As Congress considers another much-needed coronavirus relief bill, we need to ensure fiscal hawks in Congress and the Trump Administration do not undermine Social Security and Medicare using the coronavirus pandemic as cover.

While President Trump has indicated he would be supportive of another relief bill, his chief of staff has insisted a "payroll tax deduction" is a "critical component" of this legislation. However, this proposal would reduce much-needed revenue flowing into Social Security at a time when this program should be strengthened not weakened.

At the same time, the National Committee is deeply concerned about growing bipartisan support for Senator Mitt Romney's (UT) "TRUST Act" (S. 2733) which could end up as part of the next coronavirus relief bill. This dangerous bill would create a "Rescue Committee" to draft legislation addressing the solvency of Social Security and other trust fund programs. Once this committee approved a trust fund bill, the legislation would be fast-tracked in the House and Senate, bypassing regular order. This would open up Social Security to potentially devastating across-the-board cuts. Significantly, the bill does not ask these committees to consider whether benefits are sufficiently adequate to meet Americans' financial and health security needs.

The National Committee recognizes that working Americans need relief from the financial pain of the coronavirus pandemic. But we disagree that Social Security — a program funded by Americans workers — should be misappropriated for purposes having nothing to do with its core mission, which is to provide basic income upon retirement, disability or the death of a family breadwinner. That is the very reason that President Franklin Roosevelt and his aides crafted Social Security as a worker-funded program — to protect it from politicians who might seek to misuse or dismantle it.

That's why the National Committee is urging House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to exclude these dangerous measures from a new coronavirus relief bill. Our message: Swelling debt and deficits are legitimate concerns, but lawmakers should not enact legislation that compels future Congresses to cut Americans' benefits while lavishing tax cuts on those who need it least.

Now is the time to provide additional relief to workers, small businesses, the unemployed and their families struggling through this pandemic — not to punish them with future benefit cuts.

The National Committee endorses U.S. Representative Jan Schakowsky's (IL-09) bill, the "Lower Drug Costs for Seniors During COVID-19 Act" (H.R. 6649).

H.R. 6649 will make it easier for seniors to take advantage of the provision in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES) Act that allows seniors to get three-month refills under Medicare Part D by spreading up-front copays over the 90-day period. This will make it more affordable for seniors to get three months of their medications, allowing them to reduce the frequency of pharmacy visits and stay safely at home.

We applaud this legislation for creating another buffer between seniors and the risks and added costs associated with our nation's health crisis.

In yet another aggressive step to demolish the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on which millions of Americans now depend on for their health care coverage, the Trump Administration is urging the Supreme Court to strike down the health care reform law passed under the Obama Administration, arguing that the ACA is invalid because the last Congress repealed the individual mandate. This comes at a time when millions of Americans have lost their jobs and employer-provided health care benefits as a result of the coronavirus pandemic, and may now have to sign up for the ACA to gain coverage.

That's why I asked our readers the following question in the last issue of Benefits Watch:

At a time when millions of Americans are losing their jobs and their health care coverage because of the ongoing coronavius pandemic, should the Trump Administration drop its attack on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) — or continue full steam ahead?

The results from our recent poll are fascinating, but they’re only available to National Committee members! Join the National Committee today and we’ll immediately give you the results of this important poll.

Did you know that a team of experts in the field of Social Security policy is available to answer your questions about benefits? For 37 years, the National Committee has been helping thousands of our members and supporters with a broad range of concerns on Social Security.

Whether you're currently retired or approaching retirement, the National Committee's "Ask Us" section can help answer your questions about Social Security. You can either search our archives for valuable advice on a broad range of concerns at www.ncpssm.org/ask-us-recent/ or email your question to [email protected].

This week's question is: I am being penalized under Medicare Part B by paying 20 percent more per month in premiums than I would have paid had I applied for Medicare at 65 instead of 68, even though I was covered by my employer's health insurance. This doesn't seem right to me. Comments?

Click here to read the answer.

What Happens to Medicare & Social Security if Trump is Successful? (July 10, 2020, WVBF, Audio Clip with Max Richtman)

The ACA and Social Security Under Attack (July 1, 2020, WDEV, Audio clip with Max Richtman)

What's at Stake for Medicare if the ACA is Struck Down (July 8, 2020, WVMT, Audio Clip with Director of Government Relations & Policy Dan Adcock)

The bad old days: A look at why Social Security is necessary (July 12, 2020, The Dallas Morning News, Tom Margenau)

Drug prices steadily rise amid pandemic, data shows (July 7, 2020, Politico, Sarah Owemohle)

Payroll-Tax Cuts Mostly Go to the Well Off (July 9, 2020, Wall Street Journal, Letter to Editor by Max Richtman)