Larson, Schakowsky Lead 116 House Democrats Opposing Commissions Aimed at Cutting Social Security

Washington, D.C. - Today, Reps. John B. Larson (CT-01) and Jan Schakowsky (IL-09) led 116 House Democrats in a letter to House Leadership opposing the creation of a fast-track commission designed to slash Social Security. 

“Fiscal Commission legislation currently under consideration by the House Committee on Budget would create a process in which legislating would be done by a small group of individuals behind closed doors,” the members wrote. “The goal of these commissions would be to produce legislation that cuts benefits and calls for an up or down vote without hearings, and that is unamendable. This is not a simple debate over process.  

“There is no shortage of legislation that will improve the fiscal standing of the United States while directly benefiting the public. Democratic proposals include legislation that would extend Social Security’s solvency for another generation while expanding benefits the American people rely on – benefits that haven’t been expanded in more than 50 years. It is Congress’s responsibility to conduct the oversight and recommend enhancements to solvency or cuts, and it should be done in the open and not behind closed doors,” the members continued.

Full text of the letter is available here. 

“We cannot allow House Republicans to ram through their closed-door commission that is designed to fast-track cuts to the benefits hard-working Americans rely on, like Social Security. If they want to have debates about policy that directly impacts the lives and livelihoods of Americans families, we should have these discussions out in the open for our constituents to see and be a part of,” said Congressman John B. Larson. “I will continue to work with my Democratic colleagues to safeguard the earned benefits our nation’s families and seniors. Instead of imposing unpopular benefit cuts on the American people behind closed doors, we should work together to enhance benefits and prevent devastating cuts.” 

“Republicans are not serious about the deficit. They are not even serious about governing. They are serious about only one thing, and that is ripping away Social Security from seniors behind closed doors. A so-called fiscal commission would fast-track cuts to vital benefits Americans rely on. Social Security benefits are already modest – only about $21,384 a year, yet Republicans want to put these hard-earned benefits at risk. We must expand Social Security benefits, not cut them,” said Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky. “Over a decade ago, I served on the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, better known as the Simpson-Bowles Commission. That commission failed, but not before its co-chairs tried to make deep cuts to the American people’s hard-earned Social Security and Medicare benefits. We cannot allow Republicans to dig up an old playbook and create a new commission modeled after Simpson-Bowles. My fellow Democrats and I stand ready to address our deficit and preserve the future of Social Security so Americans relying on this crucial program can live with dignity and respect.”

Full text of the letter is available here and below. 

Dear Speaker Johnson and Leader Jeffries,   

 As you work to finalize Fiscal Year 24 appropriations legislation and other must pass bills, we urge you to exclude the creation of a so-called fiscal commission, especially with language that creates a “fast-track” process around regular order.   

Fiscal Commission legislation currently under consideration by the House Committee on Budget would create a process in which legislating would be done by a small group of individuals behind closed doors. The goal of these commissions would be to produce legislation that cuts benefits and calls for an up or down vote without hearings, and that is unamendable.  

This is not a simple debate over process. Without member input and public review, fiscal commissions have historically recommended cutting or privatizing Social Security:  

• The Greenspan Commission was the basis of the Social Security Amendments of 1983, which resulted in a raise in the retirement age that was the equivalent to a 13% benefit cut, a tax on benefits for middle income retirees, and the creation of the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and the Government Pension Offset (GPO) which reduces the benefits of 2 million public servants.   

• The President's Commission to Strengthen Social Security, established by President George W. Bush, issued a report outlining three models of partial privatization of Social Security. 

• Most recently, the Bowles-Simpson Commission recommended raising the retirement age, reducing the cost-of-living adjustment (COLA), and reducing benefit amounts for many earners. 

Given this track record, and the stated intention of the Republican Study Committee, a Commission would have fast-track authority to enact greater cuts to Social Security and other programs vital to the American people. This is no profile in courage, it’s a direct circumvention of the process to expedite cuts to Social Security.    

Let’s be clear, a Commission is not the solution. There is no shortage of legislation that will improve the fiscal standing of the United States while directly benefiting the public. Democratic proposals include legislation that would extend Social Security’s solvency for another generation while expanding benefits the American people rely on – benefits that haven’t been expanded in more than 50 years. It is Congress’s responsibility to conduct the oversight and recommend enhancements to solvency or cuts, and it should be done in the open and not behind closed doors.  

We do not need a Commission to tell us what we must do, we need the political courage to take up these or any other proposals in regular order. Committees and subcommittees must have the ability to hold hearings to examine policy and mark-ups so that improvements can be made on behalf of our constituents.   

We urge you to commit to regular order by opposing the creation of a fiscal commission in any must pass legislation.