ACTION ALERT
Executive Committee Task Force On Social Security
Reform
February 28, 2000
VOTES PENDING ON THE
SOCIAL SECURITY EARNINGS
LIMIT
On Tuesday, February 29, 2000 the House Ways and Means Committee will
consider H.R. 5, the Senior Citizen's Freedom to Work Act. The
committee is expected to approve the proposal. Floor Action on the bill
could come as early as Wednesday, March 1, 2000.
BACKGROUND:
The bill would eliminate the earning limit for Social Security
beneficiaries age 65 to 69. Under current law, Social Security
beneficiaries, age 65 to 69, who earn more than $17,000 have their Social
Security benefits reduced by $1 for every $3 dollars of earnings in excess
of $17,000. Beneficiaries who are 70 face no earnings test.
In our Social Security Reform policy, passed at the Annual Meeting, we
support the elimination or modification of the earnings limit. The
bill is expected to pass the Ways and Means Committee and is expected on
the House floor this week as early as Wednesday, March 1, 2000.
The Social Security Administration supports the change and the
President has made it clear that he will sign a clean bill,
although several amendments may be offered. Current co-sponsorship of the
bill is overwhelmingly Republican, but Democratic Ways and Means members
are expected to vote for the bill. The bill has a great deal of support
from the AARP and other national seniors' advocacy groups.
If passed, the change would take effect on January 1, 2000. Although
CBO has not yet formally scored the bill, the ten-year cost to the Social
Security Trust Fund is said to be about $22.7 billion. Over the long run,
the impact on the Trust Fund is offset fully and the Social Security
actuaries have confirmed that the repeal of the earnings limit maintains
the current projected solvency of the Social Security Trust fund.
There are at several proposals that could complicate the measure by the
time it gets to the House floor:
- Several members of the House have expressed an interest in
eliminating the earnings limit that affects persons 62-64 collecting
reduced Social Security benefits. The addition of such an amendment
would increase the cost of the proposal and would face stiff opposition
within the House, from the Social Security Administration and from the
administration. Most of those who oppose changing this provision do so
1) because of cost; and 2) because they believe that the elimination of
the earnings limit for persons 62-64 might encourage more people to
retire earlier and consequently might lead to more elderly persons
living in poverty, as persons who receive benefits before they reach the
full retirement age (currently 65) receive permanently reduced benefits.
- Representative Matsui (California), ranking member of the Ways and
Means Social Security Subcommittee, and other members have expressed
concern that the bill in its current form does not do enough for people
with disabilities. Mr. Matsui would like to see liberalization of
Social Security disability benefits for blind persons under 65.
- Representative William Jefferson (Louisiana) is expected to offer an
amendment that would add H.R. 1217 to the bill. H.R. 1217 would amend
the Government Pension Offset (GPO), which reduces spousal benefits to
those persons who also receive an uncovered government pension by
two-thirds. Uncovered benefits are those government pension benefits
earned through government work where Social Security payroll taxes were
not paid. Jefferson's bill would set a minimum combined benefit of
$1,200 before Social Security benefits were reduced by two-thirds. For
example, a person with a state government pension of $600 per month and
a Social Security benefit of $600 would be allowed to collect his/her
full spousal benefit. It's too early to tell whether Representative
Jefferson and his backers (his bill currently boasts 203 co-sponsors)
will be successful.
- Finally, under current law, the earnings limit will increase to
$30,000 by 2002. While little opposition to the bill has surfaced,
stiff competition with other congressional budget and tax priorities may
put the bill's passage in jeopardy.
Þ ACTION:
Call your Representative on the House Ways and Means Committee
immediately and share NCSL's support for H.R. 5. A list of the members
follows. If your delegation is not represented on the Ways and Means
Committee, call Speaker Hastert's office at (202) 225-0600 or
Representative Gephardt's office at (202) 225-0100.
NCSL staff contacts: Gerri Madrid (202) 624-8670, gerri.madrid@ncsl.org, Sheri
Steisel, (202) 624-8693, sheri.steisel@ncsl.org.
Members of the House Ways and Means
Committee
Members who have co-sponsored H.R. 5 are
italicized
|
Republican Members |
Democratic Members |
|
Bill Archer (TX), Chairman |
Charles B. Rangel (NY), Ranking Member |
|
Philip M. Crane (IL) |
Fortney Pete Stark (CA) |
|
Bill Thomas (CA) |
Robert T. Matsui (CA) |
|
E. Clay Shaw, Jr. (FL) |
William J. Coyne (PA) |
|
Nancy L. Johnson (CT) |
Sander Levin (MI) |
|
Amo Houghton (NY) |
Benjamin L. Cardin (MD) |
|
Wally Herger (CA) |
Jim McDermott (WA) |
|
Jim McCrery (LA) |
Gerald D. Kleczka (WI) |
|
Dave Camp (MI) |
John Lewis (GA) |
|
Jim Ramstad (MN) |
Richard E. Neal (MA) |
|
Jim Nussle (IA) |
Michael R. McNulty (NY) |
|
Sam Johnson (TX) |
William J. Jefferson (LA) |
|
Jennifer Dunn (WA) |
John S. Tanner (TN) |
|
Mac Collins (GA) |
Xavier Becerra (CA) |
|
Rob Portman (OH) |
Karen L. Thurman (FL) |
|
Philip S. English (PA) |
Lloyd Doggett (TX) |
|
Wes Watkins (OK) |
|
J.D. Hayworth (AZ) |
|
Jerry Weller (IL) |
|
Kenny Hulshof (MO) |
|
Scott McInnis (CO) |
|
Ron Lewis (KY) |
|
Mark Foley (FL) |
|
