Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
Congressional research reportJan 22, 2025
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House
and Senate Since 1935
Updated January 22, 2025
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
RL30920
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
Social Security: Major Decisions in the
House and Senate Since 1935
Social Security—formally known as Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance—was
enacted in 1935 and has been amended numerous times. Lists and summaries of
individual major Social Security amendments may illuminate the tone and context of the
debate of the program in the House and Senate. Major statutory decisions made by
Congress on the Social Security program, vote information, summaries of major
legislative actions, and descriptions of floor amendments and congressional debate may
be informative to current discussions of the Social Security program.
RL30920
January 22, 2025
Tamar B. Breslauer
Senior Research Librarian
William R. Morton
Analyst in Income Security
During the 118th Congress, P.L. 118-273 was enacted, repealing two Social Security provisions that
reduced Social Security benefits for certain individuals who were in receipt of other pension benefits: the
government pension offset, which in various instances reduced Social Security benefits for spouses,
widows, and widowers who also received government pensions based on their own earnings not subject to
Social Security payroll taxes; and the windfall elimination provision, which in some instances reduced
Social Security benefits for individuals who also received a pension or disability benefit based on earnings
not subject to Social Security payroll taxes.
Congressional Research Service
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
Contents
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1
Chamber Votes................................................................................................................................. 3
P.L. 271—74th Congress, Enactment of the Social Security Act ............................................... 3
House Action....................................................................................................................... 4
Senate Action ...................................................................................................................... 6
Conference Action .............................................................................................................. 7
P.L. 379—76th Congress, Social Security Act Amendments of 1939 ........................................ 7
House Action....................................................................................................................... 8
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 10
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 10
Payroll Tax Freeze, 1942-1947 ............................................................................................... 10
P.L. 492—80th Congress, 1948 Provision for Exclusion of Certain Newspaper and
Magazine Vendors from Social Security Coverage (H.R. 5052) and P.L. 642—80th
Congress, 1948 Provision to Maintain Status Quo Concept of Employee ........................... 12
House Action..................................................................................................................... 13
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 13
Veto ................................................................................................................................... 13
Veto Override .................................................................................................................... 14
P.L. 734—81st Congress, Social Security Act Amendments of 1950 ...................................... 14
House Action..................................................................................................................... 15
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 16
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 17
P.L. 590—82nd Congress, Social Security Act Amendments of 1952 ..................................... 17
House Action..................................................................................................................... 17
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 18
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 18
P.L. 761—83rd Congress, Social Security Amendments of 1954 ............................................ 18
House Action..................................................................................................................... 19
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 19
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 20
P.L. 880—84th Congress, Social Security Amendments of 1956 ............................................ 20
House Action..................................................................................................................... 21
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 21
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 22
P.L. 85-840, Social Security Amendments of 1958 ................................................................. 22
House Action..................................................................................................................... 22
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 22
House Concurrence ........................................................................................................... 23
P.L. 86-778, Social Security Amendments of 1960 ................................................................. 23
House Action..................................................................................................................... 24
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 24
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 25
P.L. 87-64, Social Security Amendments of 1961 ................................................................... 25
House Action..................................................................................................................... 25
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 26
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 26
Proposed Social Security Amendments of 1964 ..................................................................... 27
Congressional Research Service
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
House Action..................................................................................................................... 27
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 27
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 27
P.L. 89-97, Social Security Amendments of 1965 ................................................................... 28
House Action..................................................................................................................... 28
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 29
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 30
P.L. 89-368, Tax Adjustment Act of 1966 ............................................................................... 31
House Action..................................................................................................................... 31
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 31
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 31
P.L. 90-248, Social Security Amendments of 1967 ................................................................. 32
House Action..................................................................................................................... 32
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 32
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 33
P.L. 91-172, Tax Reform Act of 1969 ..................................................................................... 33
House Action..................................................................................................................... 33
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 34
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 34
P.L. 92-5, Public Debt Limit Increase; Social Security Amendments ..................................... 34
House Action..................................................................................................................... 34
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 35
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 35
P.L. 92-336, Public Debt Limit; Disaster losses; Social Security Act Amendments ............... 35
House Action..................................................................................................................... 36
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 36
House Response to Senate Amendment ............................................................................ 36
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 37
P.L. 92-603, Social Security Amendments of 1972 ................................................................. 37
House Action..................................................................................................................... 38
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 38
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 38
P.L. 93-233, Social Security Benefits Increase ....................................................................... 39
House Action..................................................................................................................... 39
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 39
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 40
P.L. 95-216, Social Security Amendments of 1977 ................................................................. 40
House Action..................................................................................................................... 41
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 43
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 44
P.L. 96-265, Social Security Disability Amendments of 1980 ................................................ 45
House Action..................................................................................................................... 45
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 46
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 46
P.L. 96-403, Reallocation of OASI and DI Taxes ................................................................... 47
House Action..................................................................................................................... 47
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 47
P.L. 96-473, Retirement Test Amendments ............................................................................. 47
House Action..................................................................................................................... 48
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 48
Congressional Research Service
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
House Concurrence ........................................................................................................... 49
Senate Concurrence .......................................................................................................... 49
P.L. 97-35, Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 ....................................................... 49
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 50
House Action..................................................................................................................... 50
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 51
P.L. 97-123, Social Security Amendments of 1981 ................................................................. 51
House Action..................................................................................................................... 52
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 52
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 53
P.L. 97-455, An Act Relating to Taxes on Virgin Island Source Income and Social
Security Disability Benefits ................................................................................................. 53
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 54
House Action..................................................................................................................... 54
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 55
P.L. 98-21, Social Security Amendments of 1983 ................................................................... 55
House Action..................................................................................................................... 55
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 56
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 57
P.L. 98-460, Social Security Disability Benefits Reform Act of 1984 .................................... 57
House Action..................................................................................................................... 58
Administrative Action ....................................................................................................... 58
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 59
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 59
P.L. 99-177, Public Debt Limit—Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control
Act of 1985 .......................................................................................................................... 59
House Action..................................................................................................................... 60
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 60
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 60
S.Con.Res. 32, Proposed COLA Constraints in FY1986 Budget Resolution ......................... 60
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 61
House Action..................................................................................................................... 61
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 62
P.L. 99-509, Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986 ..................................................... 62
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 62
House Action..................................................................................................................... 62
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 63
P.L. 100-203, Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987 ................................................... 63
House Action..................................................................................................................... 63
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 63
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 64
On December 21, 1987, the Senate passed the conference report by a vote of 61 (18R, 43-D) to 28 (23-R, 5-D).P.L. 100-647, Technical and Miscellaneous Revenue
Act of 1988 .......................................................................................................................... 64
House Action..................................................................................................................... 64
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 64
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 64
P.L. 101-239, Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989 ................................................... 65
House Action..................................................................................................................... 65
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 65
Congressional Research Service
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 65
P.L. 101-508, Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 ................................................... 66
House Action..................................................................................................................... 66
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 66
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 67
P.L. 103-66, Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 ..................................................... 67
House Action..................................................................................................................... 68
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 68
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 68
House Action as Modified ................................................................................................ 69
Senate Action as Modified ................................................................................................ 69
Conference Action as Modified ........................................................................................ 69
P.L. 103-296, Social Security Administrative Reform Act of 1994 ........................................ 70
House Action..................................................................................................................... 70
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 70
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 71
P.L. 103-387, Social Security Domestic Reform Act of 1994 ................................................. 71
House Action..................................................................................................................... 71
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 71
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 71
P.L. 104-121, Senior Citizens Right to Work Act of 1996 ...................................................... 72
House Action..................................................................................................................... 72
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 72
P.L. 106-170, Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act of 1999 ...................... 73
House Action..................................................................................................................... 73
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 73
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 73
P.L. 106-182, Senior Citizens Right to Work Act.................................................................... 73
House Action..................................................................................................................... 74
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 74
Conference Action ............................................................................................................ 74
P.L. 108-203, Social Security Protection Act of 2004 ............................................................. 74
House Action..................................................................................................................... 76
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 76
House Response to Senate Action..................................................................................... 76
P.L. 111-312, Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job
Creation Act of 2010 ............................................................................................................ 77
House Action..................................................................................................................... 77
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 77
House Action as Amended ................................................................................................ 77
Senate Action as Amended................................................................................................ 77
House Action Approved Amendment ............................................................................... 78
P.L. 112-78, Temporary Payroll Tax Cut Continuation Act of 2011 ....................................... 78
House Action..................................................................................................................... 78
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 78
P.L. 112-96, Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 ...................................... 78
House Action..................................................................................................................... 79
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 79
House Action as Agreed .................................................................................................... 79
Senate Action as Agreed ................................................................................................... 79
Congressional Research Service
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
P.L. 113-270, No Social Security for Nazis Act ...................................................................... 79
House Action..................................................................................................................... 80
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 81
P.L. 114-74, Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 ............................................................................ 81
Changes to Social Security’s Filing Rules ........................................................................ 81
Social Security Payroll Tax Reallocation .......................................................................... 83
House Action..................................................................................................................... 83
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 83
P.L. 115-8, Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United
States Code, of the rule submitted by the Social Security Administration relating to
Implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 ................................ 84
House Action..................................................................................................................... 84
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 85
P.L. 115-59, Social Security Number Fraud Prevention Act of 2017 ...................................... 85
House Action..................................................................................................................... 85
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 85
P.L. 115-165, Strengthening Protections for Social Security Beneficiaries Act of 2018 ........ 85
House Action..................................................................................................................... 86
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 86
P.L. 115-243, Tribal Social Security Fairness Act of 2018 ..................................................... 87
House Action..................................................................................................................... 87
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 87
P.L. 115-174, Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act.............. 87
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 88
House Action..................................................................................................................... 88
P.L. 116-250, ALS Disability Insurance Access Act of 2019 .................................................. 88
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 89
House Action..................................................................................................................... 89
P.L. 116-260, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 ............................................................ 90
House Action..................................................................................................................... 91
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 91
P.L. 118-273, Social Security Fairness Act of 2023 ................................................................ 91
House Action..................................................................................................................... 92
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 93
Tables
Table 1. Social Security Laws, 1935-2024 ...................................................................................... 1
Appendixes
Appendix. List of Acronyms ......................................................................................................... 95
Contacts
Author Information........................................................................................................................ 95
Congressional Research Service
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
Introduction
The Social Security Act of 1935 established a federal old-age pension financed with employeeemployer payroll taxes. Since then, Congress has amended the Social Security program for
multiple purposes, including to expand coverage, change the minimum age for retirement
benefits, provide an automatic cost-of-living adjustment to benefits, and address concerns about
solvency of the Social Security trust funds.
