2017: Schweikert Voted For The FY 2018 Republican Study Committee Budget Resolution Which In Part Called For Switching To The Chained-CPI For Social Security. In October 2017, Schweikert voted for a budget resolution that would in part, according to Congressional Quarterly, "provide for $2.9 trillion in new budget authority in fiscal 2018. It would balance the budget by fiscal 2023 by reducing spending by $10.1 trillion over 10 years. It would cap total discretionary spending at $1.06 trillion for fiscal 2018 and would assume no separate Overseas Contingency Operations funding for fiscal 2018 or subsequent years and would incorporate funding related to war or terror into the base defense account. It would assume repeal of the 2010 health care overhaul and would convert Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program into a single block grant program. It would require that off budget programs, such as Social Security, the U.S. Postal Service, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, be included in the budget." The underlying legislation was an FY 2018 House GOP budget resolution. The House rejected the RSC budget by a vote of 139 to 281. [House Vote 555, 10/5/17; Congressional Quarterly, 10/5/17; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 455; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 71]
2015: Schweikert Voted To Recommend That Social Security Switch To The So-Called 'Chained-CPI' To Measure Cost Of Living Adjustments As Part Of The FY 2016 Republican Study Committee Budget Resolution. In March 2015, Schweikert voted for recommending that Social Security adopt the Chained CPI. According to the Republican Study Committee, "This budget recommends switching to a more accurate index for all government programs called chained CPI-U." The underlying budget resolution would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "provide[d] for $2.804 trillion in new budget authority in fiscal 2016, not including off-budget accounts. The substitute would call for reducing spending by $7.1 trillion over 10 years compared to the Congressional Budget Office baseline." The vote was on the substitute amendment to a Budget Resolution. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 132 to 294. [House Vote 138, 3/25/15; Republican Study Committee, FY 2016 Budget; Congressional Quarterly, 3/25/15; Congress.gov, H. Amdt. 83; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 27]
2014: Schweikert Voted To Reduce The Annual Social Security Benefits COLA By Using The Chained CPI-U Index To Measure Inflation Rather Than CPI-W; Change Would Save $137 Billion Over 10 Years. In April 2014, Schweikert voted for the Republican Study Committee's proposed budget resolution for fiscal years 2015 to 2024. According to the Republican Study Committee, "To ensure that the purchasing power of benefits stays constant each year, the Social Security cost of living adjustment (COLA) increases the dollar amount of benefits by a formula tied to inflation. Unfortunately, the formula uses an old index, CPI-W (the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers), that overstates the effects of inflation. This outdated policy contributes to the current program's path to bankruptcy. This budget recommends switching to a more accurate index for all government programs called chained CPI-U, which economists across the political spectrum agree tracks the effects of inflation more accurately. This more accurate index better achieves the goal of the COLA: ensuring that retirees who depend on Social Security do not see their benefits eroded by inflation. This proposal would save $137 billion over ten years, and more importantly, according to the Social Security Trustees 2013 report, would solve about 20 percent of Social Security's long-range actuarial balance." The House considered the RSC budget as a substitute amendment to House Republicans' FY 2015 budget resolution; the amendment was rejected by a vote of 133 to 291. [House Vote 175, 4/10/14; Republican Study Committee, 4/7/14; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 615; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 96]
2013: Schweikert Voted To Use A Chained Consumer Price Index (CPI) For Social Security Cost Of Living Adjustments. In March 2013, Schweikert voted to support raising the Social Security eligibility age, as part of the Republican Study Committee's proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 2014 to 2023. According to the Republican Study Committee, "This budget recommends switching to a more accurate index, chained CPI U, which economists across the political spectrum agree tracks the effects of inflation more accurately. Chained CPI U also better achieves the goal of the COLA: ensuring that retirees who depend on Social Security do not see their benefits eroded by inflation. This proposal saves $127 billion over ten years, and more importantly, according to the Social Security Trustees 2012 report, this would solve 20 percent of Social Security's long range actuarial balance." The vote was on an amendment to the House budget resolution replacing the entire budget with the RSC's proposed budget; the amendment failed by a vote of 104 to 132 with 171 Democrats voting present. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Repeating a strategy from last year, 171 Democrats voted "present" to push Republicans to vote against the RSC plan to make sure it did not have enough support to replace the Ryan plan." [House Vote 86, 3/21/13; Republican Study Committee, 3/18/13; Congressional Quarterly, 3/25/13; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 35; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 25]
2014: Schweikert Voted To Terminate Social Security Eligibility For Nazis. In December 2014, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert voted for the "motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill that would terminate Social Security benefits for individuals who participated in Nazi persecution and expand ineligibility beyond former Nazis who have been removed from the country to include those whose citizenship or admission to the United States has been revoked. It also would terminate benefits for individuals who admit to Nazi conduct pursuant to a settlement agreement with the Justice Department and those who lose status as a national of the United States by such a renunciation. It would specify that ineligibility would apply to individuals who participated in Nazi persecution activities during the period beginning on March 23, 1933, and ending on May 8, 1945." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 420 to 0. [House Vote 537, 12/2/14; Congressional Quarterly, 12/2/14; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5739]
