SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
");background-position:center;background-size:19px 19px;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-color:var(--button-bg-color);padding:0;width:var(--form-elem-height);height:var(--form-elem-height);font-size:0;}:is(.js-newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper) .widget__body:has(.response:not(:empty)) :is(.widget__headline, .widget__subheadline, #mc_embed_signup .mc-field-group, #mc_embed_signup input[type="submit"]){display:none;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) #mce-responses:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-row:1 / -1;grid-column:1 / -1;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget__body > .snark-line:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-column:1 / -1;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) :is(.newsletter-campaign:has(.response:not(:empty)), .newsletter-and-social:has(.response:not(:empty))){width:100%;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col{display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;justify-content:center;align-items:center;gap:8px 20px;margin:0 auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .text-element{display:flex;color:var(--shares-color);margin:0 !important;font-weight:400 !important;font-size:16px !important;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .whitebar_social{display:flex;gap:12px;width:auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col a{margin:0;background-color:#0000;padding:0;width:32px;height:32px;}.newsletter-wrapper .social_icon:after{display:none;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget article:before, .newsletter-wrapper .widget article:after{display:none;}#sFollow_Block_0_0_1_0_0_0_1{margin:0;}.donation_banner{position:relative;background:#000;}.donation_banner .posts-custom *, .donation_banner .posts-custom :after, .donation_banner .posts-custom :before{margin:0;}.donation_banner .posts-custom .widget{position:absolute;inset:0;}.donation_banner__wrapper{position:relative;z-index:2;pointer-events:none;}.donation_banner .donate_btn{position:relative;z-index:2;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_0{color:#fff;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_1{font-weight:normal;}.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper.sidebar{background:linear-gradient(91deg, #005dc7 28%, #1d63b2 65%, #0353ae 85%);}
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"MAGA House Republicans are demonstrating their hostility to working Americans and retirees," said one critic.
Congressional Democrats and other defenders of Social Security and Medicare responded with alarm after U.S. House Budget Committee Republicans on Thursday advanced a sweeping resolution that includes support for a fiscal commission intended to gut the crucial programs.
While Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) celebrated the committee's passage of the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2025, Ranking Member Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.) declared that "today, we saw just how backward and extreme House Republicans' vision for the future really is."
"We saw just how willing Republicans are to sell out American families in order to continue giving trillions in tax cuts to price gouging corporations and the ultrarich," Boyle said. "And we saw just how hellbent they are on gutting critical programs—raising the cost of living and pushing the middle class out of reach for hardworking families."
"Budget Committee Democrats know who we're fighting for. That's why we proposed amendments that would have protected Social Security and Medicare, prevented Republicans from raising healthcare costs, and defended American families against the devastating cuts in this budget resolution," he continued. "By voting for this dangerous budget and by rejecting our amendments today, committee Republicans have made it clear who they're fighting for—the wealthy and the well-connected."
"The commission is designed to slash vital earned benefits through a fast-track, closed-door process, intended to allow Republicans to avoid political accountability."
The committee vote came as President Joe Biden prepared to deliver his third State of the Union speech at 9:00 pm ET. The Democrat is a fierce critic of the GOP's proposed "death panel," as the White House and other opponents call the commission. He is seeking reelection in November and is expected to face former Republican President Donald Trump.
"After hearing Budget Committee Republicans tell us how they'll take us backward, I look forward to hearing President Biden tell us how he'll keep America moving forward at the State of the Union tonight," said Boyle. The congressman was not alone in referencing the Thursday night address in remarks about the GOP attack on key programs.
Social Security Works president Nancy Altman said that "at tonight's State of the Union, President Joe Biden has a golden opportunity to slam the Trump-Arrington death panel. In addition, Biden should renew his promise to protect and expand Social Security—and pay for it by taxing the ultrarich. Then the American people will know which party stands with them and which party stands with the billionaire class."
"The commission is designed to slash vital earned benefits through a fast-track, closed-door process, intended to allow Republicans to avoid political accountability," Altman stressed. "Every Republican who voted for this budget voted to cut Social Security and Medicare."
"This markup comes two days after Donald Trump enthusiastically endorsed Chairman Arrington," she noted. "Arrington is a fervent supporter of the death panel commission, and wants to attach it to must-pass government spending bills. By endorsing Arrington, Trump has endorsed the Social Security death panel."
Max Richtman, president and CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, also took aim at not only the committee's Republicans but also Trump, referencing the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act that he signed into law in 2017.
"MAGA House Republicans are demonstrating their hostility to working Americans and retirees via their fiscal year 2025 budget resolution," he said. "The MAGA budget includes trillions of dollars in cuts to domestic spending while extending the Trump/GOP tax giveaways to the wealthy and profitable corporations that swelled the debt."
