On Election Night, while the world was watching the results come in, members of the aggressively contrarian House Freedom Caucus executed an unusual maneuver on the U.S. House floor, stalling a widely supported Social Security bill that was expected to come up for a vote as soon as next week after congressional recess.  

U.S. Reps. Abigail Spanberger (D-VA) and Garret Graves (R-LA) had gathered the necessary 218 signatures for a discharge petition to bypass the House Committee hearing and bring their bill, ATPE-supported House Resolution (H.R.) 82, to the floor. This bipartisan bill—co-sponsored by 330 of the 435 members of the U.S. House, including Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA)—aimed to repeal two provisions that reduce Social Security benefits for certain retirees, such as teachers in Texas and other states. Specifically, H.R. 82 sought to fully repeal the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and the Government Pension Offset (GPO), both of which lower Social Security benefits for those who worked at least part of their careers in jobs where they paid into a government pension, such as the Texas Teacher Retirement System (TRS), in lieu of paying into Social Security.  

During a brief seven-minute House floor meeting, otherwise known as a “pro forma session,” on Election Night, Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris (R-MD) recognized the former Freedom Caucus Chair, Rep. Bob Good (R-VA), who made a unanimous consent request to “lay the bill on the table”—i.e., to remove it from consideration without a direct vote on the bill. Because no one else was there to object, the motion passed by unanimous consent, effectively killing H.R. 82 under House rules.  

Although these controversial shenanigans were aimed at killing the bill, there are options to revive it. The bill could still be brought up for a vote under discharge procedures (potentially clearing the way for a vote under suspension of the rules as soon as next week), or an identical bill could be filed. However, even if a bipartisan version of the bill were to pass the House, it would most likely not pass in the Senate due to its significant cost and the limited time left in this congressional session for the House and Senate to reach a compromise. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the bill would cost $196 billion over the next 10 years and would move up the date of the Social Security trust fund’s insolvency by six months.  

No matter what happens with this bill, Congress is going to have to intervene and enact Social Security reform sometime before 2034. The National Association of Police Organizations, which has been lobbying for the measure, said its cost represents money “taken out of the hard-earned monthly Social Security checks of retired law enforcement officers, teachers, nurses, and bus drivers over the next 10 years.”