Yesterday, the Senate Finance Committee held a hearing on the looming depletion of Social Security’s Retirement and Survivors Trust Fund. Of course, you’d expect a serious nonpartisan discussion of the options. Right. The reality is that there were sharp divisions between Republicans and Democrats. Democrats favor a plan to remove the cap on wages subject to the FICA tax. Republicans thought that idea was terrible but had no plan of their own or at least not one they’ll release.
Actually, it’s fairly easy to figure out the Republicans plan. They will demand a plan that includes both benefits cuts and tax increases. However, the overwhelming majority of Republican legislators will vote against the plan. They will only supply the bare minimum number of votes needed for passage. Then, they’ll campaign against Democrats for cutting benefits and raising taxes. Jujitsu! I don’t think Democrats will fall for this but maybe they’ll never have control of both houses of Congress and the White House as well as the will to get past the Senate filibuster so they can do what they think needs to be done.
7 comments:
Between 2021 and 2023, the Democrats had the Presidency, The House and a 50/50 split in the Senate. Between 2009 and 2011 they had all 3 branches, so I ask why wasn't this done then?
The Republicans love to outsource their work.
Senator Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, the ranking member of the Finance Committee, rejected the commission approach, calling it an unnecessary transfer of congressional responsibility that could make it easier to advance benefit reductions, including an increase in the retirement age.
Wyden said Democrats had already introduced legislation that would raise additional revenue from wealthy households and higher earners while avoiding reductions for current and future beneficiaries.
“This is the work we were sent to Congress to undertake,” Wyden said. “Handing off that responsibility to somebody else is just buck-passing.”
That argument was echoed by Senators Sheldon Whitehouse, D-Rhode Island; Warren; and Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont. They urged Congress to raise or remove the cap on wages subject to the Social Security payroll tax and, in some cases, apply taxes to additional forms of income received by wealthy households.
But Republicans said the hearing’s focus on process was being mischaracterized as an attempt to engineer benefit cuts.
Ron Johnson, R–Wisconsin, was perhaps the greatest critic of some of the proposals. For instance, he called Social Security a “legal Ponzi scheme,” referencing its inability to manage to pay promised benefits, and at one point indicated that stock investments would be more appropriate for investing Social Security surpluses, which are currently invested in special government securities. Johnson stated he does not support raising taxes to support the fund.
But Cassidy, who has worked with Democrats on previous Social Security proposals, said a bipartisan group could consider plans from both parties and submit one or more options to the Finance Committee, at which point senators could accept, reject or replace them.
“This is not about a solution,” Cassidy said. “This is about a process to arrive at the solution.
Does the word filibuster ring a bell?
The Senate filibuster remains in place because lawmakers fear future political regret, value minority protection, and lack the internal party consensus required to change the rule.
Because the senate requires 60 votes to pass legislation thanks to the republicans, who obstructed literally every piece of legislation the democrats proposed. Nice try though.
The change would require a 60 vote majority in the Senate. The Mitch McConnell lead Republicans would not provide the votes needed to cross the 60 threshold.
The SSA tax hasn't been raised in about 50 years. Less workers and more retirees. Raise the SSA tax 1 percent.
Double the cap. People that make much more than $400k will figure a way to avoid paying taxes for the most part anyway.
How about we blame BOTH Sides!!!!
Post a Comment