¶ Overview
- Mast claimed on his congressional website that one of his top priorities in Congress was protecting Social Security, but the truth is Mast wanted to raise the retirement age for seniors to collect Social Security. He advocated for gradually increasing the age at which people can collect Social Security. Mast was also a member of the Republican Study Committee, which advocated for raising the retirement age.
- Mast was a big fan of Trump’s “Department of Government Efficiency,” declaring DOGE had his “100% Support.” That support was unyielding even as DOGE weakened Americans’ ability to access the Social Security Administration with mass layoffs, longer wait times, and website crashes. More than 224,000 Floridians in the 21st congressional district relied on Social Security benefits.
- Despite claiming he would always protect Medicare for seniors, Mast voted for the House Republicans’ reconciliation bill, which would trigger nearly $500 billion in Medicare cuts, absent future congressional action. Mast was also a member of the Republican Study Committee, which outlined a plan to turn Medicare into a voucher system.
¶ Mast Wanted To Raise The Social Security Retirement Age And Has Floated Privatizing It In The Past
¶ mast Said one of his top priorities was protecting social security
Mast Claimed He Had Always Fought To Protect Medicare And Social Security, And Claimed The Big Beautiful Bill Continued That Promise. According to a blog post from Rep. Brian Mast, "On July 4, 2025, President Trump signed a truly historic piece of legislation into law: the One Big Beautiful Bill will support our kids, seniors, veterans, and small businesses. It’s truly a win for all Americans. Let’s break some of it down here: From setting kids up for financial success at birth, increasing the Adoption Tax Credit, and prioritizing school choice—I’m proud to have supported legislation that takes care of our kids and families. This legislation puts more money in seniors’ pockets by delivering deductions up to $12,000 on top of the standard deduction for married couples. I’ve always fought to protect Medicare and social security, and this bill keeps that promise." [Blog – Rep. Brian Mast, 8/15/25]
Mast: “One Of My Top Priorities In Congress Is Protecting Medicare And Social Security For Today’s Seniors And For Future Generations.” According to Rep. Brian Mast’s website, "One of my top priorities in Congress is protecting Medicare and Social Security for today’s seniors and for future generations. When the federal government created these programs, it made a commitment to America’s seniors, and it’s a commitment that must be upheld. I will always fight to protect and strengthen these programs." [Rep. Brian Mast Official Website, Issues, Viewed 2/19/26]
¶ Mast has Advocated For Raising The Retirement Age
2016: Mast Said He Believed Raising The Retirement Age Was Something That Should Be Done To Keep Social Security Solvent. According to an interview with Brian Mast on WPTV News, "HOST: How do you keep Social Security solvent? And does raising the retirement age, continuing to raise it, have to be part of that solution? What do you do? MAST: Let me just say, number one, I don’t care who is spending money we don’t have, what side of the aisle it is, I don’t approve of it. Beyond that, I think raising the age for people receiving some of these, Medicare, Social Security, the age for people like myself should be increased down the road. When we have a longer life expectancy." [WPTV News, 9/4/16] (video)
2016: Mast Argued For Gradually Increasing The Age At Which People Can Receive Retirement Benefits In Order To Protect The Solvency Of Social Security. According to Brian Mast during the 18th District Congressional Debate, "MAST: I’ve been at the forefront of saying, one of the things my opponent disagrees with, it’s that the system stays in place exactly as it is for those that receiving benefits right now those that are anywhere close to receiving benefits right now. But for somebody my age, I’m 36 years old, and not to give away my wife’s age, she’s 37 years old, that we graduate the age for people our age to start receiving some of these benefits so that it can continue to last." [18th District Congressional Debate, 10/18/16] (video)
¶ mast said it would be “good policy” to allow retirement funds to be made into accounts similar to thrift savings accounts
Mast On Social Security And Medicare: “In Planning For The Future, Good Policy Would Also Entail Graduating The Retirement Age For People Like Myself And Also Allow Retirement Funds To Be Made Into Accounts Similar To Thrift Savings Accounts." According to TCPalm.com via archive.org, "Q3. Over the next 25 years, the number of Americans ages 65 and older is expected to grow from 12 percent to 20 percent of the population. The ratio of workers paying into Social Security and Medicare relative to the number of beneficiaries will decline by about one-third, according to various estimates. How and when do you plan to address this potential financial doomsday? MAST: This is a problem that will be solved through good economic policy. The reality is that every percentage point of GDP growth is worth hundreds of billions of dollars to our economy. President Obama will be the first President to not break 3%GDP growth. It is estimated that good tax reform could increase GDP by as much as 15%. We avoid financial disaster by growing our economy. We grow our economy by getting the federal government out of the way. We increase jobs to every community and get workers higher wages by having less revenue taken by Washington. In short, we save Medicare and SS by growing our economy. In planning for the future, good policy would also entail graduating the retirement age for people like myself and also allow retirement funds to be made into accounts similar to Thrift Savings Accounts." [TCPalm.com, Ask the Candidates, Viewed 4/2/17 via archive.org]
¶ Mast Was A Member Of The Republican Study Committee, Which Advocated For raising the social security retirement age
2025: Mast Was Listed As A Member Of The Republican Study Committee.
