Why We Endorsed Kamala Harris for President of the United States
On Tuesday, the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare proudly endorsed Kamala Harris for President of the United States. As Vice President, she has championed the administration’s policies on behalf of older Americans — including strengthening Social Security and Medicare and lowering prescription drug prices for seniors. She has been in lockstep with the President in his pledge to protect Americans’ earned benefits against Republican proposals to cut and privatize them — including Donald Trump.
“(We) will protect Social Security. Donald Trump will not,” Harris recently posted on social media. ‘How can you claim to fight for seniors when you intend to cut Social Security and Medicare, which is a lifeline for so many older Americans?”’
Donald Trump, who once called Social Security a ‘Ponzi Scheme’ and said this year he was ‘open’ to ‘cutting entitlements,’ cannot be trusted to protect Social Security and Medicare. As President, he submitted successive White House budgets that would have slashed both programs by hundreds of billions of dollars. He recklessly suspended Social Security payroll contributions during the pandemic and hoped that the FICA tax would be ‘terminated.’ He actively spreads disinformation that undermines seniors’ earned benefits — including the outright lie that undocumented workers are collecting Social Security.
Trump’s running mate, J.D. Vance, once called for trillions of dollars to be cut from ‘entitlement’ programs and for the conversion of Medicare into a voucher program. Vance has close ties to Heritage Foundation, which authored the infamous Project 2025 — a blueprint for a second Trump term that would shred vital social programs and repeal the Inflation Reduction Act (which is lowering drug prices for American seniors). Though he has reversed his position on benefit cuts, he, like Trump, does not merit the trust of seniors and their families.
Unlike the GOP ticket, Vice President Harris has always been on the side of older Americans as a consistent supporter of Social Security, Medicare, and lower drug prices. The Biden-Harris administration held the line against GOP-proposed benefit cuts — and was able to enact the historic Inflation Reduction Act, giving Medicare the power to negotiate drug prices with Big Pharma, capping insulin costs, and limiting seniors’ out-of-pocket costs. But there is more to be done.
The battle to lower prescription drug prices must continue. Both Medicare and Social Security must be put on a sound financial footing and expanded to meet 21st century seniors’ true needs. Further action is needed to crack down on the abuses of privatized Medicare Advantage plans and to preserve traditional Medicare. The Biden-Harris administration has made admirable efforts in that direction.
“We proudly support the Vice President as she takes the lead on these crucial issues after so ably supporting the administration’s commitment to seniors’ financial and health security,” said NCPSSM president and CEO Max Richtman. “We look forward to working with President Harris to build on the tremendous successes of the past four years.”
Harris Likely to Sustain Biden’s Social Security, Medicare, Rx Drug Policies
Vice President Harris paid tribute to President Biden today at her first public event since he withdrew from the 2024 race and endorsed her. Congratulating winning NCAA athletes at the White House this morning, she said that, in one term, President Biden has already surpassed the legacy of many presidents who served two, a record “unmatched” in American history. “I am a first-hand witness that he fights for the American people every day,” she said.
As we have noted many times, the President has fought especially hard for American seniors — by lowering prescription drug prices, strengthening Medicare, and advocating improvements to Social Security — which is why he earned our endorsement in June. His heir apparent, Vice President Harris, has been in lockstep with President Biden on these crucial issues.
As Newsweek reports, “Harris, who announced her intent to run on Sunday, has not yet released her official policy proposals, but she previously supported” Biden’s policies regarding Americans’ earned benefits. Alex Beene, a financial literacy instructor at the University of Tennessee, told Newsweek, “While there are (various) policy options being discussed in Washington, Harris’ position on Social Security will likely remain the same as Biden’s.”
President Biden and many Democrats want to increase revenue coming into Social Security’s trust fund to avoid a projected shortfall by 2035, absent corrective action.
“Harris supported Biden’s plans to raise Social Security payroll taxes on Americans earning $400,000 or more annually. Currently, only $168,600 of yearly earnings are subject to Social Security taxes.” – Newsweek, 7/22/24
During her time as a Senator from California, Harris backed the Social Security Expansion Act (introduced by Bernie Sanders), which would adjust the Social Security payroll wage cap (so that earnings above $250,000 would be subject to additional taxes). Rep. John Larson’s Social Security 2100 Act adheres more closely to the President’s pledge not to raise taxes on anyone earning less than $400,000 a year. NCPSSM has endorsed both bills, which not only would strengthen the program’s finances, but boost seniors’ benefits as well.
As the presumptive Democratic nominee, Vice President Harris likely will continue President Biden’s efforts to push back on Republican proposals to cut benefits — from raising the retirement age to means-testing or even privatizing Social Security.
“President Joe Biden and I will protect Social Security. Donald Trump will not. The contrast is clear,” Harris posted on X in June.
