A petition to force a vote on the Social Security Fairness Act in the Senate has surpassed 10,000 signatures.
The petition was set up by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), the largest trade union of public employees in the United States, representing 1.3 million workers.
Last Tuesday, the House of Representatives voted 327 to 75 to pass the act, which would repeal two federal policies that currently limit Social Security payouts for around 2.8 million Americans who work in federal, state and local jobs.
The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) reduces Social Security benefits for individuals with public sector pensions who didn't pay Social Security taxes, even if they contributed through other jobs. It currently affects around 2 million beneficiaries. Meanwhile, the Government Pension Offset (GPO) cuts spousal or survivor benefits for retirees from federal, state, and local governments who didn't pay into Social Security, impacting nearly 800,000 retirees.
The bill will now pass to the Senate. However, there is only a limited amount of time that lawmakers will have to pass the bill in the upper chamber before a new Congress convenes in January. It is unclear if Senate leaders Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell will bring the Act to a vote.
A date for a Senate vote has not yet been scheduled. Newsweek has contacted the offices of Schumer and McConnell for comment about their plans via email.
If the bill is not brought to a vote in the Senate in the next 6 weeks then lawmakers will be required to start over with a new bill.
The lawmakers who originally introduced the measure either did not seek reelection or lost their bids, meaning a new member of Congress would need to reintroduce the bill. That includes Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown, a Democrat, who lost his seat to Bernie Moreno. Virginia Democrat Abigail Spanberger and Louisiana Republican Garret Graves, who sponsored the bill in the House, also did not seek reelection.
However the new AFSCME petition, which urges Senators to pass the Social Security Fairness Act, will add new pressure to lawmakers to vote on the bill, having reached 11,030 signatures as of Wednesday morning.
"After decades of hard work by working and retiree AFSCME members, the House of Representatives has voted 327 to 75 to pass the Social Security Fairness Act, bringing the bill one big step closer to becoming law," the trade union wrote.
"But we must keep the pressure on to ensure no procedural obstacles are thrown in the way of a Senate vote," the petition added.
"We're so close to the finish line and need all hands on to ensure all public service workers receive the full Social Security benefits they earned upon retirement."
Although the petition has gained thousands of signatures, it is not legally binding and will not force a vote in the Senate.
Meanwhile, Spanberger and Graves, who sponsored the bill in the House, and Senate sponsors, Democrat Sherrod Brown and Republican Susan Collins, have urged Schumer and McConnell to bring the bill to a vote in a letter published this week. They said that Americans who are subject to the provisions "are being punished for supporting and protecting our neighbors and families, educating our children, providing healthcare to our Veterans, delivering our mail, and more."
If the Social Security Fairness Act is brought to a vote in the Senate, it is expected to pass, having already garnered 62 co-sponsors—more than enough to secure a majority and send it to President Joe Biden for approval.
"For more than 40 years, the Social Security trust funds have been artificially propped up by stolen benefits that millions of Americans paid for and that their families deserve," said Graves and Spanberger.
"The time to put an end to this theft is now," they added.
But critics say the bill would pass on a tax burden to younger workers.
A 2020 Urban Institute study found that eliminating both provisions would increase benefits for 4.5 percent of beneficiaries by 2025, with an average annual boost of about $7,300. However, the Congressional Budget Office estimates this would add around $195 billion to federal deficits over 10 years, increasing fiscal strain on the Social Security Trust funds, which are projected to be unable to pay full benefits by 2035.
"We should reform Social Security so that it provides basic income security to the most vulnerable Americans in old age without adding to the debt or tax burden that younger workers face," Romina Boccia, director of budget and entitlement policy at the Cato Institute, told CNBC. "This is not the right policy. It's what special interests were pushing, and politicians are responsive to their demands."
Rep. John Larson, who voted against the bill in the House, said he did so because it "not paid for" and would therefore "put Americans' hard-earned benefits at risk".
"It would hurt most deeply the five million of our fellow Americans who receive below poverty checks, and almost half of all Social Security recipients who rely on their earned benefits for the majority of their income," he added.
If signed into law, the changes would apply to benefits paid starting in December 2023.
"We're guardedly optimistic," Shannon Benton executive director of The Senior Citizens League, or TSCL, an advocacy group devoted to protecting retirement benefits, told CBS News. "There is so much momentum, if it doesn't get passed now, a lot of people will lose hope."
President-elect Donald J. Trump has promised to protect Social Security, but has proposed cutting taxes that pay for the program, including ending taxes on overtime pay and tips.
He also wants to end the taxation of social security benefits, a move that would put more money into retirees' pockets but eliminate another revenue source. He has not spoken out about the Social Security Fairness Act.
English (US) ·