[Republican Study Committee Website via Wayback Machine, “Membership,” 1/24/25]
¶ The Republican Study Committee Has Long Advocated For Raising The Retirement Age
The Republican Study Committee Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Proposal Included “Modest Adjustments To The Retirement Age For Future Retirees To Account For Increases In Life Expectancy.” According to the Republican Study Committee Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Proposal, “For instance, the RSC Budget would make modest changes to the primary insurance amount (PIA) benefit formula for individuals who are not near retirement and earn more than the wealthiest PIA benefit factor. It would also make modest adjustments to the retirement age for future retirees to account for increases in life expectancy. Finally, for these individuals, it would limit and phase out auxiliary benefits for high income earners.” [Republican Study Committee FY 2025 Budget Proposal, 3/20/24]
The Republican Study Committee Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Plan Included Raising The Age Of Eligibility For Social Security Benefits To 69. According to Roll Call, “The largest bloc of House conservatives offered up a fiscal blueprint Wednesday that promises to balance the federal budget in seven years, make GOP tax cuts permanent, and slash domestic spending. The plan offered by the 175-member Republican Study Committee would gradually raise the age at which future retirees can start claiming full Social Security benefits from 67 to 69, a politically fraught proposal that’s all but certain to appear in Democratic campaign ads. The document also proposes a ‘premium support’ plan that would subsidize private insurance options that compete with traditional Medicare. That would be similar to budget plans proposed by Rep. Paul D. Ryan, R-Wis., during his tenure in Congress that were panned by Democrats and some Republicans, including former President Donald Trump.” [Roll Call, 6/14/23]
The Republican Study Committee Fiscal Year 2023 Budget Proposal Called For The “Gradual Increase Of The Normal Retirement Age.” According to the Republican Study Committee FY 2023 Budget, “This trend, which will continue to increase financial pressure on Social Security, is a result of the aging U.S. population. To partially address this issue, the full retirement was raised to 67 in 2022 for those born in 1960 and later. The Social Security Reform Act would simply continue the gradual increase of the normal retirement age that current law has set in motion at a rate of three months per year until it is increased by three years for those reaching age 62 in 2040, 18 years from now.” [Republican Study Committee Fiscal Year 2023 Budget via Wayback Machine, 8/5/22]
The Republican Study Committee Fiscal Year 2022 Budget Proposal Called To “Reform The Full Retirement Age To Track Life Expectancy.” According to a press release from the Republican Study Committee, “The RSC Budget puts Social Security on a permanent path to solvency without adjusting benefits for any Americans in or near retirement. It would: Increase the minimum benefit up to 40% of average wages for those that worked 40 years or more. • Reform the full retirement age to track life expectancy.” [Press Release – Republican Study Committee, Viewed 11/25/25]
The Republican Study Committee Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Proposal Included Phasing In “An Increase In Eligibility Age To 70” For Social Security. According to the Republican Study Committee FY 2020 Executive Summary, “MAKING SOCIAL SECURITY SOLVENT - without reform, will be depleted by 2035, cutting benefits by 25 percent • implements the Social Security Reform Act to achieve long-term sustainable solvency • phases in an increase of the eligibility age to 70 and indexes life expectancy to keep up with increases in longevity ” [Republican Study Committee, “RSC Budget FY 2020: Preserving American Freedom,” Viewed 11/25/25]
¶ The Center For American Progress Estimated That Raising The Retirement Age Would Cost Future Retirees Thousands Of Dollars In Benefits Every Year
The Center For American Progress Said Raising The Retirement Age Would Cost The Median-Wage Retiree Thousands Of Dollars In Benefits Every Year. According to the Center for American Progress, “One policy that has continually been included in RSC budget proposals for years is an increase to Social Security’s full retirement age (FRA), the age at which seniors become eligible to access Social Security retirement benefits without a financial penalty for retiring early. The FRA is 67 under current law, but the RSC plan would push it back to 69, leading to drastic benefit cuts for a large majority of Americans. […] This higher FRA would cut Social Security benefits. According to Center for American Progress analysis, an FRA of 69 would cut benefits for all new retirees between roughly 12.5 percent and 14.3 percent by the time it is fully phased in. In addition, it would cost a median-wage retiree who earned $70,000 in 2022 and turns 62 in 2034 thousands of dollars every year.” [Center for American Progress, 7/31/24]
