SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
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.
Instead of eliminating taxes on Social Security, the One Big Beautiful Bill weakens Social Security’s ability to pay full benefits for current and future beneficiaries.
Over the summer, GOP members of Congress and the Trump administration—particularly President Donald Trump—will try to sell the American people on his “One Big Beautiful Bill” (OBBB). One of the claims that will be made is that the legislation ends taxes on Social Security. Ending taxation of Social Security benefits was one of the major campaign promises made by Trump when he was campaigning for reelection.
Contrary to claims made by the White House, the president himself, and GOP members of Congress, the OBBB does not end taxation of Social Security. As MSNBC reporting points out, it is procedurally impossible to enact changes in Social Security through the process of reconciliation:
First and foremost, the idea that the megabill (OBBB) eliminates federal taxes on Social Security—a claim Trump has made repeatedly of late—is plainly false. In fact, congressional Republicans relied on the budget reconciliation process to advance the package, and it’s procedurally impossible to change Social Security through this complex process.
Take a moment to let this fact register with you. It is impossible to enact the kind of Social Security changes that the President Trump and his supporters claim.
So, how did misinformation about the impact of the OBBB on Social Security get started? Well, not surprisingly it starts with the White House. A White House press release on July 1 boldly proclaims that “No Tax on Social Security is a Reality in the One Big Beautiful Bill.” The White House disinformation campaign on Social Security went to an unprecedented level when the Social Security Administration (SSA) sent out misinformation on the elimination of taxes on Social Security in the OBBB. As The Washington Post points out:
The Social Security Administration sent an email to millions of Americans soon after the passage of OBBB saying that the landmark legislation “delivers long-awaited tax relief to millions of older Americans” and includes “a provision that eliminates federal income taxes on Social Security benefits for most beneficiaries, providing relief to individuals and couples.”
So, how does the OBBB impact Social Security? Tara Siegel Bernard, of The New York Times, points out what the OBB does is to establish an enhanced tax deduction that will help reduce a household’s annual income, including Social Security. Furthermore, as Bernard points out, “Nor will the extra deduction benefit all Social Security recipients. Retirees who are 62 through 64 are ineligible.”
While Bernard and MSNBC’s coverage of this issue have been outstanding, much of the rest of the mainstream media has been disappointing on a couple of levels. First, the mainstream media has not condemned in clear terms the Trump administration’s politicalization of SSA’s communications with Social Security beneficiaries. Can you imagine the uproar you would hear had President Barack Obama done something similar?
The mainstream media is either too afraid to criticize the Trump administration or too lazy to try and understand the impact of the OBBB on Social Security, which amounts to millions of dollars of Americans’ earned benefits.
Another thing that almost all of the mainstream media is missing is that the OBBB weakens Social Security’s finances and makes the program’s fiscal challenges even more severe. The logic here is easy enough to follow: If you cut the money going into the Social Security trust funds, you weaken the program and push up the date of insolvency for the trust funds.
So, not only is the Trump administration misrepresenting what the OBBB does on the taxation of Social Security benefits, they are not telling you and me that they are weakening Social Security’s ability to pay out full benefits in the near term.
We are not powerless here. Each of us has the ability raise this issue with our members of Congress and with the media. Our answer to Trump’s false claim that the OBBB eliminates taxes is to simply tell the truth—instead of eliminating taxes on Social Security, the OBBB weakens Social Security’s ability to pay full benefits for current and future beneficiaries. Remember, as George Orwell pointed out: “In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
I would never claim to be an heir to Bill Moyers’ legacy, but I am among the millions of ordinary Americans for whom he was a powerful source of inspiration.
On June 26, America lost an iconic force for good. I lost a great friend.
A partial summary of Bill Moyers’ impressive life fills entire pages of The New York Times and The Washington Post—treatment reserved for royalty and rock stars. Bill was both.
In those pages you’ll read about his illustrious political career as President Lyndon Johnson’s special assistant, press secretary, and key architect of the “Great Society”—a collection of programs that are now in danger, including the War on Poverty that produced Medicare, Medicaid, the Food Stamp Act, and the Economic Opportunity Act; the Civil Rights Act of 1964; the Voting Rights Act of 1965; the National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Act of 1965; and more.
You’ll marvel at his unparalleled journalism that resulted in landmark documentaries, best-selling books, dozens of Emmy Awards, two Alfred I. Dupont-Columbia University Awards, nine Peabody Awards, three George Polk Awards, and the first-ever Honorary Doctor of Fine Arts from the American Film Institute.
