or widow(er) benefits for people who receive “non-covered retirement funds,” and the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP), which adjusts Social Security worker benefits for people who receive “non-covered pensions” and are eligible for Social Security benefits due to other Social Security–covered earnings, are both items that the bill aims to repeal. After passing the House, it must pass the Senate before it can be signed into law and sent to President Biden. About 2.8 million individuals would profit from their contributions if this procedure were to occur. The bill needs at least 60 senators to pass Congress, even if it has a lot of Senate support.
It shouldn’t be an issue since it received 62 cosponsors last year, but things can change. Now that Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., is starting the process of passing the bill, it’s essential to ensure Americans aren’t mistakenly denied their hard-earned Social Security benefits just because they eventually decided to pursue careers in public service. Schumer clarified.
However, things may have changed since last year. Indiana GOP Senator Mike Braun, who signed onto identical legislation the previous year, was not as outspoken about his support for this new version of the measure because he was still “weighing” whether or not to vote for it next week. He said, “Nothing ever gets paid for, so if it’s further indebtedness, I don’t know,” to justify his role shift.
He is alluding to the fact that the law would need additional funding to pay benefits, which would have to come from the already overstretched Social Security Trust funds. Indeed, they have already set a deadline for its depletion, after which the program would depend on payroll taxes to pay pensioners. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that if these measures are approved and removed, they will increase government deficits by $195 billion over ten years.
Even though it seems dreadful, the sad truth is that it would only cut the program’s lifespan by around six months, which may be a bit shortsighted given that we are discussing its extinction. The impartial Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget has verified this information.
To put things in perspective, a typical dual-income couple retiring in 2033 would get $25,000 less in lifetime Social Security payments if the program were to go bankrupt since it would only be around 79% of planned benefits.
Will the Senate Approve the Social Security Fairness Act?
Sen. Rand Paul, a Republican from Kentucky, is among the numerous conservative party members who have fiercely opposed the plan, citing its expense. It would be a huge mistake because it demonstrates a lack of care for the nation’s future, even for something people think is a noble cause.
Some Republicans are less adamant in their opposition. Sen. John Thune, the second-ranking Republican in the Senate, stated that while widespread bipartisan support for the program, some Republicans also want it “fixed in the context of a broader Social Security reform effort.”
Surprisingly, however, some people support the bill. Sen. Bill Cassidy, a Republican from Louisiana, and numerous others urged Schumer to introduce it for a vote by pointing out that the existing federal restrictions penalize families nationwide who served in public service for a portion of their careers with a separate pension. We are referring to law enforcement, firefighters, educators, and other public servants who face consequences for their community service.