- After Receiving Social Security For 10 Years, The Median-Wage Retiree Would Lose Up To Nearly $100,000 In Retirement Benefits If The Retirement Age Was Raised. According to the Center for American Progress, “However, the dollar amount of the cut would not be static each year. To account for inflation, Social Security benefits are updated with cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs), which the Social Security Administration expects to equal 2.4 percent each year after 2025, according to its intermediate cost projections. After accounting for these COLAs, the median-wage retiree would lose between $46,104 and $99,252 after 10 years of receiving Social Security.” [Center for American Progress, 7/31/24]
¶ mast gave his unyielding support to doge while it weakened the social security administration
Mast In April 2025: “You Can Count On My 100% Support For DOGE To Continue Today, Tomorrow, Next Week, Next Month, All Throughout The Year.” According to WPTV, "Mast reiterated his support for DOGE and showed a list of what he calls ‘wasteful spending’ that he believes needs to be cut. ‘You can count on my 100% support for DOGE to continue today, tomorrow, next week, next month, all throughout the year,’ Mast said amid mixed reactions from the crowd. ‘DOGE is doing absolutely incredible work rooting out waste and abuse in government.’" [WPTV (NBC), 4/15/25]
4/21/25: Mast Said He Thought DOGE Was Doing “A Fantastic Job” During A Town Hall With Constituents. According to Stet News, "Mast drew the loudest boos when he said that DOGE was only an accounting department, and ‘does not make decisions.’ Mast’s support of DOGE leader Elon Musk was unwavering. ‘I think he’s doing a fantastic job.’ He cited the elimination of programs that boosted tourism in Tunisia, paid for drag shows in Ecuador and provided condoms for the Taliban. ‘These will never again see the light of day,’ Mast said." [Stet News, 4/21/25]
Mast: “DOGE Has Been Beyond Successful.” According to a press release from Rep. Brian Mast, “DOGE has been beyond successful. Every American should be thanking President Trump. They should be thanking Elon Musk… We will all be more efficient. We will waste less dollars. There will be less inflation. This is the goal of all of this…” [Press Release – Rep. Brian Mast, 2/25/25]
¶ 2025: At The Social Security Administration, DOGE Had Forced Mass Layoffs, Longer Wait Times And Frequent Website Crashes
HEADLINE: “Social Security Stops Reporting Call Wait Times And Other Metrics” [Washington Post, 6/20/25]
HEADLINE: “As Social Security Services Are Cut Back, Millions Of Seniors Face Long Drives” [Axios, 4/8/25]
HEADLINE: “Social Security Website Keeps Crashing, As DOGE Demands Cuts To IT Staff” [Washington Post, 4/7/25]
HEADLINE: “Social Security Faces Thousands More Job Cuts Even With Service In Tailspin” [Washington Post, 4/4/25]
The Social Security Administration Website Crashed Four Times In Ten Days In March Because Servers Were Overloaded. According to the Washington Post, “The Social Security Administration website crashed four times in 10 days this month because the servers were overloaded, blocking millions of retirees and disabled Americans from logging in to their online accounts. In the field, office managers have resorted to answering phones in place of receptionists because so many employees have been pushed out. Amid all this, the agency no longer has a system to monitor customer experience because that office was eliminated as part of the cost-cutting efforts led by Elon Musk. And the phones keep ringing. And ringing.” [Washington Post, 3/25/25]
Field Office Managers At Social Security Offices Had To Answer Phones In Place Of Receptionists Because DOGE Had Pushed Out So Many Federal Employees. According to the Washington Post, “The Social Security Administration website crashed four times in 10 days this month because the servers were overloaded, blocking millions of retirees and disabled Americans from logging in to their online accounts. In the field, office managers have resorted to answering phones in place of receptionists because so many employees have been pushed out. Amid all this, the agency no longer has a system to monitor customer experience because that office was eliminated as part of the cost-cutting efforts led by Elon Musk. And the phones keep ringing. And ringing.” [Washington Post, 3/25/25]
DOGE Eliminated The Social Security Administration’s System To Monitor Customer Experience. According to the Washington Post, “The Social Security Administration website crashed four times in 10 days this month because the servers were overloaded, blocking millions of retirees and disabled Americans from logging in to their online accounts. In the field, office managers have resorted to answering phones in place of receptionists because so many employees have been pushed out. Amid all this, the agency no longer has a system to monitor customer experience because that office was eliminated as part of the cost-cutting efforts led by Elon Musk. And the phones keep ringing. And ringing.” [Washington Post, 3/25/25]
