Stuff That Flew Under the Radar: The Social Security Fairness Act—Why It Matters

H.R. 82, the “Social Security Fairness Act” was one of the last gasp endeavors of 118th Congress to get bills passed and off to President Joe Biden for signature before leaving for Christmas vacation. Because, priorities. With the passage of this bill, Congress succeeded in repealing established laws from 1977 (the Government Pension Offset or GPO) and 1983 (the Windfall Elimination Provision or WEP), which prevented certain public pension earners from double-dipping into the Social Security coffers. 

H.R. 82, passed the Senate 76 to 20, with four senators not voting. Those four included Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) because, confirmation hearings. Sen. JD Vance (R-OH), because hey, inauguration preparations. The other two were Joe Manchin (D-WV) because he has ended his Senate career and does not really care at this point, and surprisingly, Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) who has no good excuse, especially since he needs to, maybe, start earning his keep.

The bill had previously cleared the House in November, 327 to 75, with one congressperson voting present. The WEP reduced Social Security benefits for individuals who receive other retirement benefits through state or local government pension programs: like teachers, firefighters, first responders, police officers, and postal workers. The GPO eliminated the government pension offset for surviving spouses and their children who inherited their deceased spouses said government pensions. In the past, they would have had the full Social Security pension amount. I know because my father was a postal worker when he died, and my mother and my siblings received his pension benefits in full. When the GPO was signed into law in 1977, those benefits were reduced by two-thirds.

Finally, the bill eliminated the reduction of Social Security benefits for individuals who may have spent part of their employment life working for an employer who did not pay into the Social Security fund (government, state, etc.) The changes will be retroactive to December 2023.

While touted as “bipartisan,” I would bill it more of a mixed bag of representatives championing its passage, the majority Democrats. Notable on the Republican side: Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) and Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC), both whose record is not stellar in voting to reduce government coffers. Most of the labor unions are cheering this on, and if the unions are considering this a win, then it’s probably does not portend well for the American people.

Despite this repeal and relief for three million pensioners struggling in the age of Biden-Harris, none of this theater addresses Social Security’s insolvency issues–issues that have spanned decades and that each Congress kicks into the next session. As our senior editor Joe Cunningham wrote:

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the repeal will add $195 billion to federal deficits over the next decade. Some lawmakers voiced concerns over this fiscal impact, highlighting the need for broader discussions about Social Security’s solvency.

How about actual decision-making, because this has been discussed to the eye-teeth, and the conclusions remain the same. Where exactly will the federal government get this money to cover pensioners who had their benefits reduced and still cover those retirees who were not in this position? As government spending has increased, and individuals with taxable wages have decreased, so the Social Security coffers continue to be reduced. The projections by the Congressional Budget Office, according to Merrill: In 10 years, the ability to pay out full benefits will cease.

ELEVEN YEARS — THAT’S ALL THE TIME Congress has left to come up with a solution to continue funding Social Security at current spending levels. That’s the conclusion the Congressional Budget Office drew in its 2024 report — and their deadline is a year later than the drop-dead date previously projected by the Social Security trust fund’s board of trustees in their prior report.

As more American’s reach retirement age, concerns about the program’s future solvency have risen. Various methods of shoring it up have been debated by politicians and policy experts, and the debate will undoubtedly heat up as the deadline grows closer.

My take: this bill, and the CR, are an ignominious end for the 118th Congress. Both will be barnacles on the backs of the incoming 119th, and may be what tanks both Republican majority leaders. More indications that DOGE has its work cut out for it.