We have argued that Donald Trump cannot be trusted to protect Social Security. He told CNBC that he was “open” to “cutting entitlements”; he has lied about undocumented workers collecting Social Security (they don’t); and several of his White House budgets proposed cutting Social Security and Medicare by billions of dollars. At the Republican convention, Trump dubiously claimed that he is fighting for older Americans.
“How can you claim to fight for seniors when you intend to cut Social Security and Medicare, which is a lifeline for so many of our seniors?” – Kamala Harris
The University of Tennessee’s Alex Beene argues that in order to protect and strengthen seniors’ earned benefits, a President Harris would need a Democratic House and Senate. Democrats are hoping to flip the House and to hold onto their narrow margin in the Senate.
Harris will no doubt try to build on the administration’s successes in lowering prescription drug prices for seniors, as well. The administration’s landmark legislation, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), empowered Medicare to negotiate drug prices with Big Pharma. The prices of the first 10 life-saving drugs to be price-negotiated will be announced in September. The IRA also limited Medicare beneficiaries’ insulin costs to $35/month and capped overall out-of-pocket drug spending by patients to $2,000 per year – a provision that takes affect in 2025.
Project 2025, a right-wing blueprint for a second Trump term, calls for repealing the IRA and the Affordable Care Act. The House Republican Study Committee budget for 2025 would slash Social Security and Medicare.
“You paid into Medicare and Social Security your entire lives. Now, House Republicans want to cut it,” Vice President Harris posted on Facebook.
Based in part on her championing of workers’ social insurance benefits, one of the nation’s largest labor unions, the SEIU (Service Employees International Union), lost no time in endorsing Harris less than 24 hours after Biden quit the race. “We know that she will defend the Affordable Care Act and protect Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security against Republican threats.”
What Does Project 2025 Bode for Older Americans? Hint: Nothing Good
The right-wing Heritage Foundation produced Project 2025, a blueprint for a second Trump term. Though Project 2025 doesn’t specifically advocate for cuts to Social Security, the right-wing think tank has taken positions that would seriously undermine the nation’s most popular social insurance program. On the issue of Medicare and prescription drug prices, Project 2025 is crystal clear. It explicitly calls for changes that could be devastating for seniors. We chatted with our senior legislative representative, Maria Freese, about the implications of Project 2025 for older Americans.
Q: While it’s true that the Project 2025 plan itself does not call for Social Security cuts, it doesn’t give us much reassurance on the Social Security front. Why is that?
A: The organization behind Project 2025, the right-wing Heritage Foundation, has been calling for cuts for Social Security and Medicare for decades — ever since they were founded. So, this is not a new thing for them.
Q: Exactly. As recently as June 17th, the Heritage Foundation called for raising the retirement age to 69 or 70. What does that tell us about their true intentions?
That’s only one element of the plan that they have for Social Security. It’s the one that is the most dramatic, and the one that they tend to put front and center. In fact, the senior policy researcher at Heritage, Rachel Grezsler, has been behind a lot of the organization’s published writing on raising the retirement age.
Q: So if the Heritage Foundation has advocated cutting Social Security, why don’t they come out and say so in the Project 2025 document?
Well, I think it’s because the Republicans have finally learned that where Social Security is concerned, saying the quiet part out loud scares people to death. And it’s politically poisonous. I think they’ve learned that lesson from Donald Trump when he says, ‘Don’t talk about cutting Social Security because it’s bad politically.’ That doesn’t mean it’s changed their agenda at all. It just means that they have discovered the hard way that when they tell people what they plan to do about Social Security, it costs them politically because voters hate the actual GOP agenda on this issue.
Q: And, of course, we know what House Republicans would like to do if the party consolidates sufficient power in the 2024 elections, because of the budget put out by the House Republican Study Committee earlier this year.
A: That’s right. The House Republican Study Committee represents 80% of the House GOP membership. This year they submitted a budget that would have cut Social Security by $1.5 trillion. That’s a huge amount of cuts. Now the budget is a little quiet about exactly how they would do that — because they know that if they actually lay out a plan, people will object to it.
Q: The website Verify.com did an article about this: We know what the Heritage Foundation and the Republican party really want to do, despite their vague rhetoric about supporting Social Security in general. So is that a fair predictor of what might happen during a second Trump administration?
A: Clearly there is a relationship between what Heritage Foundation promotes and what and members of the Republican caucus in the House, and presumably some of them in the Senate, would be pushing in a second Trump administration. Whether it’s written in Project 2025 or not is irrelevant.
They have learned that it’s better not to tell people what they plan to do because what they plan is so terrible and so badly received by the American people and raising the retirement age is only one piece of it.
They also want to change the way the cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) are calculated, whereas we would like to see them improved so they better reflect what seniors spend their money on, which tends to be housing and health care. The Republicans have promoted this thing called the Chained CPI, which actually would reduce COLAs for seniors.
