

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.
"Any politician who doesn't support increasing Social Security's revenue is, by default, supporting benefit cuts," said one advocate.
A U.S. government report released Wednesday found that the combined Social Security trust funds will not be able to pay out full benefits to recipients come 2034, unless federal lawmakers act—an announcement that prompted defenders of Social Security to call for increased revenue for the social safety net program.
The report from the trustees of the Social Security and Medicare trust funds found that the former's two funds will be exhausted a year earlier than expected, and when that happens payroll tax revenue and other income sources will be able account for 81% of benefits owed to beneficiaries.
According to the report, the two funds—the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) Trust Fund and the Disability Insurance Trust Fund—could "not actually be combined unless there were a change in the law, but the combined projection of the two funds is frequently used to indicate the overall status of the Social Security program."
The OASI Trust Fund will pay 100% of total scheduled benefits until 2033, after which point the program income will be able to pay 77% of total scheduled benefits. At the end of last year, 60.1 million people received OASI benefits.
The report states that the Social Security Fairness Act, an expansion to the program that was signed into law in early January, is part of the reason for the gloomier financial outlook.
Social Security has "a modest funding shortfall, which is still years away. There is no question Congress will act to avert the shortfall, as it always has in the past. The question is what Congress will do," said Nancy Altman, president of the advocacy group Social Security Works, in a statement on Wednesday.
"There are two options for action: bringing more money into Social Security, or reducing benefits. Any politician who doesn't support increasing Social Security's revenue is, by default, supporting benefit cuts," she continued.
Max Richtman, president and CEO of the advocacy group the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, struck a similar line on Wednesday.
"What's needed—and what the majority of the American people support—is increasing revenue flowing into Social Security, which has been capturing a declining share of income as wealth inequality worsens," he said. He noted that "the payroll wage cap" is depriving the system of adequate revenue. Wages up to $176,100 are taxed at 6.2% for Social Security as of 2025.
"It is time to adjust the payroll wage cap so that the wealthy begin paying their fair share," according to Richtman.
Advocates also used the release of the report to denounce any targeting of Social Security, especially efforts to undermine the Social Security Administration carried out by the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
During the first few months of Donald Trump's second presidency, billionaire Elon Musk, who was tapped to lead DOGE, and his allies fanned a false narrative alleging rampant fraud at the Social Security Administration, and used those "claims to justify an aggressive effort to gain access to personal information on millions of Americans," according to June reporting from the The New York Times.
Due to pressure from DOGE, nearly 50% of the Social Security Administration's executives and thousands of employees there have left, either by retiring or taking buyouts. Per the Times, as much as 12% of staff is expected to leave because of DOGE's cost-cutting efforts.
"Despite Donald Trump's promise to protect Social Security, Elon Musk's DOGE is undermining it every day," said Altman, referencing the Times' reporting, including the loss of senior executives. "This is an incalculable loss of institutional knowledge and expertise."
Richard Fiesta, the executive director of the Alliance for Retired Americans, also called out DOGE's work at the Social Security Administration, and referenced efforts to raise the Social Security retirement age beyond 67.
While there is no current legislative push to increase the Social Security retirement age, in December three Republican senators voted for a failed amendment that would have gradually raised the Social Security retirement age. Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky put the amendment forward in response to the passage of the Social Security Fairness Act.
" Republicans in Congress have made clear they are eager to cut the benefits Americans have worked a lifetime to earn," according to Fiesta.
"Trump is clearly comfortable weaponizing Social Security for political purposes, and we fear that this is only the beginning," said one critic.
The top Democrat on the U.S. House Oversight Committee on Wednesday led calls for the resignation of acting Social Security Administration Commissioner Leland Dudek following the revelation of internal emails confirming that the SSA canceled contracts with the state of Maine as political payback after Democratic Gov. Janet Mills publicly defied President Donald Trump in support of transgender student athletes.
The emails—which were obtained by House Oversight Committee Ranking Member Gerry Connolly (D-Va.)—show that Dudek ordered the cancellation of enumeration at birth and electronic death registration contracts with Maine, even though SSAd subordinates warned that such action "would result in improper payments and potential for identity theft."
"These emails confirm that the Trump administration is intentionally creating waste and the opportunity for fraud."
Dudek—who is leading the SSA while the Senate considers Trump's nomination of financial services executive Frank Bisignano—replied to the staffer: "Please cancel the contracts. While our improper payments will go up, and fraudsters may compromise identities, no money will go from the public trust to a petulant child."
He was referring to Mills, who stood up to Trump in February after the president threatened to suspend federal funding for Maine unless the state banned transgender girls and women from participating on female scholastic sports teams.
