Recently, Social Security celebrated its 85th birthday! Since its inception, the program has been woven into the fabric of our nation and let countless seniors retire with dignity and respect. In 1935, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the legislation, an astonishing 50% of seniors lived in poverty.  Roosevelt said regarding Social Security, “It is, in short, a law that will take care of human needs…” Fast forward, and today the legislation keeps 15 million seniors out of poverty, which is a remarkable achievement. Presently, Social Security provides a modest benefit of $1,514 on average a month to 45 million retired Americans.  

Given the critical role Social Security plays in the lives of older Americans, it’s important to examine the health of the program moving forward. In April, the 2020 Social Security Trustees Report, which outlines the fiscal solvency of the program, indicated the Social Security Trust Funds would be sufficient to pay future obligations until 2035.  In 2035, the program can pay about 79% of its obligations. 

Sadly, the prospect of a shortfall has caused some people to say, “Social Security is going broke.” Nothing could be further from the truth. While a shortfall might exist, that doesn’t mean Social Security is going broke. Social Security is funded through the payroll tax; consequently, even if Congress did not provide a legislative fix, there would still be revenue coming into the program.  While not ideal, Social Security funding 79% of its obligation is a far cry from an account with no money.  

As everyone is aware, COVID-19 has unfortunately slowed our economy.  People might not know, though, the economic downturn has negatively impacted Social Security.  During a sluggish economy with less people are working, fewer individuals are drawing a paycheck. Thus, employers and employees are contributing less in payroll taxes.  If our government is generating less money from payroll taxes, then Social Security is receiving less revenue.   

So how does the pandemic impact the long-term future of Social Security?  The short answer: In July, Stephen Goss, Chief Actuary for the Social Security Administration, testified before the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Social Security. He was asked to answer this question. Goss said the pandemic’s impact on Social Security depends on how long the virus lasts.  If the economy rebounds in 2021 and we don’t have a second wave, Goss said, the trusts funds short fall might only accelerate by a year. 

However, “if closure due to the pandemic extends through 2021, or if there is a permanent reduction in the level of economic activity after recovery from this recession (as has been the case for some recent economic recessions), then the negative effects on the actuarial status of the combined OASI (Old Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund) and DI (Disability Insurance) Trust Funds could be substantially larger,” he said. Goss also noted the conclusions drawn in the 2020 Social Security Trustees Report were not based on the pandemic.   

Regrettably, talks between the White House and Congress are stalling regarding further federal stimulus legislation in response to the virus. As a result, the president issued an executive order that could potentially cut payroll taxes for the rest of the year. Clearly, the immediate future Social Security revenue is not going to be stable, making the president’s executive order cutting payroll taxes disappointing. Many estimates predict that it could cause a loss of about $100 billion in the program’s revenue. Any potential cuts to the payroll tax could erode one of our nation’s most important programs for seniors. At a time when so many people are struggling, I do not think it’s wise to propose defunding money from Social Security, a program that lifts millions of people out of poverty. 

I am certainly not arguing against federal stimulus legislation. While the money in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) is appreciated, it does not provide adequate funding to meet the challenges of the day. Legislation like The Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions Act (HEROES Act) and the Emergency Housing Assistance for Older Adults Act of 2020 are important bills that secure funding for all Americans, particularly seniors. So, we can provide relief to millions of Americans without threatening Social Security.  

A federal program’s 85th birthday is a good time to take stock. Social Security has brought the senior poverty rate down by about 40 percentage points — not a bad accomplishment for an 85th birthday! It is never a good time to threaten Social Security’s future; it’s an especially bad time to do so now.. As Roosevelt said, “It is, in short, a law that will take care of human needs…” 

In May, my wife and I received our ballots to vote by mail in Maryland’s primary. The whole process was easy. We voted and put our ballots in the provided self-addressed envelope. Given COVID-19, we preferred to vote by mail since we are trying to limit our exposure to the virus. The entire experience got me thinking, “What if every American was able to vote by mail in the general election?” Because of the pandemic, every effort should be made to ensure that all Americans are given the ability to vote by mail, particularly seniors, who are more susceptible to the virus.  