Q: According to Verify.com, the Heritage Foundation has called for something called a flat Social Security benefit, though it is not part of Project 2025. What is that all about?
A: They propose to “flatten out” benefits across the income spectrum. This wouldn’t hurt lower income people as much as the middle class. The Warren Buffets of the world are not going to be significantly impacted because they don’t rely on Social Security. The people who are going to be impacted are those whose lifetime earnings average, say, $50,000 a year. They’ll simply get less in benefits. The flat benefit would cut deeper and deeper until Social Security becomes just another welfare program. It wouldn’t be so much of an “earned benefit” anymore.
Q: Trump claims that he doesn’t know anything about Project 2025, that it has nothing to do with him. And yet, apparently, the team working on it is 80% former Trump officials. So how do we how do we call him out on that discrepancy or hypocrisy, saying Project 2025 has nothing to do with him?
A: Well, number one, you can’t trust what Trump says. Any connection between things that Donald Trump says and the truth is purely accidental. But the fact is that Project 2025 was designed by people who were parts of his administration in the past, people who are his supporters. Trump’s VP pick, J.D. Vance, is closely affiliated with the Heritage Foundation. In 2023, he wrote, “We owe so much to the Heritage Foundation and all that they’ve contributed to our cause over the past fifty years.” And Heritage was one of the sponsors of the Republican convention!
Q: We’ve talked a lot about Social Security. What would Project 2025 would do to hurt Medicare and the effort to lower prescription drug prices?
A: First of all, Project 2025 calls for repealing Medicare’s new ability to negotiate prescription drug prices with Big Pharma. That’s just the number one thing on their list. They also want to repeal the new $2,000 out of pocket cap on prescription drug costs for Medicare beneficiaries. Project 2025 also advocates eliminating the $35 per month out of pocket cap on patients’ insulin costs. Basically, they want to reverse all the good things that the Inflation Reduction Act is doing for seniors. And that’s just for starters.
They have other provisions that would make it easier to privatize the Medicare program through Medicare Advantage. So we’d end up with more and more people at the mercy of privatized, profit-making insurers.
Basically, they would gut the traditional Medicare program. There wouldn’t be much left of the traditional program if, if it still existed at all, because it would be so expensive that no one would be able to afford to sign up. To paraphrase Newt Gingrich, who giddily promoted privatization, Project 2025 would induce the ‘dying on the vine’ of Medicare as we know it.
Our Debate Takeaway: Trump’s Lies Undermine Seniors’ Earned Benefits
As seniors’ advocates, it is not our job to parse Joe Biden’s debate performance. It’s our job to tell Americans in straight talk who is telling the truth about Social Security and Medicare — and who will protect them as president. In last night’s debate, Donald Trump repeatedly spread disinformation about seniors’ earned benefits, while President Biden’s statements were consistent with the truth — and with his record in office of defending both programs.
No one who is serious about protecting Social Security and Medicare would undermine them the way Trump did last night. Early in the debate, Trump baselessly claimed that undocumented workers are collecting Social Security benefits — a myth that has no basis in reality.
“They’re going to destroy Social Security. These millions and millions of people coming in, they’re trying to put them on Social Security.” – Donald Trump, 6/27/24
Here’s the truth: Undocumented workers are not eligible for Social Security benefits, period. Either Trump doesn’t understand how America’s greatest social insurance programs work — or he is purposely lying.
Trump turned reality inside out on the issue of Medicare, as well, accusing the Biden administration of “destroying” the program, again falsely claiming that the President is giving undocumented workers benefits (for which, again, they are ineligible).
“He will wipe out Medicare…” – Donald Trump, 6/27/24
In the real world, President Biden strengthened the Medicare program through the Inflation Reduction Act. He literally empowered Medicare to negotiate drug prices with Big Pharma for the first time in history, which is projected to save beneficiaries $7.4 billion per year in prescription costs — in addition to capping insulin costs at $35 per month and limiting seniors’ out of pocket drug costs to $2,000 annually.
Trump tried to take credit for lowering prescription drug prices but never presented a comprehensive program while he was in office, and unlike President Biden, never enacted one.
“I’m the one that got the insulin down for the seniors. I took care of the seniors. What he is doing is destroying all of our medical programs because the migrants coming in.” – Donald Trump, 6/27/24
While President Trump has been all over the map on Social Security (saying earlier this year that was “open” to “cutting entitlements” and then walking it back), President Biden tonight affirmed his commitment to strengthening the program’s finances by demanding that high earners (anyone with more than $400,000 in yearly wages) begin paying their fair share.
Trump is the one who will “destroy” Social Security through is rhetoric and actions. He has called Social Security a “Ponzi scheme,” and as President his budgets included billions of dollars in cuts to both Social Security and Medicare. During the pandemic, he needlessly suspended the Social Security payroll tax and said he’d like to end it altogether, even though the FICA tax is the program’s chief funding source. Trump’s Republican allies in Congress have called for raising the retirement age, means testing, and reduced COLAs — proposals they and Trump would no doubt enact if the GOP prevails in November.