The termination of the enumeration at birth contract briefly forced Maine parents to register their newborns for a Social Security number at a Social Security office, rather than checking a box on a form at the hospital as is customary, before the SSA reversed its decision.
Connolly sent Dudek a letter demanding that he "resign immediately" and submit to a transcribed interview with House Oversight Committee Democrats. Connolly wrote that Dudek "ordered these contracts terminated" as "direct retaliation" for Mills' defiance, "even though you knew that doing so would increase improper payments and create opportunities for fraudsters."
Government accountability advocates also condemned Dudek's actions.
"These emails confirm that the Trump administration is intentionally creating waste and the opportunity for fraud—in this case, to punish Maine Gov. Janet Mills for not bowing down to Donald Trump," Social Security Works president Nancy Altman told Common Dreams.
"The people actually punished by these actions were exhausted new parents in Maine, forced to drag their newborns to overcrowded Social Security offices in the middle of a measles outbreak," she continued. "Thankfully, the Trump administration had to quickly reverse course after massive public outrage. But Trump is clearly comfortable weaponizing Social Security for political purposes, and we fear that this is only the beginning."
"Once again, we see Team Trump resorting to revenge to set domestic policy."
Max Richtman, president and CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, told Common Dreams that "it does not surprise us at all that this administration would weaponize Social Security against anyone who disagrees with or challenges President Trump."
"It's one of the concerns that we have with Elon Musk and [the Department of Government Efficiency] having access to everyone's personal data without any defensible explanation for why they need it," he continued. "We and the American people have legitimate worries, not only that this information will be vulnerable to hackers, but also that it could intentionally be misused as a weapon against anyone who publicly disagrees with Trump."
"The fact that the acting commissioner himself publicly admitted that he didn't really understand the Maine contract, but canceled it anyway, proves that this administration is making reckless changes that affect real people for no legitimate reason," Richtman added. "Once again, we see Team Trump resorting to revenge to set domestic policy."
The revelation of Dudek's emails comes amid SSA turmoil caused by the termination of thousands of agency personnel in what Trump, Musk, and other Republicans claim is an effort to reduce waste and fraud. Musk—who recently referred to Social Security as the the "biggest Ponzi scheme of all time"—has proposed the elimination of up to 50% of SSA's workforce and has said that up to $700 billion could be cut from programs including Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
"This partial victory shows that when the American people fight for our Social Security, we can win," said one advocate. "We are only going to get louder!"
Defenders of the Social Security Administration this week welcomed the delay and rollback of some policy changes at the federal agency while also reiterating the threat posed by U.S. President Donald Trump and the billionaire leader of his Department of Government Efficiency, Elon Musk.
As part of what critics condemn as "DOGE-manufactured chaos," SSA intended to require anyone who couldn't verify their identity online through "my Social Security" to do so in-person, beginning next week, while planning to shutter offices across the country. The agency announced Wednesday that the start date has been pushed to April 14, and people applying for Medicare, Social Security Disability Insurance, or Supplemental Security Income are now exempt from the rule and can complete their claim over the telephone.
Acting SSA Commissioner Leland Dudek claimed Wednesday that "we have listened to our customers, Congress, advocates, and others, and we are updating our policy to provide better customer service to the country's most vulnerable populations."
Meanwhile, opponents of Trump and Musk's attacks on the agency—widely seen as a push toward privatization—framed the development as a "good first step" but "not enough," as AARP chief advocacy and engagement officer Nancy LeaMond said in a statement to CBS MoneyWatch.
"Our members nationwide have told us this change would require hundreds of miles and hours of travel merely to fill out paperwork," LeaMond said. "SSA should be prioritizing customer service effectiveness and efficiency, and as older Americans tell us, the announcement requiring visits caused confusion and distress."
U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said on the Musk-owned social media platform X: "Delaying a bad plan—which effectively denies people their Social Security—is insufficient. Elon Musk's DOGE must take their hands off Social Security."
Warren also acknowledged the positive impact of people calling out the assault on the SSA, adding: "Keep the pressure on Republicans in Congress and Donald Trump to reverse these cuts. YOUR voice makes a difference."
Max Richtman, president and CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, similarly said that "while it is good that a bad policy is being postponed—and that some of the least mobile, most vulnerable groups are now exempted—it is still bad policy. There was no reason to end the validation of identity by phone, and limiting it in any way creates an unnecessary hurdle for seniors and families claiming their earned benefits."
Richtman also took aim at those in charge, declaring that "the circus at the Social Security Administration continues under the 'leadership' of acting Commissioner Leland Dudek," who is at the helm of the agency while the Senate considers Trump's nominee, financial services executive Frank Bisignano.