Richtman called the commission "equally troubling," adding that "we fiercely oppose such a commission as a scheme for cutting seniors' earned benefits while shielding members of Congress from accountability."
"Social Security and Medicare Part A do not contribute to the debt. Seniors' earned benefits should be protected from a commission that would fast-track benefit cuts," he argued. "If MAGA Republicans really want to reduce the debt, they should start by letting the Trump tax cuts expire. Current and future seniors on fixed incomes should not be punished for the GOP's fiscal recklessness."
"Republicans are plowing ahead with their closed-door commission designed to cut Social Security and Medicare," said Social Security Works president Nancy Altman.
With the help of three Democratic members, the Republican-controlled House Budget Committee on Thursday advanced legislation to establish a fiscal commission that critics say is a trojan horse for Social Security and Medicare cuts.
The final vote to send the bill to the full House was 22-12, with Reps. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), Scott Peters (D-Calif.), and Jimmy Panetta (D-Calif.) joining every present Republican in supporting the
Fiscal Commission Act.
The committee rejected four proposed Democratic amendments, including one supporting tax hikes on the rich to bolster Social Security and Medicare.
"Republicans are plowing ahead with their closed-door commission designed to cut Social Security and Medicare," Nancy Altman, the president of Social Security Works, said in a statement. "Many of the Republicans tried to claim that was not their goal, but they tellingly voted down Democratic amendments to rule out cutting those programs and instead require billionaires to pay their fair share."
"The vast majority of Democrats on the committee rightfully opposed the commission. Shame on the handful of exceptions," Altman added. "They have stabbed the American people in the back, and undermined President Joe Biden."
In his opening remarks at Thursday's hearing, Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.)—the top Democrat on the committee—warned that "there are absolutely those who are getting ready to use a commission as a backdoor way to force through unpopular cuts" to Social Security and Medicare.
"We can put both trust funds on the path to full solvency for the rest of this century," said Boyle, who introduced legislation last year that would extend Social Security's solvency by at least 75 years by making the wealthy pay a more equitable share into the program. "We don't need a commission to do that."
Early in Thursday's hearing, Social Security Works executive director Alex Lawson interrupted the proceedings to deliver half a million petition signatures to the committee opposing the creation of a fiscal commission.
"We don't need a smoky back room. I would like you to listen to the American people when they say, 'Absolutely no cuts to Social Security,'" Lawson said as he was escorted out of the hearing room by a Capitol police officer. "A vote for a commission is a vote to cut Social Security."
The establishment of a fiscal commission is a top priority of House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), who proposed trillions of dollars in cuts to Social Security and Medicare during his tenure as chair of the Republican Study Commission—which has continued to push for steep cuts to the two programs.
Following Thursday's vote, House Budget Committee Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) rattled off a list of right-wing groups that have supported the push for a fiscal commission, including Citizens Against Government Waste and Americans for Prosperity—an organization founded by the Koch brothers.
The AARP, the AFL-CIO, and other prominent advocacy organizations have vocally criticized the Republican-led demand for a fiscal commission, as Boyle noted at the end of Thursday's hearing.
If passed by Congress, the bill advanced Thursday would establish a 16-member commission tasked with recommending policy changes designed to "balance the budget" and improve the "long-term fiscal outlook" of the nation's trust fund programs.
Any recommendations approved by the panel would be placed on a fast track in both chambers of Congress, with no amendments or delays permitted.
"Fiscal commissions are not the answer," the Alliance for Retired Americans said Thursday. "They are just smokescreens for politicians to hide behind while slashing earned benefits."
GOP lawmakers want the commission to commit the dirty work of slashing Social Security and Medicare to death without leaving their fingerprints on the murder weapon.
This week, House Budget Committee Republicans held a hearing on creating a so-called “fiscal commission.” The hearing made it crystal clear what their real goal is: decimate Social Security and Medicare behind closed doors.
Their commission is a scheme, specifically designed to avoid accountability from voters. They would require Congress to vote on the commission’s recommendations right after the 2024 election, without any amendments. This will allow members to run on the claim that they won’t cut Social Security and Medicare, and then turn around and vote for cuts. They will insist that they hated the cuts, but had to do something about the federal debt, so their hands were tied. Some voting for it will have lost re-election or will be retiring, with nothing to lose. All of them will be as far away from the next election as possible.
During the hearing, Rep. Steve Womack (R-Ark.), one of the witnesses, stated that “If raising the [retirement] age needs to be part of that discussion then a fiscal commission will tell us that.” He added: “You cannot, rationally, take any option off the table.”
Those who are most familiar with past commissions know exactly why a new one would be so dangerous.
“Everything on the table” is Washington-speak for doing what the American people don’t want.
What options do Republicans want to put on the table? That’s not hard to glean for any of us who follow the issue closely. The Republican Study Committee, a group that comprises about 75 percent of House Republicans, has released a budget that would raise the retirement age, decimate middle-class Social Security benefits, and privatize Medicare. Past versions of their plan have also included a stingier cost-of-living adjustment. That’s what Republicans mean when they say that “everything is on the table.” What they want is political cover.