I’m going to cover different ground that you won’t find anywhere else. During the final years of Bill’s life, I had the honor of working directly with him on one of his most important missions: preserving democracy.
The Times obituary reported that Bill “retired in 2015 at the age of 80.” That’s incorrect. His online site, “Moyers on Democracy,” continued for years after that. Other outlets, including Common Dreams and Alternet, republished its articles and interviews regularly. Much of it remains available at BillMoyers.com.
In late 2016, Bill invited me to become a regular contributor to his site. It was the beginning of a collaboration that developed into a friendship I will always cherish. Amplifying my voice to his millions of readers, he put his remarkable reputation on the line for me. In one of our conversations, he explained why.
He often asked me, “Can democracy die from too many lies?” We agreed that the answer is yes, and the problem is eternal.
While meeting in the Oval Office with President Lyndon Johnson, Bill mentioned Martin Luther King Jr.’s famous line, “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”
President Johnson became animated.
“That’s bullsh*t,” he said to Moyers. “You have to keep pushing, and pushing, and pushing… and then hope to bend it just a little.”
“Johnson was right,” Bill told me 50 years later. “And you’re pushing.”
Later he flattered me with the ultimate compliment that now moves me to write this tribute:
“I think we are kindred spirits,” he said. “A kindred spirit about what? Our country, our professions, the truth... as close to it as we could get.”
“My only regret is that our paths didn’t cross 30 years ago,” I said.
I would never presume to know Bill as well as others who enjoyed longer and deeper personal and professional relationships with him. But his private messages about my articles for BillMoyers.com encouraged me to keep pushing:
“This is a keeper. Your work is making all of us proud!”
“This is brilliant!”
To that private encouragement, he added public support. Preferring the depth of coverage that today’s cable news seldom provides, he told me that he didn’t want to be a “pundit.” But he made an exception for me. To amplify my voice and our work, we appeared together on MSNBC’s “The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell.”
After Bill broke that ice, I made several more solo television appearances.
“I’ll be watching,” he always said.
Bill also interviewed me several times and posted our extended conversations on his site. His probing questions had the same insight that had characterized his award-winning interviews with far more illustrious individuals—including Elie Wiesel, Jimmy Carter, Maya Angelou, Pete Seeger, Desmond Tutu, George Lucas, and Joseph Campbell. His interviews with Campbell on “The Power of Myth” attracted 30 million viewers and led to another best-selling book.
Even after Bill finally retired and archived BillMoyers.com in 2021, he continued to follow and encourage my work. Here are just a few of his messages to me:
“Your mastery of the story is so impressive, but the story is so equally frightening I can’t get it out of my mind. I am circulating it.”
“Please know I miss our collaboration.”
“Very strong, as usual. You are effectively decoding the news for people who can’t follow it, including, alas, much of the press.”
“Very powerful piece. And brave.”
“Powerful! Go for it!”
“Your piece is stirring… It is so good to see how you continue to serve the truth.”
“Terrific!”
In our conversations, Bill told me that America was unlikely to lose its democracy in the dramatic fashion that autocrats sometimes conquered nations. U.S. elections and the three branches of government won’t merge into dictatorship, he suggested. Instead, another scenario was more insidious—a slide into a false democracy, like Viktor Orbán’s Hungary or Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s Turkey where voters still cast ballots, but the outcomes are predetermined and the strongman chief executive is above the law.
He often asked me, “Can democracy die from too many lies?”
We agreed that the answer is yes, and the problem is eternal: “Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it,” wrote Jonathan Swift in 1710. But that’s no excuse for abandoning the fight for the truth or, as Bill would say, as close to it as we can get.
I would never claim to be an heir to Bill Moyers’ legacy. Many people are far ahead of me in that special line. But I am among the millions of ordinary Americans for whom he was a powerful source of inspiration. Two of his private messages remind me that he still is:
“A strong piece, Steve. Keep it up.”
“I am so very grateful to you for continuing the fight. You see connections between the twinkling where others see only UFO’s.”
The fight—and the pushing—continues.
Building on his longstanding anti-vaxxing crusade, Kennedy has followed a multi-step program that will worsen the next outbreak.
Someone should have told Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. that President Donald Trump’s mishandling of the last pandemic probably cost him the presidency in 2020.
Building on his longstanding anti-vaxxing crusade, Kennedy has followed a three-step program that will worsen the next outbreak.
Step 1: Reduce vaccine availability. Three weeks ago, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)—one of Kennedy’s HHS agencies—announced that for healthy Americans under 65, Covid-19 vaccines will not be approved until they pass large scale and time-consuming clinical trials. That is a daunting obstacle.
