Social Security update: Republicans reverse course on expansion bill

Republicans have backtracked after killing a bill that would have expanded Social Security benefits for millions of seniors.

Last week, Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris, Maryland Republican representative, received unanimous consent to put the Social Security Fairness Act back into play.

The House bill previously had bipartisan support and more than 300 signatures from Democrats and Republicans. If passed, those impacted by the windfall elimination provision (WEP) and government pension offset (GPO) could see higher monthly benefits.

The Freedom Caucus broke protocol by tabling the bill, which effectively killed it. But Harris gained unanimous consent to vacate the order halting the proposal, and the bill could now garner approval again in the House.

Newsweek reached out to Harris for comment via email on Tuesday.

“When the original bill was tabled, many asked if it was really due to opposition to what was covered or just something procedural,” Alex Beene, financial literacy instructor for the University of Tennessee at Martin, told Newsweek.

“It now appears to be the latter. This particular bill looks to extend Social Security benefits to a select group of individuals who due to existing rules of receiving funds from a separate pension for a worker in one area of public service were deemed ineligible to receive either the full amount of Social Security benefits they were eligible for, if at all.”

The WEP and GPO at the moment take thousands of dollars from millions of seniors’ benefits if they receive pensions. Many of the recipients are retired public service workers, former police officers, teachers and nurses.

During a public hearing on the bill, GOP Representative Jodey Arrington of Texas said Congress should ensure a system of fairness for all public service workers, no matter which state they live in. But he cautioned against approving the bill without looking into how it would impact the Social Security system’s funding.

“We’re gonna accelerate the insolvency of the Social Security trust fund,” Arrington said Tuesday. “We should be responsible in how we do this. We should consider retirees in every state, and we should consider future retirees.”

The Social Security Fairness Act, if implemented, would likely cost $196 billion across 10 years, as the Social Security Administration already faces a funding shortfall that would reduce benefits by as early as 2035.

Still, supporters of the bill say it’s long overdue to adjust the Social Security benefits for the millions of Americans who have been losing out on funds while still paying into the system.

“The plan is to enhance Social Security, not to cut it …” Democratic U.S. Representative John Larsen of Connecticut said on Tuesday. “Now is the time for us to act and to vote.”

Despite broadened concerns over Social Security funding, Beene said getting rid of these provisions generally holds bipartisan support.

“It was an enormously popular move to extend benefits to them on both sides of the political aisle, meaning that permanently tabling the bill would have been met more than likely with backlash,” Beene said.