"It very much appears that the decision-makers at SSA—under the influence of Elon Musk and DOGE—are making up policy as they go along, and then are surprised when there is understandable public blowback, forcing them to make ad hoc adjustments like this one," he added. "This is the opposite of the competent, responsible stewardship of Social Security that the public deserves. Dudek, Musk, and DOGE are creating nothing but distress and confusion for the millions of people who depend on these benefits to get by, while risking irreparable damage to the Social Security system."
The Trump administration's attempt to dismantle the SSA—including with cuts to personnel and phone services—is already having an effect, with the agency website crashing four times over 10 days in the past month, and callers waiting 4-5 hours on hold.
Trump & Musk are: -Lying about Social Security fraud -Making destructive cuts to SSA staffing and phone-based services -Threatening the security of people's personal information by giving DOGE access to sensitive SSA data Social Security is in crisis entirely due to them.
— Robert Reich (@rbreich.bsky.social) March 26, 2025 at 4:00 PM
"Americans are rightfully furious about the Trump administration making it harder for them to access their earned Social Security benefits," Nancy Altman, president of the group Social Security Works, said Thursday. "They are making their voices heard at town halls and rallies across the country, and calling their members of Congress. Now, they've forced the White House to partly walk back a needless burden."
Dudek tweaking the new verification rules, Altman said, "is just a starting point. The damage the Trump administration is doing to Social Security remains immense. The White House needs to roll back all of these senseless burdens, cancel plans to close dozens of field offices, and fully staff the Social Security Administration instead of pushing out thousands of employees."
"However, even this partial victory shows that when the American people fight for our Social Security, we can win," she added. "We are only going to get louder!"
"Rather than comply with a lawful court order, he wants to see millions of families, retirees, and disabled individuals go hungry, suffer, and potentially lose their homes all to curry favor with anti-worker billionaires."
Defenders of the Social Security Administration on Friday blasted acting Commissioner Leland Dudek's threat to shut down the agency in response to a federal judge cutting off the Department of Government Efficiency's access to SSA data.
U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander wrote Thursday that "the DOGE team is essentially engaged in a fishing expedition at SSA." She issued a temporary restraining order targeting affiliates of the government-gutting entity created by Republican President Donald Trump and led by Big Tech CEO Elon Musk, the richest person on the planet.
While the advocacy and labor groups behind the lawsuit celebrated the order from Hollander—who was appointed to the District of Maryland by former President Barack Obama—Dudek responded to the ruling with a threat to shut down the agency entirely.
"My anti-fraud team would be DOGE affiliates. My IT staff would be DOGE affiliates," Dudek told Bloomberg. "As it stands, I will follow it exactly and terminate access by all SSA employees to our IT systems."
"Now, like a child who didn't get his way, he is threatening to shut down Social Security."
Dudek—who is leading the SSA until the U.S. Senate decides whether to confirm Trump's nominee, former Fiserv CEO Frank Bisignano—said he would ask the judge to immediately clarify her order, adding: "Really, I want to turn it off and let the courts figure out how they want to run a federal agency."
Lee Saunders, president of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)—which filed the suit with the Alliance for Retired Americans and the American Federation of Teachers—said in a Friday statement that "for almost 90 years, Social Security has never missed a paycheck—but 60 days into this administration, Social Security is now on the brink."
"Acting Commissioner Leland Dudek has proven again that he is in way over his head, compromising the privacy of millions of Americans, shutting down services that senior citizens rely on, and planning debilitating layoffs, all in service to Elon Musk's lies," he continued. "Now, like a child who didn't get his way, he is threatening to shut down Social Security. Rather than comply with a lawful court order, he wants to see millions of families, retirees, and disabled individuals go hungry, suffer, and potentially lose their homes all to curry favor with anti-worker billionaires. It's despicable."
"Even for this administration, this is a new low. Project 2025 didn't dare mention Social Security, but we always knew they would put it on the table," he added, citing a Heritage Foundation-led blueprint for remaking the government. "We've fought back efforts by anti-union extremists and billionaires to privatize and gut Social Security before, and we'll do it again. Workers paid into this program; it belongs to us."
Groups that are not part of the case also took aim at Dudek on Friday. Max Richtman, president and CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, called the threat "to hold hostage" the earned benefits of over 70 million people "inexcusable" and "yet another example of the Trump administration's hostility to American seniors."
"Dudek is throwing a temper tantrum—claiming that if DOGE can't access American's data, neither can anyone else," he said. "No one in the federal government has the breadth of access to data that Elon Musk has demanded. Social Security employees' access is compartmentalized and only made available on a 'need-to-know' basis, and those with access to the data go through rigorous screening, training, and are subject to fines and/or jail time for violating this policy."
