Democrats hastily trying to push through bill that ‘would cost average couple $25,000’ ahead of Trump’s presidency

Senate Democrats are rushing to push through a Social Security reform bill before Donald Trump takes office, which one group estimates would cost the average couple $25,000 in benefits.

The Social Security Fairness Act would repeal two provisions that currently reduce payouts to public sector workers, such as police officers, firefighters, teachers and U.S. postal workers.

The Committee for a Responsible Budget (CRFB), a bipartisan think tank, argued that this change would make Social Security insolvent six months earlier than current projections.

This would be done by providing full benefits to nearly 3 million retirees who the group says paid into state or local pension plans instead of Social Security.

“As a result, we estimate that a typical dual-income couple retiring in 2033 will see an additional $25,000 in retirement benefits over their lifetime, with more than $8,000 of that additional reduction coming in the roughly half year of advanced insolvency,” says the group. wrote.

If Social Security runs out of money under the bill’s reforms, the think tank says the average couple could miss out on as much as $400,000 in lifetime benefits.

It cited the Congressional Budget Office, which estimated the bill would cost the federal government more than $190 billion over the next decade.

The bill was passed in the House of Representatives last month by 327 to 75.

The bill must be signed into law on December 31 before it expires before the new Congress is sworn in and President-elect Donald Trump takes office.

After pressure from Democrats in the House of Representatives, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer plans to put the proposal to a vote this week. It will be further debated on Wednesday.

“It would ensure that Americans are not wrongly denied their well-earned Social Security benefits simply because they have chosen to work in public service at some point in their career,” Schumer said. posted on X.

The Senate version of the bill has 62 cosponsors, 14 of whom are Republicans. Proponents want the proposal to be approved and brought to President Joe Biden’s desk before it expires on December 31.

High-profile Republican co-sponsors include Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and newly elected Vice President J.D. Vance.

As the vote approaches, some members of the Republican Party are debating the bill’s impact on Social Security’s long-term financial health. The hill reported.

Noted budget hawk Senator Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican, wants his colleagues to vote on an amendment to the bill that would gradually raise the retirement age to 70.

‘It accelerates the bankruptcy of social security. Social Security will go bankrupt in 2034. This will accelerate the situation by about a year. “It adds $200 billion to a program that is already short of money,” he told The Hill. “If you’re going to expand the mandate by expanding it, you’re going to have to pay for it.”

If passed, the bill would end the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and the Government Pension Offset (GPO), two adjustments to Social Security that have been in place since 1983.

Republican Senator Rand Paul was not a co-sponsor of the Senate version of the Social Security Fairness Act and wants to include a provision that would gradually raise the retirement age to 70.

Currently, the WEP reduces benefits for workers who also receive a public pension for a job not covered by Social Security, or for jobs where the employer does not contribute to the program.

For example, many public schools across the country have chosen not to participate in Social Security taxes.

If a teacher from one of those schools works part-time in a job covered by Social Security during the summer, the WEP ensures that their ultimate benefits are commensurate with the hours they worked at that part-time job.

This was done to prevent public sector workers from “double dipping” by collecting a government pension and full Social Security benefits even if their main job did not pay into the program.

The GPO reduces two-thirds of Social Security benefits received by spouses, widows or widowers who receive pensions from work that was not covered by Social Security taxes.

In reality, these two provisions mean that millions of Americans collecting Social Security will have their benefits cut by hundreds of dollars per month.

Senators Susan Collins (left) and Lisa Murkowski are high-profile Republican co-sponsors of the Senate version of the Social Security Fairness Act

Vice President-elect J.D. Vance also signed the Senate version of the bill

That goes for Terry Hoover, who was a firefighter in Louisville, Kentucky, for 20 years. Now retired, he says the WEP and GPO cost his family more than $1,000 every month.

“My Social Security has been reduced because of my retirement,” Hoover said a rally earlier this week. “And then my wife, she was a nurse for 41 years and paid into the Social Security system, you know, and I can’t take a dime from her because of my pension.”

The CRFB argued that these reforms will devastate Social Security in the long run, even though retirees will see more money in their checks in the short term.

“Rather than repeal WEP/GPO and add roughly $200 billion to the Social Security deficit, lawmakers should reform it,” the report wrote. “We encourage lawmakers to seek solutions to Social Security’s looming insolvency and not further deteriorate the program’s finances.”