In one of the most provocative moves in recent times, Republican lawmakers foiled a bill to expand Social Security benefits by violating established legislative procedures. That has raised quite a stir of debate and concern among beneficiaries, policymakers, and the general public. This article goes into detail about what happened with the bill, why the Republicans opposed it, and what may be waiting for recipients down the road with Social Security.
The bill and its intent
The bill in question proposed an expansion of Social Security benefits, one that many proponents believe is fitting for an increase in the cost of living, as well as to preserve a decent standard of living for retirees and disabled people. This bill was intended to revise monthly benefits upwards, alter cost-of-living calculations, and take on the long-term solvency of the Social Security trust fund.
Social Security is a vital program, providing financial support to millions of retirees, persons with disabilities, and survivors of workers who have died. The program has been a cornerstone of financial security for many individuals throughout their lives-especially those who may well not have other sources of retirement income. Consequently, since its inception, any modifications to this program have contributed to changing lives far and wide. It is with that said, that the Republicans opposed this issue.
Republican lawmakers, particularly Freedom Caucus members, opposed the bill despite the welcome expansion of benefit payments. They said that adding major new benefits without dealing with the underlying financial issues facing the Social Security program would increase rather than decrease its long-term solvency problems, calling instead for reforms that would focus on making the program sustainable for future generations. For instance, the Newsweek article indicates that Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris, R-MD, was unanimously consented to lay the Social Security bill on the table. This was a procedural move to kill the bill before it reached a vote.
Breaking protocol
The other point of contention is the way the blocking of the bill was done. It is through unanimous consent in tabling the bill by Republican lawmakers, bypassing debates, committees, and floor votes. This has been assailed by Democratic lawmakers and advocacy groups alike as an undemocratic way of killing legislation and preventing it from being argumentatively threshed out.
As noted on Speaksly.net, this move has not been devoid of controversy, particularly since it has incensed a record number of advocates working to expand Social Security benefits. Such moves have been termed by critics as procedural that would prevent the good discussion and compromise of key issues affecting millions of Americans.
Implications for Social Security recipients
Meanwhile, current and future beneficiaries will suffer from the short- and long-term effects of blocking the expansion of Social Security benefits. Absent increased benefits in the near term, tens of millions of retirees and disabled people will continue to suffer from year-over-year increases in the cost of living. As a result, Social Security serves as a primary source of income for many; this could mean greater financial hardship and inability to afford basic expenses.
Long-term debates are far from over on reforms to Social Security. The program is confronting serious financial problems; given the state of the trust fund, depletion in the next decade is very possible if nothing is done to change course. Thus, there has been growing pressure for comprehensive reform that addresses both benefit adequacy and program solvency.
Read more: Social Security Update: In 23 days the SSI direct payment of $1,415 will be out for the month of December
Read more: Social Security Update: In 8 days the SSI direct payment of $1,415 will be out for the month of November