Richtman asserted that "Musk's continued effort to justify his actions by doubling down on thoroughly debunked claims of 'massive fraud' at SSA are being laid bare as a mere pretext for acquiring every American's personal information—which could then be used as weapons against anyone who disagrees with the Trump administration's actions."
Nancy Altman, president of Social Security Works, declared that "Dudek's leadership has been the darkest in Social Security's nearly 90-year history. He has sown chaos and destruction... His highest loyalty is to Elon Musk and Donald Trump, not to the beneficiaries that the agency is meant to serve. Singlehandedly, he has taken the security out of Social Security."
"Members of Congress who remain silent are complicit. The Trump-nominated commissioner, who will have his confirmation hearing next week, is no better. In fact, he proudly calls himself 'a DOGE person,'" she warned of Bisignano.
"Every member of Congress, Republicans and Democrats alike, must condemn the destruction of our Social Security system and demand that the Trump administration follow Judge Hollander's order," Altman added. "They must make it clear that no president—even one who thinks he is a king—can shut down our Social Security system."
"Elon Musk's commission is a plot to destroy our Social Security by giving it to Wall Street executives—so that you get nothing and they get everything," warned one advocate.
A lengthy series of X posts attacking Social Security as a "nightmare" caught the attention of the platform's mega-billionaire owner, Elon Musk, who could soon take aim at the beloved New Deal program as co-chair of an advisory commission tasked with identifying federal spending to slash.
"Interesting thread," Musk, the world's richest man, wrote late Monday in response to the posts by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), who once said he hopes to pull Social Security "up by the roots and get rid of it," along with Medicare and Medicaid.
In his new thread, Lee characterized Social Security—which lifts more Americans above the poverty line than any other federal program—as a "tax plan" insidiously disguised as a retirement plan and condemned the Social Security Act of 1935 as one of many "deceptive sales techniques the U.S. government has used on the American people."
Max Richtman, president and CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM), replied Tuesday that Lee's posts amount to "a misrepresentation of Social Security's history and how the program works."
"There is nothing deceptive about Social Security. The social insurance program has been working just fine for nearly 90 years and has never missed a payment," said Richtman. "The kind of propaganda Sen. Lee posted undermines public support for Social Security, making it easier to cut or privatize the program. It is perhaps no coincidence that Sen. Lee's second-biggest campaign contributor by industry is the securities and investment sector."
"The money is ours, Mike Lee, Elon Musk, and Donald Trump. You're not going to get a penny of it."
Lee also claimed the federal government "routinely raids" the Social Security Trust Fund—a longstanding and misleading right-wing talking point.
Social Security Works (SSW), a progressive advocacy group, said Tuesday that by amplifying Lee's thread to his hundreds of millions of followers, Musk "just declared war on Social Security."
"For 89 years, through war and peace, boom time and bust, health and pandemics, Social Security has never missed a single payment," said Alex Lawson, SSW's executive director. "Compared to the risky alternatives on Wall Street, Social Security is a rock of retirement security. If billionaires like Elon Musk paid into Social Security at the same rate as the rest of us on all of their income, we could expand benefits for everyone and pay them in full forever."
"This is a declaration of war against seniors, people with disabilities, and the American public," Lawson said. "The Republicans are coming for your Social Security, which they call a 'nightmare.' Elon Musk's commission is a plot to destroy our Social Security by giving it to Wall Street executives—so that you get nothing and they get everything."
"We've seen this play again and again," he added. "When Republicans destroyed defined-benefit pension plans, they claimed that the market would be able to create amazing returns for everybody. Instead, workers got pennies, while Wall Street managers got billions. That is always the plan. We will defeat this Republican effort to steal our earned benefits. The money is ours, Mike Lee, Elon Musk, and Donald Trump. You're not going to get a penny of it."
Richard Fiesta, executive director of the Alliance for Retired Americans, similarly denounced Lee's thread and Musk's promotion of it, saying both "should enrage and concern every single American who has contributed to Social Security."
"Sen. Mike Lee has dreamed about 'phasing out Social Security' and the benefits generations of Americans have earned for more than a decade. His bad ideas have been rightfully ignored but last night he got a big assist from Elon Musk, who amplified Lee's wrongheaded views about Social Security on X."
"Social Security is a solemn promise between the American people and the government," Fiesta continued. "We pay for Social Security's guaranteed benefits with every paycheck and expect them to be there when we retire, lose a spouse or parent, or become disabled. No one voted to phase out Social Security or let Wall Street gamble with their earned benefits. Older Americans will rightly punish any politician who tries to cut their benefits or gut the system that has worked for generations."
