Fixing Social Security the old-fashioned way — with buy-in from both parties | Opinion

The politicization of the future of Social Security is not new. Republicans and Democrats have used it as a wedge to convince voters that their political party will protect it. They both have lied.

In his State of the Union speech this year, President Joe Biden charged Republicans with wanting to sunset Social Security, to scare voters into thinking that Republican legislators are the devil incarnate.

Of course, the president failed to mention that the White House has been unable or unwilling to respond to Social Security’s long-term financial crisis. The president’s staff chose rhetoric versus action.

With a presidential election around the corner, inflaming the Democratic base and scaring current and future retirees is politics as usual.

The White House staff has failed to take a page from the late Sen. John Heinz’s strategy for success, where bipartisanship is the only key to solving the current and future crises facing Social Security. In 1983, President Ronald Reagan and Democratic House Speaker Tip O’Neill — working together — protected Social Security from insolvency.

Heinz, a Republican from Pennsylvania, was masterful in reaching across the political aisle. In 1990, he teamed up with two Democratic senators — Pat Moynihan of New York and Fritz Hollings of South Carolina — to build a bridge to ensure the financial future of Social Security.

Some argue that it was a different time than today. And it was. The difference was that Heinz, who personified courage and conviction, fought against partisanship to calm the nation’s fears, not inflame them.

President Biden should propose to solve the congressional and White House malaise by creating a bipartisan Social Security Commission charged with bringing forth a plan to solidify the financial future of Social Security. The plan would have a vote in December 2023 before the 2024 presidential election.

The Social Security Commission should be challenged to deliver a solution that Congress will accept or reject. The model for this work is the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission, created in 1988 to determine the best and most effective way to coordinate the realignment and closure of military installations.

A BRAC-style Social Security Commission would eliminate the partisanship challenges from both sides of the aisle and be focused on solutions.

Commissions tasked with creating solutions are familiar to Congress.

In 1981, the National Commission on Social Security Reform had members appointed by Congress and the president. The commission’s report later became the foundation for the 1983 Social Security amendments.

Congress is so polarized today. More needs to be accomplished. Tackling the Social Security crisis of 2023 would only add to the list. However, a BRAC-style Social Security Commission would provide Congress with a bipartisan roadmap.

The president would appoint the commission chair. The Senate majority leader, the speaker of the House, and the minority leaders in both the House and Senate would each appoint two commission members.

The commission’s report would be due to Congress on Dec. 1, 2023, with required up or down vote on the recommendations no later than Dec. 31. If Congress failed to vote, the commission’s recommendations would take effect in 2024.

In 1987, President Reagan said that John Heinz “helped rescue that system (Social Security) from bankruptcy.”

Is there another Republican or Democrat today willing to cross the aisle and build a bipartisan solution to ensure the long-term solvency of Social Security?