The most popular version of these bills would cost the cash-strapped program $150 billion over the next decade.
In practice, however, these rules fuel resentment among older Americans who feel cheated, rightly or wrongly, by adjusting the size of their monthly Social Security checks. On top of that concern, these rules would likely cause excessive workloads for the Social Security Administration and generate even more improper payments.
Congress is spending too much energy on the fairness of the formula when it should be understanding why these rules create such chaos in the first place. These rules lack a basic alignment of cause and effect. The decision not to participate in Social Security is a business choice of the employer, one that creates a hazard for employees. It is only reasonable for the employer to protect the employee from the consequences.
There is a simple solution: benefits portability. This change would allow a dual-entitled employee to choose which pension they wish to collect. In aggregation, the employee might choose to collect a single check from the employer or a single check from Social Security in an informed choice rather than one inflicted upon the unsuspecting retiree.