New Bill Cuts IRS Funding to Boost Social Security, Medicare

While the bill’s call to require a two-thirds vote in the Senate to cut Social Security and Medicare benefits “is a positive step,” Altman relayed, it’s “not a huge change since current law already requires 60% of the Senate for a vote” to cut Social Security or Medicare.

The National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare agreed that Scott’s bill “is an attempt at damage control after the backlash from his 2022 proposal to sunset federal programs after five years.”

Meanwhile, the Committee added, “we are not sure what this new bill would truly accomplish for seniors. Changes to Social Security already require a supermajority in the U.S. Senate. We wonder also whether the bill leaves open to interpretation exactly what constitutes a ‘benefit reduction.’”

Republicans, the committee stated, “continue to insist that their proposals would not ‘cut’ seniors’ earned benefits, but many of them patently would — including raising the retirement age, adopting a more miserly [cost-of-living adjustment] formula, means testing benefits, or gambling the Social Security trust fund on Wall Street” by privatizing Social Security.

Altman noted that Scott’s bill does not mention the House, “where 156 of his Republican colleagues have signed onto a budget that would make massive cuts to Social Security and Medicare, including raising the full retirement age to 70.”

Altman suggested Scott “update his bill to include a two-thirds threshold in the U.S. House,” or “simply sign onto” the Protect Social Security and Medicare Act, introduced in early February by Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis., which would require a two-thirds vote in both chambers of Congress.

Cutting the IRS’ budget, meanwhile, “would end up costing the government more money in lost revenue from wealthy tax cheats than it saves,” Altman opined.