President Biden has consistently championed Social Security and Medicare since taking office. In successive White House budget proposals, he has urged Congress to take action to strengthen both programs. He convinced Republicans to take Social Security and Medicare “off the table” in the 2023 debt ceiling negotiations. He called seniors’ earned benefits “a sacred trust” that must be protected and vowed that if anyone tries to cut either program, “I will stop them.”
While the pundits make gloomy pronouncements about President Biden’s debate performance and the potential consequences for his candidacy, it is not clear that the voting public is responding in kind. In an admittedly unscientific sampling, we are receiving comments on our social media feeds expressing support for Biden and disdain for Trump in the aftermath of the debate:
“I was not thrilled with Biden’s performance, but at least he answered the important questions. He did maintain his composure in spite of the ceaseless insults based on Trump’s misinformation and downright lies.” – Facebook User, Tammy
“Trump cannot be trusted on anything he says. I can tell he is lying because his mouth is open.” – Facebook User, Phil
“Trump didn’t give an answer about Social Security because they didn’t pin him down. He’ll follow whatever he’s told by the (right wing) because he doesn’t understand anything about it.” – Facebook User, Bob
“Regardless of how the debate turned out, Biden still has my vote.” – Facebook User, Debbie
NCPSSM President & CEO Max Richtman says the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare still stands squarely behind Joe Biden as the candidate who will protect American seniors’ financial and health security.
“We have been watching these two candidates for 8 years. There is no question as to which one seniors can trust with their crucial earned benefits — paid for over a lifetime of work,” says Richtman. “It’s not the candidate whose statements are erratic and false, and whose policies in office were spectacularly reckless. Seniors can trust the candidate who considers Social Security and Medicare to be ‘sacred’ and has promised to protect them from cuts. That is why, on behalf of our members and supporters across the country, we support Joe Biden for President.”
House Budget Cmte. Holds Hearing on Social Security Trustees Report
Ranking Committee Member Brendan Boyle (D-PA)
Republicans and Democrats clearly had different takeaways from the recent Social Security Trustees report — judging from a House Budget Committee hearing held last week — and vastly different proposals for the future of the program.
The Social Security Trustees projected last May that reserves in the program’s combined trust fund will become depleted in 2035 without action from Congress. At that time, the program still could pay 83% of scheduled benefits.
The House Budget Committee chairman, Jodey Arrington (R-TX), declared the “fiscal health” of Social Security “unsustainable.” Republicans on the committee made it clear that their preferred solution is to cut benefits, if not for current retirees, then for future generations — mainly by raising the Social Security retirement age from 67 or 70. Ranking Member Brendan Boyle (D-PA) said that raising the age would cut benefits for 3 in 4 (or over 250 million) Americans.
Republicans and Democrats say they want to avoid a “food fight” on Social Security
Republicans continued to try to blame Social Security for the nation’s mounting debt, although, as committee Democrats pointed out, the program does not contribute to the debt because it is fully self-funded and separate from general revenue. “They are conflating debt and deficits with Social Security’s trust fund solvency. Those are entirely separate issues,” said ranking Democrat Brendan Boyle (D-PA).
The House Republicans’ 2025 budget calls for the creation of a fiscal commission that likely would recommend cuts to Social Security and Medicare. Moderate committee Democrats Rep. Scott Peters (D-CA) and Rep. Jimmy Panetta (D-CA) also expressed support for a fiscal commission. Many Democrats and seniors’ advocates oppose the idea of outsourcing such crucial policy decisions to a special commission. As NCPSSM president Max Richtman has pointed out, “A fiscal commission would give individual members of Congress political cover to cut benefits.”
Democrats on the committee insisted that Social Security must be financially strengthened, and benefits expanded, not cut. That is exactly what legislation from Rep. John Larson, Senator Bernie Sanders, and other members of Congress would do. Their bills would increase revenue by adjusting the payroll wage cap, requiring high income earners to contribute their fair share to Social Security.
Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) said that Social Security beneficiaries must be protected from cuts. “This is not an entitlement program,” she said, “These are people who have paid every paycheck to this earned benefit.”
Congressman Boyle pledged: “I am going to do everything I can to make sure Social Security and Medicare will be there, not just for my father, not just for myself, but for generations to come.”
Despite the two parties’ divergent stances, Chairman Arrington and Ranking Member Boyle expressed a desire to find common ground and avoid some of the political “food fights” typical of other House committees.
****************************************
Committee leadership welcomed recently elected New York Congressman Tom Suozzi, who was endorsed by our organization in his successful bid to replace Rep. George Santos.
For more info on Democrats’ push to preserve these programs, listen here to our podcast with Congressman John Larson.
