GOP candidate suggests raising retirement age amid Social Security shortfall in new video

Sarah K. Burris
August 13, 2024 

Maryland Republican, former House of Delegates member Neil Parrott (Photo: Maryland House of Delegates)

Newly obtained video shows a Maryland Republican express support in 2020 for raising the retirement age to address a potential shortfall in Social Security benefits.

Neil Parrott, who is running for Congress in Democratic Rep. David Trone's vacated seat, told the Washington County Chamber of Commerce that the country needs to consider raising the retirement age to address a looming Social Security shortfall.

Speaking to the group in October 2020 in a video obtained by Raw Story, Parrott said, "Do I see a shortfall in the future? I do."

"And what plan of action we need to take, well, I think that we're living much longer — a lot longer than people anticipated when they started Social Security," he said. "And what we'll have to look at is raising the retirement age. It wouldn't affect people who are about to retire. I just turned 50, and I don't know if 65 is a realistic time to collect Social Security; that's drying up."

Read also: How Trump ends Social Security

Parrott has a history of votes that disproportionately impact lower-income seniors, including voting against providing subsidies and food stamps for seniors in need.

A bill he opposed in the Maryland legislature in March 2020 required "the Secretary of Aging to pay to certain low-income seniors up to a $1,500 subsidy from state general funds to help low-income seniors reside in assisted living programs; increasing, except under certain circumstances, a certain subsidy in effect for certain periods of time-based on annual growth in the consumer price index; requiring an applicable area agency to determine the amount of the monthly subsidy for a resident of an assisted living program and, in doing so, to make a certain deduction for personal expenses; etc.”

A second bill in March 2016 required "the State to provide a supplement to increase the total benefit to $30 per month to a household that includes an individual who is at least 62 years old and receives a federally funded benefit in an amount less than $30 per month under the food stamp program.”

He was also the only lawmaker to vote to classify bingo as illegal at senior living facilities in 2019 and again in 2020.

According to the Maryland Department of Aging, the state has about 6 million people living within its borders, about 23 percent of whom are over 60, according to 2020 Census data. It is expected to grow to over 26 percent by 2040.

April McClain-Delaney, his Democratic challenger, has spent the last two years working at the Department of Commerce as deputy assistant secretary for communications and information. She previously served as the director for Common Sense Media, a nonprofit that focused on technology and children.

See the clip below or at the link here.

GOP's attack on Americans' retirement savings just went to the next disgusting level

D. Earl Stephens
August 13, 2024 

U.S. Rep. Mike Johnson (R-LA) (L) celebrates becoming speaker of the House at the U.S. Capitol on October 25, 2023 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

It will come as no surprise to the regulars around here that I have soured to the point where I can barely pucker up to the work being done by our corporate, national media these days.

My love affair with the profession I gave most of my life to has ended in hurt and disappointment. Our national press too often presents as incompetent fools who are more interested in being led around by the nose than they are sniffing out stories, including the biggest one of our lives.

Our democracy is under attack RIGHT NOW in America, but I bet if you took off and went running to find that reported in any of our newspapers of record in this nation at this very moment, you’d be hard-pressed to locate it in any proper form. There’s a political horse race to run you see, and anything that gets in the way of that, like the biggest story in America since the Civil War, is simply not fit for print.

Imagine my surprise then, while lapping up coffee Sunday morning and poking around all the likely and unlikely places for news, I came across what we used to called a “blockbuster story” in The Washington Post.

I’ll guess they have a paywall on the thing, so I’ll be glad to help you through it here. It’s a damn important story, and one of those you might want to politely shove in the face of that certain Republican in our life, who thinks their party, and the orange huckster who is running it into the ground, gives a single shit about them.

Fact: They don’t.

I was also surprised that when I went looking for the story to share 24 hours later, I had to scroll through several screens to find it. These damn newspapers are so anxious to get back to their horse race, they are putting their own game-changing stories out to pasture.

This one needs some stubborn attention and sharing, though, so let’s begin …

Headline: INSURANCE LOBBYISTS BLOCK FEDERAL CRACKDOWN ON COSTLY RETIREMENT ADVICE

It’s backed with this subhead: The financial services industry has blocked the Biden administration from requiring brokers to put retirees’ needs first — above lucrative commissions.

Here’s the lede. I have highlighted a few passages for emphasis:

"To protect older Americans’ life savings, President Biden pledged in October to crack down on financial advisers who recommend investments just because they pay higher commissions. Then the insurance industry got to work."

