The Honorable Dick Durbin
711 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
The Honorable Bill Cassidy
455 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Senators Durbin and Cassidy,
On behalf of the millions of members and supporters of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, I am writing to express our opposition to S. 4979, the “Protecting Retirement Opportunities and Maintaining Income Security for Everyone Act of 2026” or the “PROMISE Act of 2026”. The National Committee is a grassroots advocacy and educational organization, and our members come from all walks of life and every political persuasion. What unites them is their passion for protecting and strengthening Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and the other programs that are so vitally important to older Americans.
We agree with you it is imperative that Congress address the rapidly approaching depletion date for Social Security’s Trust Funds sooner rather than later. Where we differ is in the methodology Congress should use to develop legislation stabilizing the programs’ finances.
For the reasons we have publicly stated over many years, the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare strongly believes the only appropriate course of action is for this critical legislation to be considered by Congress through regular order: introduction of legislation, a series of hearings in the Finance and Ways and Means Committees as they are the committees of jurisdiction, and public opportunities to offer and vote on amendments, with ample time for the American people to consider and comment on the proposed legislation. Anything less is a disservice to the public, and represents a smoke-screen behind which opponents of Social Security could enact cuts to workers’ earned benefits that are overwhelmingly opposed by the American people, while limiting political accountability.
Every single commission bill introduced into this Congress shares features that clearly undermine the trust Americans have placed in their representatives to preserve and strengthen Social Security. This includes your legislation, known as the PROMISE Act. S. 4979 would require an unelected, four-member Advisory Board to put together a 50-year solvency plan in just over a month, with little time for deliberation and limited public input. Any bipartisan pair of members of Congress could force votes on plans of their own in just a few weeks.
While we appreciate the fact that the legislation allows input by the committees of jurisdiction, and permits alternatives to be proposed, the extremely abbreviated timeline within which these actions could occur makes these options effectively meaningless. From September 17, 2026, the date your bill requires solvency legislation to be introduced, to November 9, 2026, the date your bill provides for debate to begin on both the Senate and House floors, the two bodies are only scheduled to be in session simultaneously for a dozen days. This is an extremely short timeframe, even if Congress were not confronted with a long list of legislation that will need to be completed before the end of the session. It is clearly not enough time to thoroughly investigate legislative solutions to a program that provides financial security to every single American.
Finally, your bill sets up fast-tracked floor debates and votes in the lame-duck session of Congress, just after the November elections, when many departing Members who are completely unaccountable to voters will be casting votes. This is a major problem, as the future of financial security for millions of Americans is placed in the hands of a Congress composed of many members who no longer fear facing voters who may object to the legislation they have supported. But even if the PROMISE Act were amended so that consideration of Social Security reform proposals took place in the regular session of the 120th Congress, the National Committee would not support the bill since its expedited procedure would limit public debate and because it would provide political cover to members of Congress that want to cut earned benefits.
Social Security’s history demonstrates the importance of robust, regular-order Congressional consideration of any changes. The Greenspan Commission, often cited as the premier example of a successful commission, was in fact not a fast-track commission in any sense of the word. It was only authorized to make recommendations to the President and Congress. No consensus recommendations it produced would have the force of law, nor would they receive any special procedural fast-tracking through Congress. The Commission itself was broadly representative, with its fifteen members including sitting members of Congress, major leaders of business, labor and the general public. The membership represented the broadest diversity of views possible.
Finally, the proposals that emerged from the negotiations proceeded through Congress under regular order and were fully amendable. Congress held dozens of days of hearings and markups, over 100 floor votes on amendments, and a full conference committee on the final bill. In fact, one of the most controversial changes to Social Security, the slow raising of the full retirement age from 65 to 67, was not part of the Commissions’ recommendations at all. It was added through an amendment by Representative J. J. “Jake” Pickle (D-TX) during consideration of the bill on the floor of the House of Representatives. The fast-track process in your bill would move Congress in the opposite direction, making that level of scrutiny far less likely at precisely the moment when openness, deliberation, and accountability matter most.
Poll after poll clearly indicates large majorities of Americans support strengthening Social Security by increasing revenue, not by cutting the earned benefits of our nation’s workforce, today or in the future. Congress does not need a commission to hide behind unless the goal is to confuse the public about benefit cuts. As the wealthiest nation on the planet, we are clearly capable of protecting Social Security while also addressing other priorities – all that is missing is the resolve to prioritize the needs and desires of the vast majority of the American people over the uber-wealthy and large, profitable corporations.
The impending depletion of Social Security’s Trust Fund reserves provides members of Congress with a unique opportunity to prove to the American people that it can fulfill its obligation to preserve and strengthen Social Security by directing new revenue into the program, not by cutting the earned benefits of current or future generations of workers. Members of Congress have been elected to take hard votes – votes that are good for the people they represent.
Social Security is too important to millions of Americans for Congress to take shortcuts or empower fast-track commissions to do their job. This is an opportunity to show that Washington can work, that it can deliver the results the American people are demanding, and that it can achieve this goal without waiting until the very last minute to act.
We look forward to working with you through Congress’ regular order on legislation that would extend Social Security’s solvency by bringing new revenue into the program, while making improvements that reflect the needs of today’s and tomorrow’s generations of workers.
Sincerely,
Max Richtman
President and CEO
