Ron Johnson suggests Medicare, Social Security be approved on annual basis | The Hill
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
by Julia Mueller - 08/03/22 7:31 PM ET
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) said Wednesday that Social Security and Medicare should be up for congressional approval each year, instead of staying under their current status as federal entitlement programs.
"Social Security and Medicare, if you qualify for the entitlement, you just get it no matter what the cost," Johnson said in an interview that aired Tuesday on "The Regular Joe Show" podcast.
The Wisconsin senator, who is up for reelection in a highly contested race this fall that will help determine which party holds the majority next year, argued that the mandatory spending status of funding for the federal programs should be switched to discretionary spending "so it's all evaluated."
"Our problem in this country is that more than 70 percent of our federal budget, of our federal spending, is all mandatory spending. It's on automatic pilot. It never — you just don't do proper oversight. You don't get in there and fix the programs going bankrupt. It's just on automatic pilot," Johnson said.
"As long as things are on automatic pilot, we just continue to pile up debt," he added.
He argued that funding for the programs should instead come before Congress for annual approval.
A spokesperson for Johnson's office told The Hill in a statement Wednesday that the senator "never suggested putting Medicare and Social Security on the chopping block."
"The Senator's point was that without fiscal discipline and oversight typically found with discretionary spending, Congress has allowed the guaranteed benefits for programs like Social Security and Medicare to be threatened. This must be addressed by Congress taking its responsibilities seriously to ensure that seniors don't need to question whether the programs they depend on remain solvent," the spokesperson said.
Social Security benefits are available to U.S. retirees, and Medicare health insurance is available to citizens who are over the age of 65 or disabled. American workers' taxes fund the programs, with workers paying into the federal programs. In the case of Social Security, benefits are linked in part to one's earnings, which help determine a monthly payment.
Democrats quickly pounced on Johnson's remarks, suggesting the majority party thinks they could hurt Johnson in his reelection bid.
Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said that Johnson's comments showed that the programs could be cut by Republicans.
"They're saying the quiet part out loud. MAGA Republicans want to put Social Security and Medicare on the chopping block," Schumer wrote, referring to the Trump campaign slogan "Make America Great Again."
Johnson's spokesperson pushed back against the majority leader, saying in a statement that "Senator Schumer is lying about what Sen. Johnson said".
Tags
Who is online
407 visitors
Worst Idea Ever! This is why the gop is "deplorable".
Hey Dickhead Johnson! How about we approve (or not) your salary and health care on a regular basis?
"Social Security and Medicare, if you qualify for the entitlement, you just get it no matter what the cost," Johnson said in an interview that aired Tuesday on "The Regular Joe Show" podcast.
Notice what he is saying there? One day maybe we'll decide to make those who became millionaires ineligible. Maybe....to save Social Security.
He is not saying make millionaires ineligible. If he wants to make millionaires ineligible, he needs to state that, not state need for annual reviews. If up for congressional review each year it will become a political football, based on whims of Congress. Look at how 1 or 2 in Congress can hold up things in Congress.
Yeah, thanks for the clarification. What Vic said made no sense at all.
Not specifically, but making Social Security means tested would logically be part of an annual review.
Ideas to help save or extend Social Security and Medicare :
I bet you're already retired. Don't go pushing my retirement age up to 70. I want to retire at 65 or if possible 62.
Exactly, if we are running out of money because retirees are living longer and we have a smaller number working, we just have to raise the SS tax on the remaining workers.
When they raised the full retirement age from 65 to 67, they included a grandfather clause that kept people of a certain age to be eligible for full retirement at 65. The remainder they created a step ladder approach based on the year you were born as to when you would reach the full retirement age with the payout rates reduced if below the full retirement age. And they did not eliminate the early retirement age of 62.
But as the baby boomers are hitting the retirement age we have more people who are starting to draw on the SS system and you are correct they are living longer. Current projections have Social Security remaining solvent until 2037, after which they will have to reduce the benefit amounts for payouts. As retirees are living longer and we have a larger group of people coming into age for SS, we do need to make changes to the system on remaining workers in order to keep SS working. Too many people rely on that system for their retirement for it to just end when it runs out of money.
Not my problem. They should have to work as hard as I did. I'm going to enjoy the fruits of my retirement.
You sound like a conservative here. I hope you appreciate the irony of your position on this topic.
That's the worst insult anyone could every hurl at me. And nonsense.
It's not irony.
FUCK OFF.
I'm 68, still productive and working and paying SS and Medicare taxes.
Yeah, I really didn't think you could see the irony there.
Good for you. I'm only 64 but retired myself. I volunteer my time as I've had a good life and set myself up for a comfortable retirement and it's only fair that I give back to the community. But you keep on working and paying into SS and Medicare to fund me. All I can say is 'Thanks'.
You really didn't think
You should have stopped right there.
See the last sentence of post 2.2.5
I took you off ignore when you responded to me today as it seemed as if you actually wanted to have a conversation on what I posted. Unfortunately your response continues to show that all you have is snark. Have a nice fucking day.
No problem. I'm an Army civilian and surprisingly, enjoy my work at the Pentagon and the people that I work with. It's as much a hobby as it's a job.
You just have to have the last word. It's tiresome.
Is this your attempt to have the last word?
It really is a childish thing.
I don't pretend to work at a high level position with probably top secret clearance and brag about it online and pretend that I'm a totally selfless person.