This report traces the major decisions affecting the Social Security program, from the earliest
enacting legislation through the most recent congressional session. It provides a summary of the
provisions and voting records for each bill, focusing on amendments to Old-Age, Survivors, and
Disability Insurance (OASDI), which is the formal name of Social Security. A list of
abbreviations used in the report can be found in the Appendix.
For an overview of the Social Security program, see CRS Report R42035, Social Security Primer,
by Barry F. Huston.
Table 1 lists major Social Security legislation from 1935 until the most recent version of this
report.
Table 1. Social Security Laws, 1935-2024
Year
Title
Public Law
Bill Number
1935
Social Security Act
P.L. 74-271a
H.R. 7260
1939
Social Security Act Amendments of 1939
P.L. 76-379a
H.R. 6635
1942
Revenue Act of 1942
P.L. 77-753a
H.R. 7378
Joint Resolution Regarding Tariff Act
P.L. 78-211a
H.J.Res. 171
Revenue Act of 1943
P.L. 78-235a
H.R. 3687
Federal Insurance Contributions Act of 1945
P.L. 78-495a
H.R. 5564
1945
Revenue Act of 1945
P.L. 79-214a
H.R. 4309
1946
Social Security Amendments of 1946
P.L. 79-719a
H.R. 7037
1947
Social Security Amendments of 1947
P.L. 80-379a
H.R. 3818
1948
Exclusion of Certain Newspaper and Magazine Vendors from Social
Security Coverage
P.L. 80-492a
H.R. 5052
1948
Maintain Status Quo Concept of Employee
P.L. 80-642a
H.J.Res 296
1950
Social Security Act Amendments of 1950
P.L. 81-734a
H.R. 6000
1952
Social Security Act Amendments of 1952
P.L. 82-590a
H.R. 7800
1954
Social Security Amendments of 1954
P.L. 83-761a
H.R. 9366
1956
Social Security Amendments of 1956
P.L. 84-880a
H.R. 7225
1958
Social Security Amendments of 1958
P.L. 85-840
H.R. 13549
1960
Social Security Amendments of 1960
P.L. 86-778
H.R. 12580
1961
Social Security Amendments of 1961
P.L. 87-64
H.R. 6027
1964
Proposed Social Security Amendments of 1964
—
H.R. 11865
1965
Social Security Amendments of 1965
P.L. 89-97
H.R. 6675
1966
Tax Adjustment Act of 1966
P.L. 89-368
H.R. 12752
1943
1943
1944
Congressional Research Service
1
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
Year
Title
Public Law
Bill Number
1967
Social Security Amendments of 1967
P.L. 90-248
H.R. 12080
1969
Tax Reform Act of 1969
P.L. 91-172
H.R. 13270
1971
Public Debt Limit, Increase; Social Security Act, Amendments
P.L. 92-5
H.R. 4690
1972
Public Debt Limit; Disaster Losses; Social Security Act, Amendments
P.L. 92-336
H.R. 15390
1972
Social Security Amendments of 1972
P.L. 92-603
H.R. 1
1973
Social Security Benefits, Increase
P.L. 93-233
H.R. 11333
1977
Social Security Amendments of 1977
P.L. 95-216
H.R. 9346
1980
Social Security Disability Amendments of 1980
P.L. 96-265
H.R. 3236
1980
Reallocation of OASl and Dl Taxes
P.L. 96-403
H.R. 7670
1980
Earnings Test Amendments
P.L. 96-473
H.R. 5295
1981
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981
P.L. 97-35
H.R. 3982
1981
Social Security Amendments of 1981
P.L. 97-123
H.R. 4331
1983
An Act Relating to Taxes on Virgin Islands Source Income and Social
Security Disability Benefits
P.L. 97-455
H.R. 7093
1983
Social Security Amendments of 1983
P.L. 98-21
H.R. 1900
1984
Social Security Disability Benefits Reform Act of 1984
P.L. 98-460
H.R. 3755
1985
Public Debt Limit—Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control
Act of 1985
P.L. 99-177
H.J.Res. 372
1985
COLA Constraints in FY86 Budget Resolution
—
S.Con.Res. 32
1986
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986
P.L. 99-509
H.R. 5300
1987
Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987
P.L. 100-203
H.R. 3545
1988
Technical and Miscellaneous Act of 1988
P.L. 100-647
H.R. 4333
1989
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989
P.L. 101-239
H.R. 3299
1990
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990
P.L. 101-508
H.R. 5835
1993
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993
P.L. 103-66
H.R. 2264
1994
Social Security Administrative Reform Act of 1994
P.L. 103-296
H.R. 4277
1994
Social Security Domestic Reform Act of 1994
P.L. 103-387
H.R. 4278
1996
Senior Citizens Right to Work Act of 1996
P.L. 104-121
H.R. 3136
1999
Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act of 1999
P.L. 106-170
H.R. 1180
2000
Senior Citizens Freedom to Work Act
P.L. 106-182
H.R. 5
2004
Social Security Protection Act of 2004
P.L. 108-203
H.R. 743
2010
Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job
Creation Act of 2010
P.L. 111-312
H.R. 4853
2011
Temporary Payroll Tax Cut Continuation Act of 2011
P.L. 112-78
H.R. 3765
2012
Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012
P.L. 112-96
H.R. 3630
2014
No Social Security for Nazis Act
P.L. 113-270
H.R. 5739
2015
Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015
P.L. 114-74
H.R. 1314
Congressional Research Service
2
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
Year
Title
Public Law
Bill Number
2016
Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5,
United States Code, of the rule submitted by the NICS Improvement
Act of 2007
P.L. 115-8
H.J.Res 40
2017
Social Security Number Fraud Prevention Act of 2017
P.L. 115-59
H.R. 624
2018
Strengthening Protections for Social Security Beneficiaries Act of
2018
P.L. 115-165
H.R. 4547
2018
Tribal Social Security Fairness Act of 2018
P.L. 115-243
H.R. 6124
2018
Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act
P.L. 115-174
S. 2155
2020
ALS Disability Insurance Access Act of 2019
P.L. 116-250
S. 578
2020
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021
P.L. 116-260
H.R. 133
2024
Social Security Fairness Act of 2023
P.L. 118-273
H.R. 82
Source: Table compiled by the Congressional Research Service (CRS).
a. The printed law does not show the number of the Congress that passed it. The number is given here for
reference purposes.