2014: Schweikert Voted To Raise The Social Security Full Retirement Age From 67 To 70 In Two Month Increments; The Full Increase Would Apply To Those Born In 1979 Or Later. In April 2014, Schweikert voted for the Republican Study Committee's proposed budget resolution for fiscal years 2015 to 2024. According to the Republican Study Committee, "As a result of the bipartisan Social Security Amendments of 1983 (P.L. 98-21), an increase of the Social Security full retirement age is being phased in over time - beginning at 65 and reaching 67 by 2022 for those born in 1960 and later. This budget proposes to continue a gradual increase of two months per year until the full retirement age reaches 70. Under this plan, for individuals born in 1962 the retirement age will be 67 and two months. The full retirement age will reach 70 for individuals born in 1979 or later." The House considered the RSC budget as a substitute amendment to House Republicans' FY 2015 budget resolution; the amendment was rejected by a vote of 133 to 291. [House Vote 175, 4/10/14; Republican Study Committee, 4/7/14; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 615; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 96]
2013: Schweikert Voted To Raise The Social Security Eligibility Age To 70. In March 2013, Schweikert voted to support raising the Social Security eligibility age, as part of the Republican Study Committee's proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 2014 to 2023. According to the Republican Study Committee, "This budget would slowly phase in an increase in the Social Security full retirement age for individuals born in 1962 (currently 51) and after to an eventual full retirement age of 70." The vote was on an amendment to the House budget resolution replacing the entire budget with the RSC's proposed budget; the amendment failed by a vote of 104 to 132 with 171 Democrats voting present. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Repeating a strategy from last year, 171 Democrats voted "present" to push Republicans to vote against the RSC plan to make sure it did not have enough support to replace the Ryan plan." [House Vote 86, 3/21/13; Republican Study Committee, 3/18/13; Congressional Quarterly, 3/25/13; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 35; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 25]
Raising The Social Security Retirement Age To 69 Years And Eight Months Would Push 1.5 Million Future Retirees Into Poverty. According to the Urban Institute, "Overall, increasing the NRA to 69 and 8 months and the EEA to 65 [...] does not hit lower-income groups harder than others, it does push more retirees below the poverty level. As compared to currently scheduled benefits, raising the retirement age would increase the share of retirees with incomes below the wage-indexed poverty level in 2050 from 14.4 percent to 16.2 percent, an increase of 1.5 million people. [Urban Institute, 12/06]
Raising The Social Security Retirement Age to 70 Would Reduce The Financing Gap For Social Security By 25 Percent. According to the National Academy of Social Insurance a gradual increase in the retirement age to 70 would cause a -25% change in the financing gap of social security." [National Academy of Social Insurance, 1/13]
The Financing Gap Was The Difference Between Revenues And Outlays For Social Security. According to the National Academy of Social Insurance, "The program has sufficient funds to pay full benefits until 2033. Eventually, as more Americans retire, Social Security is projected to face a long term financing short fall. If that were to happen, revenue continuing to come in to the program from payroll taxes and taxation of benefits would cover about 75 percent of scheduled benefits. The projected financing gap can be closed by raising revenues, reducing benefits, or some combination of both." [National Academy of Social Insurance, 1/13]
CBPP: Eligibility Age Increase Is "An Across-The-Board Cut In Benefits For All Retirees" No Matter What Age An Individual Retires. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, "[A]ny increase in the full retirement age amounts to an across-the-board cut in benefits for all retirees regardless of the age at which they file --- including people who do not retire until 67 or even 70." [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2/17/11]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against Funding The Administrative Costs Of Social Security. In September 2013, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert voted against the "motion to recommit the joint resolution to the House Appropriations Committee and report it back immediately with an amendment that would fund [...] the Social Security Administration's administrative expenses [...] through Sept. 30, 2014." The vote was on the motion to recommit. The House rejected the motion by a vote of 190 to 228. [House Vote 477, 9/20/13; Congressional Quarterly, 9/20/13; Congressional Actions, H.J. Res. 59]
2013: Schweikert Voted To Allow The Government To Borrow Over The Federal Debt Limit To Continue Paying Social Security Along With Payments Owed To Government Debt Holders. In May 2013, Schweikert voted for a bill that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "allow[ed] the Treasury Department to continue borrowing once the statutory debt limit is reached, to pay the principal and interest on government debt and obligations from the Social Security Trust Fund. It would [have] require[d] the Treasury Department to report weekly to the House Ways and Means and Senate Finance committees as long as the special borrowing authority is in use. As amended, it also would prohibit the Treasury secretary from borrowing above the debt limit to pay for compensation for members of Congress." The House passed the bill by a vote of 221 to 207. The bill was then sent to the Senate, which took no substantive action on it. [House Vote 142, 5/9/13; Congressional Quarterly, 