According to the United States Census Bureau, 70 percent of seniors (65+) turned out to vote in the 2016 presidential election (for more information please see “Seniors and Voter Participation”). Seniors are a reliable voting block; however, given the pandemic, there are now clear obstacles stopping them from being able to vote. Polling places have been removed from senior living facilities to limit the residents' exposure to the virus. This is a necessary safety move but an obvious downside because it makes voting for seniors more difficult. Dale Ho, director of the American Civil Liberties Union Voting Project, indicates in-person voting during COVID-19 brings risks because of shared touch screens, ballot marking devices and pens. We certainly don’t want anyone choosing between their health and safety and their right to vote.

Complicating matters further, Pew Research Center found a majority of poll workers are 61 and over. Furthermore, The Washington Post reported that states have had a hard time staffing polls during the pandemic. For example, in Anchorage, Alaska, 95 percent of their typical poll workers opted out of working a local election. In Milwaukee, Wisconsin, polling locations for the primary election were reduced from 180 to five. It’s hard to blame people, especially older Americans, who feel working at the polls brings inherent dangers during a pandemic. Obviously, having less staff at the polls will make in-person voting  more challenging and only furthers the need to increase voting access by mail. 

​States vary on how to administer voting through the mail.  A few states will automatically mail residents a ballot, most states have “no excuse” absentee voting and a handful of states require a reason. You might be saying, “so what’s the problem?  An overwhelming majority of states will mail seniors a ballot or allow them to request one.”

Unfortunately, during a pandemic, it’s not that simple!

What happens if older Americans are required to get a witness signature on their absentee ballots? Countless seniors are self-quarantining because of the virus, which makes getting a witness signature impractical, especially if the signature must be from another registered voter in their state. Teresa Maples, a senior with a pre-existing health problem from Minnesota, said, "There is no question that I will be unable to vote in person because I am strictly following the social distancing and self-isolation guidelines. Because I live alone and cannot safely obtain a witness signature, my vote may never be counted." According to Pew Research Center, this is a problem with potentially far reaching consequences, as 27 percent of people age 60 and above live alone in our country.

Also, what about people who live with their elderly parents and fear voting in person will expose them and, in turn, their parents to the virus? This could be a real problem in states that require “an excuse” to vote absentee. For instance, Martha Christian Green from Louisiana, whose 80-year-old mother lives with her, has a risky situation. “If I cannot vote by absentee ballot in the 2020 elections, I will be forced to choose between voting and protecting my mother’s health,” Green told the Southern Poverty Law Center. “Voting has always been important to me and my family. My father took me to register to vote when I turned 18. I have a strong family legacy of voting – almost genetic. I believe it is my civic duty.”

Thankfully, there have been lawsuits filed around the country on these and similar matters to ensure everyone’s right to vote is protected. Recently, in Minnesota, litigation was settled because both parties agreed that a witness’ signature would not be required to submit a ballot through the mail. However, legal challenges to this agreement by the Minnesota House of Representatives is still a possibility. While we can expect this type of litigation to continue around the country up until Election Day, in the end I hope that our judicial system will recognize that every citizen’s right to vote is paramount and not place any undue burdens on people’s ability to make their voices heard.   

Ideally, all elected officials would be working to expand voter access during a pandemic. Unfortunately, there doesn’t appear to be consensus on voting from home because of the virus. Some government officials argue that voting by mail will lead to election fraud.

When evaluating the propensity for voter fraud through the mail, it’s important to recognize the rigorous existing safeguards. For example, The New York Times reports that Washington state confirms personal information and works to ensure voters are only registered once throughout the state. On top of that, election offices ensure signatures on file match those on the ballot. It should be noted that the state of Washington votes largely by mail.  

Any conversation about mail-in voting should start with the premise that election fraud is not prevalent; therefore, there is no justification to force people into crowded polling places during a pandemic. Amber McReynolds, CEO of the National Vote at Home Institute, and Charles Stewart III, director of the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, have reported that during the past 20 years in our country, 250 million votes have been cast through the mail, which have resulted in only 143 criminal convictions for voter fraud.

Obviously even one case of voter fraud is a problem that should be prosecuted, but given its minuscule presence in our country, politicians who scare everyone into thinking this is a crisis are not engaging in an honest dialogue.

Pew Research Center reports a whopping 70 percent of Americans believe that voters should be allowed to vote by mail. With an overwhelming amount of support, let’s all start working together to increase access to voting. Older Americans and their loved ones shouldn’t have to choose between their health and exercising their constitutional right to vote. Life in quarantine can be frustrating enough, let’s make things a little easier and expand everyone’s ability to vote.  