It really is.
Don't worry Tessylo, no one thinks that you pretend to be a selfless person.
Don't rush out the door - 40% of your TSP has evaporated and it takes OPM 9mf months to finalize a claim, after ABC-C has scattered it.
... whilst I'm still hot - FEHB can go pound sand, too. Medicare is a bargain compared to them.
Thanks, 2 years ago I tried the L 2025 mix and it's down almost 6% for the year.
only way that will work , what he proposes , is to bring SS back to what it was when it was first initiated , a completely volentary system of contribution . those that want to will , those that dont , wont .
Asshats like him can kiss my royal irish ass , if they think i have contributed my entire working life , only to be told at the end , i will be "means tested " and not get a dime in return if i make too much or saved too much .
IF this is to be the case , i expect and demand every single penny paid in , to be returned with 3% interest compounded annually from the time i started paying in . That is what a simple savings account would have garnered if it were put away without being touched .
Should rich people receive these benefits? Or should there be income, wealth, or net worth restrictions?
Should the programs be allowed to go bankrupt? Should non-citizens receive these benefits?
I think that we should all pay into it, but once anyone makes over $250,000 per year should no longer receive benefits.
Should the programs be allowed to go bankrupt?
Social Security can't be allowed to go down. It needs fixing. Medicare needs a lot of fixing.
Should non-citizens receive these benefits?
Absolutely not. They can be a plus. The penalty for being here illegally should be that they pay into the program but may not receive benefits. It may sound harsh, but that the price to be paid for violating the law.
Could not agree more, too bad I can only give one vote up for this. Yes, there should not be an income cap on taxable income and if retired and your annual income exceeds a certain amount (and $250k annual income sure seems like a livable income) then you should not receive any social security payments. Those who make this sort of income really don't need the additional SS money and this would really impact very few in the country so there's not a large voting base being impacted.
I doubt we'll here any argument against means testing.
I hope not but never say never. Look how many arguments where made to repeal the SALT tax cap.
And how many decades have we been talking about having Medicare negotiate prescription drug prices with Big Pharma?
If you want to tax income then tax income. Stop trying to protect the rich at the expense of everyone else. Stop selling out America to play political games. We all know that means testing Social Security is a political ploy to avoid taxing income before eligibility. It's just another gimmick to protect rich parasites on the economy.
The problem of Social Security solvency only proves that there isn't enough income to live in the United States. We're shipping our prosperity offshore. We can't save anything for the future any longer. The entire country is living paycheck to paycheck.
Judas sold out Jesus for 30 pieces of silver. And Judas died anyway. So, what was the real value of that money?
No, Nerm. I still want them to pay into SS.
Yeah, you only want to deny SS benefit so they don't have to pay income taxes. We get it. FICA taxes on that first $100k is such a burden. The top 20 percent is still crying about that hardship.
If you want to tax income then tax income. Your argument is as 'woke' as any other liberal argument.
People seem completely unware that the financial sector is planning a tectonic shift in global economics. These Mitt Romney arguments are going to become obsolete in the not-too-distant future. The coinbase is coming.
YES. They've paid into the program so they are entitled to the benefit. That's the way it works in America.
Drive the money lenders out of the temple.
This was one of the seats Democrats think they already had a shot at. This could be the one thing that takes it over the top.
So you don't believe in common sense adjustments? That's what Johnson is suggesting.
The problem IMO with changing from an entitlement program to an annually approved program is that you rely on Congress to approve funding for it each year. If they don't pass a budget or a continuing resolution then checks don't get sent out and there are millions of retirees in the country that only have that SS check to live on. They have nothing to fall back on and cannot wait a month or so before Congress gets it's ass in gear to pass a budget or CR so that the money can again roll out. And what about those seniors on Medicare who are in the middle of critical health procedures such as cancer treatment that get paused when the money halts.
No, this is not a program that should be changed to annual approval for funding. I do agree that it's time to reset the rules on SS and Medicare but not this.
They are not common sense adjustments, they are retarded suggestions that would immediately become a complete fucking shit show and hurt a lot of people (including a significant number of republicans) for no reason other than people like Johnson are fuckin assholes.
I wonder what his thoughts would be if his salary and benefits were put up for an annual vote by the American people? Why do I feel like he thinks he deserves to ride the biggest gravy train in the country without the worry that it could be cut off on an given year?
Seriously, what other job do you get paid 6 figures, have the best benefits and retirement package imaginable, and you don’t have to actually do ANYTHING?
Yet another “idea” from the GOP that is complete shit and whose sole purpose is to inflict harm just for the hell of it.
I had to pay SS taxes starting on a summer job at 15, so now they owe me. I did not get a choice on paying in and government is now obligated to pay out to me.
Sure thing, ron,,,as long as your pay and benefits are voter approved every year.
Why do Republicans hate seniors? Most of them in office have been seniors for quite awhile. Their attitudes about seniors during Covid should have told people everything. They only want forced birth, indoctrinated evangelicals, right wing nuts and a base voter who never questions authority.
Republicans just can't help themselves, bless their hearts. MAGA needs bigger nukes to burn this deadwood out of the party. And the Democrats' Congressional Campaign Committee supports MAGA.
These DINO RINO dinosaurs don't have a future.
Politicians benefit immensely from defining/creating groups that need to lobby politicians for favor. Johnson wants to be greased annually for me to have a chance at recovering my money.