Readers who saw the coverage of former Senator Fred Thompson's proposal for cutting Social Security can be forgiven for thinking that the NYT reporters are supporting the strike by the Writers Guild. Thompson proposed changing the SS benefit formula so that benefits would be indexed to inflation rather than wages. Thompson then proposed using general revenue to make up the remaining Social Security shortfall.
If the NYT reporters weren't on strike, the article would have told readers that with Mr. Thompson's proposed benefit cut, the SS program would be in surplus forever. In other words, this change is far more than sufficient to eliminate the shortfall projected by either the Congressional Budget Office or the Social Security trustees. Therefore there would be no reason to ever use general revenue to pay Social Security benefits. Perhaps the NYT will clarify this point for readers after the strike ends.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. For over 30 years, The American Prospect has delivered independent reporting that exposes corporate power, investigates political corruption, and analyzes threats to our democracy. Unlike many media outlets, we’re not owned by billionaires or corporations—we’re powered by readers like you.
Today’s independent journalism faces unprecedented challenges. Your support makes our reporting possible and keeps our work free and accessible to all. Whether it’s $5 or $50, every contribution helps sustain our nonprofit newsroom.
Join our community of supporters and make a donation today to help keep independent journalism thriving.
Copyright 2025 | The American Prospect, Inc. | All Rights Reserved
