...
By Suzanne Blake
Reporter
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
A new bipartisan bill introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives this week is looking to tackle one of Washington’s most pressing economic challenges—the long-term solvency of Social Security.
Introduced by Representatives Tom Cole, an Oklahoma Republican, and Tom Suozzi, a New York Democrat, the Bipartisan Social Security Commission Act would create a formal process to develop major changes to the program before the looming funding shortfall triggers automatic benefit cuts. While this is a new introduction for the current legislative session, Cole has led or co-led versions of this exact bill across seven different Congresses.
“I am going to tell you the truth that many of my fellow politicians in Washington refuse to acknowledge: the solvency of Social Security is at a critical point, and millions of Americans who have paid into this program throughout their working lives may not receive the money they deserve. Therefore, doing nothing on Social Security is not an option,” Cole said in a statement emailed to Newsweek. “As a Congress, we must act.”
Read More on Politics
Newsweek reached out to Suozzi's office for comment.
...
Why It Matters
The proposal arrives amid worsening projections for Social Security’s finances:
- The main retirement trust fund is projected to run out in 2032.
- After that point, the program would only be able to pay about 78 percent of scheduled benefits.
- That would effectively trigger automatic across-the-board benefit reductions unless Congress acts.
Lawmakers backing the proposed bill argue that delay increases the risk of sharper cuts later.
What to Know
The bill would not directly change Social Security benefits. But it does set up a framework to propose reforms in the future.
The Bill Outlines:
- Creation of a 13-member bipartisan commission to study Social Security’s finances
- A specific appointment structure: Eight members are chosen by congressional leadership (evenly split), four by the Chairs and Ranking Members of the House Ways & Means and Senate Finance committees, and the 13th member (the Chair) is appointed by the president.
- A requirement that at least two of the congressional appointees must be non-elected, outside experts
- A requirement to produce a solvency plan within one year
- Recommendations must receive bipartisan approval (at least nine of 13 members) before advancing
- The final proposal would be fast-tracked for a vote in Congress without amendment
Cole and Suozzi modeled the bill on the 1983 Social Security Commission, which helped forge bipartisan reforms that extended the program’s lifespan.
“Social Security is a promise we make to our seniors, and we cannot afford to wait until the program reaches insolvency to act. Everyone knows Social Security faces serious long-term challenges, but too often Washington chooses to ignore them,” Suozzi said in a statement. “We owe it to current and future retirees to set partisan politics aside and develop responsible solutions that protect and strengthen the program.”
Michael Ryan, a finance expert and the founder of MichaelRyanMoney.com, called the Cole-Suozzi bill the “first serious structural fix” to deal with Social Security reform.
“The problem isn't ideas. We've had plenty of those sitting around since the 1983 Greenspan Commission. The problem is accountability. Every previous commission produced recommendations that died in committee with zero political consequence,” Ryan told Newsweek. “Congress could ignore them because there was no mechanism forcing a vote.”
For an average dual-earning married couple, the impending Social Security cuts mean that around $10,600 dollars will be gone per year.
“Six years is not enough time for political theater,” Ryan said. "Either Congress creates a credible process now or they own the 22 percent cut when it lands.”
Social Security Funding Outlook
Projected Timeline
...
What Changes Could Be Considered
While the bill itself does not specify policy changes, the commission would be tasked with exploring options such as adjustments to payroll taxes or revenue sources or changes to benefit formulas or eligibility rules.
Some have also proposed updates to retirement age or cost-of-living adjustments.
“These are typically unpopular changes, but they were needed to save Social Security. We already know what needs to be done: more of what happened in 1983,” Drew Powers, the founder of Illinois-based Powers Financial Group, told Newsweek. “This Commission feels more like a stall tactic, pushing off unpopular changes, instead of taking a stand and actually making the changes. The only bright spot is we are discussing this with more time to spare than we had in 1981.”
What Happens Next
The bill is in the early stages of the legislative process.
Next steps include:
- Committee review in the House
- Potential revisions before a floor vote
- Consideration in the Senate if passed
Even if enacted, the commission would still need time to develop recommendations, meaning any major policy changes would likely come later.
“While it doesn't offer an immediate plan for replenishing the trust fund or securing future Social Security funding, it's a realistic approach to bringing both political sides together and laying the groundwork for future changes,” Alex Beene, a financial literacy instructor for the University of Tennessee at Martin, told Newsweek. “While it's still uncertain as to whether this particular bill will pass, the odds are high that Social Security's woes will more than likely go through the hands of a similar commission before a firm solution is reached.”
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines