¶ Overview
- During a March 2025 town hall, Edwards promised that President Trump and the Republican-controlled congress had no intention of disrupting Medicare or Social Security.
- Then, Edwards voted for a bill voted for House Republicans’ reconciliation bill, which would trigger nearly $500 billion in Medicare cuts, absent future congressional action. The same bill Edwards said didn’t “go far enough, fast enough, to get our fiscal house in order.” He was also a member of the Republican Study Committee, which has advocated for raising the retirement age and turning Medicare into a voucher system.
- Edwards also defended Trump’s “Department of Government Efficiency” as it was weakening Americans’ ability to access the Social Security Administration. More than 221,000 people in North Carolina’s 11th congressional district relied on Social Security benefits.
¶ Edwards Voted For Cuts To Medicare After Promising Republicans Would Not Disrupt Medicare
¶ edwards claimed republicans did not intend to DISRUPT medicare, but also claimed the house reconciliation bill didn’t go far enough
Edwards: “There's No Intent From President Trump Nor From The Current Congress To Do Anything To Disrupt Payments For Medicare Or Social Security.” According to a town hall held by Rep. Chuck Edwards, “QUESTION Many of us in Western North Carolina rely on Medicaid, Medicare, and or Social Security to get health care and pay our bills. Mathematically, it is impossible to enact your proposed budget, the Republican proposed budget, without making deep cuts to these programs. What is your message to constituents who depend on these programs here? EDWARDS I would say. That I think that you might be referring to the budget resolution that was passed out of the budget committee that I sit on about 3 weeks ago it did, it did make it across the House floor. It did have quite a bit of political adversity, with, with, without any fact. There's nothing in that resolution that mentions the word Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security. [CROWD GRUMBLING] There's no intent from President Trump nor from the current Congress to do anything to disrupt payments for Medicare or Social Security.” [Congressman Chuck Edwards Town Hall, 3/13/25] (video)
¶ Before Voting For The House Version Of The Bill, Edwards Also Claimed The Bill Didn’t Go Far Enough
Edwards On The House Version Of The Big Beautiful Bill: “The Flaw Of This Bill Is That It Doesn’t Go Far Enough, Fast Enough, To Get Our Fiscal House In Order.” According to CBS 17, "Fiscal hawks on the House Budget Committee on Friday sunk a key vote to advance the ‘One Big Beautiful Bill Act’ that encompasses President Trump’s legislative agenda, marking a stunning setback for the legislation. The 16-21 vote throws up a hurdle for leaders hoping to send the bill to the Senate by Memorial Day — but are still haggling over last minute changes to appease not only the fiscal hawks but moderates seeking bigger blue-state tax breaks. Three North Carolina Republican congressmen sit on the House Budget committee, including Representative Chuck Edwards (R) from western North Carolina. Rep. Edwards spoke in favor of moving forward with the budget proposal. ‘This is not the Big Beautiful Bill that I had hoped for — but it does reign in mandatory spending, it restores program integrity, and finally begins, but only begins, to right size the federal bureaucracy,’ said Edwards. ‘Mr. Chairman, the flaw of this bill is that it doesn’t go far enough, fast enough, to get our fiscal house in order. But it does take some great strides. Let’s take these strides today, pass this bill and go to work next week in taking greater and bolder steps.’" [CBS 17, 5/16/25]
¶ Edwards voted for house republicans’ reconciliation bill, which would trigger $500 billion in medicare cuts, absent future congressional action
May 2025: Edwards 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, Edwards 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 (H Con Res 14). 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 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]
July 2025: Edwards Voted For The Senate FY 2025 Budget Reconciliation Bill That Extended $4 Trillion In Expiring Tax Cuts, Added New Tax Breaks, Appropriated $448 Million In Defense, Border, And Immigration Enforcement Funding, And Cut Medicaid And Other Social Programs To Offset The Costs. In July 2025, Edwards 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]
¶ edwards claimed the republican reconciliation bill would make america prosperous
Edwards: “The House-Passed Reconciliation Bill Will Make Life Better For Every American.” [Twitter, @RepChuckEdwards, 6/18/25]
Edwards Claimed The Republican Reconciliation Bill Would Help Western North Carolina And Put American “Back On A Path Of Strength And Prosperity.” According to a press release from Rep. Chuck Edwards, "U.S. Congressman Chuck Edwards (NC-11) issued the following statement on his vote for the Senate-amended reconciliation bill: […] This bill will also instate pro-growth policies that will incentivize investments to generate revenue and grow our economy. As a lifelong businessman who is tired of Washington stifling economic growth, the importance of these policies cannot be overstated. ‘This bill strengthens Medicaid to its original intent: to serve pregnant women, children, folks with disabilities, low-income seniors, and other vulnerable populations. Medicaid costs ran rampant under the last administration because the United States government failed to police waste, fraud, and abuse and allowed the American taxpayer to cover the health care costs of able-bodied, working-age adults who were not required to work. This bill establishes reasonable work requirements: just 80 hours of work or enrollment in a community service or education program per month for non-pregnant adults without dependents. ‘Under current law, only 7 percent of all Medicaid hospital spending reaches rural hospitals. Our rural hospitals are essential, and the care they provide for WNC communities is foundational to our region’s well-being. This bill will better support rural hospitals in WNC by creating a targeted $50 billion fund to offset the increased costs hospitals will take on from a lower provider tax reimbursement rate. This fund provides a tailored approach, rather than increasing general Medicaid spending, to improve and preserve care. ‘The message to me from the people of Western North Carolina was clear in the weeks leading up to this vote: the provisions included in this bill will pave the way for a stronger, more prosperous, and more resilient nation. Western North Carolina can’t succeed if we aren’t succeeding as a country, and this bill will put our nation back on a path of strength and prosperity.’" [Press Release – Rep. Chuck Edwards, 7/4/25]
¶ Edwards was a member of the republican study committee, which has proposed turning medicare into a voucher system
As Of January 2025, Edwards Was A Member Of The Republican Study Committee.
[Republican Study Committee Website via Wayback Machine, “Membership,” Viewed 1/23/25 via archive.org]
¶ 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 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]
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]
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]
¶ Edwards Was A Member Of A Group That Has Long Advocated For Raising The Social Security Retirement Age
¶ Edwards was a member of the republican study committee, which has proposed turning medicare into a voucher system
As Of January 2025, Edwards Was A Member Of The Republican Study Committee.
[Republican Study Committee Website via Wayback Machine, “Membership,” Viewed 1/23/25 via archive.org]
¶ The Republican Study Committee Has Long Advocated For Raising The Social Security 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 In Benefits Every Year
According To The Center For American Progress, Raising The Retirement Age Would Cost The Median-Wage Retiree Thousands 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 Nearly $100,000 In Retirement Benefits. 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]
¶ EDWARDS CLAIMED REPUBLICANS HAD NO INTENTION TO DISRUPT SOCIAL SECURITY, THEN SUPPORTED AN AGENCY THAT HAMSTRUNG THE SOCIAL SECURITY AGENCY
¶ Edwards Claimed Republicans Had No Intention Of Disrupting Social Security
Edwards: “There's No Intent From President Trump Nor From The Current Congress To Do Anything To Disrupt Payments For Medicare Or Social Security.” According to a town hall held by Rep. Chuck Edwards, “QUESTION Many of us in Western North Carolina rely on Medicaid, Medicare, and or Social Security to get health care and pay our bills. Mathematically, it is impossible to enact your proposed budget, the Republican proposed budget, without making deep cuts to these programs. What is your message to constituents who depend on these programs here? EDWARDS I would say. That I think that you might be referring to the budget resolution that was passed out of the budget committee that I sit on about 3 weeks ago it did, it did make it across the House floor. It did have quite a bit of political adversity, with, with, without any fact. There's nothing in that resolution that mentions the word Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security. [CROWD GRUMBLING] There's no intent from President Trump nor from the current Congress to do anything to disrupt payments for Medicare or Social Security.” [Congressman Chuck Edwards Town Hall, 3/13/25] (video)
¶ Edwards Supported DOGE And Its Cuts
Edwards Supported DOGE And Its Cuts. According to a town hall held by Rep. Chuck Edwards, “EDWARDS: "However, it is an unavoidable reality that all departments and agencies under the federal government need to run more efficiently. And I support current efforts to identify those opportunities for making the taxpayers dollars go farther." [Congressman Chuck Edwards Town Hall, 3/13/25] (video)
Edwards Defended DOGE And Claimed It Was “Going Through The Federal Agencies, One At A Time, Looking For Efficiencies.” According to the Biltmore Beacon, "Edwards said DOGE must take its cue from Congress, citing Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution — which stipulates all revenue and spending measures must originate in the House of Representatives. ‘There’s no question Elon Musk has gotten a bit ahead of Congress,’ Edwards said. However, that will all be sorted out as the process unfolds going forward, Edwards said. ‘What the DOGE committee is doing is going through the federal agencies, one at a time, looking for efficiencies,’ Edwards said. In the process, some funding allocated by Congress has been suspended ‘until we better understand if it is being spent as Congress intended,’ Edwards said. Some of the DOGE actions aren’t recommendations at all, but include firing federal employees, revoking grant funds or not spending funds on departments or programs authorized by Congress.” [Biltmore Beacon, 3/12/25]
¶ At The Social Security Administration, DOGE Forced Mass Layoffs, Longer Wait Times And Frequent Website Crashes
One Year After DOGE-Era Cuts Resulted In A 12 Percent Cut Of The Social Security Administration’s Workforce, Social Security Offices Across The Country Still Struggled With Staffing. According to Business Insider, "More than a dozen Social Security field offices are listed as closed to in-person service, instead directing customers to reach out by phone or contact the national 800 number. Now, the list of closures has prompted concerns for the beleaguered agency and its recipients. A federal employees' union memo obtained by Business Insider sheds some light on why offices are closed: Some due to operational issues with their buildings, while others are so small that any understaffing forces them to temporarily shut down. […] The closures come at a tumultuous time for the Social Security Administration and its beneficiaries; the agency shed around 7,000 workers, or nearly 12% of its workforce, during the DOGE era, and has had to temporarily reassign some employees to staff phone lines. While the SSA said these office closures are temporary, staffing issues and a lack of field offices could be an increasing problem for the administration and recipients alike. Some currently-shuttered offices simply don't have enough staff. These smaller offices, called resident stations, are often staffed by just one person and serve low-population areas. Two resident stations in rural Montana and Wyoming are closed for lack of workers." [Business Insider, 4/23/26]
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]
HEADLINE: “DOGE Cuts Trim Funding For Arts And Humanities Efforts In Minnesota” [MinnPost, 4/8/25]
CBPP Said The Trump Administration Had Pushed Out 7,000 Social Security Workers. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, "Over the past five months, the Trump Administration has forced the Social Security Administration (SSA) through a radical transformation that threatens to disrupt services for the largely older and severely disabled people who most rely on the agency.[1] The Trump Administration and its so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) have created huge gaps in customer service and support by indiscriminately pushing out 7,000 workers to hit an arbitrary staffing reduction target. This is the largest staffing cut in SSA’s history.[2] (See Figure 1.)" [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 6/23/25]
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]
¶ More than 221,000 NOrth Carolinians in the 11th congressional district relied on social security benefits
221,251 North Carolinians In The 11th Congressional District Relied On Social Security Benefits. According to the Social Security Administration, in 2024, 221,251 North Carolinians in the 11th congressional district received Social Security benefits. [Social Security Administration, North Carolina, 2024]