Ron Johnson Aims to Put Social Security “On the Chopping Block” White House Says

On a podcast on Tuesday, U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisconsin) said that he believes Social Security and Medicare should be turned into discretionary spending programs – a move that would require Congress to pass a bill each year in order to fund them and likely lead to massive conservative-led cuts to the programs.

Both programs are currently funded automatically. Johnson said that he would like to see more oversight and that the best way is to have them both funded automatically. through required funding debates annually in Congress. “What we ought to be doing is we ought to turn everything into discretionary spending so it’s all evaluated so that we can fix problems or fix programs that are broken,” Johnson misleadingly said.

If his plan was to come true, which is unlikely it would likely lead to huge partisan budget battles each year, with a possibility of cuts in funding to the social spending programs — and thus potential cuts for beneficiaries.

These programs, however are not available in English. are not “broken” or facing a huge funding problem at the moment – from 1983 to 2021, for instance, Social Security raised a surplus every year. The program ran a deficit in its most recent year but was offset by funding reserves from prior years.

Even if programs face funding problems, holding annual debates about their existence could lead them to be cut and have devastating effects on recipients and the wider society. Both programs were created to provide a vital social safety net for seniors, people with disabilities, and other vulnerable groups. Social Security is a popular government program and, while it is not without its faults, it is still one of the most cherished. Upgrades are urgently neededHas it? allowed millions ofPeople can retire and avoid poverty. Medicare, meanwhile, has saved countless livesExperts say that cutting it is the best option. would be disastrous.

Many lawmakers believe that the programs need better funding mechanisms for the future – Social Security is projected to not be solvent any longer by the year 2034, for instance – but conservatives often bring up their funding mechanisms as a cover for cutting the programs.

Johnson’s office has deniedAlthough he suggested making cuts, Republicans have tried for years to use the possibility that these programs would become insolvent as a way to continue to be Republicans. implement drastic cuts to themEliminate them or replace them altogether in favor of a privatized version of themThis would be detrimental to those in need.

Experts believe that problems with Medicare and Social Security funding are a result of budget shortfalls. Economists have for yearsAccording to them, the best way to ensure that Medicare and Social Security are funded is to lift the tax caps on the wealthy.

Currently, only the first $147,000 of a person’s incomeSocial security tax is applicable to this income. That means a person earning more than that is paying a far smaller tax rate than people making under that threshold — a person earning $1 million in income per year pays less than 1 percent of their income to the program, for instance.

By “scrapping the cap” entirely, the program would not only be solvent, However, benefits could be increased.As Sen. Bernie Sanders (Irish-Vermont) stated in June, “Yes,” Johnson suggested that oversight could be done in other ways than what he suggested. If he suggests that the programs should not be cut, it is possible to have oversight done in other ways.

Critics lambasted Johnson’s calls for changing how Social Security and Medicare are funded.

Its official Twitter account is: the White House stated that “congressional Republicans like @SenRonJohnson want to put Medicare on the chopping block.”

“That would devastate families,” the White House added.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-New York) also spoke out against Johnson’s plan, stating that he and other Republicans are “saying the quiet part out loud”Many people have faith in their intentions for social spending programs.

Wisconsin Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes, the presumptive Democratic nominee set to challenge Johnson in this year’s senatorial race in the state, also took aim at the Republican.

“Wisconsinites pay into Social Security through a lifetime of hard work, and they’re counting on this program and Medicare — but Ron Johnson just doesn’t care,” Barnes said.

Johnson has made several controversial statements in the last year. Johnson has been a long-standing denier of the climate crisis. Johnson called it “bullshit”During a meeting with state Republicans earlier in the summer. Johnson also pretended that he was on a call in June in order to avoid questions from reporters regarding his congressional office’s involvement in trying to pass on lists of “fake” electors from Wisconsin and Michigan in 2020 to then-Vice President Mike Pence, ahead of the certification of the Electoral College.

Johnson, perhaps showing that his desire to significantly modify social spending programs does not seem unusual, suggested in March that Republicans Most likely, they would resume efforts to repeal the Affordable Care ActIf they win back Congress in this year’s election and the presidency in 2024 despite its popularity with most Americans,

Polling on Johnson’s and Barnes’s race this fall shows that it’s a tight race. They are statistically tied, according to the margins of error. a Marquette University Law School poll conducted last monthBarnes was just slightly ahead of Barnes by 2 points.

The net-negative favorability rating of Johnson among Wisconsinites is also very low. According to the same poll only 37% of his constituents give him favorable grades, while 46% say they view him unfavorably.

Help! Transformative journalism that is donor-funded is at risk.

For over two decades, Truthout has published uncompromised, truly independent journalism that puts social and environmental justice before profit — funded overwhelmingly by our readers.

It has been essential to our core values that we remain donor-funded. We’re not answerable to a high-powered media conglomerate or a billionaire owner. Our work is a reflection of the interests of our readers. We are a small team of dedicated nonprofit workers who want to see progressive journalism make a difference in society.

That being said, it’s not always easy being donor-funded. The majority of our donations are one-time gifts, making it difficult to plan for the future and putting us in a tough financial position more often than we’d like. We’ve set the aspirational goal of doubling our monthly donors, so we can rest a little easier each month and focus more on publishing the award-winning journalism you know us for.

We’re looking for 33 more people to start a monthly gift by the end of today. Please, if you’ve found value in our work, consider starting a monthly, tax-deductible donation. Every dollar counts.

Donate Now