On the campaign trail, President-elect Donald Trump pledged to defend Social Security while simultaneously pushing proposals that would wreck the program's finances.
Many Republican lawmakers, who are soon to be in the majority in both chambers of Congress, have called for raising the Social Security retirement age—a change that would cut benefits across the board. On Tuesday, Rep. Rich McCormick (R-Ga.) told Fox Business Network that "we're going to have to have some hard decisions" on Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare—a euphemism for benefit cuts.
Richtman of NCPSSM said that the kind of attack advanced by Lee and other Republicans "conflicts with President Trump's promise not to tamper with Americans' earned benefits."
"It signals where Trump's MAGA allies in Congress are heading—toward privatization and benefit cuts, something the majority of Americans across party lines say they do not want," Richtman added.
Even after nearly six decades of Medicare’s overall success, we must continually protect it from conservatives’ attempts to cut and privatize the program.
Before Medicare was
signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson 59 years ago today, nearly half of American seniors had no hospital insurance. Private insurance companies were reluctant to cover anyone over 65. Even fewer seniors had coverage for non-hospital services like doctor’s visits. Many of the elderly were forced to exhaust their retirement savings to pay for medical care; some fell into poverty because of it. All of that changed with Medicare.
In Medicare’s first year of coverage, poverty decreased by 66% among the senior population. From 1965, when Medicare was enacted, to 1994, life expectancy at age 65 increased nearly three full years. This was no coincidence. Access to Medicare coverage for those who were previously uninsured helped lift seniors out of poverty and extend their lives.
As with Social Security, workers would contribute with each paycheck toward their future Medicare benefits. Upon putting his signature on this new program, a keystone of the Great Society, President Johnson declared, “Every citizen will be able, in their productive years when they are earning, to insure themselves against the ravages of illness in old age.”
Project 2025, the right-wing blueprint for a second Trump presidency, would gut traditional Medicare by accelerating privatization and repealing drug price negotiation.
Medicare has been improved several times over the decades. In 1972, Americans with disabilities (under 65 years of age) became eligible for Medicare coverage—along with people suffering from chronic kidney disease needing dialysis or transplants. In 2003, prescription drug coverage was added to Medicare (though the program was prohibited from negotiating prices with drugmakers). The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 finally empowered Medicare to negotiate prices with Big Pharma—and lowered seniors’ costs by capping their out-of-pocket expenses for prescription drugs and insulin.
Nearly 60 years after it was enacted, Medicare is one of the most popular and efficient federal programs. Ninety-four percent of beneficiaries say they are “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with their quality of care. Unlike many other federal programs, Medicare spends less than 2% of its budget on administrative costs.
Medicare isn’t perfect. It should be expanded to cover dental, hearing, and vision care. More urgently, though, the privatized version of the program, Medicare Advantage (MA), is gobbling up a larger share of the program despite myriad problems, including MA insurers overbilling the government and denying care that’s always offered by traditional Medicare. The Biden-Harris administration has been working to hold those private plans more accountable, but much remains to be done to protect traditional Medicare from efforts toward privatization.
Even after 59 years of Medicare’s overall success, we must continually defend Medicare against conservatives’ attempts to cut and privatize the program. Our founder, Rep. James Roosevelt, Sr. (D-Calif.), son of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, knew that Medicare (along with Social Security) would need continuous advocacy to withstand assaults from antagonistic political forces. That’s why the word “preserve” is in our organization’s name.
Many conservatives opposed Medicare from the start, labeling it “socialism” and “socialized medicine.” In 1962, Ronald Reagan warned that if Medicare were to be enacted, “One of these days you and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children, and our children’s children, what it once was like in America when men were free.”
Today, the onslaught continues. The House Republican Study Committee’s (RSC) 2025 budget proposes to cut Medicare by an estimated $1 trillion over the next decade. The RSC would replace Medicare’s current system with vouchers, and push seniors into private plans that can and do deny coverage. Project 2025, the right-wing blueprint for a second Trump presidency, would gut traditional Medicare by accelerating privatization and repealing drug price negotiation.
Democrats by and large support protecting and even expanding Medicare. President Joe Biden tried to add dental, vision, and hearing coverage in his Build Back Better Act, but encountered resistance from Republicans and centrist Democrats. It’s still a laudable goal.