Here’s the red meat backing that strong lede:
"Lobbying groups representing New York Life, Lincoln Financial Group, Prudential Financial and other companies first pushed back against the newly proposed regulations before suing to topple them entirely."
"Now the government’s latest attempt to protect retirees is in political and legal limbo, facing the possibility that it may never take effect."
"It is the latest example of a pervasive pattern: As the Biden administration tries to impose new restrictions on powerful industries, those businesses successfully turn to (Republican) Congress and courts for a reprieve. This time, the resulting clash centers on a basic question: Should federal law require more financial professionals to put retirees’ needs above all else — including their own paychecks — when they offer advice about how to invest?"

This is stunning, folks, it really is, and another direct attack on retirees by Republicans and the courts who own them. I say again: Anybody who tells you Republicans care about protecting you from financial predators is just flat lying, and might have some golden sneakers they’d like to sell you.

Further, they have absolutely no problem preying on hardworking people who spent their lives working their fingers to the bone and would like a few years to enjoy the fruits of that labor before limping into the sunset.

That’s a lot of necessary metaphors right there to drive home a point: If you are in, or nearing retirement and are not voting Democratic, you are very much voting AGAINST yer own interests.

Back to the story real quick. The American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) was asked to comment on these heinous Republican actions, and said this:
“What they’re (GOP and these financial predators) saying is, the only way they can operate is by giving you advice that is not in your best interest. “If they hung that on their shingle … no one would go to that financial adviser.”


Dang, eh? Their success depends on screwing you.

Read that again:

Their success depends on screwing you.


So Republicans are busy little bees making it OK for your financial advisor to look you in the eyes and pick your pocket.

Back to the story:
In April, the Labor Department finalized rules that would subject a wide array of brokers to a higher legal standard, requiring them to act as fiduciaries. The effort primarily aims to protect the millions of Americans who leave their jobs, or otherwise need to roll over their retirement savings, and opt for tax-advantaged accounts such as IRAs — transactions that exceeded $770 billion in 2022 alone, according to federal estimates.
These savers face critical, one-time decisions about what to do with their money, and a miscalculation caused by conflicted investment advice could cut deeply into their retirement funds. But the Biden administration’s attempts to ensure Americans receive the best guidance have sparked immense political backlash, as financial services and insurance professionals try to avert what they see as costly, illegal federal mandates.
In July, the industries scored a string of critical early victories: Republicans in Congress took the first step toward invalidating the new rules, while judges in two federal courts blocked the government from implementing the proposal nationwide in September, as planned, potentially setting the stage for the regulations to be scrapped.


That’s a lot of evil to chew on, so here’s the nut: Republicans are actively working to protect these wolves, so they can eat YOUR savings. If this isn’t an abomination, I’m not sure what is.

Here’s some reaction to that crime:
Micah Hauptman, the director of investor protection at the Consumer Federation of America, predicted additional delays as the fight winds its way to the Supreme Court— adding to the high stakes for Americans who already face confusing choices about what to do with their retirement money.
“Conflicted advice is very costly to retirement savers,” he said. “It can mean the difference between tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars in lost savings over time.”


Again I say: DANG. Because when this all gets to the bought-off, radical-Right Supreme Court, you KNOW which way this is certain to go.

No surprise, the corporate bastards either refused to comment for this story, or churned out fatty propaganda like this:
The American Council of Life Insurers, one of the organizations that sued (the Biden Administration), declined to comment. But it cheered the court ruling in an unsigned statement last month, adding that the new fiduciary requirements threaten to “deprive millions of consumers [of] access to much needed retirement financial guidance and protected lifetime income products.”

Sorry, but this is a projection in the highest order, so a correction: “The fiduciary requirement threatens to deprive these corporate predators of access to the retirement funds of these retirees so they can pad their own fat pockets.”

Again, the Republican Congress and their chummy courts are on the take, and it is all right there for everybody to see.

Here’s something else that everybody needs to see. There has been a lot of talk about the safety of OUR social security and Medicare. Republicans don’t seem to like these programs much because they’d rather feed the thieves I alluded to above more of OUR money.

Don’t believe me? Well, slide this fact in front of that Trump-lover in your family:

In Trump’s final 2020 budget, before he left the White House, he proposed spending $1.5 trillion less on Medicaid, $25 billion less on Social Security, and $845 billion less on Medicare.

Facts are, this convicted felon and fraudster WILL cut retirement programs if God forbid he ever gets the chance. He cares as much about you, as he does the truth, which is to say, not at all.

Look, for a variety of reasons, you have to be nuts to vote for a Republican right now. They probably don't care about you or our country. They probably care only about the filthy-rich bastards who are funding their campaigns and lifestyles and the bought-off courts who are protecting them.

Isn't that right, Clarence?


D. Earl Stephens is the author of “Toxic Tales: A Caustic Collection of Donald J. Trump’s Very Important Letters” and finished up a 30-year career in journalism as the Managing Editor of Stars and Stripes. Follow @EarlofEnough