Early February-Late March 2025: AARP Said More Than 2,000 People Per Week Had Called Expressing Concerns About Whether They Would Continue To Get Their Social Security Benefits. According to the Washington Post, “Alarmed lawmakers are straining to answer questions back home from angry constituents. Calls have flooded into congressional offices. AARP announced Monday that more than 2,000 people a week have called the retiree organization since early February — double the usual number — with concerns about whether benefits they paid for during their working careers will continue. Social Security is the primary source of income for about 40 percent of older Americans.” [Washington Post, 3/25/25]
¶ DOGE’s Cuts To USDA Funding Hurt Florida Food Banks And The Families They Served
May 2025: Florida Food Banks Suffered After DOGE Cut Funding For Nearly $1 Billion Worth Of U.S. Department Of Agriculture Programs. According to CBS News, "The food goes to people like Rosalyn Budgett, who lives on a fixed income and comes to Feeding South Florida every two months. ‘I'm able to get a balanced meal on a daily basis,’ Budgett told CBS News. She says that without the food bank, ‘I'd probably starve.’ But the aid she relies on has been reduced. In March, the White House's Department of Government Efficiency cut funding for about $1 billion worth of U.S. Department of Agriculture programs. The two federal programs that were cut allowed schools and food banks to purchase food directly from local farmers and producers. ‘We've been seeing empty racks since February,’ Paco Velez, CEO of Feeding South Florida, told CBS News. ‘These cuts have really made an impact, not just on our ability to serve, but on the families' ability to thrive in South Florida and across the country." [CBS News, 5/21/25]
¶ DOGE’s Cuts To FEMA And NOAA Made Florida, Which Was Prone To Natural Disasters, More Vulnerable
Experts Said DOGE Cuts To FEMA And NOAA Left States Like Florida Vulnerable If A Weather Disaster Hit. According to the Associated Press, “With predictions for a busy hurricane season beginning Sunday, experts in storms and disasters are worried about something potentially as chaotic as the swirling winds: Massive cuts to the federal system that forecasts, tracks and responds to hurricanes. Experts are alarmed over the large-scale staff reductions, travel and training restrictions and grant cut-offs since President Donald Trump took office at both the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which prepares for and responds to hurricanes, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which tracks and forecasts them. ‘My nightmare is a major catastrophic storm hitting an area that is reeling from the impact of all of this nonsense from the Trump administration and people will die. And that could happen in Florida, that could happen in Texas, that could happen in South Carolina,’ said Susan Cutter, the director of the Hazards and Vulnerability Research Institute at the University of South Carolina.” [Associated Press, 5/31/25]
- DOGE Cuts Caused FEMA To Lose Nearly 2,000 Employees, Cancel Emergency Management Training Events And Cut Disaster Resilience Programs. According to the Associated Press, “About 2,000 full-time staff have left FEMA since Trump took office in January, a loss of roughly one-third of the agency’s full-time workforce, amid Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) mandated cuts. Scholars who study emergency management are concerned by both the reduction in capacity and the ‘brain drain’ of experienced staff. […] FEMA canceled various emergency management trainings this spring, moved others online and restricted travel to events such as the National Hurricane Conference. Some trainings have resumed. ‘Given the reduction in staffing, being unable to do trainings, participate in conferences, there’s potential that the federal government’s ability is diminished,’ said former Florida Emergency Management chief Bryan Koon, now president of the disaster preparedness firm IEM. FEMA has also cut disaster resilience programs. Making areas more survivable saves up to $13 for every dollar spent, said Lori Peek, director of the Natural Hazards Center at the University of Colorado.” [Associated Press, 5/31/25]
¶ more than 224,540 floridians in the 21st congressional district relied on social security benefits
2024: 224,540 Floridians In The 21st Congressional District Relied On Social Security Benefits. According to the Social Security Administration, in 2024, 224,540 Floridians in the 21st congressional district received Social Security benefits. [Social Security Administration, Florida, 2024]
¶ Mast Voted To Cut Medicare Despite Claiming He Would Protect It
¶ mast claimed one of his top priorities was protecting medicare