5/9/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 807]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Allow The Government To Borrow Over The Federal Debt Limit To Continue Paying Social Security Along With Payments Owed To Government Debt Holders. In May 2013, Schweikert voted for a bill that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "adoption of the rule (H Res 202) that would provide for House floor consideration of the bill that would allow the Treasury Department, once the statutory debt limit is reached, to continue borrowing to pay the principal and interest on government debt and obligations from the Social Security Trust Fund." The House agreed to the motion by a vote of 226 to 199. [House Vote 139, 5/8/13; Congressional Quarterly, 5/8/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 807]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Allow The Government To Borrow Over The Federal Debt Limit To Continue Paying Social Security Along With Payments Owed To Government Debt Holders. In May 2013, Schweikert voted for a bill that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "Sessions, R-Texas, motion to order the previous question (thus ending debate and the possibility of amendment) on the rule (H Res 202) that would provide for House floor consideration of the bill that would allow the Treasury Department, once the statutory debt limit is reached, to continue borrowing to pay the principal and interest on government debt and obligations from the Social Security Trust Fund." The House agreed to the motion by a vote of 227 to 199. [House Vote 138, 5/8/13; Congressional Quarterly, 5/8/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 807]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Reduce Funding For Social Security. In February 2013, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert voted against the "motion to recommit the bill to the House Budget Committee and report it back immediately with an amendment that would replace the bill's finding section with language stating that Congress should pass legislation to replace the automatic spending cuts under the sequester scheduled to take effect in March 2013 without increasing taxes on middle-income Americans, decreasing long-term spending and maintaining Medicare and Social Security." The vote was on the motion to recommit. The House rejected the motion by a vote of 194 to 229. [House Vote 37, 2/6/13; Congressional Quarterly, 2/6/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 444]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against Prohibiting The Use Of Funds To Privatize Social Security. In September 2013, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert voted against the "motion to recommit the joint resolution to the House Appropriations Committee and report it back immediately with an amendment that would fund military personnel accounts, the Social Security Administration's administrative expenses, the Health and Human Services Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services program management account and the Veterans Benefit Administration's operating expenses through Sept. 30, 2014. It also would bar the use of funds provided by the bill to implement a system that would privatize the Social Security program, reduce the insurance benefits it provides or to establish a Medicare voucher plan that provides limited payments to purchase health care in the private sector. It also would increase funding for the Essential Air Service by $2.7 million and decrease the Transportation Department Planning, Research and Development account by the same amount." The vote was on the motion to recommit. The House rejected the motion by a vote of 190 to 228. [House Vote 477, 9/20/13; Congressional Quarterly, 9/20/13; Congressional Actions, H.J. Res. 59]
2017: Schweikert Voted For The FY 2018 Republican Study Committee Budget Resolution Which In Part Called For Raising The Social Security Normal Retirement Age To 69. In October 2017, Schweikert voted for a budget resolution that would in part, according to Congressional Quarterly, "provide for $2.9 trillion in new budget authority in fiscal 2018. It would balance the budget by fiscal 2023 by reducing spending by $10.1 trillion over 10 years. It would cap total discretionary spending at $1.06 trillion for fiscal 2018 and would assume no separate Overseas Contingency Operations funding for fiscal 2018 or subsequent years and would incorporate funding related to war or terror into the base defense account. It would assume repeal of the 2010 health care overhaul and would convert Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program into a single block grant program. It would require that off budget programs, such as Social Security, the U.S. Postal Service, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, be included in the budget." The underlying legislation was an FY 2018 House GOP budget resolution. The House rejected the RSC budget by a vote of 139 to 281. [House Vote 555, 10/5/17; Congressional Quarterly, 10/5/17; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 455; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 71]
2015: Schweikert Voted To Raise Raising Social Security's Retirement Age To 70 As Part Of The FY 2016 Republican Study Committee Budget Resolution. In March 2015, Schweikert voted for raising to 70, Social Security's Full Retirement Age. According to the Republican Study Committee, "This budget proposes to continue a gradual increase of two months per year until the full retirement age reaches 70. Under this plan, for individuals born in 1962, the retirement age would increase to age 67 and two months. The full retirement age will reach age 70 for individuals born in 1979 or later." The underlying budget resolution would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "provide[d] for $2.804 trillion in new budget authority in fiscal 2016, not including off-budget accounts. The substitute would call for reducing spending by $7.1 trillion over 10 years compared to the Congressional Budget Office baseline." The vote was on the substitute amendment to a Budget Resolution. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 132 to 294. [House Vote 138, 3/25/15; Republican Study Committee, FY 2016 Budget; Congressional Quarterly, 3/25/15; Congress.gov, H. Amdt. 83; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 27]