Chamber Votes
P.L. 271—74th Congress, Enactment of the Social Security Act
The Social Security Act became law on August 14, 1935, when President Franklin Roosevelt
signed H.R. 7260. Title II of the act created a compulsory national old-age benefits program,
covering nearly all workers in commerce and industry and providing monthly pensions for
insured workers aged 65 or older. A benefit weighted toward lower-paid workers was to be based
on cumulative wages and was to be payable beginning in 1942 to persons aged 65 or older who
had paid Social Security taxes for at least five years. The benefit was to be withheld from
otherwise qualified persons in any month in which they did any work. Under Title VIII of the act,
a payroll tax of 1%, each, on employees and employers, payable on earnings up to $3,000 each
year, was to be imposed on covered jobs as of January 1, 1937, and was scheduled to rise in steps
to 3% each by 1949.
Besides old-age benefits, the act provided for a system of federal-state unemployment
compensation funded with employer payroll taxes, and for grants to states to help fund assistance
payments to certain categories of needy persons (i.e., the aged, the blind, and children under 16
who had been deprived of parental support), child welfare services, and maternal and child health
services.
When the act was debated in Congress, prominent Republicans in the House and Senate made
attempts to delete the provisions creating the old-age pension system. They said they preferred to
rely solely on the assistance (i.e., charity/welfare) approach to help the aged. They argued that the
payroll tax/insurance mechanism of the old-age benefits provisions might be unconstitutional and
that it would impose a heavy tax burden on businesses that would retard economic development.
Members of the minority stated, in the Ways and Means Committee’s report to the House, that the
old-age benefits program (Title II) and the method by which the money was to be raised to pay
for the program (Title VIII) established a “bureaucracy in the field of insurance in competition
with private business.” They contended further that the program would “destroy old-age
retirement systems set up by private industries, which in most instances provide more liberal
Congressional Research Service
3
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
benefits than are contemplated under Title II.”1 Although some party members tried to remove the
old-age benefits provisions, the majority of Republicans in both chambers nevertheless did vote
for the final Social Security bill. During congressional debate, Democrats generally supported the
proposed old-age benefits program, and the vast majority of Democrats voted for the final bill.
House Action
The Ways and Means Committee began holding executive sessions on the Social Security bill
soon after the conclusion of its hearings on it in January and February of 1935.2 The committee
reported H.R. 7260 on April 5, 1935, with 17 Democrats voting in favor of the bill and all 7
Republicans voting “present.”3
Debate on the Social Security bill started in the House on April 11 and lasted until April 19, 1935.
Approximately 50 amendments were offered, but none passed. According to Edwin Witte, a key
player in the development of the Social Security Act, House leaders passed the word that they
wanted all amendments defeated.4
Four particularly significant votes were Representative Monaghan’s amendment proposing a
revised “Townsend plan” and Representative Connery’s amendment proposing the Lundeen plan,
both of which (described below) called for a more generous social insurance system;
Representative Treadway’s motion to recommit H.R. 7260 to delete the old-age benefits program
and its related taxes; and the vote on final passage of the bill.
On April 18, 1935, Representative Monaghan (D-MT) offered an amendment, introduced in its
original form by Representative Groarty (D-CA) and referred to as the Townsend plan, which
required the federal government to pay a $200-a-month pension to everyone 60 years of age or
older, to be financed by a 2% tax on “all financial” transactions (essentially a sales tax). (For
more details on the Townsend plan, see discussion of the 1939 amendments below.)
Representative Monaghan’s amendment, although less costly than the original Townsend plan,
was rejected by a vote of 56 to 206.5
On April 18, 1935, Representative Connery (D-MA) offered an amendment that contained the
provisions of a bill sponsored by Representative Lundeen (Farmer-Laborite-MN). The Lundeen
bill, which was approved 7-6 by the House Labor Committee, called for the “establishment of a
system of social insurance to compensate all workers and farmers, 18 years of age or older, in all
1 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Ways and Means, The Social Security Bill, report to accompany H.R. 7260, 74th
Cong., 1st sess., April 5, 1935, H.Rept. 615 (Washington, DC: GPO, 1935), p. 44.
2 Edwin E. Witte, The Development of the Social Security Act (University of Wisconsin Press, 1963), p. 91.
(Hereinafter cited as Witte, The Development of the Social Security Act.)
3 A reproduction of the Ways and Means Committee votes on 74 H.R. 7260 appears on p. 283 (PDF p. 293) of U.S.
Congress, House Committee on Ways and Means, The Committee on Ways and Means: A Bicentennial History 17891989, 100th Cong., 1st Sess., January 1, 1989, H.Doc. 100-244, at https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GPO-CDOC100hdoc244. The reproduction shows that the bill, H.R. 7260, passed committee by a vote of 17 (17-D, 0-R) to 0 (0-D,
0-R). The seven Republican members of the committee voted “present.” One Democratic member of the committee
was absent and did not vote by proxy. For a list of committee membership in the 74th Congress by party, see p. 415
(PDF p. 425).
4 Witte, The Development of the Social Security Act, p. 98.
5 Congressional Record, April 18, 1935, House, p. 5958. The vote on the Townsend plan amendment was not taken by
roll call, but by division. A division vote is taken as follows: Members in favor of a proposal stand and are counted by a
presiding officer; then Members opposed stand and are counted. There is no record of how individual Members voted.
The Members voting for the Townsend plan, however, were listed in newspapers. The majority of Members who voted
for the Townsend plan were conservative Republicans who opposed the entire Social Security bill. Witte, The
Development of the Social Security Act, p. 99.
Congressional Research Service
4
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
industries, occupations, and professions, who are unemployed through no fault of their own.... ”6
Representative Lundeen’s plan offered higher benefits than the bill reported out of the Committee
on Ways and Means, and it tied benefits to the cost of living. Under the Lundeen proposal, a more
generous social insurance program was to be extended to all workers and farmers unable to work
because of illness, old age, maternity, industrial injury, or any other disability. This system was to
be financed by taxes falling most heavily on persons with higher incomes (by levying additional
taxation on inheritances, gifts, and individual and corporation incomes of $5,000 or more per
year). There was a division vote of 52 in favor and 204 opposed. Representative Connery asked
for tellers. The Connery amendment was rejected by a 40-158 teller vote.7
On April 18, 1935, Representative Treadway (R-MA), the ranking minority Member of the Ways
and Means Committee, offered an amendment to strike Title II, the old-age benefit provisions,
from the bill. Representative Treadway was opposed to the old-age benefits provision and to the
taxing provisions of Title VIII. He said that the financing arrangement was unconstitutional. He
indicated that the tax would be particularly burdensome on industry, running up to 6% on
payrolls. He said that “business and industry are already operating under very heavy burdens” and
maintained that to add a payroll tax to their burden would probably cause more unemployment
and more uncertainty.8 Representative Jenkins (R-OH), supporter of the Treadway amendment,
stated that making each worker pay 3% of his money for old-age benefits, whether he wanted to
or not, and requiring employers to do the same, was clearly unconstitutional. He said, “Why talk
about wanting to relieve the Depression, why talk about charity, why talk about all these other
things when you are placing a financial lash upon the backs of the people whose backs are
breaking under a load of debts and taxes?” He described the old-age benefits system as
“compulsion of the rankest kind.”9 The Treadway amendment was defeated by a 49-125 teller
vote.10
On April 19, 1935, Representative Treadway made a motion to recommit H.R. 7260, including
instructions to the Ways and Means Committee to strike out the old-age and unemployment
insurance provisions and to increase the federal contribution for the welfare program of old-age
assistance, Title I of the bill.11 Representative Treadway stated that the old-age benefit and
unemployment insurance provisions of the bill were not emergency measures and that they
“would not become effective in time to help present economic conditions, but, on the contrary
would be a definite drag on recovery.” He was opposed to levying a tax against both the employer
and the employee. During his remarks on April 12, 1935, he stated that he would “vote most
strenuously in opposition to the bill at each and every opportunity.”12 During his April 19, 1935,
remarks, Representative Treadway said he was disgusted “at the attitude of business in that it has
not shown the proper interest in protecting itself by stating its case before Congress.”13 His
motion to recommit was rejected by a vote of 149 (95-R, 45-D, 9-I) to 253 (1-R, 252-D).14
6 Congressional Record, April 18, 1935, House, in floor remarks by Rep. Lundeen, p. 5965.
7 Congressional Record, April 18, 1935, House, p. 5969. In the House, Members would file past tellers and be counted
as for or against a measure, but they were not recorded by name. The teller vote has not been used in the House in
many years and was never used in the Senate.