Why We Endorsed Kamala Harris for President of the United States
On Tuesday, the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare proudly endorsed Kamala Harris for President of the United States. As Vice President, she has championed the administration’s policies on behalf of older Americans — including strengthening Social Security and Medicare and lowering prescription drug prices for seniors. She has been in lockstep with the President in his pledge to protect Americans’ earned benefits against Republican proposals to cut and privatize them — including Donald Trump.
“(We) will protect Social Security. Donald Trump will not,” Harris recently posted on social media. ‘How can you claim to fight for seniors when you intend to cut Social Security and Medicare, which is a lifeline for so many older Americans?”’
Donald Trump, who once called Social Security a ‘Ponzi Scheme’ and said this year he was ‘open’ to ‘cutting entitlements,’ cannot be trusted to protect Social Security and Medicare. As President, he submitted successive White House budgets that would have slashed both programs by hundreds of billions of dollars. He recklessly suspended Social Security payroll contributions during the pandemic and hoped that the FICA tax would be ‘terminated.’ He actively spreads disinformation that undermines seniors’ earned benefits — including the outright lie that undocumented workers are collecting Social Security.
Trump’s running mate, J.D. Vance, once called for trillions of dollars to be cut from ‘entitlement’ programs and for the conversion of Medicare into a voucher program. Vance has close ties to Heritage Foundation, which authored the infamous Project 2025 — a blueprint for a second Trump term that would shred vital social programs and repeal the Inflation Reduction Act (which is lowering drug prices for American seniors). Though he has reversed his position on benefit cuts, he, like Trump, does not merit the trust of seniors and their families.
Unlike the GOP ticket, Vice President Harris has always been on the side of older Americans as a consistent supporter of Social Security, Medicare, and lower drug prices. The Biden-Harris administration held the line against GOP-proposed benefit cuts — and was able to enact the historic Inflation Reduction Act, giving Medicare the power to negotiate drug prices with Big Pharma, capping insulin costs, and limiting seniors’ out-of-pocket costs. But there is more to be done.
The battle to lower prescription drug prices must continue. Both Medicare and Social Security must be put on a sound financial footing and expanded to meet 21st century seniors’ true needs. Further action is needed to crack down on the abuses of privatized Medicare Advantage plans and to preserve traditional Medicare. The Biden-Harris administration has made admirable efforts in that direction.
“We proudly support the Vice President as she takes the lead on these crucial issues after so ably supporting the administration’s commitment to seniors’ financial and health security,” said NCPSSM president and CEO Max Richtman. “We look forward to working with President Harris to build on the tremendous successes of the past four years.”
Harris Likely to Sustain Biden’s Social Security, Medicare, Rx Drug Policies
Vice President Harris paid tribute to President Biden today at her first public event since he withdrew from the 2024 race and endorsed her. Congratulating winning NCAA athletes at the White House this morning, she said that, in one term, President Biden has already surpassed the legacy of many presidents who served two, a record “unmatched” in American history. “I am a first-hand witness that he fights for the American people every day,” she said.
As we have noted many times, the President has fought especially hard for American seniors — by lowering prescription drug prices, strengthening Medicare, and advocating improvements to Social Security — which is why he earned our endorsement in June. His heir apparent, Vice President Harris, has been in lockstep with President Biden on these crucial issues.
As Newsweek reports, “Harris, who announced her intent to run on Sunday, has not yet released her official policy proposals, but she previously supported” Biden’s policies regarding Americans’ earned benefits. Alex Beene, a financial literacy instructor at the University of Tennessee, told Newsweek, “While there are (various) policy options being discussed in Washington, Harris’ position on Social Security will likely remain the same as Biden’s.”
President Biden and many Democrats want to increase revenue coming into Social Security’s trust fund to avoid a projected shortfall by 2035, absent corrective action.
“Harris supported Biden’s plans to raise Social Security payroll taxes on Americans earning $400,000 or more annually. Currently, only $168,600 of yearly earnings are subject to Social Security taxes.” – Newsweek, 7/22/24
During her time as a Senator from California, Harris backed the Social Security Expansion Act (introduced by Bernie Sanders), which would adjust the Social Security payroll wage cap (so that earnings above $250,000 would be subject to additional taxes). Rep. John Larson’s Social Security 2100 Act adheres more closely to the President’s pledge not to raise taxes on anyone earning less than $400,000 a year. NCPSSM has endorsed both bills, which not only would strengthen the program’s finances, but boost seniors’ benefits as well.
As the presumptive Democratic nominee, Vice President Harris likely will continue President Biden’s efforts to push back on Republican proposals to cut benefits — from raising the retirement age to means-testing or even privatizing Social Security.
“President Joe Biden and I will protect Social Security. Donald Trump will not. The contrast is clear,” Harris posted on X in June.