Republicans, for the most part, advocate cutting Medicare benefits and privatization. We endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris for president, because she knows the importance of Medicare to America’s seniors and people with disabilities—and has vowed to protect them. Former President Donald Trump, on the other hand, has been rhetorically all over the map on this topic, telling CNBC he is “open” to “cutting entitlements” but claiming to support Medicare. (His budgets as president called for billions of dollars in Medicare cuts.)
The 59th anniversary of Medicare is both an occasion for celebrating the program’s enormous successes over the past six decades—and a time to defend Medicare in the marbled halls of Washington, D.C., and at the ballot box this November.
"Allowing Donald Trump back in the White House... is unacceptable," said one advocate. "The choice in November couldn't be clearer."
Three leading groups representing the interests of senior citizens made clear Wednesday they believe that Democratic President Joe Biden is the far superior choice to presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump when it comes to protecting Social Security, Medicare, and other policies concerning older Americans.
The National Committee to Preserve Social Security & Medicare (NCPSSM), National United Committee to Protect Pensions (NUCPP), and Social Security Works Political Action Committee (PAC) all backed Biden over the presumed Republican nominee.
"The Biden-Harris administration's record on senior issues is impeccable," said Social Security Works PAC president Jon "Bowzer" Bauman. "In sharp contrast, Donald Trump is an existential threat to our earned benefits. Despite his lies that he will not cut Social Security, all of his budgets as president proposed deep cuts."
"Allowing Donald Trump back in the White House along with a potential Republican House majority where three-fourths of its members want to cut Social Security by $1.5 trillion, including raising the retirement age to 69, is unacceptable," he argued. "The choice in November couldn't be clearer."
"Donald Trump is an existential threat to our earned benefits."
In a Wednesday opinion piece for Common Dreams, Social Security Works president Nancy Altman cataloged how Biden has "delivered for seniors in enormously consequential ways during his first term and will deliver even more if reelected."
"For years, politicians have talked about giving Medicare the power to negotiate lower prescription drug prices. Biden got it done. He took on Big Pharma and won," Altman wrote. "Republicans were threatening to hold hostage an increase in the debt limit—legislation essential to avoid a worldwide economic crash—in exchange for benefit cuts. Biden stood strong and won."
"Biden has endorsed congressional efforts to expand both Social Security and Medicare, and he supports paying for those expansions by requiring billionaires and the uber-wealthy to pay their fair share," she continued. He's "replaced the no-show Trump crony heading the Social Security Administration with a proven champion" as well as "proposed minimum staffing standards for nursing homes, worked to boost compensation and job quality for care workers, and fought to improve and expand care options."
After noting that the Biden administration also "forced shady financial advisers to stop ripping off working people planning for retirement," she took aim at Trump along with U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and House Budget Committee Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) over their plans for federal programs that serve older Americans.
Altman has previously called out the Republican Study Committee—made up of the vast majority of GOP House members—over the group's budget proposal for fiscal year 2025, which she said proves that "the Republican Party is the party of cutting Social Security and Medicare, while giving tax handouts to billionaires."
"Hardworking Americans' retirement and health security is at stake."
Like the Social Security Works leaders, NUCPP president Kenneth Stribling on Wednesday highlighted Biden's progress so far—particularly cutting drug prices—and stressed that "the stakes for seniors are crucial in the November election."
"Not only does President Biden continue to be pro-labor, but he also supports seniors and promises to protect Social Security and Medicare," Stribling said. "There is no doubt that Social Security and Medicare need to be fixed. But the question remains: 'On whose back is that going to fall?' If Social Security and Medicare are under attack, we will activate our forces again and make our voices heard in Washington and at the ballot boxes in November."
NCPSSM president and CEO and Max Richtman on Wednesday pointed to his group's first-ever presidential endorsement during the last election cycle, saying that "we broke precedent in 2020 because we believed Joe Biden would fight for America's seniors—and protect Social Security and Medicare. We did not trust Donald Trump to safeguard either program or to uphold other cherished American institutions. Four years later, those beliefs have been validated beyond dispute."
After also listing Biden's positive actions and the threats posed by Trump, Richtman said that "as one of the nation's leading seniors' advocacy groups, with millions of members and supporters across the United States, we have a responsibility to put our weight behind candidates for federal office with respect for American institutions and the programs we defend."
In addition to backing Biden, "our PAC is endorsing candidates for Congress who strongly support Social Security and Medicare," he explained, also noting the group's national voter education campaign. "We believe that this is an existential election for Social Security and Medicare. Hardworking Americans' retirement and health security is at stake. Even though our organization has not traditionally endorsed presidential candidates, these past two cycles are obviously different."
"Another Trump presidency would be an absolute nightmare for America's seniors."
