Military Contruction and Veterans Affairs and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2016

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. WARREN. Madam President, exactly 3 weeks ago the Social Security Administration made a very quiet announcement. Next year, for just the third time since 1975, seniors who receive Social Security won't be getting an annual cost-of-living increase.

Two-thirds of seniors depend on Social Security for the majority of their income. For 15 million Americans, Social Security is all that stands between them and poverty. But not one of these Americans--not one--will see an extra dime next year. Millions of other Americans whose benefits are pegged to Social Security--millions who receive veterans' benefits, disability benefits, and other monthly payments--won't see an extra dime either.

These are tough times--but not for everyone. According to most recent data from the Economic Policy Institute, CEOs at the top 350 American companies received on average a 3.9-percent pay increase last year. That is a lot of money because the average CEO pay at one of the top 350 American companies was a cool $16.3 million in 2014. On average, they got more than half a million dollars each in pay raises. So CEOs get huge pay raises while seniors, veterans, and others who have worked hard--70 million of them--will get nothing. Why? It is not an accident; it is the result of deliberate policies set right here in Congress.

Social Security is supposed to be indexed to inflation so that when prices go up, benefits will go up, too. But Congress's formula looks at the spending habits of only about a quarter of the country, and the formula isn't geared to what older Americans actually spend. Projections for costs of core goods and services, projections that remove the components of prices that are the most uncertain and erratic, show that inflation is up about 2 percent, but seniors, who usually get a boost on January 1, won't see an extra dime next year, mostly because of falling gasoline prices, which just don't mean as much to millions of seniors who don't commute to work. Meanwhile, seniors who are trying to cover things such as rent and exploding prescription drug prices are left out in the cold. It is all Federal policy.

What about those huge CEO bonuses? They are also the consequence, in part, of congressional policy. A report released just last week from the Center for Effective Government and the Institute for Policy Studies details how taxpayers subsidized CEOs' huge pay packages through billions of dollars in giveaways, including subsidies such as special tax-deferred compensation accounts and a crazy loophole that allows corporations to write off obscene bonuses as a business expense.

Companies can make their own decisions on how much to compensate their executives, but because of the laws Congress has passed, American taxpayers are forced to subsidize these multimillion-dollar pay packages.

It is time for Congress to make different choices. If we do nothing, on January 1 more than 70 million seniors, veterans, and other Americans won't get an extra dime. While Congress sits on its hands and pretends there is nothing we can do for seniors or vets, while Congress claims there just isn't any money to fix the problem, American taxpayers will keep right on subsidizing billions of dollars' worth of bonuses for highly paid CEOs. It is a choice. Congress can spend taxpayer money subsidizing billions of dollars for bonuses for corporate executives or Congress can use that very same money to help 70 million people who live on Social Security, veterans' benefits, and disability payments. Congress makes the choice.

That is why I am here today, along with a number of my colleagues, to introduce the Senior and Veterans Emergency Benefits Act. The SAVE Benefits Act will give seniors on Social Security, veterans, those with disabilities, and others a one-time payment equivalent to an average increase of 3.9 percent--the same tax-subsidized pay increase top CEOs received last year.

We can increase pay for seniors and vets without adding a single penny to the deficit simply by closing one of the many tax loopholes that subsidize these giant pay packages for executives. In fact, according to the Chief Actuary of the Social Security Administration, closing this loophole will create enough revenue to help seniors and vets and there will still be enough money left over to help extend the life of the Social Security trust fund. This should be a bipartisan act. Nobody wants to see seniors struggle to pay their grocery and utility bills. Everybody should want to extend the life of Social Security.

Both Democrats and Republicans have expressed contempt for this tax loophole. Back in 1993, Congress passed section 162(m)--a Tax Code provision designed to rein in excessive corporate compensation--but the provision includes so many loopholes, most corporations just get around them. In fact, in 2006 Republican Senator Chuck Grassley said that ``sophisticated folks are working with Swiss-watch-like devices to game this Swiss-cheese-like rule.''

In 2009 Republican Senator John McCain and Democratic Senator Carl Levin introduced a bill to shut down access to this loophole for corporate stock options. Just last year, the Republican chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee included reform of this loophole as part of his flagship tax reform bill. So let's just do it. Let's close the loophole, and let's use the money to give seniors and vets the support they need.

Think about what this change would mean. That 3.9 percent is worth about $581 a year, a little less than $50 a month. I know that is a rounding error for those top corporate executives who are pulling in an average of over $16 million each. But Social Security payments average only about $1,250 a month, and millions of seniors who rely on those checks are barely scraping by. A $581 increase could cover almost 3 months of groceries for seniors or a year's worth of out-of-pocket costs on critical prescription drugs for Medicare beneficiaries. That $50 a month is worth a heck of a lot to the 70 million Americans who would have just a little more in their pockets as a result of this bill. In fact, according to an analysis from the Economic Policy Institute, that little boost could lift more than a million people out of poverty.

We all know someone who lives on Social Security--every single one of us. We know family members, a friend, a neighbor, people who worked hard all their lives and who now rely on Social Security checks to get by. Giving seniors a little help with their Social Security and stitching up these corporate tax write-offs isn't just about economics; it is about our values. For too long we have listened to a handful of powerful folks who have had one message: Cut taxes for those at the top, cut rules and regulations that keep businesses honest, and let everybody else fight over the scraps. We have tried that approach, and now we have a retirement crisis. Guaranteed pensions are gone, and 401(k)s and IRAs have been decimated by the stock market. Fewer and fewer people can afford to save for the future. We tried it, and it was a complete failure.

These same powerful folks will tell you there is nothing we can do to help 70 million seniors, veterans, Americans with disabilities, and others who will not see an extra dime this year. They will say we can't afford it. They will say we can't do anything to expand Social Security. They will say we need to gut Social Security in order to save it. They will say all of this, exactly at the same moment that we continue to shovel billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies out the door for corporations to boost pay to their highest paid executives.

That is the problem. The money is there, only right now it goes to a handful of CEOs because that is where the law written by Congress sends it. But Congress can make a different choice--a choice that reflects our deepest values, a choice to give a boost to 70 million Americans who have earned one, a choice to lift over 1 million people out of poverty, and a choice to extend the life of Social Security. It is all about choices--millionaire and billionaire CEOs or retires, vets, and disabled Americans.

I ask my colleagues to support the SAVE Benefits Act. January 1 will be here soon, and we need to make a choice now.

Madam President, I yield to my colleague from Connecticut.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source