8 Congressional Record, April 18, 1935, House, in floor remarks by Rep. Treadway, p. 5990. Also see, Congressional
Record, April 12, 1935, House, p. 5531.
9 Congressional Record, April 18, 1935, House, in floor remarks by Rep. Jenkins, p. 5993.
10 Congressional Record, April 18, 1935, House, p. 5994.
11 Congressional Record, April 19, 1935, p. 6068.
12
Congressional Record, April 12, 1935, House, in floor remarks by Rep. Treadway, p. 5531.
13 Congressional Record, April 19, 1935, House, in floor remarks by Rep. Treadway, p. 6053.
14 Congressional Record, April 19, 1935, House, Roll call no. 56, not voting 29, pp. 6068-6069.
Congressional Research Service
5
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
On April 19, 1935, the House passed the Social Security bill by a vote of 372 (77-R, 288-D, 7-I)
to 33 (18-R, 13-D, 2-I).15
Senate Action
There were also four major votes in the Senate: Senator Long’s (D-LA) proposal to substitute
taxes on wealth and property for the payroll tax; Senator Clark’s amendment to exempt from
coverage employees in firms with private pensions; Senator Hastings’s motion to recommit; and
the vote on final passage of the bill.
On June 17, 1935, Senator Long offered an amendment to liberalize the proposed old-age
assistance program (Title I of the bill) and delete the payroll tax provisions (Title VIII and IX). In
place of the payroll tax, Senator Long recommended that states levy a tax on wealth or property.
Senator Long’s amendment was rejected by voice vote.16
On June 19, 1935, Senator Clark (D-MO) offered an amendment to exempt from coverage under
the old-age benefits system employees in firms with private old-age pension systems. This idea
came from an official of a Philadelphia insurance brokerage firm that specialized in group annuity
contracts. Proponents of the amendment stated that employees would benefit from more liberal
private annuities that would be in true proportion to earnings and service; joint annuities to
protect spouses; earlier retirement for disability; and other factors. Supporters of the amendment
also maintained that the government would benefit because the reserves of private annuity plans
would increase investment and create more income to tax. The Administration (being opposed to
the amendment) argued that the amendment did not provide true retirement income guarantees
because private pension programs could be cancelled, or the firm sponsoring them could go out of
business. Critics maintained that the amendment discouraged the employment of older men. The
Ways and Means Committee rejected the proposal and so did the Finance Committee (by a
narrow margin), but when Senator Clark offered it as an amendment on the Senate floor, it was
passed by a vote of 51 (16-R, 35-D) to 35 (3-R, 30-D, 2-I).17
On June 19, 1935, Senator Hastings (R-DE) made a motion to strike out the old-age benefits
provisions from the bill. Senator Hastings stated that those provisions were an effort to write into
law a forced annuity system for a certain group of people. He maintained that the reserve account
to take care of people in the future was not a contract and the American public could not depend
upon it. He stated that the accumulation of huge sums of money for persons who had not yet
reached retirement age would be subjected to many demands and most likely could not be
preserved intact. He also said “let us not deceive that youth by making him believe that here is an
annuity whereby he is contributing 50% and his employer is contributing 50%, and that it goes to
his credit, when as a matter of fact, part of it is taken from him in order that we may take care of
the older people of today.”18 Senator Hastings’s amendment was rejected by a vote of 15 (12-R,
3-D) to 63 (7-R, 54-D, 2-I).19
On June 19, 1935, Senator George (D-GA) offered an amendment to encourage formation of
industrial pensions as a substitute for Titles II and VIII. Under the amendment, employers were to
operate and manage their own plans. The amendment called for a uniform schedule of benefits
15 Congressional Record, April 19, 1935, House, Roll call no. 57, not voting 25, pp. 6069-6070.
16 Congressional Record, June 17, 1935, Senate, pp. 9427-9437.
17
Congressional Record, June 19, 1935, Senate, not voting 9, p. 9631.
18 Congressional Record, June 17, 1935, Senate, in floor remarks by Sen. Hastings, p. 9422.
19 Congressional Record, June 19, 1935, Senate, not voting 17, p. 9648.
Congressional Research Service
6
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
nationwide and provided for disability and survivor benefits along with old-age and
unemployment benefits. The amendment was defeated by voice vote.20
The Senate passed the bill on June 19, 1935, by a vote of 77 (15-R, 60-D, 2-I) to 6 (5-R, 1-D).21
Conference Action
The conferees settled all differences except on the Clark amendments related to employees under
private pension plans. The conference committee reported the bill without the Clark amendments,
but with an understanding that the chairmen of the Ways and Means and Finance Committees
would appoint a special joint committee to study whether to exempt industrial employers with
private pension plans from coverage under Social Security and to report to the next Congress.22
On July 17, 1935, the House rejected Representative Treadway’s motion to accept the Clark
amendment by a vote of 78 to 268;23 then agreed by a vote of 269 to 65 to a motion by
Representative Doughton (D-NC) that the House insist that the Senate drop the Clark
amendment.24
On July 17, 1935, the Senate agreed, by voice vote, to Senator Harrison’s motion to insist on
keeping the Clark amendment and ask for a further conference.25
On August 8, 1935, the conference report cleared the House by a voice vote.26
On August 9, 1935, the Senate conferees agreed to delete the Clark amendment;27 the Senate then
agreed to the conference report by a voice vote.28
P.L. 379—76th Congress, Social Security Act Amendments of 1939
H.R. 6635, the Social Security Act Amendments of 1939, was signed into law on August 10,
1939, by President Franklin Roosevelt. Congress expressly provided in the 1935 Act that the
Social Security Board (a three-member panel appointed by the President with advice and consent
of the Senate) study and make recommendations on the most effective methods of providing
economic security through social insurance. An advisory council appointed by the Senate Special
Committee on Social Security and the Social Security Board was created in May 1937 to work
with the Social Security Board to study amending Titles II and VII of the Social Security Act.
Some members of the advisory council represented employees, some represented employers, and
others represented the general public. Both the Social Security Board and the advisory council
made recommendations on how the old-age benefits program should be changed, and many of
their recommendations were the same. President Roosevelt sent the Social Security Board’s
20 Congressional Record, June 19, 1935, Senate, p. 9650.
21 Congressional Record, June 19, 1935, Senate, not voting 12, p. 9646.
22 The issue, however, does not appear to have emerged in subsequent Social Security legislation. It has been said that
deferring the Clark amendment was crucial to the passage of the bill (Derthick, Martha, Policymaking for Social
Security. The Brookings Institution, 1979, p. 282). (Hereinafter cited as Derthick, Policymaking for Social Security.)
23 Congressional Record, July 17, 1935, House, Roll call no. 132, not voting 83, pp. 11342-11343.
24 Congressional Record, July 17, 1935, House, Roll call no. 133, not voting 95, p. 11343.
25 Congressional Record, July 17, 1935, Senate, p. 11310.
26
Congressional Record, August 8, 1935, House, p. 12760.
27 Congressional Record, August 9, 1935, Senate, pp. 12793-12794.
28 Congressional Record, August 9, 1935, Senate, p. 12794.
Congressional Research Service
7
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
recommendations to Congress on January 16, 1939. The 1939 amendments incorporated most of
the board’s recommendations.
The 1939 amendments extended benefits to dependents and survivors of workers covered by
Social Security. Dependents included an aged wife, a child under 16 (under 18 if attending
school), a widowed mother caring for an eligible child, an aged widow, and a dependent aged
parent if there were no eligible widow or child. Widows would receive 75% of the primary
insurance amount (PIA)29 of the worker, and all other dependents would receive 50% of the PIA.