Biden campaign manager Julie Chávez Rodriguez said that the president "has always had the backs of seniors and he is honored to receive the endorsement" of three groups "at the forefront of efforts to advocate for seniors and protect vital programs like Social Security and Medicare."
"With today's endorsements, we will be stronger and more prepared than ever to mobilize seniors across the country, to remind voters of how dangerous Trump and his policies are, and to make him a loser again this November," she declared.
Reuters reported Wednesday that "older Americans could play a key role in the election, given that they vote at higher levels than any other group and account for nearly 10 million voters in key election battleground states, including Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada."
The groups' announcements followed the Tuesday launch of the Biden campaign's national organizing program to engage older voters across the United States to reelect the president and Vice President Kamala Harris.
"Another Trump presidency would be an absolute nightmare for America's seniors, which is why Seniors for Biden-Harris will be critical to beating Donald Trump once again," said Chávez Rodriguez. "Seniors deserve a president who puts them first—that's President Biden."
"The future of these earned benefit programs depends on who is elected this fall—both as president and to Congress," said one campaigner.
Advocacy groups, congressional Democrats, and U.S. President Joe Biden's reelection campaign on Monday pointed to new government reports on Medicare and Social Security as proof that the key programs must be protected from Republican attacks.
The annual trustee reports show that Social Security is projected to be fully funded until 2035, a year later than previously thought, while Medicare is expected to be fully funded until 2036, five years beyond the earlier projection.
Former President Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee to face Biden in November, "proposed cutting Social Security and Medicare every year he was in office, he's said repeatedly he would cut them, his allies openly plan to target them, and just this weekend he dismissed them as bribes," noted James Singer, a spokesperson for the Democrat's campaign.
"Let's be clear, Donald Trump will steal the hard-earned Social Security and Medicare benefits Americans have been paying into their entire lives and he'll use it to fund tax cuts for rich people like him," Singer warned. "President Biden keeps his promises. He has and will continue to protect Social Security and Medicare from MAGA Republican efforts to cut them—Donald Trump won't."
"No doubt we will hear cries from so-called 'fiscal conservatives' that Social Security is going 'bankrupt,' supposedly requiring Draconian measures—which couldn't be further than the truth."
Richard Fiesta, executive director of the Alliance for Retired Americans, said Monday that "current and future American retirees should feel confident about both Medicare and Social Security, which [are] stronger due to the robust economy under President Biden. But the future of these earned benefit programs depends on who is elected this fall—both as president and to Congress."
Fiesta highlighted that Biden's latest budget "calls for strengthening" the programs whereas Trump recently said that "there is a lot you can do... in terms of cutting" them and "the Republican Study Committee (RSC), which includes around 80% of House Republicans, stands ready to make cuts as well."
Nancy Altman, president of Social Security Works, similarly declared that "today's report shows that our Social Security system is benefiting from the Biden economy. Due to robust job growth, low unemployment, and rising wages, more people than ever are contributing to Social Security and earning its needed protections."
"That said, Congress should take action sooner rather than later to ensure that Social Security can pay full benefits for generations to come, along with expanding Social Security's modest benefits," she argued, noting various plans from Democrats in Congress that "are paid for by requiring millionaires and billionaires to contribute more of their fair share."
Unlike Democratic leaders in Washington, D.C., "Republicans want to cut benefits despite overwhelming opposition from the American people," Altman said of federal lawmakers and the former president. Additionally, "Trump plans to sharply restrict immigration. This would harm Social Security by reducing the number of workers paying in."
"The United States is the wealthiest nation on Earth at the wealthiest moment in our history. We can use that wealth to protect and expand Social Security, or to provide yet more tax handouts to billionaires," she concluded. "This report is a reminder that the next decade is a crucial one for Social Security's future. Americans should vote accordingly this November."
Max Richtman, president and CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security & Medicare, also asserted that "Congress must act NOW to strengthen Social Security for the 67 million Americans who depend on it. We cannot afford to wait to take action until the trust fund is mere months from insolvency, as Congress did in 1983."
According to Richtman:
No doubt we will hear cries from so-called 'fiscal conservatives' that Social Security is going 'bankrupt,' supposedly requiring Draconian measures—which couldn't be further than the truth. Revenue always will flow into Social Security from workers' payroll contributions, so the program will never be 'broke.' But no one wants seniors to suffer an automatic 17% benefit cut in 2035, so Congress must act deliberately, but not recklessly. A bad deal driven by cuts to earned benefits could be worse than no deal at all.
