Please keep in mind that Trump has nothing to do with the Social Security Fairness Act. I hope this post sparks a conversation that stays focused on the topic at hand.
The Social Security Fairness Act, recently signed into law by President Biden, repeals the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and the Government Pension Offset (GPO). These provisions previously reduced Social Security benefits for public sector retirees who also received pensions from non-Social Security-covered employment. The repeal is expected to increase monthly benefits for nearly 3 million retirees, including teachers, firefighters, and police officers, with some beneficiaries receiving up to $1,190 more per month.
While the Act aims to address long-standing concerns about fairness for these retirees, it introduces significant financial challenges. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that this legislation will cost taxpayers approximately $196 billion over the next decade. It will also accelerate the depletion of the Social Security Trust Fund, moving its projected insolvency date closer, possibly by six months. The Social Security Trustees have already projected that the Trust Fund could become insolvent by 2034, and this new Act could bring that date even closer.
This is a parting gift from the Biden administration that will hurt Americans for decades to come. The Act highlights the lack of foresight in addressing Social Security’s broader structural issues. Instead of offering a sustainable solution, it adds to the financial strain on the system, leaving future generations to face greater uncertainty. Once again, this reflects another Biden administration expenditure that worsens the national debt and drains critical resources, without providing real solutions to the problems it creates.
It’s odd how these kinds of social programs, although attractive to some, are not well thought out by the people we send to represent us in Washington. President Biden has shown a pattern of initiating costly measures that address short-term issues but fail to tackle the underlying problems. In this case, the Social Security Fairness Act may provide temporary relief for a select group of retirees but leaves the larger crisis of Social Security's solvency unaddressed, deepening the challenges for the program’s future.
A few questions-------
How do you think the Social Security Fairness Act will impact the long-term stability of Social Security?
Do you believe the government is addressing the right issues with Social Security, or is this another short-term solution that could worsen the problem?
What other reforms do you think should be prioritized to ensure the future solvency of Social Security?
Is this Act a necessary step for public sector retirees, or do you think it could have been handled differently to avoid further strain on the system?
As far as bearing responsibility it went through the House (Nov 12, 2024 votes cast = 327-75-1) & Senate (Dec 21, 2024 votes cast = 76-20) and was a bipartisan effort. To me Biden's action of signing the act was no more than a formality. So, a moot topic.
#1 You already shared how the act will impact the stability of the Social Security Trust Fund. What else can be commented about it?
#2 Two unrelated clauses as I see it. As to the first one it is debatable. The position of fairness to the recipients not having received benefits in the past, why that was so, and if the act corrects it to being fair is open to discussion, of which I have no opinion at this time.
The second clause from what I read there is no expiration date and the act is permanent, thus not short-term. At least that is my understanding. However, it will worsen as you shared the problem of hastening insolvency. Maybe it is a question of morality if to do it or not with what is right is right. I don't know.
#3 I don't know enough other than the obvious to creatively problem solve the challenge of Social Security solvency. To show my ignorance wouldn't paying back the loans it has given over the years give a good start it? A long discussion could be had on Social Security starting with its inception.
#4 I don't know.
Of course, insert standard disclaimer I cannot take responsibility for any of the reply above due to a degree of ignorance, shooting from the hip, and possible misunderstanding. Just kidding around due to the normal Monday morning, Hooray, a new week a new adventure feeling.
Thank you Tim for your reply
Yes, it is clear the bill passed in a bipartisan fashion. However, I was concentrating on this bill as a long-term problem due to its spending and the potential for it to deplete the Social Security fund in a relatively short period of time. While I can see some fairness in the bill, I also view it as a significant issue due to the points I’ve mentioned. In my opinion, this mirrors much of what we saw from the Biden administration—creating problems without providing a solution to prevent the negative consequences down the road.
The lack of a clear plan for how the bill will be funded or how its costs will be offset raises concerns about the future sustainability of Social Security. While the bill appears fair to a segment of Americans, I have concerns about those who could be affected if Social Security becomes insolvent or if cuts are needed across the board due to overspending from the fund. It's crucial to consider the broader impact on all Americans, especially those who rely on Social Security for their livelihood in retirement.