Mast Claimed He Had Always Fought To Protect Medicare And Social Security, And Claimed The Big Beautiful Bill Continued That Promise. According to a blog post from Rep. Brian Mast, “On July 4, 2025, President Trump signed a truly historic piece of legislation into law: the One Big Beautiful Bill will support our kids, seniors, veterans, and small businesses. It’s truly a win for all Americans. Let’s break some of it down here: From setting kids up for financial success at birth, increasing the Adoption Tax Credit, and prioritizing school choice—I’m proud to have supported legislation that takes care of our kids and families. This legislation puts more money in seniors’ pockets by delivering deductions up to $12,000 on top of the standard deduction for married couples. I’ve always fought to protect Medicare and social security, and this bill keeps that promise.” [Blog – Rep. Brian Mast, 8/15/25]
Mast: “One Of My Top Priorities In Congress Is Protecting Medicare And Social Security For Today’s Seniors And For Future Generations.” According to Rep. Brian Mast’s website, “One of my top priorities in Congress is protecting Medicare and Social Security for today’s seniors and for future generations. When the federal government created these programs, it made a commitment to America’s seniors, and it’s a commitment that must be upheld. I will always fight to protect and strengthen these programs.” [Rep. Brian Mast Official Website, Issues, Viewed 2/19/26]
¶ 2025: Mast Voted For House Republicans’ Reconciliation Bill, Which Would Trigger Nearly $500 Billion In Medicare Cuts
¶ July 2025: Mast Voted For The Final Version Of Republicans’ Reconciliation Bill
July 2025: Mast Voted For The Senate FY 2025 Budget Reconciliation Bill That Extended $4 Trillion In Expiring Tax Cuts, Added New Tax Breaks, Appropriated $448 Billion In Defense, Border, And Immigration Enforcement Funding, Increased The SALT Deduction To $40,000, And Cut Medicaid And Other Social Programs To Offset The Costs. In July 2025, Mast voted for, according to Congressional Quarterly, the “motion to concur in the Senate amendment to the bill that would permanently extend nearly $4 trillion in expiring individual and business tax cuts, create several new tax breaks and fund border and immigration enforcement and air traffic control upgrades. It would cut Medicaid and other safety net programs to partly offset the cost. Among other provisions, it would raise the statutory debt ceiling by $5 trillion and appropriate more than $448 billion in mandatory funding for Trump administration priorities and other needs, including $153 billion for defense, $89 billion for immigration enforcement, and $89.5 billion for border control and security. It also would increase the state and local tax deduction cap to $40,000 annually for five years for households making up to $500,000 a year until 2030, when it would permanently revert to $10,000.” The House passed the bill by a vote of 218 to 214. [House Vote 190, 7/3/25; Congressional Quarterly, 7/3/25; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
¶ May 2025: Mast Voted To Pass The Republican Reconciliation Bill, Which Included Cuts To Medicare
May 2025: Mast Voted For The FY 2025 Budget Reconciliation Bill That Included $3.8 Trillion In Tax Cuts Offset By $1.5 Trillion In Spending Reductions To Programs Like Medicaid And The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. In May 2025, Mast voted for, according to Congressional Quarterly, “the bill that would provide for approximately $3.8 trillion in net tax cuts and $321 billion in military, border enforcement and judiciary spending, offset by $1.5 trillion in spending reductions, as instructed in the fiscal 2025 budget resolution. It would raise the statutory debt limit by $4 trillion and provide for increased spending on defense and border security, spending cuts on social safety net programs, such as Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. It also includes a mix of tax breaks for businesses and individuals; tax increases on universities and foundations; and a phase-down of clean energy tax credits. […] It would reduce federal spending on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program by requiring states to shoulder more of the cost, expand work requirements for SNAP, extend programs authorized under the 2018 farm bill, and prohibit the U.S. Department of Agriculture from increasing the cost of the Thrifty Food Program. As amended, it would cap state and local tax deductions at $40,000 for households with incomes below $500,000.” The House passed the bill by a vote of 215 to 214. [House Vote 145, 5/22/25; Congressional Quarterly, 5/22/25; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1]
- HEADLINE: ‘Trump And GOP’s Tax Bill Would Force Cuts To Medicare, CBO Says’ [Washington Post, 5/21/25]
¶ Congressional Budget Office Estimated That House Republicans’ Reconciliation Bill Would Trigger Nearly $500 Billion In Cuts To Medicare
HEADLINE: "Trump And GOP’s Tax Bill Would Force Cuts To Medicare, CBO Says" [Washington Post, 5/21/25]
