CATO Analyzes Political Calculation Behind “Social Security Fairness” Passage - CATO Institute
It’s been nearly two weeks since the Social Security Fairness Act was officially signed into law. In that time, and still today, the victory laps among those who sponsored or advocated for passage of the Act continue, as does the outcry from the many voices piqued by the decision. Cato Institute’s Romina Boccia is one of those voices. Her post on cato.org, which you can read in full here, offers insights into not only the political machinations that led to the repeal of the two troublesome Social Security provisions–the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and the Government Pension Offset (GPO)–but also to what the Congressional tendency “to take the path of least resistance” could presage for future resolution of Social Security’s long–term financing problems.
So much of the background confusion on the “fairness” issue is a consequence–an outgrowth, really–of Social Security’s embedded complexity. As Ms. Boccia notes, “It didn’t help that the windfall elimination and government pension offset provisions were complex policy adjustments applied to an even more complex Social Security benefit formula that few people understand in great depth.” As a result of this complexity and the confusion it causes, it’s easy to understand how public pressure and targeted advocacy could sway the vote.
Central to Ms. Boccia’s post is the future of Social Security reform, something that will happen one way or another in just a few short years. The Social Security Fairness Act passage is a clear example of the problem Congress is facing with the larger issue of insolvency. She references the concept of a “general revenue transfer” to shift the burden and offers conjecture on how such a move would negate real, comprehensive reform. Interestingly, as she points out, it took 24 years to get the WEP/GPO repeal movement to the finish line…anyone who is paying attention knows that we do not have that kind of time for meaningful reform. As a closing, she rightfully calls for for “… taxpayers and advocates of limited government and sustainable Social Security reform to get organized now and counter the ingrained tendency to keep benefits flowing while kicking the financing can.”
This, of course, will take a herculean educational effort across all involved to understand what works and what doesn’t work with respect to Social Security policy.