Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
Thu Feb 20, 2014, 06:18 PM Feb 2014

Carter was the last Democratic President to lower Social Security benefits.

<...>

The Solution: Wage Indexing

By 1976, the need for substantial revisions in the Social Security program and its financing was overwhelmingly clear.(19) In June, the Ford Administration submitted to Congress a proposal to create a new method for determining initial benefits(20) based on an approach called "wage indexing," a method which adjusts a worker's wages to reflect economy-wide changes in wages over his or her lifetime.'' Hearings were held on this proposal, but Congress adjourned for the upcoming Presidential elections before completing a full review.

The new administration of President Carter sent its proposals to Congress in May 1977. Its package included the same "wage indexing" solution proposed by the Ford Administration as well as many new tax and financing proposals.

Despite the two Administrations' support for wage indexing, Congress examined numerous alternative proposals!! in a lengthy series of hearings. Ultimately, both the House and the Senate adopted legislation replacing the flawed 1972 method with a wage indexing method, and President Carter signed these new Social Security amendments into law on December 20, 1977.


These new amendments preserved the way that benefits were adjusted for inflation for those already on the rollsCin other words, existing beneficiaries continued to receive annual increases (COLAs) based on the percentage increase in the CPI. The way initial benefits were calculated. however, was completely revised.

Under the old law, a person's initial benefit was determined by averaging the actual wages he or she earned (in "covered" jobs) over a period roughly equivalent to a working lifetime. A benefit table was then used to determine the basic amount payable.

But since earnings levels in the economy tend to increase each year, initial benefits tended to creep up as the worker's average earnings rose. In addition, these benefits were also "price-indexed" -adjusted for inflation - since the figures in the table rose by the percentage increase in the CPI.

Fixed Formula Introduces Wage Indexing

Thus the old law generated, under some economic conditions, inflated initial benefits by linking, or "coupling," the effect of both wage and price increases. The 1977 legislation "de-coupled&quot 23) those two elements, substituting a fixed formula for determining initial benefits: (24)

  1. 90 percent of the lowest range of average indexed monthly earnings, plus
  2. 32 percent of the mid range of such earnings, plus
  3. 15 percent of the highest range of such earnings (up to a maximum based on amount of earnings on which taxes are paid).
Like the old approach, this new approach used average earnings over a "working lifetime." But those earnings would now be adjusted ("indexed&quot to reflect the growth of wages in the economy Cin other words, past wages would be translated into their equivalent in current wage levels.(25)

By adopting this new method, Congress purposely lowered initial benefits to offset the unintended increases that would have occurred as a result of the flawed 1972 method. However, it protected anyone who reached eligibility age prior to 1979Cthat is, anyone born before January 2, 1917 Cby "grandfathering" them under the old law. This protected people already on the benefit rolls as well as those who could have retired in 1978 or earlier but continued working. For those who continued working, the initial benefit calculations resulting from this grandfathering proved especially generous.

Thus a worker retiring under the new law would generally receive lower benefits than a worker I retiring under the old law, which was the intent of Congress. To minimize the abruptness of this change, however, Congress created a special five-year "transitional method" for people who would become eligible for benefits beginning in 1979.(26) In other words, those born between 1917-21 would I be the first to have their benefits calculated under the new law. This "transitional method" was designed to ease their transition to the new, lower level of benefits.

The transitional method was identical to the old method except (1) earnings after age 61 could not be used in figuring benefits, and (2) after 1978, no inflation adjustments would be made until age 62.(27) Individuals eligible for the transitional method would have their benefits computed under the new law method if it produced higher benefits.

The transitional method did not alterCnor was it intended to alterCthe fact that people born after January 1, 1917 would receive, with few exceptions, lower benefits than those born prior to that year. That was the purpose of the 1977 law.

http://www.ssa.gov/history/notchfile1.html


Reagan's legacy was a tax on Social Security Benefits, which Clinton expanded.

<...>

Q3. Which political party started taxing Social Security annuities?

A3. The taxation of Social Security began in 1984 following passage of a set of Amendments in 1983, which were signed into law by President Reagan in April 1983. These amendments passed the Congress in 1983 on an overwhelmingly bi-partisan vote.

The basic rule put in place was that up to 50% of Social Security benefits could be added to taxable income, if the taxpayer's total income exceeded certain thresholds.

The taxation of benefits was a proposal which came from the Greenspan Commission appointed by President Reagan and chaired by Alan Greenspan (who went on to later become the Chairman of the Federal Reserve).

The full text of the Greenspan Commission report is available on our website.

President's Reagan's signing statement for the 1983 Amendments can also be found on our website.

