To the Editor:
I recently attended an event hosted by Rep. Tim Walberg (R) at the Cass County Medical Care Facility. I asked Mr. Walberg about the House Republican Study Committee recently released which proposes multiple changes to Social Security including raising the age at which Americans can receive full SS benefits to 69.
Mr. Walberg’s first response was that Republicans were not talking about changes or cuts to Social Security. However, the Study Committee’s Report released in the summer of 2023 clearly states otherwise. (https://rsc-hern.house.gov/news/press-releases/rsc-releases-fy2023-budget-blueprint-save-america)
When asked again to state his position on Social Security, Mr. Walberg said he stands for “protecting the promise of Social Security.” He then referred to his bill proposing a “lock box” for SS funds.
Unfortunately, this box prevents SS funds from being invested in U.S. bonds, such as Treasury (bonds). According to www.congress.gov/, Walberg’s bill establishes a Social Security Surplus Protection Account and a Medicare Surplus Protection Account as well as “a commission to study the most effective vehicles for investing the trust funds, other than investments in the form of U.S. obligations,” such as the stock market, rather than the much safer U.S. Treasury bonds.
In other words, Mr. Walberg is in favor of privatizing Social Security. He says on his website (https://walberg.house.gov/issues/social-security) that “we must be responsible for our own retirement planning. We need to reform Social Security so that, while it meets current financial obligations, it allows young workers the freedom to form their own individual savings accounts that they are able to control. “
This is unfortunately a misguided understanding of Social Security. Social Security provides economic security for disadvantaged and at-risk populations, people whose work histories and incomes did not allow them to establish their own retirement savings. Many people are employed in fields where the physical nature of their work forces them to retire early.
According to Alan Cohen, Senior Fellow for American Progress, “the low-income and middle-income seniors who would be hardest hit by the increase in the retirement age have not seen the life expectancy gains that higher-income people have experienced. This is especially true for Black retirees, who on average, have lower lifetime earnings than white retirees. . . . For many of these individuals, raising the retirement age would only put financial security further out of reach.” (https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-house-republican-study-committee-budget-proposes-harsh-changes-to-social-security/)
At the senior fair, Mr. Walberg stated his aversion to (President Joe) Biden administration proposals that would strengthen Social Security by increasing the payroll tax on earnings above $400,000. Walberg said that this plan “punishes” those who have been economically successful. He doesn’t seem to be as concerned about taking away benefits from those who have not been as economically successful.
In November 2023, a group of over 100 organizations wrote an open letter to Congress strongly opposing the formation of this commission to determine how to invest Social Security funds. They stated, “It is imperative to understand that Social Security does not add a penny to the federal debt. It has its own dedicated revenue, cannot spend a penny unless it has sufficient dedicated revenue to cover the cost of all benefits and associated administrative costs, and has no borrowing authority.”
They also state that “The only reason to make changes to Social Security via a closed-door commission is to cut already modest earned benefits — something the American people overwhelmingly oppose — while avoiding political accountability.”
This letter further identifies various options for protecting the solvency of Social Security and the retirement benefits of American workers who have paid and are paying into Social Security.
We should call out Representative Walberg when he says he stands “for the promise of protecting Social Security.” My response is, “Don’t gamble with my Social Security, Mr. Walberg.”
Naomi Ludman
Dowagiac
Any views or opinions expressed in this letter are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the Watershed Voice staff or its board of directors.
