Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
With Trump, Social Security could come to a screeching halt
Last edited Wed Sep 9, 2020, 11:10 AM - Edit history (1)
https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/01/opinions/social-security-payroll-trump-altman/index.htmlNancy Altman, a lawyer, is president of Social Security Works and chair of the Strengthen Social Security coalition. Her latest book is "The Truth about Social Security." The opinions expressed here are her own. View more opinion articles on CNN.
...
Once re-elected, if he keeps deferring those taxes, all benefits will come to a screeching halt, with no Congressional involvement whatsoever.
According to estimates from the independent chief actuary of the Social Security Administration, if all Social Security contributions from payroll tax stopped on Jan. 1, 2021.... Social Security would be without money to pay benefits by 2023 (Congress could only stop Trump by enacting veto-proof legislation, a highly unlikely proposition).
. . .
With a presidential threat to have zero benefits paid whatsoever, congressional supporters of Social Security would effectively be held hostage, with little they could do but give into the demands of a lame duck president. It is not hard to imagine, at that point, a backroom deal that fulfilled the longstanding right-wing goal of eliminating the features of Social Security that have made it so successful and so popular.
. . .
Some pundits are giving Trump the benefit of the doubt, arguing that Congress would simply make up for the missing payroll contributions with general revenue. That, though, is highly unlikely. We are talking about general revenue of over $1 trillion a year. Since no one is suggesting raising taxes to make up the lost revenue from Social Security, that additional $1 trillion would have more than doubled the fiscal year 2019 deficit.
. . .
Importantly, even just substituting general revenue would fundamentally alter Social Security. Its dedicated revenue and inability to deficit-spend means that Social Security does not add a penny to the nation's federal debt. Social Security's creator, President Franklin D. Roosevelt clearly understood the importance of those Social Security contributions, which, in his words, "give the contributors a legal, moral, and political right to collect their [Social Security] pensions."
Trump has shown himself willing to attack numerous fundamental institutions. He has attacked the US Postal Service, which the Constitution explicitly lists as an enumerated power of Congress. He has attacked the free press and our elections. Does anyone believe he wouldn't take our Social Security system hostage to attain a radical reform?
Once re-elected, if he keeps deferring those taxes, all benefits will come to a screeching halt, with no Congressional involvement whatsoever.
According to estimates from the independent chief actuary of the Social Security Administration, if all Social Security contributions from payroll tax stopped on Jan. 1, 2021.... Social Security would be without money to pay benefits by 2023 (Congress could only stop Trump by enacting veto-proof legislation, a highly unlikely proposition).
. . .
With a presidential threat to have zero benefits paid whatsoever, congressional supporters of Social Security would effectively be held hostage, with little they could do but give into the demands of a lame duck president. It is not hard to imagine, at that point, a backroom deal that fulfilled the longstanding right-wing goal of eliminating the features of Social Security that have made it so successful and so popular.
. . .
Some pundits are giving Trump the benefit of the doubt, arguing that Congress would simply make up for the missing payroll contributions with general revenue. That, though, is highly unlikely. We are talking about general revenue of over $1 trillion a year. Since no one is suggesting raising taxes to make up the lost revenue from Social Security, that additional $1 trillion would have more than doubled the fiscal year 2019 deficit.
. . .
Importantly, even just substituting general revenue would fundamentally alter Social Security. Its dedicated revenue and inability to deficit-spend means that Social Security does not add a penny to the nation's federal debt. Social Security's creator, President Franklin D. Roosevelt clearly understood the importance of those Social Security contributions, which, in his words, "give the contributors a legal, moral, and political right to collect their [Social Security] pensions."
Trump has shown himself willing to attack numerous fundamental institutions. He has attacked the US Postal Service, which the Constitution explicitly lists as an enumerated power of Congress. He has attacked the free press and our elections. Does anyone believe he wouldn't take our Social Security system hostage to attain a radical reform?
10 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