A detailed explanation of the provisions of the 1983 law is also available on the website.

Q4. Which political party increased the taxes on Social Security annuities?

A4. In 1993, legislation was enacted which had the effect of increasing the tax put in place under the 1983 law. It raised from 50% to 85% the portion of Social Security benefits subject to taxation; but the increased percentage only applied to "higher income" beneficiaries. Beneficiaries of modest incomes might still be subject to the 50% rate, or to no taxation at all, depending on their overall taxable income.

This change in the tax rate was one provision in a massive Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) passed that year. The OBRA 1993 legislation was deadlocked in the Senate on a tie vote of 50-50 and Vice President Al Gore cast the deciding vote in favor of passage. President Clinton signed the bill into law on August 10, 1993.

(You can find a brief historical summary of the development of taxation of Social Security benefits on the Social Security website.)

http://www.ssa.gov/history/InternetMyths2.html

Breaking: Obama To Drop Social Security Cuts In His Budget
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024534935

Sanders Welcomes White House Decision to Protect Social Security
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024535612




14 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
2. No,
Thu Feb 20, 2014, 06:30 PM
Feb 2014

"Are you saying it's ok cause someone else did it? nt"

...I'm saying stop pretending that a proposal that wasn't implemented is a first. Clearly, there are a lot of people not up on their history.

denverbill

(11,489 posts)
3. Reagan also raised Social Security taxes to keep it solvent.
Thu Feb 20, 2014, 06:36 PM
Feb 2014

God forbid any of those communist, left-wingers we have in office actually suggest that.

Eliminate the cap on wages and it's solvent for the foreseeable future.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
5. That was
Thu Feb 20, 2014, 07:06 PM
Feb 2014

"Reagan also raised Social Security taxes to keep it solvent."

...a proposal passed before Reagan, who actually raided the SS trust fund.

The effect of Reagan's tax cuts were at least partially offset by phased in Social Security payroll tax increases that had been enacted by President Jimmy Carter and the 95th Congress in 1977.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaganomics#Tax_receipts

denverbill

(11,489 posts)
6. I don't particularly like my source for this, but ..
Thu Feb 20, 2014, 07:16 PM
Feb 2014

The 1977 amendments to the Social Security Act advanced the scheduled increases in the Social Security tax rate. For 1979-80, the rate increased to 10.16 percent, for 1981, the rate increased to 10.7 percent, and for 1982-1984, the rate increased to 10.8, or at least it was supposed to. The 1983 amendments to the Social Security Act – signed into law by Reagan in April of 1983 – increased the rate for 1984 to 11.4 percent, and kept it there until 1987. For 1988-89, the rate increased to 12.12 percent. The 1983 amendments – which Reagan signed – also mandated that the rate increase to 12.4 percent beginning in 1990. So Reagan was responsible for raising the rate from 10.8 percent to 12.4 percent – a 14.81 percent increase.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/01/laurence-m-vance/ronald-reagan-and-social-security-taxes/


So of the increases were planned, but Reagan accelerated them AND increased the percentages.

 

El_Johns

(1,805 posts)
14. Of course it is.
Fri Feb 21, 2014, 02:21 PM
Feb 2014

The 1983 amendments to the Social Security Act – signed into law by Reagan in April of 1983 – increased the rate for 1984 to 11.4 percent, and kept it there until 1987. For 1988-89, the rate increased to 12.12 percent. The 1983 amendments – which Reagan signed – also mandated that the rate increase to 12.4 percent beginning in 1990.

okaawhatever

(9,461 posts)
4. That wasn't a cut, it was a fix. What's your point? Are you aware of the pace of ss benefits vs.
Thu Feb 20, 2014, 06:50 PM
Feb 2014

inflation?
From 1940 to 1974, Congress increased Social Security benefits 391% while inflation was 252%, according to a recent study by Larry DeWitt, the Social Security Administration's historian. Additionally when this law was passed it was done so after agreeing to another 20% increase in benefits. (Fortune Magazine)

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
8. A "fix" is a cut.
Fri Feb 21, 2014, 01:35 AM
Feb 2014

Everything objectionable, from linking Social Security to the general fund, was part of that proposal.

President Jimmy Carter

<...>

While campaigning for President, I stressed my commitment to restore the financial integrity of the Social Security system. I pledged I would do my best to avoid increases above those already scheduled in tax rates, which fall most heavily on moderate and lower-income workers. I also promised to correct the technical flaw in the system which exaggerates the adjustment for inflation, and to do so without reducing the relative value of retirement benefits as compared with pre-retirement earnings.

I am announcing today a set of proposals which meet those commitments and which solve both the short-term and long-term problems in the Social Security system through the end of the twentieth century. These proposals are designed to:

--Prevent the default of the trust funds now predicted to occur.