Kennedy said that the firings were necessary to restore public trust in vaccines. They do the opposite.
Step 2: Reduce vaccine eligibility. The following week, Kennedy announced that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) would no longer recommend the Covid-19 vaccine for children and pregnant women. Within days, the CDC had to walk it back somewhat, stating that whether to vaccinate a child should be the product of “shared decision-making” involving parents and physicians. But pregnant women remain in the limbo world of “no recommendation.” In any event, the negative impact on overall public health will be enormous.
Step 3: Eliminate vaccine expertise. On June 9, Kennedy fired the entire CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)—all 17 of them. This committee of outside experts reviews the most recent data on all vaccines to assess safety, efficacy, and clinical need. It develops a recommended guidance schedule for all vaccines, including seasonal flu shots and Covid-19 boosters. Physicians rely on that guidance in counseling patients, and insurance companies and government programs use it to determine the vaccines they will cover. Committee members received their termination notices via email sent two hours after Kennedy announced their firing in a Wall Street Journal op-ed.
With Kennedy’s selection of his first eight replacements on June 11, we’re getting a sense of the disaster that will accompany Step 4.
Kennedy’s stated justifications for terminating every member of the vaccine advisory committee are a combination of lies, half-truths, and misinformation.
Fact: Committee members are screened for major conflicts of interest. They cannot hold stock or serve on advisory boards or bureaus affiliated with vaccine manufacturers. If members have a conflict of interest, they disclose it and recuse themselves from related votes.
Lie: But Kennedy asserted falsely that most members of the committee had received substantial funding from pharmaceutical companies. “The committee has been plagued with persistent conflicts of interest and has become little more than a rubber stamp for any vaccine,” he said falsely.
Fact: Individual working groups may meet in private, but committee meetings and members’ materials are public. Over several days of meetings, they review safety and effectiveness data, debate policy, hear from experts, and entertain public comment.
Lie: Kennedy asserted falsely that the committee worked secretly “behind closed doors.”
Misinformation/half-truth: According to The New York Times, “Kennedy claimed that 97% of financial disclosure forms from committee members had omissions. But the statistic came from an inspector general’s report in 2009, which found that 97% of the forms had errors, such as missing dates or information in the wrong section, not significant financial conflicts.”
Kennedy said that the firings were necessary to restore public trust in vaccines. They do the opposite. Thanks in large measure to Kennedy’s years of anti-vaxxing leadership, support for vaccinating children is eroding. Now he can stack the CDC’s vaccine advisory committee—the key medical and scientific body responsible for determining which vaccines protect and promote public health.
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), the physician who reluctantly provided the key vote that resulted in Kennedy’s Senate confirmation, sees the mess. He was instrumental in creating it. Cassidy could have killed Kennedy’s nomination and thought seriously about doing so.
But like almost all Republicans in the Senate, his spine failed him. Before voting on Kennedy’s nomination, Sen. Cassidy took the Senate floor to explain his decision. He said that Kennedy had assured him that, if confirmed, he would “maintain the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices without changes.”
Reacting to Kennedy’s mass firings, Sen. Cassidy posted on X:
“Of course, now the fear is that the ACIP will be filled up with people who know nothing about vaccines except suspicion…”
Two days later, Sen. Cassidy’s fears came to life.
On June 11, Kennedy named eight replacements. Among them are anti-vaccine activists, conspiracy theorists, vaccine misinformation promoters, a co-author of and a signatory to the pandemic-era Great Barrington Declaration that recommended widespread exposure to Covid-19 as strategy for dealing with the outbreak (instead of widespread vaccination), and individuals who lack the expertise required for the board’s task. One new member testified as an expert witness in a case against Merck over its Gardasil vaccine (for HPV)—mass tort litigation that Kennedy played a key role in organizing.
Kennedy included 4 of the 8 new members in the dedication of his 2021 book, The Real Anthony Fauci. Dr. Theodore Dalrymple, a physician and scientist who reviewed it for the Claremont Review of Books, observed, “When I looked up at random five of the medical papers Kennedy cites, I found that he had misrepresented all of them… He asserts things that are simply not true.”
Kennedy is at it again. Announcing his selections on X, he wrote, “The slate includes highly credentialed scientists, leading public-health experts, and some of America’s most accomplished physicians.”
Do you agree, Sen. Cassidy?
Kennedy’s vaccine advisory committee meets on June 25-27. We should all fear the outcome.