Also on January 20, the National Council of Women’s Organizations brought interested Congressional staff and media representatives to hear several experts discuss the impact on women of proposed legislation. Social Security was the most frequent topic.
Several speakers assailed Republican deficit hawks who want to cut or privatize Social Security by falsely claiming that it is a major contributor to the fiscal deficit. In fact the Social Security Trust Fund can pay for all scheduled benefits through 2036, and minor increases in the payroll tax could cover any needs for the following decades.
Having failed to undermine public support for Social Security with a direct assault during the Bush administration, opponents are using the rubric of deficit reduction to go after it indirectly.
According to the Institute for Women’s Policy Research, any cuts in social security will have a greater impact on women than men because it is more often their only source of income in retirement. Women’s average annual income from Social Security is only three-fourths that of men, so any reductions in benefits will compound the effect.
Some of the proposals to limit spending could disproportionately affect women. Joan Entmacher, Vice President of the National Women's Law Center, said that working women lost ground in the recovery from the Great Recession. Since it officially ended in June 2009, women have lost 222,000 jobs, while men have gained 640,000 jobs.
Women’s job loss was due to heavy cuts in public sector jobs where women predominate, largely due to loss of state and local tax revenue. Republican reluctance to provide fiscal relief to states will lead to a loss of more public sector jobs, and hence more jobs held by women.
©2011 Jo Freeman for SeniorWomen.com
*Editor's Note: The Source on Women's Issues in Congress included the following new bills that were introduced during the week of January 21, 2011.
Abortion
H.R. 3 — Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ)/Judiciary, Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means (1/20/11) — A bill to prohibit taxpayer funded abortions and to provide for conscience protections, and for other purposes.
H.R. 358 — Rep. Joseph Pitts (R-PA)/Energy and Commerce (1/20/11) — A bill to amend the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to modify special rules relating to coverage of abortion services under such Act.
H.R. 361 — Rep. John Fleming (R-LA)/Energy and Commerce (1/20/11) — A bill to prohibit certain abortion-related discrimination in governmental activities.
Judiciary:
H.R. 374 — Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA)/Judiciary (1/20/11) — A bill to implement equal protection under the 14th article of amendment to the Constitution for the right to life of each born and preborn human person.
Pages: 1 · 2
More Articles
- Selective Exposure and Partisan Echo Chambers in Television News Consumption: Innovative Use of Data Yields Unprecedented Insights
- Congressional Budget Office: Federal Budget Deficit Totals $1.4 Trillion in 2023; Annual Deficits Average $2.0 Trillion Over the 2024–2033 Period
- Jo Freeman's Review of Yippie Girl: Exploits in Protest and Defeating the FBI
- Jo Freeman Reviews Thank You For Your Servitude: Donald Trump's Washington and the Price of Submission
- Kaiser Health News: In Some States, Voters Will Get to Decide the Future of Abortion Rights
- Attorney General Merrick B. Garland Statement on Supreme Court Ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization
- Journalist's Resource: Religious Exemptions and Required Vaccines; Examining the Research
- Jo Freeman Reviews: Lady Bird Johnson: Hiding in Plain Sight
- Jo Freeman Writes: Sex and the Democratic Party – In Brooklyn
- Jo Freeman Reviews MADAM SPEAKER, Nancy Pelosi and the Lessons Of Power: “An iron fist in a Gucci glove”