PolicyViz tried to find out how candidates in the 20 most hotly contested Senate races stood on proposals to solve Social Security’s funding difficulties by eliminating the cap on the FICA tax that supports Social Security. The results are enlightening. Thirteen Democrats and four independents support removing the cap while two Democrats are generally in support of raising taxes on the wealthy for this purpose but don’t endorse a specific plan. Three Republicans support eliminating the FICA cap. Only one candidate, an Republican, opposes eliminating the cap. Sixteen Republicans and two Democrats have said nothing on the issue.
I don’t know when this might come up in the Senate. Certainly not in the next two years if Republicans control the chamber but if Democrats are in charge, who knows? It looks like Republicans would prefer not to vote on it but if forced they may find it difficult to vote against it. Would Democrats try to bring it to a vote in the next Congress if they get a chance? They certainly wouldn’t mind forcing a tough vote on Republicans. Would Trump veto it if it comes to his desk?
7 comments:
Why are Democrats spiking the football when the midterms are not until November 3rd?
PS… Go VOTE! 🗳️
DJT has made it clear that if Democrats take over Congress he will veto everything. Nobody is predicting a veto proof Senate so this is all wishful thinking.
I think it's telling that nowhere in the article does it discuss whether contributions above the current tax max would lead to higher benefits, and whether there's a new bend point. The authors of the post certainly understand how big a difference that makes to public and interest group support for the policy, and how long it would extend solvency. Many of the candidates probably don't understand the details of Social Security enough to even ask.
Ya... nothing will get done for a couple years, but that might not be a bad thing! A little bit of "no action" in the government would be a welcomed reprieve from the last 2 years. Everyone is mentally exhausted from this reality-show government we have going on.
This will help, but not be nearly enough. Investing a portion in the market, like most private and state/local pension plans, is the only path forward with increasing the age and/or decreasing benefits. Neither of those will fly.
Only a tiny minority actually care whether raising or eliminating the cap leads to a higher retirement (and to that group: SPOILER- it inevitably will as compared to program insolvency, idiots!). Most trumpeting that question and perceived unfairness just want the program to go away because it takes money out of the hands of private investment manager.
I don't know, but someone had better damn well do something before it's too late and we turn into France!
Post a Comment