Almost 50 million aged Americans received a Social Security check last month.
Future generations are expected to be dependent on Social Security payouts. According to a Gallup poll in April, 84% of nonretirees think their monthly benefit will be a major source of income during their golden years.
Social Security is important to the financial well-being of retirees but it is in deep trouble.
The program is staring down a $20.4 trillion cash shortfall over the next 75 years according to the latest Social Security Board of Trustees report. If the OASI's cash reserves are gone, there will be a cut to Social Security checks.
The official White House photo was taken by Adam Shultz.
Changes need to be made to strengthen Social Security, and the American public wants the president and Congress to make it happen.
If Congress has known since 1985 that Social Security was going to have insufficient revenue in the future, why haven't they fixed it?
Political arrogance is what the answer is.
Increasing payroll taxes on high-earning workers is favored by Democrats. Wages and salary of between $0.01 and 147,000 are subject to the payroll tax. The payroll tax is not applicable to workers who earn more than 147,000 dollars a year. This allows a lot of money to escape the payroll tax.
Increasing the full retirement age is preferred by Republicans. The full retirement age has risen just two years since Social Security began. The average lifespan in the U.S. has increased from 63 in 1940 to 77 in 2020. Social Security expenses would be reduced over time.
Neither party is incentivized to find common ground with their opposition because the solutions strengthen Social Security. Today we have a stalemate.
Social Security's long-term funding shortfall can be solved by either individual solution or both.
Increasing the payroll tax on high earner could provide an immediate boost to revenue collection and could possibly extend the solvency of the OASI for a couple of decades depending on the source of the analysis. Increasing taxes on the rich isn't enough to close the projected cash shortfall through 2096.
The GOP's plan to raise the retirement age is flawed. Raising the retirement age would take a long time to have an impact. This doesn't help the OASI avoid a 23% cut to Social Security checks by 2034.
President Biden might have a solution that would change Social Security and solidify its foundation.
When Biden was running for president in 2008, Tim Russert asked him a simple question about America's third rail. Russert said that Social Security and Medicare were looming. Do you want to look at the age of eligibility, cost of living, and other programs?
Biden said that Russert had to put all of it on the table.
A willingness to break with strict party views is what this response means. A bipartisan proposal could resolve Social Security's funding shortfall by itself.
In 1983 under President Ronald Reagan, Joe Biden was involved in the last major Social Security reform. This bipartisan piece of legislation that gradually increased the payroll tax and full retirement age over time was supported by 88 senators, including Biden.
The image came from the same source as the one above.
A lot has changed since 15 years ago when Biden said he would put it all on the table. President Biden's views on Social Security have changed a little.
Biden released a plan to strengthen Social Security while on the campaign trail.
There is no mention of raising the full retirement age in Joe Biden's proposal.
Without a supermajority of 60 seats in the Senate, Social Security's funding shortfall can only be solved by votes from the opposition. Although Senator Biden has been part of major bipartisan legislation concerning Social Security before, it's not clear if he's open to the idea of putting it all on the table as President.
It seems likelier that the stalemate on Capitol Hill will persist than that real changes are a possibility.