We have argued that Donald Trump cannot be trusted to protect Social Security. He told CNBC that he was “open” to “cutting entitlements”; he has lied about undocumented workers collecting Social Security (they don’t); and several of his White House budgets proposed cutting Social Security and Medicare by billions of dollars. At the Republican convention, Trump dubiously claimed that he is fighting for older Americans.
“How can you claim to fight for seniors when you intend to cut Social Security and Medicare, which is a lifeline for so many of our seniors?” – Kamala Harris
The University of Tennessee’s Alex Beene argues that in order to protect and strengthen seniors’ earned benefits, a President Harris would need a Democratic House and Senate. Democrats are hoping to flip the House and to hold onto their narrow margin in the Senate.
Harris will no doubt try to build on the administration’s successes in lowering prescription drug prices for seniors, as well. The administration’s landmark legislation, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), empowered Medicare to negotiate drug prices with Big Pharma. The prices of the first 10 life-saving drugs to be price-negotiated will be announced in September. The IRA also limited Medicare beneficiaries’ insulin costs to $35/month and capped overall out-of-pocket drug spending by patients to $2,000 per year – a provision that takes affect in 2025.
Project 2025, a right-wing blueprint for a second Trump term, calls for repealing the IRA and the Affordable Care Act. The House Republican Study Committee budget for 2025 would slash Social Security and Medicare.
“You paid into Medicare and Social Security your entire lives. Now, House Republicans want to cut it,” Vice President Harris posted on Facebook.
Based in part on her championing of workers’ social insurance benefits, one of the nation’s largest labor unions, the SEIU (Service Employees International Union), lost no time in endorsing Harris less than 24 hours after Biden quit the race. “We know that she will defend the Affordable Care Act and protect Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security against Republican threats.”
What Does Project 2025 Bode for Older Americans? Hint: Nothing Good
The right-wing Heritage Foundation produced Project 2025, a blueprint for a second Trump term. Though Project 2025 doesn’t specifically advocate for cuts to Social Security, the right-wing think tank has taken positions that would seriously undermine the nation’s most popular social insurance program. On the issue of Medicare and prescription drug prices, Project 2025 is crystal clear. It explicitly calls for changes that could be devastating for seniors. We chatted with our senior legislative representative, Maria Freese, about the implications of Project 2025 for older Americans.
Q: While it’s true that the Project 2025 plan itself does not call for Social Security cuts, it doesn’t give us much reassurance on the Social Security front. Why is that?
A: The organization behind Project 2025, the right-wing Heritage Foundation, has been calling for cuts for Social Security and Medicare for decades — ever since they were founded. So, this is not a new thing for them.
Q: Exactly. As recently as June 17th, the Heritage Foundation called for raising the retirement age to 69 or 70. What does that tell us about their true intentions?
That’s only one element of the plan that they have for Social Security. It’s the one that is the most dramatic, and the one that they tend to put front and center. In fact, the senior policy researcher at Heritage, Rachel Grezsler, has been behind a lot of the organization’s published writing on raising the retirement age.
Q: So if the Heritage Foundation has advocated cutting Social Security, why don’t they come out and say so in the Project 2025 document?
Well, I think it’s because the Republicans have finally learned that where Social Security is concerned, saying the quiet part out loud scares people to death. And it’s politically poisonous. I think they’ve learned that lesson from Donald Trump when he says, ‘Don’t talk about cutting Social Security because it’s bad politically.’ That doesn’t mean it’s changed their agenda at all. It just means that they have discovered the hard way that when they tell people what they plan to do about Social Security, it costs them politically because voters hate the actual GOP agenda on this issue.
Q: And, of course, we know what House Republicans would like to do if the party consolidates sufficient power in the 2024 elections, because of the budget put out by the House Republican Study Committee earlier this year.
A: That’s right. The House Republican Study Committee represents 80% of the House GOP membership. This year they submitted a budget that would have cut Social Security by $1.5 trillion. That’s a huge amount of cuts. Now the budget is a little quiet about exactly how they would do that — because they know that if they actually lay out a plan, people will object to it.
Q: The website Verify.com did an article about this: We know what the Heritage Foundation and the Republican party really want to do, despite their vague rhetoric about supporting Social Security in general. So is that a fair predictor of what might happen during a second Trump administration?
A: Clearly there is a relationship between what Heritage Foundation promotes and what and members of the Republican caucus in the House, and presumably some of them in the Senate, would be pushing in a second Trump administration. Whether it’s written in Project 2025 or not is irrelevant.
They have learned that it’s better not to tell people what they plan to do because what they plan is so terrible and so badly received by the American people and raising the retirement age is only one piece of it.
They also want to change the way the cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) are calculated, whereas we would like to see them improved so they better reflect what seniors spend their money on, which tends to be housing and health care. The Republicans have promoted this thing called the Chained CPI, which actually would reduce COLAs for seniors.