We strongly support revenue-side solutions that would bring more money into the trust fund by demanding that the wealthy pay their fair share. Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.) has offered legislation that would do just that—by maintaining the current payroll wage cap (currently set at $168,600), but subjecting wages $400,000 and above to payroll taxes, as well—and dedicating some of high earners' investment income to Social Security. Rep. Larson's bill also would provide seniors with a much-needed benefit boost.
Larson was among the lawmakers who responded to Monday's Social Security report by demanding urgent action. The Democrat also called out his Republican colleagues for pushing cuts and trying to "ram their dangerous plan through an undemocratic and unaccountable so-called 'fiscal commission,'" which critics have dubbed a "death panel."
"The Social Security 2100 Act is co-sponsored by nearly 200 House Democrats and would improve benefits across the board while extending solvency until 2066, while Donald Trump and House Republicans continue their calls to slash Americans' hard-earned benefits!" Larson said. "By contrast, President Joe Biden and Democrats are working to strengthen Social Security, not cut it."
Co-sponsors of Larson's bill include Congressman Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), ranking member of the House Budget Committee.
"Social Security is the greatest anti-poverty program in history, and ensuring its solvency for future generations has been one of my top priorities in Congress," Boyle said Monday, promoting the Medicare and Social Security Fair Share Act, his bill with Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.). "Unfortunately, while Democrats and President Biden want to protect Social Security and Medicare, Republicans have made clear they want to tear them down."
"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."
"This commission is a poison pill designed to slash Social Security and Medicare behind closed doors."
Social Security defenders are sounding the alarm ahead of a Thursday House Budget Committee hearing and vote on the Fiscal Commission Act, bipartisan legislation that opponents say is a ploy to fast-track cuts to the popular New Deal program without political accountability.
"This commission is a poison pill designed to slash Social Security and Medicare behind closed doors," Nancy Altman, president of Social Security Works, said in a statement ahead of Thursday's markup. "The White House has accurately stated that such a commission is a 'death panel for Medicare and Social Security.'"
Altman warned that House Republicans, who have made a so-called fiscal commission a top priority, are "rushing to advance" the Fiscal Commission Act so they can attempt to tie it to must-pass government funding legislation. Rep. Jodey Arrington (R-Texas), the chair of the House Budget Committee, said in late November that appropriations bills are a "likely vehicle" for the fiscal commission.
"Democratic leadership should respond that our earned benefits are non-negotiable, and that they will not accept a commission under any circumstances," said Altman. "Instead, any legislation on Social Security should go through regular order so that Congress can debate it in the sunlight."
Social Security Works is urging members of the public to call their representatives and express opposition to the Fiscal Commission Act ahead of Thursday's committee hearing, which is scheduled to begin at 10:00 am ET.
Progressive Democrats on the GOP-controlled House Budget Committee are expected to push back forcefully against the commission bill, which is led by Reps. Bill Huizenga (R-Mich.) and Scott Peters (D-Calif.), a budget committee member. Sens. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) and Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) are spearheading a companion measure in the Senate.
Last week, Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.)—a member of the budget panel—co-led a letter to the House leadership opposing the legislation and arguing that debates over Social Security and Medicare "should be done in the open and not behind closed doors."
"Social Security benefits are already modest—only about $21,384 a year, yet Republicans want to put these hard-earned benefits at risk," Schakowsky said in a statement. "We must expand Social Security benefits, not cut them."
But the bill is likely to get some Democratic support from the budget panel: Rep. Jimmy Panetta (D-Calif.), a committee member, has joined Peters in co-sponsoring the legislation.
"This bill does not deserve a markup or a vote—or, frankly, to see the light of day."
If passed, the Fiscal Commission Act would establish a panel of 16 members selected by Republican and Democratic congressional leaders.
The panel would consist of both lawmakers and individuals from the private sector, and it would have a mandate to craft policy recommendations "designed to balance the budget at the earliest reasonable date" and improve the "long-term fiscal outlook" of the nation's trust fund programs, including Social Security and Medicare, according to a summary from Huizenga's office.
The commission would then vote on whether to advance its recommendations shortly after the 2024 election. If approved by the commission, the proposals would receive expedited consideration in both the House and Senate, with no amendments allowed.
Polling data released last year by Data for Progress showed that a fiscal commission tasked with cutting Social Security and Medicare is overwhelmingly unpopular with U.S. voters, including 78% of Democrats, 72% of Independents, and 65% of Republicans.
Max Richtman, president and CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, said ahead of Thursday's markup that "a fiscal commission is designed to give individual members of Congress political cover for cutting Americans' earned benefits."
"Any changes to Social Security and Medicare should go through regular order and not be relegated to a commission unaccountable to the public and rushed through the Congress," said Richtman. "This bill does not deserve a markup or a vote—or, frankly, to see the light of day."