Those who are most familiar with past commissions know exactly why a new one would be so dangerous. Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) served on the Bowles-Simpson Commission, which today’s commission proponents cite as a model. During the hearing, she said that “this kind of commission is a way for members of Congress to get out of having to take the blame for the kinds of cuts that may be presented.”
In a Common Dreamsop-ed this week, Schakowsky was even more specific. “The speaker [of the House Mike Johnson]... has devised an accountability-free way to gut [Social Security]. [We] don’t have to guess that this is what will happen, because Republicans have tried this before. During discussions on forming Bowles-Simpson in 2010, Senator Max Baucus (D-Mont.) astutely pointed out that ‘The Chairman and Ranking Republican Member of the Budget Committee have painted a big red bull’s eye on Social Security. Their commission is a Social Security-cutting machine.’ Sen. Baucus was right.”
Those seeking to create another Social Security-cutting machine sometimes argue that the problem isn’t commissions per se, and point to the Greenspan Commission as an example of a successful one. But those who make that claim were not involved 40 years ago. I staffed Alan Greenspan in his capacity as Chair of that commission. Recently, I and other former commission staffers, who worked for both Democrats and Republicans, issued a statement to set the record straight and to argue forcefully against what is being proposed today.
We conclude our statement by quoting the late Robert M. Ball, who then-Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill put on the Greenspan Commission to represent him. As the talk of the Greenspan Commission as a model for today arose, Ball was so concerned that he requested—literally on his deathbed—that the chapter from his memoir about the Greenspan Commission be published as a separate monograph. He made the deathbed request in an effort to avoid the misuse of the Greenspan Commission to force the type of commission that Speaker Johnson is determined to create. In the monograph, Ball warned that “to suggest that the Greenspan Commission provides a model for resolving questions about Social Security’s future would be laughable if it were not so dangerous.”
The real reason—the only reason—to create a closed-door, fast-track commission is to do what the American people don’t want: Cut benefits.
Notably, unlike today’s effort to avoid political accountability, the Greenspan Commission’s recommendations were just that: recommendations. They did not have the force of law and were not fast-tracked. Rather, they went through regular order, with open hearings, and the ability to amend and, in the Senate, to filibuster.
Congress should simply consider, through regular order, one of the several Social Security legislative proposals that have been introduced in this Congress. All the options are already known. No commission is needed – other than to avoid political accountability. Rather than establish a commission to amend Social Security, Congress should do its job: Determine Social Security’s future through regular order, in the light of day, as the Democrats want to do.
As Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) said at the hearing: “There already is a bipartisan forum where these kinds of decisions should get made. It's called Congress and we shouldn't pass the buck to a fiscal commission to do the work that we ourselves don't want to do.”
McGovern was being diplomatic with his colleagues. What Republicans want is not to avoid the work but rather to cut Social Security without leaving fingerprints on the murder weapon. President Biden understands this clearly. His White House has called the planned commission a death panel for Social Security and Medicare. House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries is staunchly opposed to the commission. So are AARP, the AFL-CIO, Indivisible, MoveOn, the Strengthen Social Security Coalition, and over 100 other organizations who have signed letters in opposition.
What Republicans want is not to avoid the work but rather to cut Social Security without leaving fingerprints on the murder weapon.
Those opposed to a Social Security cutting-machine in the form of a fast-track commission represent the overwhelming will of the American people — Republicans, Democrats, and Independents. Voters of all parties, from MAGA supporters to Democratic socialists, overwhelmingly support protecting and expanding Social Security, not cutting it, and paying for it by requiring the wealthy to contribute their fair share. That’s the real bipartisan solution, and there’s no reason to go behind closed doors to enact it.
The real reason—the only reason—to create a closed-door, fast-track commission is to do what the American people don’t want: Cut benefits.
As Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA) masterfully explained during the hearing, Republicans like Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and House Budget Chairman Jodey Arrington (R-TX) happily voted for deficit-exploding tax handouts to the wealthy. Now they are crying crocodile tears about the deficit and demanding closed-door cuts to Social Security — which doesn’t contribute a single penny to the deficit.
A few corporate-friendly Democrats testified at the hearing, including retiring Senator Joe Manchin. But they are, thankfully, extreme outliers. They represent wealthy donors (and are uber-wealthy themselves), not their constituents. In fact, Manchin is so uninterested in representing his constituents that he’s leaving the Senate.
At this week’s hearing, Democrats—including Schakowksy, McGovern, Scott, and Ranking Member Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.)—were outspoken in their opposition to a commission. Every Democrat should join them, and make it clear that there’s nothing bipartisan about cutting our earned benefits behind closed doors.