Q: According to Verify.com, the Heritage Foundation has called for something called a flat Social Security benefit, though it is not part of Project 2025. What is that all about?
A: They propose to “flatten out” benefits across the income spectrum. This wouldn’t hurt lower income people as much as the middle class. The Warren Buffets of the world are not going to be significantly impacted because they don’t rely on Social Security. The people who are going to be impacted are those whose lifetime earnings average, say, $50,000 a year. They’ll simply get less in benefits. The flat benefit would cut deeper and deeper until Social Security becomes just another welfare program. It wouldn’t be so much of an “earned benefit” anymore.
Q: Trump claims that he doesn’t know anything about Project 2025, that it has nothing to do with him. And yet, apparently, the team working on it is 80% former Trump officials. So how do we how do we call him out on that discrepancy or hypocrisy, saying Project 2025 has nothing to do with him?
A: Well, number one, you can’t trust what Trump says. Any connection between things that Donald Trump says and the truth is purely accidental. But the fact is that Project 2025 was designed by people who were parts of his administration in the past, people who are his supporters. Trump’s VP pick, J.D. Vance, is closely affiliated with the Heritage Foundation. In 2023, he wrote, “We owe so much to the Heritage Foundation and all that they’ve contributed to our cause over the past fifty years.” And Heritage was one of the sponsors of the Republican convention!
Q: We’ve talked a lot about Social Security. What would Project 2025 would do to hurt Medicare and the effort to lower prescription drug prices?
A: First of all, Project 2025 calls for repealing Medicare’s new ability to negotiate prescription drug prices with Big Pharma. That’s just the number one thing on their list. They also want to repeal the new $2,000 out of pocket cap on prescription drug costs for Medicare beneficiaries. Project 2025 also advocates eliminating the $35 per month out of pocket cap on patients’ insulin costs. Basically, they want to reverse all the good things that the Inflation Reduction Act is doing for seniors. And that’s just for starters.
They have other provisions that would make it easier to privatize the Medicare program through Medicare Advantage. So we’d end up with more and more people at the mercy of privatized, profit-making insurers.
Basically, they would gut the traditional Medicare program. There wouldn’t be much left of the traditional program if, if it still existed at all, because it would be so expensive that no one would be able to afford to sign up. To paraphrase Newt Gingrich, who giddily promoted privatization, Project 2025 would induce the ‘dying on the vine’ of Medicare as we know it.
Our Debate Takeaway: Trump’s Lies Undermine Seniors’ Earned Benefits
As seniors’ advocates, it is not our job to parse Joe Biden’s debate performance. It’s our job to tell Americans in straight talk who is telling the truth about Social Security and Medicare — and who will protect them as president. In last night’s debate, Donald Trump repeatedly spread disinformation about seniors’ earned benefits, while President Biden’s statements were consistent with the truth — and with his record in office of defending both programs.
No one who is serious about protecting Social Security and Medicare would undermine them the way Trump did last night. Early in the debate, Trump baselessly claimed that undocumented workers are collecting Social Security benefits — a myth that has no basis in reality.
“They’re going to destroy Social Security. These millions and millions of people coming in, they’re trying to put them on Social Security.” – Donald Trump, 6/27/24
Here’s the truth: Undocumented workers are not eligible for Social Security benefits, period. Either Trump doesn’t understand how America’s greatest social insurance programs work — or he is purposely lying.
Trump turned reality inside out on the issue of Medicare, as well, accusing the Biden administration of “destroying” the program, again falsely claiming that the President is giving undocumented workers benefits (for which, again, they are ineligible).
“He will wipe out Medicare…” – Donald Trump, 6/27/24
In the real world, President Biden strengthened the Medicare program through the Inflation Reduction Act. He literally empowered Medicare to negotiate drug prices with Big Pharma for the first time in history, which is projected to save beneficiaries $7.4 billion per year in prescription costs — in addition to capping insulin costs at $35 per month and limiting seniors’ out of pocket drug costs to $2,000 annually.
Trump tried to take credit for lowering prescription drug prices but never presented a comprehensive program while he was in office, and unlike President Biden, never enacted one.
“I’m the one that got the insulin down for the seniors. I took care of the seniors. What he is doing is destroying all of our medical programs because the migrants coming in.” – Donald Trump, 6/27/24
While President Trump has been all over the map on Social Security (saying earlier this year that was “open” to “cutting entitlements” and then walking it back), President Biden tonight affirmed his commitment to strengthening the program’s finances by demanding that high earners (anyone with more than $400,000 in yearly wages) begin paying their fair share.
Trump is the one who will “destroy” Social Security through is rhetoric and actions. He has called Social Security a “Ponzi scheme,” and as President his budgets included billions of dollars in cuts to both Social Security and Medicare. During the pandemic, he needlessly suspended the Social Security payroll tax and said he’d like to end it altogether, even though the FICA tax is the program’s chief funding source. Trump’s Republican allies in Congress have called for raising the retirement age, means testing, and reduced COLAs — proposals they and Trump would no doubt enact if the GOP prevails in November.
