Let's explore the history and facts about Social Security before Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy dismantle the pieces that are left.
Congress just passed the Social Security Fairness Act, which restores full Social Security benefits to teachers, law enforcement officers, social workers, firefighters, and other government employees who have already paid Social Security taxes throughout their working lives. The Social Security Fairness Act restores the rights of those government employees to claim their Social Security benefits by repealing two provisions of the Windfall Elimination Provisions (WEP) and the Government Pension Offset Act (GPO), which were signed into law by President Ronald Reagan in 1983 signed.
Led by Senators Susan Collins and Bill Cassidy, the Senate passed the Social Security Fairness Act just before Elon and Vivek took control of our money. Twenty senators objected to this new law because it would reduce the solvency of the Social Security Trust Fund by six months. They also counted on the public's reaction to the word “government pension.” If firefighters, teachers and police officers already have government pensions, why would they also need their earned retirement benefits as part of their retirement?
Gema Hernández
Anticipating a lot of misinformation about the benefits of the Social Security Fairness Act, and about what can be done with the Social Security Trust Fund, it is essential to first investigate how teachers, firefighters, and other public employees have been unfairly affected through the windfall elimination provision and the government pension compensation law since 1983.
The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) affected several employees and their spouses. Traditionally, a young person's first job is not that of the government, but that of a waitress, delivery person, clerk and part-time employee at various employers. From this premise, young workers will continue to work multiple jobs, not realizing that they are contributing to Social Security in each of those jobs as they add quarters to qualify for the Social Security program. Throughout their working lives, they never realized that if they ever got a government job, they would lose their accrued Social Security benefits.
We are not talking about getting a government job as head of an agency or as a senior level employee. We're talking about getting hired as a teacher, social worker, firefighter, law enforcement officer, or any other position in a government agency. For example, independent school districts and public schools are government entities. Additionally, the Veterans Administration, CDC, and EPA are all government agencies. If you work for one of the government agencies mentioned above, the employee is eligible for a pension, but under the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provisions and the Public Pension Compensation Act, by default they lose the money they have already paid into the Social Security Trust Fund .
This elimination provision reduces workers' Social Security benefits by two-thirds of their government pension. For example, if you receive a monthly civil service pension of $3,000, two-thirds or $2,000 must be deducted from your already earned Social Security benefits. To get a $3,000 pension, you have to be at the top of the pay scale, which most federal workers don't reach. The standard reduction in Social Security benefits in 2024 for a 62-year-old worker under the Windfall Elimination Provision is $587 per month. Some workers face higher withholdings, sufficiently higher, that their entire wage contribution to Social Security payroll taxes is eliminated before they are hired as a teacher or firefighter.
This government pension compensation provision only affected the employees? Unfortunately that is not correct. It also affected the employee's spouse and former spouses. The Government Pension Offset (GPO) is similar to the WEP, but instead of reducing an employee's benefits, the Government Pension Offset (GPO) reduces benefits for that spouse or former spouse employee who can no longer claim spousal benefits based on partner benefits. or a former spouse's earnings record.
This new law is aptly called the Social Security Fairness Act, because if a worker pays Social Security taxes for at least forty quarters throughout his working life, it is fair that he is entitled to that benefit once he reaches retirement age. It is unfair that government pension compensation focuses only on Social Security, and not on 401Ks, annuities or other financial retirement instruments. Now let's look at other facts about the Social Security Trust Fund that Elon and Vivek look at. This information will help us understand what is at stake.
Money paid to Social Security eligible recipients comes from the Social Security Trust Fund. The Social Security Trust Fund is not part of the federal budget. Since 1986, the Social Security Trust Fund has been outside the federal budget. The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 legally reaffirmed and codified this. It is still the law of the land. Social Security is not part of the federal budget; therefore, it is against the law to take money from this trust fund to “reduce,” “balance,” or manipulate the federal budget.
Recipients of the Social Security Trust Fund include children. We often forget that the Social Security Trust Fund provides payments to children who have lost at least one working parent who met the eligibility requirements for the program. Their wage contribution made the child or children eligible for social security benefits up to the age of 18. One historical fact that is forgotten is that a significant number of children who lost a parent during 911 began receiving payments from the Social Security Trust Fund before any payment occurred. annuity, life insurance or 401k started assessing their business. As of June 30, 2024, 503 million children received monthly Social Security benefits. A significant number are survivors of a deceased working parent who paid Social Security payroll taxes.
Presidents and Congress have used the Social Security Trust Fund to finance other government programs, including military operations. The Social Security Trust Fund contains many paper promises amounting to somewhere between 1.7 trillion and 2.9 trillion. These “I Owe U” are the government's assurance that current and future recipients of Social Security benefits will not be shortchanged and that the money borrowed will not be stolen. Any future discussion about the future of the program must first address how the privatization of Social Security will repay the paper promises.
Starting in 2024, only individuals with a salary of $168,600 or less will pay Social Security taxes on their entire salary. This is expected to rise to $176,100 by 2025. If your salary is higher than that, you won't have to pay Social Security taxes above the $176,100 expected for 2025. Why not increase the salary limit for Social Security taxes to $500,000 or better yet? , remove the cap so that payroll tax is paid on the entire salary?
Before we determine when the Social Security Trust Fund will run out of money, we must ask Congress to repay the trillions of dollars in paper promises owed to the Social Security Trust Fund. Let's raise the Social Security salary cap from $176,100, projected for 2025, to $500,000. Not having to pay Social Security taxes on all wages or at least a larger portion of wages limits the amount of income that the Social Security trust fund supports and shortens the program's financial solvency.
Now for the 118th Congress, you are leaving an important legacy that your children and grandchildren will appreciate: passing the Social Security Fairness Act, which repeals the Windfall Elimination Provisions (WEP) and the Government Pension Offset Law (GPO), is one of the important contributions you have made for the American working class. Thank you.
Gema G. Hernandez, DPA, is a former secretary of the Florida Department of Elder Affairs, a retired college professor and part-time resident of Fort Myers Beach.
This article originally appeared on Fort Myers News-Press: The Social Security Fairness Act Just Passed | Opinion