As of now, there has been no clear, comprehensive plan outlined by Congress for how the Social Security Fairness Act will be funded.
https://www.ssa.gov/benefits/retirement … s-act.html
For me to make the bold statement I know all that needs to be known about Social Security especially regarding funding or its financial accounting would be completely asinine as I see it. Just reading about it with the information I receive from the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget and going to its site to read articles can be overwhelming.
https://www.crfb.org/
The U.S. debt with its deficits created by the budget(s) are like a boulder rolling downhill. I am reminded of the myth of Sisyphus in some ways. Maybe metaphorically where the leadership of Sisyphus is the symbolic collective leadership of our government. And the boulder is representative of the failures of governing seen as debt (Period - monetary wealth, lack of knowledge, results of poor leadership, and etc), constantly accumulating whether via spending or cutting taxes. Debt is debt.
I am sure I don't make sense ha-ha
Great sense. I think I get what you're saying. The U.S. debt does seem like it's constantly growing and hard to manage, no matter what the government does. It feels like the more they try to fix it, the bigger it gets, which makes it tough to understand. I agree that Social Security and the financial side of things are complicated, and it's easy to get overwhelmed trying to figure it all out. It's like we're stuck in a cycle that keeps getting worse unless there's a real shift in how things are managed.
Even Republicans are saying that the impact on the projected Social Security shortfall is not a dire one. Both parties have been aware of the danger of insolvency of the fund for many years. So, instead of picking on Biden as is the custom with Republicans for at least making sure that participants get what is coming to them, why not a comprehensive solution?
When Republican come up with solutions besides blaming Democrats, then they can talk.....
I am one of the WEP folks, why can't I receive the full benefits due from my contribution to Social Security without the arbitrary draconian cuts to my benefits?
My main concern is budgetary. I believe WEP folks have been given a raw deal for years, and they deserve a fair solution. However, my concerns are twofold. First, I’m worried about how this new bill will affect all Americans in the long run, given Social Security's lack of long-term solvency. Second, I feel that once again, Biden has failed to consider the bigger picture, which I find unwise.
This bill will undoubtedly deplete the Social Security fund further, and after researching the legislation, it’s clear it was passed in a bipartisan manner without any serious thought about how it would be paid for. To me, that’s nonsensical and typical of the status quo in Washington. I can’t help but wonder how long the general public will overlook Social Security’s looming financial issues—perhaps not until all payments are at risk of being cut for every American.
I understand your point, and I agree that WEP needs to be addressed with a fair and effective solution. However, any changes must include a clear plan for how they will be funded to avoid jeopardizing the future of Social Security for everyone.
The Social Security Fairness Act (H.R. 82), recently signed into law by President Biden, repeals the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and the Government Pension Offset (GPO), thereby increasing Social Security benefits for certain public sector retirees.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that this repeal will increase federal expenditures by approximately $196 billion over the 2024-2034 period.
As of now, Congress has not specified new funding mechanisms or budgetary offsets to cover these additional costs. This means the increased expenditures are expected to be financed through general federal revenues, potentially adding to the federal deficit.
CBS NEWS
During legislative discussions, some lawmakers raised concerns about the financial impact of the bill. For instance, a point of order was raised in the Senate, citing violations of budgetary rules due to the lack of offsets for the increased spending. However, a motion to waive these budgetary concerns was agreed upon, allowing the bill to pass without specified funding sources.
CONGRESS.GOV
In summary, while the Social Security Fairness Act provides increased benefits to certain retirees, Congress has not detailed specific measures to fund these benefits, leading to potential implications for the federal budget and deficit.
A reasonable reply. I have read that as a result of this ACt, Social Security insolvency will occur 6 months sooner than otherwise. So, our politicians need to work together to find a way to shore up the shortfall and not continue to kick the can down for some future time, as we are running out.
There are solutions, many which have been deemed politically unpalatable for one side or the other. To acquire equity for public service employees will cost 6 months. Lets come up with a comprehensive solution that will deal with the impeding crisis while not screwing any contributory to the system over.
We have been asking for this "clear plan" for a long time, so what are they waiting for?
Lawmakers across party lines have praised the legislation which stands to help millions of Americans.
Late last month, the Senate overwhelmingly passed the Social Security Fairness Act by a 76-20 margin. The month before, the bill passed the House via a 327-75 vote.
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), the sponsor of the Social Security Fairness Act, said Sunday in a thread on the social platform X that she “was honored to be in attendance for the signing of the Social Security Fairness Act into law.”