During the last decade, the LGBTQ community has made important strides in its effort to tear down the walls of discrimination in this country.  The crowning achievement occurred when the Supreme Court declared that the right to marry extends to same sex couples. The court stated, “the right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment couples of the same-sex may not be deprived of that right and that liberty.” After the Supreme Court’s ruling in 2015, according to Gallup Daily tracking, about half of the people identifying as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender indicated they were living with a same sex partner and married. These couples were finally able to enjoy the practical benefits of marriage associated with tax exemptions, health insurance, Medicare, inheritance rights and Social Security survivor benefits.

While older Americans in the LGBTQ community have made great advancements in equality,   more work is still needed. There are about 1.1 million LGBTQ seniors in this country, who often face their own unique set of challenges. One of those hurdles is around affordable housing.

Unfortunately, there are senior housing facilities which have been hostile to LGBTQ older Americans. The Equal Right Center studied housing discrimination facing LGBTQ seniors in 10 states and reported that 48 percent of same sex couples were victims of discrimination during the application process.  Sadly, discrimination does not stop once LGBTQ older Americans move into a building.  Often, they are victims of verbal and physical abuse by their fellow residents. Look no further than Marsha Wetzel who moved into a low-income senior building in Chicago, Illinois. When her fellow residents learned she is gay, she was emotionally and physically abused. Consequently, Lambda Legal filed a lawsuit against her building, Glen St. Andrew Living Community, claiming the defendant did not adequately protect Wetzel from the harassment, discrimination and violence that she encountered from other residents due to her sexual orientation.  The federal appeals court further ruled that a landlord could be liable when he or she is aware of tenant-on-tenant harassment based on a protected class and didn’t take reasonable steps to stop the behavior.  

Unfortunately, many LGBTQ seniors who want to age in place, don’t seek out assistance for fear of being treated poorly. Making life more complicated is that according to the National Alliance for Caregiving and AARP, this group is not as likely to have children, or a partner to help with caregiving.

Fortunately, cities around the country are taking positive steps to create affordable housing welcoming to LGBTQ seniors. These buildings advertise themselves as being LGBTQ friendly and often coordinate meetings and support groups that benefit this particular aging community. In addition, like many senior buildings, they go out of their way to create common areas that foster a sense of community and provide a space for educational programing and reduced cost meals. Carla Harrigan, a resident of Town Hall Apartments in Chicago told AARP, “Here, there's a sense of camaraderie. We have all lived through the difficult times of being gay or bi or trans, and now that we're seniors, we look out for one another.”

Funding for these communities has originated from local, state and federal resources and in some cases developers have been able to secure rental subsidies from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. These rental subsidies ensure that residents of the building are only obligated to pay 30 percent of their income on rent. Given the fact in 2016, 80 percent of residents at Town Hall Apartments had incomes below $15,000 a year, clearly these rental subsidies are badly needed.  
​
Currently, 2.7 million adults 50 and over are part of the LGBTQ community, with that number expected to double by 2060. Everyone should be able to participate in society free of discrimination, especially in their home.  We should applaud cities and nonprofit developers across America for creating housing that meets the needs of LGBTQ seniors. Hopefully, by fostering a sense of tolerance, LGBTQ older Americans will be better able to thrive in their homes and community.  

​As COVID-19 continues to plague our nation, Congress has spent months debating the best way to respond to the pandemic. It has debated economic stimulus for individuals, small businesses, state and local governments and the private sector. In March, Congress passed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act to provide an economic jolt to a stalled economy.   

While stimulus checks and small business loans got most of the publicity, Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) senior housing also received financial resources to better meet the challenges from COVID-19. B’nai B’rith’s Center for Senior Services, as the largest national Jewish sponsor of low-income, nonsectarian housing for seniors in the United States, is taking a keen interest in how stimulus legislation will impact senior housing. While the money in the CARES Act is helpful and appreciated, the virus is still impacting our country and requires further stimulus legislation.

Therefore, it was encouraging to see the House of Representatives pass the Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions (HEROES) Act, which provided a financial boost for HUD assisted senior housing. This legislation provides $1.2 billion, which will enable buildings to hire more staff, purchase more personal protective equipment (PPE) and deal with decreased rents because of the virus. In addition, this money could help advance service coordination for buildings that have and don’t have a service coordinator. A service coordinator is a social service staff person that connects residents with services in the community.