The starting date for monthly benefits was accelerated to January 1, 1940, instead of January 1,
1942. Benefits were based on average monthly wages rather than on cumulative wages. In
addition, Congress repealed the tax rate increase to 1.5%, scheduled to go into effect in 1940,
replacing it with an increase to 2% in 1943-1945. The amendments also modified qualifying
provisions, including the definition of insured status, for consistency with other changes in the
act.30 Further, people receiving OASI benefits were permitted to earn up to $14.99 monthly: no
benefits were to be paid in any month in which the recipient earned $15 or more in covered
employment. The system now was called Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI). Congress
also changed the old-age reserve account to a trust fund, managed by a board of trustees.
House Action
On June 2, 1939, following public hearings on the proposed amendments and six weeks of
executive sessions, the Committee on Ways and Means reported to the House H.R. 6635,
embodying its recommendations for amendments to the Social Security Act. The day before, the
House had debated on and voted against the Townsend old-age pension bill. The Townsend plan,
embodied in H.R. 6466 introduced by Representative McGroarty (D-CA) in January 1935, was
offered as a substitute for H.R. 6635.31 The Townsend plan would have provided a monthly
pension of $200 to every citizen aged 60 or older who had not been convicted of a felony. To
receive the pension, a person could not earn wages and was required to spend the entire pension
within 30 days. The plan would have been financed by a 2% tax on every commercial and
financial transaction; the President would have been given discretionary power to raise the tax to
3% or to lower it to 1%. During a 1935 Ways and Means Committee hearing, Representative
Townsend stated that his plan was only incidentally a pension plan. He said the principal
objectives of the proposal were to solve the unemployment problem and to restore prosperity by
giving people purchasing power. He cited Census Bureau data that 4 million people over the age
of 60 held jobs in 1930. He reiterated that to be eligible for the proposed pension of $200 a
month, those elderly people would have to give up their jobs, which he said meant that 4 million
jobs would become available to middle-aged and younger people. In addition, he said that
requiring 8 million elderly persons to buy $200 worth of goods and services each month would
increase demand and result in more jobs.32
29 The primary insurance amount (PIA) was the basic benefit amount for a worker who began receiving benefits at the
age of 65.
30 Benefits can be paid to workers or their dependents or survivors only if the worker is “insured” for these benefits.
Insured status is measured in terms of “quarters of coverage.” A person who had one year of coverage for every two
years after 1936 and before death or reaching the age of 65 was fully insured.
31 The Townsend movement, led by Francis E. Townsend, a California doctor, began in 1934, survived for some 20
years, and was at its peak in the 1935-1941 period. See Derthick, Policymaking for Social Security, p. 193.
32 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Ways and Means, Economic Security Act, hearings on H.R. 4120, 74th Cong.,
1st sess., January 21-31 and February 1, 2, 4-8, and 12, 1935 (Washington, DC: GPO, 1935), p. 680.
Congressional Research Service
8
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
Representative Sabath (D-IL) said he thought it was “decidedly out of place to bring the
Townsend bill to the floor.” He said that the bill “had no chance of passing in the first place;
neither was it feasible nor possible of operation.”33 Others branded the bill as “crackpot,” and in
general objected because they thought that the Social Security program was a better means of
caring for the aged, asserting that any liberalization of pensions should be done within the
framework of the Social Security Act.
Edwin Witte wrote
The members of the House of Representatives at all times took the Townsend movement
much more seriously than did the senators. The thousands of letters that the members
received in support of this plan worried them greatly. With the exception of probably not
more than a half dozen members, all felt that the Townsend plan was utterly impossible; at
the same time they hesitated to vote against it.34
The House rejected H.R. 6466, the Townsend plan bill, on June 1, 1939, by a vote of 97 (55-R,
40-D, 2-I) to 302 (107-R, 194-D, 1-I).35
A New York Times editorial reported that “the psychological effect of the presentation of the
Townsend bill was to make these liberalized benefits, referring to the provisions in H.R. 6635,
seem small. Most of those who voted against the Townsend plan will be eager to vote for these
liberalized benefits to show that their hearts are in the right place. The result is that the real cost
of the new Social Security scale of benefits is not likely to receive very serious attention.”36
The House took up H.R. 6635 on June 6, 1939. The bill had the general support of the Ways and
Means Committee. The minority stated in the committee’s report to the House that “while the bill
in no sense represents a complete or satisfactory solution of the problem of Social Security, it at
least makes certain improvements in the present law (some of which we have ourselves
heretofore suggested) which we believe justify us in supporting it despite its defects.”37
On June 9, 1939, Representative Havenner (D-CA) offered an amendment, endorsed by the
American Federation of Labor, to extend Social Security coverage to workers employed in
college clubs or fraternities or sororities; employees in nonprofit religious, charitable, or
educational institutions; student nurses; and some agricultural workers. The amendment was
rejected by voice vote.38
On June 9, 1939, Representative Kean (R-NJ) offered an amendment that required that the money
derived from the Social Security payroll tax be invested in one-year marketable U.S. government
bonds rather than in special nonmarketable Treasury obligations. Representative Kean remarked
that the adoption of the amendment would “prevent the present practice of using old-age taxes for
current expenses.” The amendment was rejected by voice vote.39
On June 9, 1939, Representative Carlson (R-KS) offered an amendment to exclude noncitizens
from coverage under Social Security. He was opposed to putting foreigners under the U.S. oldage insurance provisions. Opponents of the amendment argued that exemption of such people
33 Congressional Record, June 6, 1939, House, p. 6681.
34 Witte, The Development of the Social Security Act, pp. 95-96.
35 Congressional Record, June 1, 1939, House, Roll call no. 85, not voting 29, pp. 6524-6525.
36 “The Townsend Plan Vote,” New York Times, June 2, 1939, Editorial page.
37 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Ways and Means, Social Security Act Amendments of 1939, report to
accompany H.R. 6635, 76th Cong., 1st sess., June 2, 1939, H.Rept. 728 (Washington, DC: GPO, 1939), p. 113.
38 Congressional Record, June 9, 1939, House, p. 6935.
39 Congressional Record, June 9, 1939, House, p. 6936.
Congressional Research Service
9
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
would give employers of aliens a competitive advantage over vessels owned and manned by
Americans. Representative Carlson’s amendment was rejected 24 to 59 by a division vote.40
On June 10, 1939, Representative Carlson moved to recommit H.R. 6635 to the Committee on
Ways and Means. The motion was rejected by voice vote.41
On June 10, 1939, the House passed H.R. 6635 by a vote of 364 (142-R, 222-D) to 2 (2-R).42
Senate Action
On July 13, 1939, Senator Downey (D-CA), in the course of his statement on how “unworkable,
unjust, and unfair” the Social Security Act was, moved that the bill be recommitted to the Finance
Committee for more study of the whole pension and savings field. Senator Downey stated that
under H.R. 6635 covered workers in 1942 would receive only one-half as much in old-age
benefits as those receiving government subsidies (old-age assistance benefits/cash relief). Under
H.R. 6635, the average monthly Social Security benefit was projected at between $19 and $20 for
80% of workers in 1942, whereas the maximum old-age assistance benefit was $40. The motion
was rejected by a vote of 18 (12-R, 5-D, 1-I) to 47 (4-R, 41-D, 2-I).43
On July 13, 1939, Senator Reynolds (D-NC) offered an amendment to prohibit non-U.S. citizens
from being eligible for Social Security coverage or benefits. Senator Harrison (D-MS) offered
additional language to Senator Reynolds’s amendment that allowed benefit payments to aliens if
they lived within 50 miles of the United States. The amendment as modified was agreed to by
voice vote.44
The Senate passed H.R. 6635 on July 13, 1939, by a vote of 57 (8-R, 45-D, 4-I) to 8 (6-R, 2-D).45
Conference Action
The conference report was approved by the House on August 4, 1939, by voice vote,46 and by the
Senate on August 5, 1939, by a vote of 59 (14-R, 42-D, 3-I) to 4 (4-D).47
Payroll Tax Freeze, 1942-1947
Between 1942 and 1947, the Social Security payroll tax rate increase was postponed seven times.
It was not until 1950 that the 1% Social Security tax rate was allowed to rise to 1.5%.