“I have fought for this change since 2003, when I held the first-ever Senate hearing on repealing the WEP and GPO, and I am proud that this law will ensure public service no longer comes at the expense of the retirement benefits earned by an individual or their spouse,” Collins added later in her thread.
"I am so thankful that we in the federal government are keeping a promise on earned benefits to return that which is due to the people who have given their lives to serve the public," Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., said after its passage in the Senate last month.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-con … cosponsors
"not well thought" "will hurt to Americans" "Biden Biden Biden"
Most dont agree with you.
My post was ultimately focused on two main points—It was not about who voted for the bill. Yes, I see this as a problem in itself, for a separate conversation. However, I welcome your view.
But the cost of such a bill and the potential damage it could do to the Social Security fund, which could harm all Americans if the fund becomes insolvent. I also pointed out my belief that it was irresponsible for Biden to sign the bill, given the current state of the Social Security fund. I made no mention of the Americans the bill was intended to help. The point is that there is a problem, and it needs to be addressed with common sense, considering how the bill would be funded and how it wouldn't further deplete a Social Security fund that is already predicted to fail.
"The Social Security Administration is currently evaluating how to implement the Act, but specific details regarding its funding and potential impact on the Social Security Trust Fund have not been clearly outlined"
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
https://www.ssa.gov/benefits/retirement … s-act.html
Good discussion seeks its own level without restriction.
by Credence2 34 hours ago
In the ongoing war Trump and Republicans wage on the poor, here is the next installment.After listening to Trump whine endlessly about "Obamacare" saying it needs to be repealed for something better, all we received was a "nothing burger". Now he shows us all what his ideas of...
by Readmikenow 29 hours ago
It's time to let go of this institutional tool of the democrat party.Department of Education doesn’t educate anyone or run any schools or colleges. It’s a collection of 4,000 bureaucrats who mostly manage student loans, write rules, oversee various grant programs, and generate paperwork. (The...
by Readmikenow 3 weeks ago
This is called the "TRUMP" Affect. It would no have happened if biden was still in office or harris had become president. This is because Donald Trump made strong statements to Hamas and they know he's serious.Israel and Hamas have agreed to a cease-fire deal that also ensures...
by Sharlee 3 years ago
It's being reported that over 8 thousand poured in over the weekend.In the last six months, we have had over a million illegal immigrants cross into America. Fox News reported that In the last 24 hours 8 thousand have been processed and most released into the country free to travel to wherever they...
by Tim Mitchell 6 months ago
We all know it will be party-line loyalty for most voters. According to Pew Research, six percent of voters for the 2022 elections crossed party lines. For the mythical independent voter, it is a binary choice for the President. We are fortunate to be able to assess two Presidents based on criteria...
by Sharlee 2 years ago
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics … story.htmlhttps://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- … SKBN2B81M5Migrant encounters at the U.S.-Mexico border are at a 21-year high.Through the first nine months of this year, U.S. Customs and Border Protection has reported it “encountered”...
Copyright © 2025 The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of The Arena Platform, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
Copyright © 2025 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective owners.
As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.
For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy
Show DetailsNecessary | |
---|---|
HubPages Device ID | This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons. |
Login | This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service. |
Google Recaptcha | This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy) |
Akismet | This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy) |
HubPages Google Analytics | This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy) |
HubPages Traffic Pixel | This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized. |
Amazon Web Services | This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy) |
Cloudflare | This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy) |
Google Hosted Libraries | Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy) |
Features | |
---|---|
Google Custom Search | This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy) |
Google Maps | Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy) |
Google Charts | This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy) |
Google AdSense Host API | This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy) |
Google YouTube | Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy) |
Vimeo | Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy) |
Paypal | This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy) |
Facebook Login | You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy) |
Maven | This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy) |
Marketing | |
---|---|
Google AdSense | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Google DoubleClick | Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Index Exchange | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Sovrn | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Facebook Ads | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
AppNexus | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Openx | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Rubicon Project | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
TripleLift | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Say Media | We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy) |
Remarketing Pixels | We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites. |
Conversion Tracking Pixels | We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service. |
Statistics | |
---|---|
Author Google Analytics | This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy) |
Comscore | ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy) |
Amazon Tracking Pixel | Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy) |
Clicksco | This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy) |