Just below the surface of the crises currently engulfing the nation is a debate over Social Security, with wide-ranging consequences. The Democratic Party is on board for expanding, not cutting, Social Security. The Republican Party is planning to slash Social Security.
Support for expanding Social Security makes sense, as Social Security provides a large measure of economic security to tens of millions of retirees, people with disabilities and others. And, the vast majority of the public supports its expansion. After supporting a number of bipartisan attempts to cut Social Security over the last several decades, Vice-President Biden now favors expanding it, if elected president.
President Trump campaigned on the promise of never cutting Social Security, though his actions in office have shown that to be a lie. If he gains a second term, efforts to cut are likely.
In sharp contrast, the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, including Senators Bernie Sanders, Ed Markey and Kamala Harris, are proposing to give workers a $2,000 monthly stipend as part of the next coronavirus stimulus package. They want to make sure that working Americans have the money to pay for basic necessities throughout this pandemic, including expanded unemployment insurance, paycheck protection help for small businesses and larger Social Security payments to retirees.
Outright emergency payments at a time of serious economic hardship is a far cry from a conservative proposal that would exploit people’s desperation by giving them some money now from the Social Security Trust Funds if they agree to take less Social Security later. As David Sirota writes in Jacobin, what’s so especially inexcusable and unseemly about this proposal is that it would require tens of millions of people with literally no savings to protect themselves by using money that they will need for their economic wellbeing, at the same time as Congress literally gives tens of billions of dollars to companies with billions of dollars in reserves.
The proponents of this inequitable proposal are effectively suggesting that government handouts to profitable businesses, without proof of need and no payback, are acceptable. But, in their view, individuals should self-finance, increasing their current economic security by trading away their future economic security. If fiscal neutrality is the goal, why not impose corporate and individual wealth taxes, which would be far more equitable?
Biden is now on the side of Americans, tweeting “Give people coronavirus economic relief and don’t hold their hard-earned benefits hostage.” Working families’ economic security depends on him prevailing in November. And, when he does, all of us will need to hold him to his promise to expand, not cut Social Security.
Here’s more from Just Care:
Leave a Reply