The real reason conservatives are voting against a Social Security bill
Congress is voting on a pair of Social Security bills that will address the benefit structure of the program, but only one is favored among hardline conservatives.Congress has the choice between H.R. 82, known as the Social Security Fairness Act, and H.R. 5342, known as the Equal Treatment of Public Servants Act. Both would address the windfall elimination provision and government pension offset, which adjust Social Security benefits for employees based on whether their jobs paid into the system.There is also concern about the potential backlash for moving a bill this consequential through a discharge petition, which deprives congressmen of the opportunity to amend or debate a bill before voting on it. H.R. 82 would get rid of the WEP and GPO altogether while H.R. 5342 would amend them. As a result, some conservatives like Republican Rep. Chip Roy of Texas have objected to H.R. 82 and favored H.R. 5342, citing fiscal concerns.By eliminating both provisions, H.R. 82 would add nearly $200 billion to the federal deficit over the next decade, according to a cost estimate from the Congressional Budget Office. "This bill irresponsibly eliminates Social Security’s WEP and Government Pension Offset, which means some retirees already covered by government pensions could receive an unfair windfall from Social Security at the expense of other retirees," Roy told Blaze News in an exclusive statement. "The Congressional Budget Office estimates H.R. 82 would cost taxpayers a whopping $200 billion and will accelerate Social Security’s insolvency – threatening benefits for every American currently paying into the system and those currently receiving benefits."On the other hand, H.R. 5342 will make a smaller contribution to the national debt, which is now approaching $36 trillion."H.R. 5342 will cost somewhere from [$25-30 billion] over 10 years and will not hasten Social Security's insolvency," a spokesman from Roy's office told Blaze News in an exclusive statement."Many of America’s police, firefighters, teachers, and other public servants have unfairly seen their Social Security benefits reduced because of the poorly crafted WEP, despite many of these individuals paying into Social Security while working other jobs," Roy told Blaze News. "H.R. 5342, which I have co-sponsored since coming to Congress in 2019, would have responsibly addressed the problems stemming from WEP without accelerating Social Security’s insolvency," Roy continued. "It was designed to replace the unfair, slipshod WEP with a new and carefully considered benefit formula to ensure these Americans get the benefits they deserve. At the same time, it would have provided monthly rebates to current beneficiaries to offset the impacts of the WEP."There is also concern about the potential backlash for moving a bill this consequential through a discharge petition, which deprives congressmen of the opportunity to amend or debate a bill before voting on it. "Just imagine if we did this to jam through something like, say, congressional stock trading next Congress," Roy's spokesman told Blaze News. "If we want this program to be there – if we want our country to be there – for future generations, we need to make choices that do right by people with what they have earned, and to do that with a clear-eyed view of our fiscal challenges," Roy told Blaze News in an exclusive statement. "That is why Congress has a duty to responsibly and fairly protect Social Security benefits for all Americans both today and tomorrow. That is what I voted for today."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Congress is voting on a pair of Social Security bills that will address the benefit structure of the program, but only one is favored among hardline conservatives.
Congress has the choice between H.R. 82, known as the Social Security Fairness Act, and H.R. 5342, known as the Equal Treatment of Public Servants Act. Both would address the windfall elimination provision and government pension offset, which adjust Social Security benefits for employees based on whether their jobs paid into the system.
There is also concern about the potential backlash for moving a bill this consequential through a discharge petition, which deprives congressmen of the opportunity to amend or debate a bill before voting on it.
H.R. 82 would get rid of the WEP and GPO altogether while H.R. 5342 would amend them. As a result, some conservatives like Republican Rep. Chip Roy of Texas have objected to H.R. 82 and favored H.R. 5342, citing fiscal concerns.
By eliminating both provisions, H.R. 82 would add nearly $200 billion to the federal deficit over the next decade, according to a cost estimate from the Congressional Budget Office.
"This bill irresponsibly eliminates Social Security’s WEP and Government Pension Offset, which means some retirees already covered by government pensions could receive an unfair windfall from Social Security at the expense of other retirees," Roy told Blaze News in an exclusive statement. "The Congressional Budget Office estimates H.R. 82 would cost taxpayers a whopping $200 billion and will accelerate Social Security’s insolvency – threatening benefits for every American currently paying into the system and those currently receiving benefits."
On the other hand, H.R. 5342 will make a smaller contribution to the national debt, which is now approaching $36 trillion.
"H.R. 5342 will cost somewhere from [$25-30 billion] over 10 years and will not hasten Social Security's insolvency," a spokesman from Roy's office told Blaze News in an exclusive statement.
"Many of America’s police, firefighters, teachers, and other public servants have unfairly seen their Social Security benefits reduced because of the poorly crafted WEP, despite many of these individuals paying into Social Security while working other jobs," Roy told Blaze News.
"H.R. 5342, which I have co-sponsored since coming to Congress in 2019, would have responsibly addressed the problems stemming from WEP without accelerating Social Security’s insolvency," Roy continued. "It was designed to replace the unfair, slipshod WEP with a new and carefully considered benefit formula to ensure these Americans get the benefits they deserve. At the same time, it would have provided monthly rebates to current beneficiaries to offset the impacts of the WEP."
There is also concern about the potential backlash for moving a bill this consequential through a discharge petition, which deprives congressmen of the opportunity to amend or debate a bill before voting on it.
"Just imagine if we did this to jam through something like, say, congressional stock trading next Congress," Roy's spokesman told Blaze News.
"If we want this program to be there – if we want our country to be there – for future generations, we need to make choices that do right by people with what they have earned, and to do that with a clear-eyed view of our fiscal challenges," Roy told Blaze News in an exclusive statement. "That is why Congress has a duty to responsibly and fairly protect Social Security benefits for all Americans both today and tomorrow. That is what I voted for today."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Originally Published at Daily Wire, World Net Daily, or The Blaze
What's Your Reaction?
