Below is the language from the House Draft Budget Resolution (starts on page 104) concerning Social Security:
(b) POLICY ON SOCIAL SECURITY. — It is the policy of this concurrent resolution that the House should work in a bipartisan manner to make Social Security solvent on a sustainable basis. This concurrent resolution assumes, under a reform trigger, that —(1) if in any year the Board of Trustees of the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund annual Trustees Report determines that the 75-year actuarial balance of the Social Security Trust Funds is in deficit, and the annual balance of the Social Security Trust Funds in the 75th year is in deficit, the Board of Trustees should, no later than September 30 of the same calendar year, submit to the President recommendations for statutory reforms necessary to achieve a 75-year actuarial balance and a positive annual balance in the 75th year, and any recommendations provided to the President must be agreed upon by both Public Trustees of the Board of Trustees;
(2) not later than December 1 of the same calendar year in which the Board of Trustees submit its recommendations, the President should promptly submit implementing legislation to both Houses of Congress including recommendations necessary to achieve a positive 75-year actuarial balance and a positive annual balance in the 75th year, and the majority leader of the Senate and the majority leader of the House should introduce the President’s legislation upon receipt;
(3) within 60 days of the President submitting legislation, the committees of jurisdiction should report a bill, which the House or Senate should consider under expedited procedures; and
(4) legislation submitted by the President should —(A) protect those in or near retirement;
(B) preserve the safety net for those who count on Social Security the most, including those with disabilities and survivors;
(C) improve fairness for participants;
(D) reduce the burden on and provide certainty for future generations; and
(E) secure the future of the Disability Insurance program while addressing the needs of those with disabilities today and improving the determination process.(c) POLICY ON DISABILITY INSURANCE. — It is the policy of this concurrent resolution that the House should consider legislation on a bipartisan basis to reform the Disability Insurance program prior to its insolvency in 2028 and should not raid the Social Security retirement system without reforms to the Disability Insurance system. This concurrent resolution assumes reform that—(1) promotes opportunity for those trying to return to work;
(2) ensures benefits continue to be paid to individuals with disabilities and their family members who rely on them;
(3) prevents a 7 percent across-the-board benefit cut;
(4) legislation submitted by the President should —(A) protect those in or near retirement;
(B) preserve the safety net for those who count on Social Security the most, including those with disabilities and survivors;
(C) improve fairness for participants;
(D) reduce the burden on and provide certainty for future generations; and
Some comments:(d) POLICY ON SOCIAL SECURITY SOLVENCY. — It is the policy of this concurrent resolution that any legislation the House considers to improve the solvency of the Disability Insurance Trust Fund must also improve the long-term solvency of the combined Old Age and Survivors Disability Insurance Trust Fund.(E) secure the future of the Disability Insurance program while addressing the needs of those with disabilities today and improving the determination process.
- Seventy-five years is a very long time. Securing Social Security for 75 years into the future would require either dramatic cuts in Social Security benefits, significant tax increases or some combination of the two. How likely is it that a Republican controlled Congress would enact tax increases? No, this is Republicans trying to find a way to cut Social Security.
- This includes the idea that the public will accept cuts in Social Security if we just "protect those in or near retirement." Republicans have been pushing this idea for decades but the public hasn't been buying it -- at all. By this point, the faith of Republican leaders that this plan will work is pathetic.
- Even though the draft resolution calls for no cuts in Social Security benefits for those in or near "retirement" it would be almost impossible to apply this to disability benefits. Accomplishing the goals of this resolution without "raiding" the retirement trust fund and without raising taxes would require dramatic cuts in disability benefits for those already on benefits unless there was some draconian limit on the number of people going on disability benefits. I don't know how you'd achieve this kind of savings without something like that 7% across the board cut.
- Note that this draft doesn't say exactly what should be done. It just demands that the President and other Congressional committees do something. The resolution keeps saying what others "should" do. What if they don't actually do what this resolution says they "should" do? This is not a rhetorical question. Trump is unlikely to propose cutting benefits or raising taxes. The votes won't be there to report a bill out of committee that would do either. It's a bigger non-starter than enacting Trumpcare. This is a wistful statement of what Republicans in Congress would really love to do if they didn't have to worry about those pesky voters back in their districts.
