{"id":49553,"date":"2026-08-05T12:04:19","date_gmt":"2026-08-05T19:04:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/?p=49553"},"modified":"2026-08-05T12:04:20","modified_gmt":"2026-08-05T19:04:20","slug":"sanders-warns-democrats-dont-support-bill-to-fast-track-social-security-cuts","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/2026\/08\/05\/sanders-warns-democrats-dont-support-bill-to-fast-track-social-security-cuts\/","title":{"rendered":"Sanders Warns Democrats: Don\u2019t Support Bill to Fast-Track Social Security Cuts"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"Senator<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) speaks at a press conference at the US Capitol in Washington, DC on May 20, 2026.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u00a0(Photo by Nathan Posner\/Anadolu via Getty Images)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIf the Democratic Party is ever to regain the faith of ordinary Americans it must stand firm on the issue of Social Security,\u201d said Sen. Bernie Sanders.<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Jake Johnson<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Aug 04, 2026 (CommonDreams.org)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

US Sen. Bernie Sanders<\/a> on Tuesday warned his Democratic colleagues against supporting bipartisan legislation<\/a> that would open the door to fast-tracked Social Security<\/a> cuts under the guise of rescuing the New Deal program from insolvency.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a Dear Colleague letter<\/a>, Sanders (I-Vt.) wrote that the best and most popular way to extend the life of Social Security and expand its modest benefits is to lift the payroll tax cap, which currently exempts annual income above $184,500<\/a> from taxation<\/a>. But the senator argued that the Protecting Retirement Opportunities and Maintaining Income Security for Everyone (PROMISE) Act\u2014introduced last month by a bipartisan group of senators\u2014\u201cmoves us in exactly the wrong direction.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

RECOMMENDED…<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Johnson<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Senate Dems Push GOP to Divulge Secret Plan to \u2018Attack Earned Benefits Like Social Security\u2019<\/a><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\"'They<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

\u2018They Want Change\u2019: Bernie Sanders Explains Appeal of Democratic Socialism to Fox Reporter<\/a><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe so-called PROMISE Act would direct four unelected members of the Social Security Advisory Board to produce, in little more than a month, a proposal to make Social Security solvent for the next 50 years\u2014with virtually no transparency, no meaningful public input, and no accountability,\u201d Sanders wrote. \u201cIf the Advisory Board reaches an agreement, Congress would be required to vote on their proposal during the lame-duck session after the November elections when Republicans<\/a> still control the Senate and the House.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIf the board cannot reach an agreement, the PROMISE Act would allow any member of Congress to force a vote on their own Social Security proposal under expedited procedures without the opportunity to amend it or seek a compromise\u2014also during the lame-duck session,\u201d Sanders continued. \u201cIn other words, Members of Congress who have been defeated at the polls or who have chosen to retire could determine the future of Social Security for the next half century.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The PROMISE Act\u2019s lead sponsors are Sens. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), Dick Durbin<\/a> (D-Ill.), Thom Tillis (R-NC), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Angus King (I-Maine.), and Alan Armstrong (R-Okla.). Five of the bill\u2019s seven sponsors either lost reelection or aren\u2019t running again in 2026.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIn other words, members of Congress who have been defeated at the polls or who have chosen to retire could determine the future of Social Security for the next half century,\u201d Sanders wrote in his letter. \u201cEven more significantly, a political party that was repudiated by the electorate in the\u00a0midterm elections<\/a>\u00a0could determine the fate of Social Security. That would be absurd, anti-democratic, and unacceptable.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

X post: https:\/\/x.com\/SenSanders\/status\/2084707215559078033?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2084707215559078033%7Ctwgr%5E0f7eeda647396cf09d99239724120c88e7196706%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.commondreams.org%2Fnews%2Fsanders-democrats-social-security<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sanders isn\u2019t alone in warning against the PROMISE Act. A week after the bill\u2019s introduction, the AARP\u2019s executive vice president expressed opposition in a letter<\/a> to Cassidy and Durbin, writing that \u201cwe strongly object to fast-tracking Social Security changes through Congress, as your bill would do.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Max Richtman, president and CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare<\/a>, echoed<\/a> Sanders\u2019 concern that the legislation\u2019s changes \u201cwould likely occur during a lame-duck session, after the election, when many members are on their way out.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThose members could be asked to vote on sweeping changes to Americans\u2019 earned benefits, when they\u2019ll no longer be accountable because they\u2019re leaving office. I think that\u2019s a real problem,\u201d said Richtman. \u201cAnd I think members of Congress should be 100% responsible for any changes to the Social Security program.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe will strengthen and expand Social Security by requiring the wealthiest Americans to finally pay the same percentage of their income into Social Security as tens of millions of working people.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In early June, Social Security\u2019s Board of Trustees said in its annual report that\u2014in the absence of congressional action\u2014the program will be unable to pay out full benefits by the end of 2032. At that point, the Social Security trust fund \u201cwill be sufficient to pay 78% of total scheduled benefits,\u201d the trustees said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sanders argued on Tuesday that the solution is straightforward: \u201cstrengthen and expand Social Security by requiring the wealthiest Americans to finally pay the same percentage of their income into Social Security as tens of millions of working people do today.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Last year, Republicans blocked<\/a> Sanders\u2019 attempt to pass via unanimous consent his legislation<\/a> to expand Social Security benefits by $2,400 a year per recipient. The expanded benefits would be funded by subjecting all annual income above $250,000 to Social Security payroll taxes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to<\/a> the senator\u2019s office, his legislation would ensure Social Security\u2019s solvency for the next 75 years. Data for Progress polling<\/a> shows Sanders\u2019 proposal is overwhelmingly popular, with 80% of US voters supporting the measure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIf the Democratic Party<\/a> is ever to regain the faith of ordinary Americans it must stand firm on the issue of Social Security,\u201d Sanders wrote on Tuesday. \u201cThat means: We will not cut Social Security benefits. We will not raise the retirement age. We will not reduce cost-of-living adjustments. We will not privatize Social Security.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe will not support procedural shortcuts that make it easier to reduce earned Social Security benefits behind closed doors while limiting public debate,\u201d Sanders continued. \u201cInstead, we will strengthen and expand Social Security by requiring the wealthiest Americans to finally pay the same percentage of their income into Social Security as tens of millions of working people do today.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Jake Johnson<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Jake Johnson is a senior editor and staff writer for Common Dreams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Full Bio ><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) speaks at a press conference at the US Capitol in Washington, DC on May 20, 2026. \u00a0(Photo by Nathan Posner\/Anadolu via Getty Images) \u201cIf the Democratic Party is ever to regain the faith of ordinary Americans it must stand firm on the issue of Social Security,\u201d… Continue reading → <\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2331],"tags":[88],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49553"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=49553"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49553\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":49554,"href":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49553\/revisions\/49554"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=49553"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=49553"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=49553"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}