The Revenue Act of 1942, P.L. 753 (H.R. 7378, 77th Congress) was signed by President Franklin
Roosevelt on October 21, 1942. It provided that for calendar year 1943, the payroll tax rate for
old-age and survivors benefits would be frozen at the existing rate of 1% for employees and
employers, each, instead of being increased to 2% on each as otherwise would have been
required.
40 Congressional Record, June 9, 1939, House, pp. 6937-6939.
41 Congressional Record, June 10, 1939, House, p. 6970.
42 Congressional Record, June 10, 1939, House, Roll call no. 91, not voting 63, pp. 6970-6971.
43 Congressional Record, July 13, 1939, Senate, not voting 31, p. 9023.
44 Congressional Record, July 13, 1939, Senate, p. 9030.
45
Congressional Record, July 13, 1939, Senate, not voting 31, p. 9031.
46 Congressional Record, August 4, 1939, House, p. 11092.
47 Congressional Record, August 5, 1939, Senate, not voting 33, p. 11146.
Congressional Research Service
10
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
P.L. 211 (H.J.Res. 171, 78th Congress), a joint resolution regarding the Tariff Act, signed by
President Roosevelt on December 22, 1943, froze the payroll tax at the 1% rate until March 1,
1944. The purpose of the resolution was to give Congress time to consider the scheduled payroll
tax increase before it went into effect.
The Revenue Act of 1943, P.L. 235 (H.R. 3687, 78th Congress), was vetoed by President
Roosevelt on February 22, 1944; the veto was overridden by the House on February 24, 1944,
and by the Senate on February 25, 1944. The bill deferred the scheduled payroll tax increase
(from 1 to 2%) until 1945.
P.L. 235 also contained an amendment by Senator Murray (D-MT) that authorized the use of
general revenues if payroll taxes were insufficient to meet Social Security benefit obligations.
Senator Murray stated that the amendment merely stated in law what had been implied in the
Senate committee report. Senator Vandenberg (R-MI) replied that the amendment “has no
immediate application, it has no immediate menace, it contemplates and anticipates no immediate
appropriation; but as the statement of a principle, I agree with the amendment completely.”48 The
amendment passed by voice vote.49 The “Murray-Vandenberg” general revenue provision was
repealed in 1950, when the tax rate was increased.
The Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) of 1945, P.L. 495 (H.R. 5564, 78th Congress),
signed by President Roosevelt on December 16, 1944, froze the payroll tax rate at 1% until 1946
and scheduled the payroll tax rate to rise to 2.5% for the years 1946 through 1948, and to 3%
thereafter.
The Revenue Act of 1945, P.L. 214 (H.R. 4309, 79th Congress), signed by President Truman on
November 8, 1945, deferred the tax rate increase until 1947.
The Social Security Amendments of 1946, P.L. 719 (H.R. 7037, 79th Congress), signed by
President Truman on August 10, 1946, deferred the tax rate increase until 1948.
The Social Security Amendments of 1947, P.L. 379 (H.R. 3818, 80th Congress), signed by
President Truman on August 6, 1947, continued the freeze on the tax rate increase until 1950 and
provided that it would rise to 1.5% for 1950-1951 and to 2% thereafter.
Members who favored these payroll tax freezes argued that the Social Security reserves were
adequate and that benefit payments in the immediate future could be met with the current payroll
tax rate. In a 1942 letter to the Senate Finance Committee, President Roosevelt said that “a failure
to allow the scheduled increase in rates to take place under the present favorable circumstances
would cause a real and justifiable fear that adequate funds will not be accumulated to meet the
heavy obligations of the future and that the claims for benefits accruing under the present law
may be jeopardized.” He also stated that “expanded Social Security, together with other fiscal
measures, would set up a bulwark of economic security for the people now and after the war and
at the same time would provide anti-inflationary sources for financing the war.”50 Members who
were opposed to the freeze argued that the scheduled payroll tax increase was important for the
long-term soundness of the OASI Trust Fund and that postponing the tax increase would mean
higher payroll tax rates in the future and perhaps government subsidies to meet obligations. Some
proponents of the freeze maintained that the Administration wanted the tax increase to retire the
public debt accumulated by wartime expenditures.
48
Congressional Record, January 19, 1944, Senate, in floor statement by Sen. Vandenberg, p. 374.
49 Congressional Record, January 19, 1944, Senate, p. 374.
50 Congressional Record, October 9, 1942, Senate, pp. 7983-7984.
Congressional Research Service
11
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
Although Senator Vandenberg (R-MI) was the main spokesman for postponing the payroll tax
increases, the legislative effort to defer tax increases was bipartisan. “Without regard to party or
ideology, elected representatives of the people were not willing to argue for increases in an
earmarked tax if a current need for them could not be demonstrated,” one scholar observed.51
P.L. 492—80th Congress, 1948 Provision for Exclusion of Certain
Newspaper and Magazine Vendors from Social Security Coverage
(H.R. 5052) and P.L. 642—80th Congress, 1948 Provision to Maintain
Status Quo Concept of Employee
Two pieces of 1948 legislation, H.R. 5052 and H.J.Res. 296, settled the argument of who was
considered an employee for purposes of Social Security coverage. The term employee was not
defined in the Social Security Act or in the Internal Revenue Code. However, in 1936, the Social
Security Board and the Department of the Treasury issued regulations that to a certain extent
explained the meaning of the terms employee and employer. In defining employer, both sets of
regulations emphasized the concept of “control”—the right to give instructions—but other
significant factors, such as the right to discharge, the furnishing of tools, and a place to work,
were also mentioned in the regulations. During the next few years, the Social Security Board and
the Department of the Treasury issued numerous rulings to clarify the boundaries of the
employee-employer relationship and a number of court cases established generally applicable
precedents. The common-law meaning of employee, however, was very unclear in cases of
outside salesmen.52
On December 31, 1946, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, in the case
of Hearst Publications, Inc. v. The United States, ruled that newspaper vendors should be
considered employees rather than independent contractors. H.R. 5052, introduced in 1948,
proposed to treat newspaper and magazine vendors as independent contractors rather than
employees and thereby to exclude them from Social Security coverage. In addition, in 1948,
Congress addressed the broader issue of who was to be considered an employee by passing
H.J.Res. 296, a resolution to maintain the status quo of treating newspaper vendors as
independent contractors, by stating that Congress, not the courts or the Social Security
Administration (SSA), should determine national policy regarding Social Security coverage. It
was reported that H.J.Res. 296 was introduced primarily to prevent the release of new federal
regulations defining the meaning of employee along the lines interpreted by the Supreme Court in
three cases decided in June 1947.53 H.J.Res. 296 excluded from Social Security coverage (and
unemployment insurance) any person who was not considered an employee under the commonlaw rules. In effect, H.J.Res. 296 said that independent contractors (e.g., door-to-door salesmen,
insurance salesmen, and pieceworkers) were not to be considered employees. H.R. 5052 and
H.J.Res. 296 were vetoed by President Truman. Congress overrode both vetoes.
In his veto of H.R. 5052, President Truman asserted that the nation’s security and welfare
demanded that Social Security be expanded to cover the groups excluded from the program: “Any
step in the opposite direction can only serve to undermine the program and destroy the confidence
of our people in the permanence of its protection against the hazards of old age, premature death,
51 Derthick, Policymaking for Social Security, p. 237.
52 Wilbur Cohen and James L. Calhoon, “Social Security Legislation. January-June 1948: Legislative History and
Background,” Social Security Bulletin, vol. 11, no. 7, July 1948, pp. 3-11, at https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/
v11n7/v11n7p3.pdf.
53 Ibid.
Congressional Research Service
12
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
and unemployment.”54 The action taken on H.R. 5052 illustrated the controversial issues involved
in determining who should be covered under Social Security.