--Bring income and expenses into balance in 1978 and keep them that way through the end of the century.

--Create sufficient reserves to protect the system against sudden declines in revenue caused by unemployment or other economic uncertainties.

--Protect the system's integrity beyond the turn of the century to the extent we can predict what will happen in the next 75 years.

--Provide for an orderly review and examination of the system's basic structure.

My proposals are the result of a number of hard choices. I am convinced that action is needed now, and that these steps will restore the financial integrity of the Social Security system.

I will ask the Congress to take the following specific actions:

1. Compensate the Social Security trust funds from general revenues for a share of revenues lost during severe recessions. General revenues would be used in a counter-cyclical fashion to replace the payroll tax receipts lost as a result of that portion of unemployment in excess of six percent. General revenues would be used only in these carefully limited situations. Because this is an innovative measure, the legislation we submit will provide this feature only through 1982. The next Social Security Advisory Council will be asked to review this counter-cyclical mechanism to determine whether it should be made permanent.

2. Remove the wage-base ceiling for employers. Under present law employers and employees pay a tax only on the first $16,500 in wages. Under this proposal the employer ceiling would be raised over a three-year period, so that by 1981 the ceiling would be removed. This action will provide a significant source of revenue without increasing long-term benefit liabilities.

3. Increase the wage base subject to the employee tax by $600 in 1979, 1981, 1983, and 1985, beyond the automatic increases in current law. This will provide a progressive source of financing.

4. Shift revenues from the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund to the Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Trust Funds. In part, this shift will be made possible because of substantial savings to the Medicare system from the hospital cost containment legislation that I have proposed.

5. Increase the tax rate on the self-employed from 7 percent to 7.5 percent. This will restore the historical relationship between the OASI and the DI rates paid by the self-employed to one and one-half times that paid by employees.

6. Correct certain technical provisions of the Social Security Act which differentiate on the basis of sex. This will include a new eligibility test for dependent benefits. Recent Supreme Court decisions would result in un-financed increases in the cost of the system and some inequities without this change.

These six steps, along with measures already contained in existing law, will eliminate the short-term financing problem and improve the overall equity of the Social Security system.

In order to guarantee the financial integrity of the system into the next century, two additional steps must be taken. I will be asking the Congress to:

1. Modify the Social Security benefit formula to eliminate the inflation over-adjustment now in law. This modification, known as "decoupling," should be done in a way that maintains the current ratio of retirement benefits to pre-retirement wages.

2. Adjust the timing of a tax rate increase already contained in current law. The one percent tax rate increase presently scheduled for the year 2011 would be moved forward so that .25 percent would occur in 1985 and the remainder in 1990.

Taken together, the actions I am recommending today will eliminate the Social Security deficit for the remainder of this century. They mill reduce the estimated 75-year deficit from the Trustee Report forecast of 8.2 percent of payroll to a manageable 1.9 percent.

Prompt enactment of the measure I have recommended will provide the Social Security system with financial stability. This is an overriding immediate objective.

In addition, I am instructing the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare to appoint the independent Social Security Advisory Council required by law to meet each four years. I will ask the Council to conduct a thorough reexamination of the structure of the system, the adequacy of its benefits, the effectiveness and equity of disability definitions, and the efficiency and responsiveness of its administration. Their report, which will be issued within the next two years, will provide the basis for further improvements.

I call upon the Congress to act favorably on these major reform initiatives.

Jimmy Carter

The White House,

May 9, 1977.

http://www.ssa.gov/history/carterstmts.html#system


 

El_Johns

(1,805 posts)
9. Not really. Reagan cut some benefits (for example the education benefit for dependent children) &
Fri Feb 21, 2014, 01:37 AM
Feb 2014

also began taxation of benefits, as well as increasing the age to receive full benefits.

Clinton increased the percent of benefits subject to taxation.

All those things were benefit cuts.

Douglas Carpenter

(20,226 posts)
13. That is true. Although President Carter pursued a more enlightened foreign policy - on
Fri Feb 21, 2014, 01:56 AM
Feb 2014

economics he was the first step away from Keynesian/New Deal economics toward Neoliberal economics. It was the beginning of the end of the New Deal/Great Society tradition for the Democratic Party, the country as a whole and perhaps to some extent the whole world. Although Fritz Mondale was originally a New Dealer - by 1984 he had pretty much abandoned that tradition - like Carter supporting instead a more moderate form of Neoliberalism than Reagan. No candidate running on a Keynesian/New Deal agenda has even come close to winning a major party nomination since then.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Carter was the last Democ...