President Biden has consistently championed Social Security and Medicare since taking office. In successive White House budget proposals, he has urged Congress to take action to strengthen both programs. He convinced Republicans to take Social Security and Medicare “off the table” in the 2023 debt ceiling negotiations. He called seniors’ earned benefits “a sacred trust” that must be protected and vowed that if anyone tries to cut either program, “I will stop them.”
While the pundits make gloomy pronouncements about President Biden’s debate performance and the potential consequences for his candidacy, it is not clear that the voting public is responding in kind. In an admittedly unscientific sampling, we are receiving comments on our social media feeds expressing support for Biden and disdain for Trump in the aftermath of the debate:
“I was not thrilled with Biden’s performance, but at least he answered the important questions. He did maintain his composure in spite of the ceaseless insults based on Trump’s misinformation and downright lies.” – Facebook User, Tammy
“Trump cannot be trusted on anything he says. I can tell he is lying because his mouth is open.” – Facebook User, Phil
“Trump didn’t give an answer about Social Security because they didn’t pin him down. He’ll follow whatever he’s told by the (right wing) because he doesn’t understand anything about it.” – Facebook User, Bob
“Regardless of how the debate turned out, Biden still has my vote.” – Facebook User, Debbie
NCPSSM President & CEO Max Richtman says the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare still stands squarely behind Joe Biden as the candidate who will protect American seniors’ financial and health security.
“We have been watching these two candidates for 8 years. There is no question as to which one seniors can trust with their crucial earned benefits — paid for over a lifetime of work,” says Richtman. “It’s not the candidate whose statements are erratic and false, and whose policies in office were spectacularly reckless. Seniors can trust the candidate who considers Social Security and Medicare to be ‘sacred’ and has promised to protect them from cuts. That is why, on behalf of our members and supporters across the country, we support Joe Biden for President.”
House Budget Cmte. Holds Hearing on Social Security Trustees Report
Ranking Committee Member Brendan Boyle (D-PA)
Republicans and Democrats clearly had different takeaways from the recent Social Security Trustees report — judging from a House Budget Committee hearing held last week — and vastly different proposals for the future of the program.
The Social Security Trustees projected last May that reserves in the program’s combined trust fund will become depleted in 2035 without action from Congress. At that time, the program still could pay 83% of scheduled benefits.
The House Budget Committee chairman, Jodey Arrington (R-TX), declared the “fiscal health” of Social Security “unsustainable.” Republicans on the committee made it clear that their preferred solution is to cut benefits, if not for current retirees, then for future generations — mainly by raising the Social Security retirement age from 67 or 70. Ranking Member Brendan Boyle (D-PA) said that raising the age would cut benefits for 3 in 4 (or over 250 million) Americans.
Republicans and Democrats say they want to avoid a “food fight” on Social Security
Republicans continued to try to blame Social Security for the nation’s mounting debt, although, as committee Democrats pointed out, the program does not contribute to the debt because it is fully self-funded and separate from general revenue. “They are conflating debt and deficits with Social Security’s trust fund solvency. Those are entirely separate issues,” said ranking Democrat Brendan Boyle (D-PA).
The House Republicans’ 2025 budget calls for the creation of a fiscal commission that likely would recommend cuts to Social Security and Medicare. Moderate committee Democrats Rep. Scott Peters (D-CA) and Rep. Jimmy Panetta (D-CA) also expressed support for a fiscal commission. Many Democrats and seniors’ advocates oppose the idea of outsourcing such crucial policy decisions to a special commission. As NCPSSM president Max Richtman has pointed out, “A fiscal commission would give individual members of Congress political cover to cut benefits.”
Democrats on the committee insisted that Social Security must be financially strengthened, and benefits expanded, not cut. That is exactly what legislation from Rep. John Larson, Senator Bernie Sanders, and other members of Congress would do. Their bills would increase revenue by adjusting the payroll wage cap, requiring high income earners to contribute their fair share to Social Security.
Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) said that Social Security beneficiaries must be protected from cuts. “This is not an entitlement program,” she said, “These are people who have paid every paycheck to this earned benefit.”
Congressman Boyle pledged: “I am going to do everything I can to make sure Social Security and Medicare will be there, not just for my father, not just for myself, but for generations to come.”
Despite the two parties’ divergent stances, Chairman Arrington and Ranking Member Boyle expressed a desire to find common ground and avoid some of the political “food fights” typical of other House committees.
****************************************
Committee leadership welcomed recently elected New York Congressman Tom Suozzi, who was endorsed by our organization in his successful bid to replace Rep. George Santos.
For more info on Democrats’ push to preserve these programs, listen here to our podcast with Congressman John Larson.