Social Security Fairness Act of 2023
Floor Speech
Mr. Speaker, first and foremost, I commend Representatives Abigail Spanberger and Garret Graves for their extraordinary work. It is not often in this body, Mr. Speaker, that my colleagues are going to find a bipartisan group of more than 300 Members who sign on to a proposal. Why? Well, my colleagues did it because of how dead wrong WEP and GPO are and because of the impact on schoolteachers, firefighters, police officers, and municipal employees. That is why it is so heartening to see colleagues on both sides of the aisle come together and say, yes, there is a path forward, and yes, WEP and GPO need to be reformed and, in fact, eliminated.
Mr. Speaker, I agree with the chair. We need regular order. We need regular order because Social Security needs to be addressed comprehensively. If not for the work of Ms. Spanberger and Mr. Graves, we wouldn't even be here. There would be no dialogue, no discussion, no debate on the number one antipoverty program for the elderly and the number one antipoverty program for children, a program that protects spouses and their children, which every American agrees with and understands.
Congress hasn't acted to expand a program and, in this case, hasn't acted to help people who actually worked other jobs and paid into a system and are being wrongfully penalized, which is why, in our proposal of Social Security 2100, we repeal it, as well, and pay for it.
Mr. Speaker, I agree with the chairman. We didn't have all the data over 40 years ago. Now, we do, and now, we have that opportunity. We also have the momentum in a body that recognizes that not only is this unfair, but to have 5 million fellow Americans get below-poverty-level checks is unfair. To not have increased or enhanced benefits in over 50 years is unfair. To not have a COLA that actually reflects what seniors spend their money on is also unfair. To tax Social Security with regular income after you have retired is unfair.
It needs to be addressed. I thank the Members who have done this and have brought this, and we need to respond comprehensively. I will add that we need to pay for it as well, but the Members who have strove to bring this to the floor deserve tremendous credit.
Spanberger).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LARSON of Connecticut.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Budzinski).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I will point out as well that the Social Security trust fund is not part of the national debt. This proposal does not run up the national debt. It impacts the trust fund.
Hoyle).
Mr. Speaker, it is rare when you see in this body the number of people who have come together to support a bill. I think it demonstrates overwhelmingly how badly we need to come together and pass legislation that impacts the American people. We see so many of them as was so eloquently stated by so many speakers today, especially Mr. Graves and Mr. Higgins, saying how these individuals have had money taken out of their paychecks and receive nothing. It is wrong. We all know that it is wrong. It needs to be corrected, and it needs to be paid for.
I respect the idea and notion that we have to be fiscally responsible, but Social Security, the trust fund, is so solid but for one thing: the inaction of the United States Congress for more than 53 years failing the American people, failing to do the right thing for teachers, for firefighters, and for police officers.
I will bet everybody here has heard from the firefighters' union and from the teachers' union and from others who are standing up and saying, this is flat-out wrong. They are absolutely right, but there are other people that are hurt as well when items aren't paid for.
Who is here to speak for the 5 million Americans who get below- poverty-level checks from the wealthiest Nation in the world? Who speaks for them? Who speaks for the more than 33 million Americans who the only benefit that they have is Social Security?
As proud as I am of the speakers on our side who have talked about the need to address this issue for people that have been hurt and disadvantaged, if we don't pay for it we hurt and disadvantage people who are in the fund currently by not comprehensively addressing this issue and paying for it.
What that takes is for the discussion to move forward in a manner in which it goes through regular order, it is debated in committee and on the floor, and then voted on.
The great news is that there will actually be a vote and there will actually be a discussion, and people will have to say, well, why was that so and what was the outcome?
In doing so, hopefully, we will have an understanding about the absolute neglect by the United States Congress, both Chambers, to address the Nation's number one antipoverty program for our elderly and for our children. It is the safety net of capitalism and entrepreneurialism. It should be something we are embracing where both sides have good points to make, but one of them clearly isn't cutting benefits intentionally or unintentionally that end up hurting the very people we are sworn to serve, the very people that Social Security was meant to protect. The genius of Roosevelt and the Congress back in 1935 is that they got it. It took a major event like the Great Depression, but if you think it can't happen again, think back to 2008 and 2009 when people's 401(k)'s became 101(k)'s.
Mr. Speaker, the American people are begging us to do something, to have a vote. They are right. These benefits have been taken from them that they earned and paid for. They deserve them, but in the process we can't hurt those people who we have also neglected. There are 5 million fellow Americans in all of our districts getting below-poverty-level checks. That is wrong.
My heart is heavy because I oppose this bill because of who it impacts and hurts, but I totally respect the effort in what was done and the fact, thanks to the efforts of 300 Members of this body, there will at least be a vote, not the vote I would have preferred, but a vote.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source