House Action
On March 4, 1948, Representative Gearhart (R-CA) asked unanimous consent for immediate
consideration of H.R. 5052. He stated that “until the rendition of the federal court decisions I
have referred to were rendered the status of the newspaper and magazine vendors was considered
by everyone, and as this Congress clearly intended, to be that of independent contractors since
they bought their periodicals at a low price and sold them at a higher price, deriving their
livelihood from the profit in the operation.” Under the court decisions55 “these vendors were
arbitrarily declared to be employees and therefore subject to the payroll taxes though the money
they receive is not wages, as generally understood, but profits derived from an independent
business operation of their own.” Under the court decisions, newspaper and magazine vendors
were in essence employees of all of the newspaper and magazine companies with which they had
an arrangement. H.R. 5052 excluded newspaper and magazine vendors from coverage under the
Social Security Act. Representative Gearhart stated in his remarks that “when newspaper vendors
are covered into the Social Security system—and I believe they will be by act of Congress before
this session ends—they will be brought in as the independent contractors which they are, as the
self-employed.... ” The House passed H.R. 5052 on March 4, 1948, by unanimous consent.56
On February 27, 1948, H.J.Res. 296 was passed by a vote of 275 to 52.57
Senate Action
On March 23, 1948, the Senate passed by unanimous consent H.R. 5052 in form identical to that
passed by the House.58
On June 4, 1948, H.J.Res. 296 was passed, after public assistance amendments increasing federal
assistance to states were added, by a vote of 74 to 6.59
Although there was no conference on H.J.Res. 296, the House concurred with the Senate
amendments on June 4, 1948, by voice vote.60
Veto
On April 6, 1948, in the veto message on H.R. 5052, President Truman stated that some vendors
work under arrangements, “which make them bona fide employees of the publishers, and,
consequently, are entitled to the benefits of the Social Security Act.” President Truman further
stated that “It is said that news vendors affected by this bill could more appropriately be covered
by the Social Security laws as independent contractors when and if coverage is extended to the
self-employed. Whether that is true or not, surely they should continue to receive the benefits to
which they are now entitled until the broader coverage is provided. It would be most inequitable
54 Congressional Record, April 6, 1948, House, p. 4134.
55 United States v. Silk (67 S. Ct. 1463), Harrison v. Grayvan Lines, Inc. (67 S. Ct. 1463), and Bartels v. Birmingham
(67 S. Ct. 1547).
56 Congressional Record, March 4, 1948, House, p. 2143.
57 Congressional Record, February 27, 1948, House, Roll call no. 18, not voting 103, pp. 1908-1909.
58
Congressional Record, March 23, 1948, Senate, p. 3267.
59 Congressional Record, June 4, 1948, Senate, not voting 16, p. 7134.
60 Congressional Record, June 4, 1948, House, p. 7215.
Congressional Research Service
13
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
to extinguish their present rights pending a determination as to whether it is more appropriate for
them to be covered on some other basis.”61
On June 14, 1948, President Truman vetoed H.J.Res. 296, saying that “If our Social Security
program is to endure, it must be protected against these piecemeal attacks. Coverage must be
permanently expanded and no employer or special group of employers should be permitted to
reverse that trend by efforts to avoid the burden which millions of other employers have carried
without serious inconvenience or complaint.”62
Veto Override
The House overrode President Truman’s veto of H.R. 5052 and passed the bill on April 14, 1948,
by a vote of 308 (207-R, 101-D) to 28 (2-R, 24-D, 2-I).63 On April 20, 1948, the Senate overrode
the President’s veto and passed H.R. 5052 by a vote of 77 (48-R, 29-D) to 7 (7-D).64
On June 14, 1948, President Truman’s veto of H.J.Res. 296 was overridden in the House by a
vote of 298 to 7565 and in the Senate by a vote of 65 (37-R, 28-D) to 12 (2-R, 10-D).66
P.L. 734—81st Congress, Social Security Act Amendments of 1950
H.R. 6000, the Social Security Act Amendments of 1950, was signed by President Truman on
August 28, 1950. H.R. 6000 broadened the Social Security Act to cover roughly 10 million
additional persons, including regularly employed farm and domestic workers; self-employed
people other than doctors, lawyers, engineers, and certain other professional groups; certain
federal employees not covered by government pension plans; and workers in Puerto Rico and the
Virgin Islands. On a voluntary group basis, coverage was offered to employees of state and local
governments not under public employee retirement systems and to employees of nonprofit
organizations. Dependent husbands, widowers, and, under certain circumstances children of
insured women were also made eligible for benefits (before, such benefits were not generally
available to children of female workers).
In addition, Congress raised benefits by about 77%; raised the wage base from $3,000 to $3,600;
raised employer and employee taxes gradually from 1.5% to an ultimate rate of 3.25% each in
1970 and years thereafter; set the OASI tax rate for the self-employed at 75% of the combined
employer-employee rate; eased requirements for eligibility for benefits by making 1950 the
starting date for most people in determining the quarters of coverage needed; permitted recipients
to have higher earnings ($50 a month) without losing any OASI benefits (i.e., those aged 75 or
older could now earn any amount without losing OASI benefits); and gave free wage credits of
$160 for each month in which military service was performed between September 16, 1940, and
July 24, 1947.67
61 Congressional Record, April 6, 1948, House, p. 4134.
62 Congressional Record, June 14, 1948, House, p. 8188.
63 Congressional Record, April 14, 1948, House, Roll call no. 44, not voting 93, p. 4432.
64 Congressional Record, April 20, 1948, Senate, not voting 12, p. 4594.
65 Congressional Record, June 14, 1948, House, Roll call no. 105, not voting 57, p. 8191.
66 Congressional Record, June 14, 1948, Senate, not voting 19, p. 8093.
67 Several subsequent pieces of legislation during the early 1950s extended these wage credits to periods of service up
to December 31, 1956. The 1967 amendments gave military wage credits of $300 per calendar quarter of service after
1967 (amended in 1972 to be effective in 1957). The 1977 amendments gave wage credits of $100 per $300 of basic
pay, up to a maximum of $1,200 credit per year, beginning in 1978.
Congressional Research Service
14
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
House Action
On August 22, 1949, the Committee on Ways and Means reported H.R. 6000. H.R. 6000 did not
include President Truman’s recommendations for health insurance or his request to lower the
OASI eligibility age to 60 for women, but it did include disability protection for both Social
Security and public assistance recipients. It also extended coverage to farm and domestic
workers.
All 10 Republicans on the committee (including 7 who voted to send H.R. 6000 to the floor) filed
a minority report stating that OASI coverage and benefits should be limited so as to provide only
a “basic floor” of economic protection. The minority report opposed the disability insurance
provision, saying that aid to the disabled should be limited to charity aid provided under the
proposed public assistance program for the permanently and totally disabled.68
The Committee on Rules at first refused to send H.R. 6000 to the floor, but, after much debate, a
closed rule barring floor amendments was granted. A number of Members opposed the rule
because they said it foreclosed their right to improve the bill through floor amendments.
On October 4, 1949, Representative Sabath (D-IL) offered a resolution for four days of debate,
with only the Committee on Ways and Means having the right to offer amendments, and with
only a motion to recommit being in order. Those favoring the resolution stated that the Ways and
Means Committee had devoted six months to considering the bill, had heard testimony from 250
witnesses and thus knew best how to improve the program. Those opposing the closed rule said
the bill was very controversial and that the whole House should settle difficult questions of
policy. They said the closed rule negated the importance of other House Members and usurped
their rights.
The House agreed to the resolution for a closed rule by a vote of 189 (12-R, 176-D, 1-I) to 135
(123-R, 12-D) on October 4, 1949.69
On October 5, 1949, Representative Mason (R-IL) moved to recommit H.R. 6000, and offered
H.R. 6297 (a bill that carried out the minority view on H.R. 6000) as its substitute. H.R. 6297,
introduced by Representative Kean (R-NJ) on October 3, 1949, held the wage base to $3,000;
recommended greater coverage for domestic workers so that those who were less regularly
employed would be included; exempted teachers, firemen, and policemen with their own pension
systems from coverage; confined disability payments to the public assistance program; and
recommended that Congress establish an independent Social Security system in Puerto Rico, the
Virgin Islands, and other possessions rather than include them in the existing OASI program.
The motion to recommit was defeated by a vote of 113 (112-R, 1-D) to 232 (29-R, 202-D, 1-I).70
Immediately following the rejection of the motion, H.R. 6000 was passed in the House by a vote
of 333 (R-130, D-202, 1-I) to 14 (R-12, D-2).71
68 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Ways and Means, Social Security Act Amendments of 1949, report to
accompany H.R. 6000, 81st Cong., 1st sess., August 22, 1949, H.Rept. 1300 (Washington, DC: GPO, 1949), pp. 157165.
69
Congressional Record, October 4, 1949, House, Roll call no. 215, not voting 106, p. 13819.
