Summary
The Senate passed the Social Security Fairness Act in a 76-20 vote, sending it to President Biden for approval.
The bill repeals the Windfall Elimination Provision and Government Pension Offset, which reduced Social Security benefits for nearly 3 million retirees, including teachers, police officers, and postal workers.
It also restores full benefits for surviving spouses and families of these workers.
Though backed by bipartisan support, some Republicans opposed the bill due to its $195 billion cost over a decade. Advocates hailed it as a victory for public service workers.
If he thinks 93 to 3 and 76 to 20 is close, it’s probably time to step down and let someone who’s not a 74yo shill for fossil fuel interests get a say…
Pretty sure hemeant it in jest.
Maybe. Should still step down, though.
Maybe even older people can retain a sense of humor, while others never get one.
True. Betty White was hilarious until the end. Schumer, on the other hand, has never been known for great wit…
I’ve seen some witty remarks from him over the years. One of my favorites was when Republicans wanted to make it illegal to burn THE FLAG (gasp). Schumer was quoted something like: “I wish these people cared as much about what the symbol represents as much as the symbol itself.”
Sarcasm is hard to discern over text. Especially when journos don’t bother to mention the speaker’s tone.
My parents were urging me to write my rep over this, but I think this is misguided at best
These two provisions were addressing a real issue with how SS benefits are calculated - typically your monthly benefit is a percentage of your average monthly earnings eligible for SS. Higher AIMEs are indexed down more than lower ones on a principle of need (those with lower lifetime earnings are likely to need more of a benefit to live through retirement). These provisions basically addressed fringe cases where low AIME’s weren’t necessarily a result of low earnings but of switching out of SS eligible income into a pension system
As I understand it, these simply indexed the monthly benefit down based on (largely outdated) assumptions about those earners. As others have pointed out - SS already has a solvency problem (it’s been undermined for decades now), and further stressing that fund without expanding the tax base is just going to further stress it at a time when the GOP is itching to cut it across the board.
No question that our retirement system needs to be expanded, but this particular change seems reckless. I have to wonder why they chose to do this now
What effect does this have on the solvency date?
Another article said it moves it closer by about six months. So it’s still 9-10 years away
As a millennial I can’t wait to receive the social security I’m paying into right now. I’m foaming at the mouth with excitement.
Thanks for the info!
I feel like this would accelerate that a bit. While this increases fairness in the system it’s putting it further at risk in my opinion. They need to get rid of the cap, it’s absurd to give someone already making massive amounts of income a break when the system is in need of more funding.
deleted by creator
Vitriol aside is this not accurate? I mean, I wouldn’t say it’s “doomed” but I also don’t think either side has the guts or political capital to save it.
… For people who get a government pension. I don’t think this is good legislation unless the person needs to stop work for long term disability.
They pay the Social Security tax, so they shouldn’t get the benefit?
