A super PAC backing Donald Trump’s candidacy for president launched an advertisement last week attacking Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) on his record on entitlements, including Social Security and Medicare.
The advertisement, released by the Trump-aligned super PAC last week, claims that DeSantis favors cutting Social Security and Medicare, based on votes he made while serving in Congress.
REP. THOMAS MASSIE PREEMPTIVELY ENDORSES DESANTIS FOR PRESIDENT
President Trump is on the side of the American people when it comes to Social Security and Medicare. Ron DeSantis sides with DC establishment insiders. We are going to expose the key differences between President Trump and Ron DeSantis that illustrate just how unelectable… pic.twitter.com/EQYoSgX6yH
— MAGA War Room (@MAGAIncWarRoom) March 30, 2023
Social Security and Medicare, both popular old-age entitlement programs, have become hotly contested political topics. President Joe Biden has sought to cast himself as a defender against GOP efforts to cut the programs. Congressional Republicans have pushed back against that characterization, most notably at the State of the Union address.
Trump stood against major changes to the retirement programs in his first presidential run, in the 2016 campaign, when many Republicans favored reforms championed by Paul Ryan, then the speaker of the House of Representatives. Now, Trump’s allies are trying to punish DeSantis for being in the GOP mainstream during that time.
The three main claims in the advertisement come from three budget proposals that DeSantis voted for as a member of Congress. Here is a look at the reality behind the claims.
Claim: “Ron DeSantis voted to cut Social Security three times.”
The votes cited for the claim in the ad that DeSantis voted to cut Social Security are DeSantis’s “aye” votes for budget proposals for fiscal 2014, 2015, and 2016 advanced by the Republican Study Committee, which is a large group of conservatives in the House Republican conference. As a congressman representing an area south of Jacksonville, DeSantis was one of the more conservative members of the lower chamber.
The RSC proposals in all three of those years called for changes to ensure that Social Security was put “on a path to solvency,” alluding to predictions then and now that the program is estimated to become insolvent by 2033. There were three aspects to the proposals:
FIRST: One change would be to use a different measure of inflation in calculating Social Security benefits. It would have abandoned the consumer price index for urban wage earners and clerical workers in favor of the chained consumer price index for all urban consumers, or “chained CPI.”
“Chained CPI,” as it is known, reflects that when prices of similar goods change, households often switch to the cheaper option.
The RSC argued at the time that chained CPI was a “more accurate measure of inflation.”
Critics, though, argued that switching to chained CPI would constitute a cut to benefits (and criticized President Barack Obama when he floated such a change in budget negotiations with Republicans in previous years). A report from the Congressional Budget Office from 2013, at about the time the 2014 fiscal budget was being debated, found that chained CPI was about 0.25 percentage points lower than traditional CPI.
SECOND: The RSC budgets would have gradually raised the full-retirement age over time to 70 years (under current law, it is rising over time to 67). Such a change wouldn’t have affected people who were then retired or near retirement but would have meant fewer years of full retirement for future beneficiaries — a change the RSC justified based on greater longevity.
THIRD: The fiscal 2016 RSC budget would have cut benefits for higher earners. The group said that such a reform would preserve Social Security as a safety-net benefit. Critics, though, have argued that such means-testing for Social Security would make it into a “welfare” program and thus less politically and socially viable.
Claim: “Ron DeSantis voted to cut Medicare two times.”
The citations for these claims come from two of the three votes previously cited, being the RSC budget proposals for fiscal 2014 and 2015.
The RSC’s proposal for the fiscal budgets called for transitioning Medicare to a “premium-support system,” which would have changed the program to have individuals select a health insurance policy from a marketplace and have the Medicare program cover the premiums. The premium support model was the signature reform championed for years by Paul Ryan as chairman of the House Budget Committee and embraced by the Romney-Ryan 2012 presidential campaign. At the time, it had the strong support of conservative Republicans.
“This plan provides Medicare enrollees a greater menu of choices including staying with the current system, harnessing the power of competition among private insurance plans and improving the quality of care,” the RSC said in its 2014 proposal.
Critics argued that the premium-support model would have ended Medicare as it exists. Proponents, though, maintained that, through greater competition by the private sector, it would allow beneficiaries to receive the same benefits but at a lower cost to the government.
It’s worth noting that the reforms would not have changed Medicare for those already in the program or near retirement but instead would apply to future retirees, meaning those aged 55 and younger at the time.
Claim: “Ron DeSantis: Raise the retirement age to 70.”
The claims that DeSantis favored raising the retirement age come from the three previously cited votes relating to the RSC’s budget proposals.
The 2014 fiscal year proposal called for the Social Security and Medicare eligibility ages to be moved up by two months per year beginning in 2024, until it reaches the age of 70. The proposal, made in 2013, also said it would not have any “impact on individuals currently 55 or older.”
The 2015 and 2016 fiscal year proposals by the RSC called for the full retirement age being moved up two months every year beginning in 2022, until it reached the age of 70.
The justification for moving the retirement age up was due to “Americans’ increasing longevity,” according to the 2014 fiscal year proposal.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
The three budget proposals by the Republican Study Committee for fiscal 2014, 2015, and 2016 failed as amendments to broader budget resolutions in the House of Representatives.
DeSantis has not announced a bid for the presidency but is expected to do so soon. He is widely seen as the chief rival to Trump in the Republican primary.