Recently Rep. Katie Porter (D-CA) and Financial Services Committee Chairwoman Maxine Waters (D-CA) introduced the Emergency Housing Assistance for Older Adults Act of 2020 in Congress. Like the HEROES Act, this legislation provides funding, but this bill specifically allocates $50 million in funding for increasing WiFi accessibility in senior housing.  Additional funding for WiFi is crucial because it makes telehealth more readily available for older Americans and allows service coordinators to speak with residents while practicing social distancing.

As Congress deliberates further COVID-19 stimulus legislation, I hope the provisions from the Emergency Housing Assistance for Older Adults Act make their way into the final draft. During a time of national crisis, we are thankful that Rep. Porter and Chairwoman Waters are leading the efforts to ensure that senior housing has the resources in light of the pandemic.   
​
B’nai B’rith has and will continue to advocate to congressional offices on how critical additional funding is for HUD assisted housing to combat the pandemic. The House has done their part passing the HEROES Act. It’s now time for Senate to do their own heavy lifting. Congress must reach a deal to ensure that senior housing and countless people, programs and state and local governments have the appropriate resources to meet the challenges of the day!   

​As you may recall, a couple of years ago I wrote a blog entitled, “Senior Scams, A New Low” which detailed how low-life individuals prey on seniors for their own financial gain. Over the past few months, our world has been engulfed by COVID-19.  While our nation has certainly seen fantastic stories of heroism born from the pandemic, our national crisis has also brought out the worst in people. If COVID-19 wasn’t bad enough, there are people in the world who are using this tragedy to profit through illegal streams. Sadly, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) indicated by the end of April that they had already received over 18,000 reports of fraud in connection to the pandemic. 
 
Unfortunately, for a variety of reasons, older Americans are susceptible to many of the reported scams being perpetrated relating to the crisis. For example, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFBP) has announced scams encompassing the medical world (vaccines, test kits and etc.), fictious charities, Social Security and people falsely impersonating a loved one requesting money.  
 
One scam, according to the Social Security Administration (SSA), involves seniors being contacted through the mail and told that their social security benefits could be in jeopardy because of COVID-19. The letter goes onto provide a phone number for recipients to contact to rectify the problem. Once they call the number, they are expected to share sensitive personal and financial information. In response to scams like, SSA noted, “Social Security employees continue to work. Social Security will not suspend or decrease Social Security benefit payments or Supplemental Security Income payments due to the current COVID-19 pandemic. Any communication you receive that says SSA will do so is a scam, whether you receive it by letter, text, email, or phone call.”
 
In another example, the Denver District Attorney, Beth McCann, in an interview with Rocky Mountain PBS said that because of the pandemic, people are being fraudulently asked to provide bank information over the phone to get their stimulus checks faster.  Furthermore, the elder abuse unit in McCann’s office reports of a couple who received an offer by a stranger to go grocery shopping; however, the couple had to provide the individual with their credit card information. McCann said in response, “And you know, you think that sounds like a good idea. But we just advise people: do not trust a stranger, do not give anyone your credit card information or bank account information, or let them into your home. Even if they seem nice, and they seem like they really want to help. Just rely on neighbors, friends, people that you know.”
 
So how can seniors be best prepared to weed out scams in the age of COVID-19?
 
First, SSA reports they will never pressure you with legal actions or offer you an increase in benefits in exchange for money, ask to handle matters in secret, email you personal information or ask for money through gift cards, wire transfers, internet currency or prepaid debit card. In addition, the FTC advises people to ignore all advertisements claiming to be a vaccine for COVID-19. Sadly, such a vaccine does not exist currently.
 
Plus, if someone is asking for money and claiming to be a relative, hang up the phone and call them back on their number, and ask questions only they would know. Furthermore, people should always research a charity before donating.  
 
People should also take proactive steps when they come across scams like reporting the incidents to the authority.  Federal government agencies like the Department of Justice (DOJ), Administration on Community Living (ACL) and the FTC have all setup platforms for people to report these cases.  People can also take basic steps like calling their parents or grandparents and making them aware these schemes exist.  While we probably can’t dissuade people from taking advantage of a national crisis, we can certainly make their lives significantly harder.