Equal Treatment of Public Servants Act of 2023

Floor Speech

Mr. Speaker, I start by acknowledging my good friend and colleague, and I thank him. I think his heart is in the right place.

Let me say, having worked on this issue for a number of years, to have a Social Security, and in this case a portion of it, come to the floor, albeit under suspension and not through regular order, Mr. Speaker, is a step in the right direction, but the American people have to be outraged by the fact that it has been over 50 years since Congress has adjusted Social Security. By that, I mean enhanced Social Security for its recipients. Imagine that.

Do you think a few things have happened since Richard Nixon was President of the United States? Do you think a few things have happened, especially as we live in this post-COVID and now inflationary period?

It impacts over 70 million of our fellow Americans. This provision that my colleague and good friend is talking about, WEP, is minuscule in terms of comparing that to individuals. As well intended as I believe he is, this doesn't straighten out the problem. In our bill, the Social Security 2100 Act, we repeal WEP and GPO, and we pay for it. That is the responsible thing that Congress has to do on behalf of the American people.

Here are the facts: 70 million Americans rely on Social Security, and it is the Nation's number one antipoverty program for the elderly and the number one antipoverty program for children. More veterans rely on Social Security for disability than they do the VA.

Congress has done nothing to help these individuals out. Add to that, Mr. Speaker, the fact that 10,000 baby boomers a day become eligible for Social Security.

What we need to do today, and in both of these bills that are coming before us, are steps forward, but we need to come together as a Congress and vote to fix Social Security in a manner that doesn't hurt or cut benefits for individuals who haven't seen a benefit enhancement in more than 50 years. We come here today and say here is a crumb, but even in the form of this crumb, this proposal will cut benefits for hardworking, everyday Americans.

I respect my colleague, and I do believe that his heart is in the right place, but Congress--both sides--have responsibility here, but perhaps now there is an opportunity for us to act--perhaps the fact that even under suspension, not regular order with public hearings where viewers get to see and actually hear from expert witnesses and get to hear both the fiscal side of what needs to be paid for but also the benefits side in terms of what has not been done.

Imagine, my dear friend knows this, 5 million of our fellow Americans--and they are in Texas and Connecticut--get below poverty- level checks from their government. So it is great that you have a proposal for WEP, but 5 million people currently on Social Security get below poverty-level checks from the wealthiest Nation in the world and from a country that has had a program in place, but Congress hasn't acted in over 50 years. Most of the 5 million are women, and most of them are women of color.

There are more than 33 million who the only benefit that they have, the only thing that keeps them out of poverty, is Social Security, and Congress hasn't acted since 1971. These people will be hurt by this proposal.

Benefit cuts in a time of inflation? Ask your constituents back home, Mr. Speaker, whether or not they can afford this cut.

Now, here is the other irony. Here we have one of the great economic development plans ever instituted by the United States Congress; That is right, an economic development plan, Social Security. How so?

Every district, on average, has about 143,000 Social Security recipients. Every district, monthly, receives on average $200 million in cash coming into their district.

In fact, for my dear friend and colleague here, $222 million comes into his district on a monthly basis. He has more than 95,000 retirees, 9,000 children who get money from Social Security, 10,000 widows, 4,800 spouses, and 14,000 disabled.

Congress has done nothing. These cuts will take place because Congress hasn't stepped up and said we need to fund this program, not cut it. Some say back in 1983 they did do something. Yeah, what they did is they raised the age, another great proposal on the other side. For every year you raise the age, that is a 7 percent cut in benefits. Let's raise the age to age 70, the Republican Study Committee says, and what does that do? It cuts benefits by 21 percent.

Aren't you glad you worked hard and invested and put your money aside so that you could find out that, yeah, what we are going to do is raise the age so you work longer, and as you are living longer, we expect that you will get less in retirement, not more. It makes no sense whatsoever.

We need to come together as a Congress and vote to enhance the Nation's number one antipoverty program for the elderly and for our children.

I respect the good intentions that people have, but as they say, the road to hell oftentimes is paved with good intentions. In this case, though, let's not talk about the parties. There is a lot of blame to go around here. How about we focus on the people, the American people, who we take an oath of office and swear to serve.

Staring this Congress in the face is over 50 years of inaction and 70 million people who are impacted by this in what is the Nation's number one antipoverty program for the elderly and for our children.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. I have to say I do agree with Mr. Roy's last statement that what we needed to do was go through regular order and what we need is to pay for it. That is the responsible thing to do, is to pay for it.

