Richard Stephen iStock | getty images
as congress scrambles to escape Following a government shutdown, the Senate is also set to consider another bill that would increase social security benefits For some public workers.
But Bill, Social Security Fairness ActIf efforts by some senators to add amendments are successful, changes could occur.
As originally proposed, the Social Security Fairness Act calls for eliminating Social Security provisions The windfall elimination provision, or WEP, and the government pension offset, or GPO, have been in place for decades.
WEP reduces Social Security benefits for individuals who receive a pension or disability benefits from employment where they did not pay Social Security payroll taxes. The GPO reduces Social Security for spouses, widows and widowers who also receive their own government pension income. Overall, the provisions affect an estimated 3 million individuals.
The bill has enthusiastic support from organizations representing teachers, firefighters, police and other government employees who are affected by benefit cuts.
“You shouldn’t be penalizing people for having income outside the system when you’ve paid into it and earned that benefit,” said John Hatton, vice president of policy and programs at the National Association of Active and Retired Federal Employees. “It took 40 years to try to get it repealed.”
The bill has received overwhelming bipartisan support. Social Security Fairness Act passed by House 327 majority in November.
Initial Senate votes this week also show strong bipartisan support for moving the proposal forward. On Wednesday, the chamber voted with a 73 majority on a motion to move the proposal forward. After this, voting was held on Thursday on the proposal to move ahead, in which a majority of 73 votes was also obtained.
Experts say the Senate may soon hold a final vote. It can proceed in one of two ways – with amendments that change the terms of the original bill or with a final vote without any changes.
Amendments may include increasing the retirement age
The cost of the Social Security Fairness Act would be Estimated $196 billion More than 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
Those additional costs come as the trust fund relies on Social Security to help pay benefits, already facing expiration dates. trustee of social security has projected The program’s trust fund used to pay retirement benefits could be exhausted in nine years, when only 79% of benefits will be payable.
Some senators opposing the Social Security Fairness Act have expressed concerns about additional cost pressures on the program.
Senator Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, who voted against advancing the current version of the bill in the Senate this week, said this week He plans to propose an amendment to offset those costs by gradually raising the retirement age to 70 while adjusting for life expectancy. Social Security’s full retirement age – when beneficiaries receive 100% of the benefits they have earned – is currently 67 for individuals born in 1960 or later.
“It is absurd to consider a proposal that would make Social Security less fair and economically weaker,” Paul said in a statement. “To offset the harms caused by this legislation, my amendment to gradually raise the retirement age to reflect current life expectancies would strengthen Social Security by providing savings of approximately $400 billion.”
More than personal finance:
Answers to common questions on the Social Security Fairness Act
73% of workers worry Social Security won’t be able to pay benefits
Study shows early retirement comes as a surprise to many workers
As of Friday morning, a total of six amendments had been introduced to the bill, according to Emerson Sprick, associate director of economic policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center.
Some amendments call for completely repealing the WEP and GPO provisions and replacing them with other changes.
An amendment from Sens. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and Joe Manchin, I-West Virginia, would instead establish a more proportional formula to calculate benefits for affected individuals. That change, inspired by Texas Republican Representative Jody Arrington Equal Treatment of Public Servants ActThere is a lot of support from policy experts and bipartisan policy centers, Sprick said.
Social Security advocacy groups have pushed for major comprehensive Social Security reform that would use tax increases to make benefits more generous.
“We want to help make that happen, but our priority was that it be part of a much larger Social Security reform,” said Dan Adcock, director of government relations and policy at the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare.
To be sure, if amendments are successfully added to the bill, it will have to go back to the House.
“We’re hoping that doesn’t happen, because that could complicate matters, depending on the timing of what happens with (a continuing solution) to avoid a government shutdown,” Adcock said.
The Senate can proceed to a final vote on the original bill.
According to Sprick, much of what happens next depends on Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-New York, who can make a unilateral decision not to allow the amendments to be considered.
Alternatively, Schumer could decide to allow amendments in exchange for limiting the time it takes to consider the bill, he said.
However, Sprick said he doubted Schumer would allow the amendment at this point.
“The most likely scenario at this point is that Senator Schumer simply calls time out, does not allow any amendments to be considered, and they take a final vote late tonight or tomorrow morning,” Sprick said.
Although opponents of the bill could delay the vote, they would not be able to stop the vote, Hatton said. Moreover, there is reason to believe that the leaders who voted to advance the bill this week will also vote for it when it is put up for a final vote, he said.
“I’m still optimistic that this will pass, and it’s just a matter of when, not if,” Hatton said.
