House Republican Says People Wish To Retire Later, Challenging Social Security

Rep. Rick Allen, a Georgia Republican, stated last week that he would support increasing the Social Security retirement age. This legislative change would reduce benefits all across the board since constituents have shown a desire to work longer.

In response to an advocate’s question in the Capitol Building about how the GOP intends to slash Social Security, the lawmaker stated they have no plans.

Moments later, however, Allen contradicted himself by stating raising the retirement age will “address all of these problems” without elaborating on what he considers “problems.”

A Gradual Increase

Allen is a representative of the Republican Study Group, a House GOP body that produced policy goals last year advocating for the gradual increase of the full-retirement age from 67 to 70. It also backed the partial privatization of the New Deal program and means-testing of benefits.

According to Matt Bruenig of the People’s Policy Project, a left-leaning research group, increasing the Social Security retirement age is only a clear cut in benefits conveyed in a murky manner.

Bruenig noted in October that there is no one Social Security retirement age. There are 96 retirement ages, for every month between 62 and 70 years old.

He continued by stating “full retirement age” (FRA) is only a term in a formula that sets the level of benefits at each of the 96 retirement ages.

He argued that when someone recommends raising the retirement age to 68, they are actually suggesting reducing monthly Social Security payments by around seven percent for all 96 retirement ages.

A plan to increase the retirement age to 70 is a proposal to reduce monthly benefits by approximately 23 percent for all 96 retirement ages.

In recent months, House Republicans have consistently warned they will use every point of leverage available to them, including an imminent clash over the debt limit, to seek long-sought changes to Social Security.

This will happen under the pretense of “saving” the institution from a nonexistent financial catastrophe.


Last week, at a House Republican conference meeting, a PowerPoint presentation revealed the party planned to utilize its slim majority in the second chamber to push for “policy changes” to “mandatory expenditure programs.”

This is a category that encompasses Social Security and Medicare. Social Security Works, a leftist advocacy organization, tweeted on Sunday that Republicans want you to labor until you die.

In an opinion piece published by The Hill last week, Max Richtman, CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Medicare and Social Security, argued that America’s elderly could not afford benefit cuts, such as increasing the eligibility age range for future Medicare and Social Security enrollees.

Richtman stated the public does not want cuts to Social Security and Medicare. The exact reverse was true, as both programs enjoyed immense popularity.

A huge majority of people (83 percent) from all political parties agree that Social Security should be enhanced, not cut, with the wealthiest paying their fair amount of payroll taxes.

He said McCarthy still enabled a handful of ultra-MAGA legislators to determine House majority policy.

This article appeared in NewsHouse and has been published here with permission.