Congressional Budget Office Estimated That The House Republican Reconciliation Bill Would Trigger Nearly $500 Billion In Cuts To Medicare. According to a letter the Congressional Budget Office sent to Rep. Brendan Boyle, “Today the Congressional Budget Office transmitted an estimate of the budgetary effects of the 2025 reconciliation bill, as ordered reported by the House Committee on the Budget on May 18, 2025. 1 CBO has not yet completed estimates of the effects of interactions among the titles of the legislation. This letter responds to your questions concerning the sequestration (the cancellation of budgetary resources) in accordance with the Statutory Pay‑As‑You‑Go Act of 2010 (S-PAYGO) that would occur if an enacted bill raised deficits by $2.3 trillion over 10 years. Under S-PAYGO, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is required to maintain 5- and 10-year scorecards that it updates with the estimated cumulative changes in revenues and outlays generated by newly enacted legislation. […] The 4 percent maximum reduction in Medicare spending would apply to sequestration orders for years after 2026. If OMB ordered a sequestration of $230 billion for each year through 2034, the ordered reductions in Medicare spending would increase to about $75 billion in 2034 and would total roughly $490 billion over the 2027–2034 period.” [Letter to Rep. Brendan Boyle – Congressional Budget Office, 5/20/25]
¶ mast was a member of the republican study committee, which sought to raise prices for seniors on medicare
Mast Was A Member Of The Republican Study Committee.
[Republican Study Committee Website via Wayback Machine, “Membership,” 1/24/25]
¶ The Republican Study Committee Budget Has Proposed Raising Health Care Costs For Seniors By Switching To A “Premium Support” System
The Republican Study Committee’s Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Proposed A “Premium Support” Model For Medicare Beneficiaries. According to Roll Call, "The plan offered by the 175-member Republican Study Committee would gradually raise the age at which future retirees can start claiming full Social Security benefits from 67 to 69, a politically fraught proposal that’s all but certain to appear in Democratic campaign ads. The document also proposes a ‘premium support’ plan that would subsidize private insurance options that compete with traditional Medicare. That would be similar to budget plans proposed by Rep. Paul D. Ryan, R-Wis., during his tenure in Congress that were panned by Democrats and some Republicans, including former President Donald Trump." [Roll Call, 6/14/23]
The Republican Study Committee’s Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Proposed A “Premium Support” Model For Medicare Beneficiaries. According to the Republican Study Committee Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Proposal, "The RSC budget would implement a premium support model where private, Medicare Advantage (MA) plans would compete with a federal Medicare plan (the ‘Fed Plan’) that would offer the traditional Medicare benefits received through Part A, B, and D. Medicare Advantage (MA) plans provide the same services as Medicare but are administered by private health insurance providers. Under this plan, Medicare’s trust funds would be merged into a singular fund that would be responsible for paying premium support subsidies to cover the vast majority of their premium costs. This new singular trust fund would be funded with revenues from existing payroll taxes, Part B premiums, and Part B and D cost sharing—which would help ensure continued traditional Medicare benefits remain available. This framework would ensure seniors, whether they choose a private plan or the Fed Plan, receive more affordable, high-quality coverage." [Republican Study Committee FY 2025 Budget Proposal, 3/20/24]
Republicans’ Proposal To Switch To A Medicare “Premium Support” System Would Result In Most Beneficiaries Paying More For Health Care Than They Do Under Current Laws. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priority, "Under premium support, Medicare would make a fixed-dollar payment (often called a voucher) for each beneficiary to defray part of the cost of health insurance — either through a private plan or a form of traditional Medicare. The beneficiary’s premium would equal the difference between the voucher amount and the cost of the plan that he or she selected. Premium support would apply to all new beneficiaries starting in 2024 and to any other beneficiaries who chose to participate. Unlike the current system, in which Part B premiums are generally the same for all beneficiaries, premiums under the House GOP plan would vary by region and by plan. Although the GOP plan lacks the details to assess its impact on beneficiaries, most beneficiaries enrolled in traditional Medicare would pay more than under current law, according to the Congressional Budget Office. " [Center on Budget and Policy Priority, 7/26/16]