We have a plan to not only repeal WEP and GPO but pay for it. Yes, I heard people refer to the Brady-Neal proposal, but Ranking Member Neal has a plan also to deal with WEP that is fair and makes sense and is something that we should be embracing and including and is paid for. That is the big issue today. It is not that people's hearts aren't in the right place, and I think the gentleman from Texas understands this.

All of us are Americans. The President of the United States, Mr. Biden, has made a proposal. The incoming President, Mr. Trump, has made a proposal also. He has made a proposal to cut taxes for people on Social Security. We have that proposal in our bill, except we pay for it. That is the responsible thing to do.

What has been irresponsible is Congress not debating this in regular order and bringing it to the floor. How about doing something incredible here, actually have a vote on the Nation's number one antipoverty program for the elderly and number one antipoverty program for our children until the child tax credit is fully adopted, and is the program that more veterans rely on for disability than the VA.

This program is so admired and respected by the American people that overwhelmingly Independents, Republicans, and Democrats, all believe that it should be supported, expanded, because it hasn't been in over 50 years, and paid for.

We have a plan. We are anxiously waiting for the debate and for the discussion and the dialogue to take place here in regular order and have a vote on a plan that is comprehensive and paid for and lifts the 5 million Americans who get below-poverty-level checks from the government above the poverty level and provides people with the opportunity in every single one of our communities to get the benefits they richly deserve.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I yield myself the balance of my time to close.

I think you gave a very impassioned plea, but I think we have to dispense with we are throwing money at the problem. This is money that people have paid weekly, biweekly, and monthly out of their paychecks.

We are not talking about just 2 million people with regard to WEP. We are talking about 70 million Americans. They understand this program.

Frankly, it doesn't need to be studied. It needs to be voted on.

Where is the plan on your side?

We have a plan, and God only knows that plan should be subject to debate and discussion, but the plan is to enhance Social Security, not to cut it, so that people who are currently struggling, people now, today, not waiting for a study, but as we speak are getting below poverty-level checks.

You stand there and tell me we are throwing money at them?

They didn't think it was throwing money when we were paying the money out of their paycheck and they put their trust and confidence in the United States of America to return to them a benefit that has been the number one antipoverty program for the country.

I don't care what party you are in or who you are, you understand what Social Security has meant to you. Social Security is the safety net for capitalism. It is what allows entrepreneurialism to succeed, for people to take risks, and if they fail unintentionally or otherwise, people are disadvantaged or out of work, they are protected. We learned that lesson after the Great Depression.

If you think it can't happen again, it can. In 2008 and 2009, people saw their 401(k) become a 101(k), and during that time, that trust fund never missed a payment, not a pension payment, not a disability payment, and not a spousal or child payment.

What it needs is Congress to act and Congress to vote. Congress is going to go one of two ways. They are either going to enhance the benefit and say: Hey, do you know what? This hasn't been adjusted in over 53 years, and we recognize we have the responsibility to do that, but we haven't acted, and we haven't voted.

Both sides haven't acted.

However, now is the time for us to act and to vote and put a plan in front of people so that they get the opportunity to choose.

Have you got a better plan?

We have got one. We have got one that expands benefits and is paid for. We actually have the temerity to ask people who pay nothing to actually contribute to Social Security just like they do to this great military that we have in this Nation. People don't go out and buy their own tanks and their own F-35s. It is long overdue that people in this country all contribute their fair share to the process. This is the safety net for capitalism and entrepreneurialism in order for us to survive. Every single district--every district--is benefited by it. It is an economic development plan.

How do you explain it to people?

How can you look them in the eye and say: I am sorry we couldn't do anything for you, even though your districts all receive over $200 million, and yet we haven't done anything to enhance that?

These were suggestions that they take less while they are living longer?

Where do they spend that money?

They spend that money right back in your district at the local pharmacy, at the grocery store, paying their rent and mortgages, and at the dry cleaners. It all goes back to the American people and allows our economy to flourish.

The brilliance of Franklin Delano Roosevelt is still with us today. It is obstinate of Congress to not vote to enhance people's benefits in more than 50 years.

Ask anyone in your district: Have things changed for them since 1971? Could they use a little help from their Congress?

How many do you think even understand there is a cap on Social Security?

Are we proposing that we lift the cap on people making over $400,000 and that they actually would have to pay the same thing as someone who is making $30, $50, and $100,000?

They all pay.

Isn't that the fair thing to do in the country so that all of your constituents and mine and all 435 Members of this body can make sure that we are taking care of the people whom we are sworn to serve, especially those who are already retired, those who are there now?

While I respect the intention of the gentleman, 14 million people's benefits get cut under your proposal--14 million. That is not acceptable.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source