70 Congressional Record, October 5, 1949, House, Roll call no. 217, not voting 84, pp. 13972-13973.
71 Congressional Record, October 5, 1949, House, Roll call no. 218, not voting-84, pp. 13973-13974.
Congressional Research Service
15
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
Senate Action
Since Congress adjourned shortly after the House action, the Senate did not consider H.R. 6000
until 1950. The Senate Finance Committee held extensive hearings and adopted many
amendments to H.R. 6000. The committee stated that the chief purpose of the bill was to
strengthen the OASI system so that OASI would be the primary method of offering “basic
security to retired persons and survivors,”72 with public assistance (particularly old-age
assistance) playing strictly a supplementary and secondary role. The Finance Committee version
of the bill did not include the disability insurance provision passed by the House nor the provision
providing federal grants to states for needy persons who were permanently and totally disabled,
nor President Truman’s health insurance proposal. The bill was reported to the Senate on May 17,
1950, and debate began on June 12, 1950.
On June 14, 1950, following a Senate Republican Policy Committee meeting, Senator Millikin
(R-CO) and Senator Taft (R-OH) indicated that Republicans would support H.R. 6000 but
favored a study to determine whether the OASI and old-age assistance programs eventually
should be united in a universal pay-as-you-go system. Under this proposal, all elderly persons in
the United States would become eligible for subsistence-level pensions at the age of 65, with
pension amounts the same for all (rather than varied to reflect earnings during the work career),
and financed from current revenues rather than a trust fund.73
An amendment offered by Senator Myers (D-PA) to add a disability insurance program to OASI
was rejected by a voice vote.74
On June 20, 1950, another amendment offered by Senator Myers to boost the OASI wage base
from $3,000 to $4,200, closer to what President Truman had requested (instead of $3,600
specified in the George amendment—see below), was rejected 36 (9-R, 27-D) to 45 (27-R, 18D).75
On June 20, 1950, Senator Long (D-LA) introduced an amendment to provide federal grants to
States for needy disabled persons. The amendment was rejected by a vote of 41 (4-R, 37-D) to 42
(33-R, 9-D).76
On June 20, 1950, Senator George’s (D-GA) amendment to increase the basic wage base from
$3,000 to $3,600 was agreed to by voice vote.77
On June 20, 1950, by a voice vote, the Senate adopted S.Res. 300, authorizing a study of a
universal pay-as-you-go old-age pension system.78
The Senate passed H.R. 6000 on June 20 by a vote of 81 (35-R, 47-D) to 2 (2-R).79
72 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Finance, Social Security Act Amendments of 1950, report to accompany H.R.
6000, 81st Cong., 2nd sess., May 17, 1950, H.Rept. 1669 (Washington, DC: GPO, 1950), p. 2.
73 Congress and the Nation: 1945-1964, Washington, Congressional Quarterly Inc., 1965, p. 1243.
74 Congressional Record, June 20, 1950, Senate, p. 8904.
75 Congressional Record, June 20, 1950, Senate, not voting 15, p. 8883.
76 Congressional Record, June 20, 1950, Senate, not voting 13, p. 8889.
77
Congressional Record, June 20, 1950, Senate, p. 8883.
78 Congressional Record, June 20, 1950, Senate, p. 8878.
79 Congressional Record, June 20, 1950, Senate, not voting 13, p. 8910.
Congressional Research Service
16
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
Conference Action
Conferees dropped the disability insurance proposal, but retained the public assistance program
for the permanently and totally disabled (i.e., the so-called charity approach). The conference
report was submitted to the House on August 1, 1950.
On August 16, 1950, Representative Byrnes (R-WI) moved to recommit the conference report on
H.R. 6000. He stated that his main reason for doing so was to prevent any attempt to remove from
the bill a Senate floor amendment by Representative Knowland (R-CA) to reduce federal control
over state-administered unemployment insurance. Representative Doughton (D-NC) moved the
previous question on the motion to recommit.80 The motion on the previous question was passed
by a vote of 188 (120-R, 68-D) to 186 (20-R, 165-D, 1-I). The motion to recommit the conference
report was rejected.
The conference report passed the House on August 16, 1950, 374 (140-R, 234-D) to 1 (1-R);81
and the Senate on August 17, 1950, by voice vote.82
P.L. 590—82nd Congress, Social Security Act Amendments of 1952
H.R. 7800, the Social Security Amendments of 1952, was signed into law on July 18, 1952, by
President Truman. The amendments increased OASI benefits for both present and future
recipients (by an average of 15% for those on the rolls), permitted recipients to earn $75 a month
(instead of $50) without losing OASI benefits, extended wage credits of $160 for each month in
which active military or naval service was performed during the period from July 24, 1947,
through December 1953, and provided for a disability “freeze,” which in principle preserved the
Social Security benefits of qualified workers who became permanently and totally disabled before
retirement by averaging the person’s wages only over his or her working years. (See following
conference action section for more details.)
House Action
In the House, debate centered largely on a so-called disability freeze proposed by the Committee
on Ways and Means. Under the provision, if a person became permanently and totally disabled,
the period of disability was to be excluded in computing the number of quarters of coverage he or
she needed to be eligible for benefits, and in computing the average earnings on which the
benefits would be based. The provision, in effect, preserved benefit rights while a person was
disabled. Medical examinations by doctors and public institutions would be designated and paid
for by the Federal Security Agency (FSA). The American Medical Association (AMA) claimed
that this arrangement would lead to socialized medicine. Representative Reed (R-NY), the
minority leader of the Ways and Means Committee, was the primary spokesman for Members
who endorsed the AMA position.
On May 19, 1952, when H.R. 7800 was brought to the floor under suspension of the rules
procedure—requiring a two-thirds vote for passage and barring amendments—the majority of
Republicans voted against it because of the disability provision, and it was rejected by a vote of
151 (52-R, 98-D, 1-I) to 141 (99-R, 42-D), failing to win a two-thirds vote.83
80 A motion for the previous question, when carried, has the effect of stopping all debate and amendments, forcing a
vote on the pending matter. This parliamentary maneuver is used only in the House.
81
Congressional Record, August 16, 1950, House, Roll call no. 242, not voting 55, p. 12673.
82 Congressional Record, August 17, 1950, House, p. 12718.
83 Congressional Record, May 19, 1952, House, Roll call no. 79, not voting 139, pp. 5483-5484.
Congressional Research Service
17
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
On June 16, 1952, Democratic leaders brought H.R. 7800 to the floor under suspension of the
rules. An amended version of the revised bill empowered the FSA to make disability
determinations but omitted the language specifying how the FSA administrator should do so.
Representative Reed said “... let no person on this floor be deceived. You have the same old H.R.
7800 here before you. While the socialized medicine advocates pretend to remove the specific
instructions to the Administrator, they now give him more powers under general provisions of the
law than he had before. You have socialized medicine here stronger in this bill than was H.R.
7800, heretofore defeated.”84 Representative Reed later contended that because of the
approaching election, many Members chose to go on record in favor of the other OASI provisions
and so voted for the amended version of H.R. 7800. The bill was approved 361 (165-R, 195-D, 1I) to 22 (20-R, 2-D) on June 17, 1952.85
Senate Action
When the bill came to the Senate Finance Committee, it dropped the disability freeze provision.
The Finance Committee said there was inadequate time to study the issue properly.
The committee amendment, offered by Senator George (D-GA), to drop the disability freeze
provision, was passed by voice vote on June 26, 1952.86
H.R. 7800 (without the disability freeze provision) was passed in the Senate by a voice vote on
June 26, 1952.87
Conference Action
The conferees retained the disability freeze provision, in principle. The compromise terminated
the freeze provision on June 30, 1953; at the same time, it did not allow an application to be
accepted before July 1, 1953. Thus, the disability freeze provision was made inoperative unless
Congress, in subsequent legislation, were to take action to remove the bar. The stated intent in
making the provision inoperative was to permit “the working out of tentative agreements with the
States for possible administration of these provisions.”88 In addition, the conferees gave
responsibility for determining whether an applicant was disabled to appropriate state agencies
(such as public assistance, vocational rehabilitation, or workmen’s compensation), instead of the
FSA. The Federal Security administrator would be able to overturn a ruling by the state agencies
that a person was disabled, but would not be able to reverse a ruling by the state agencies that a
person was not disabled.
The conference report was agreed to July 5, 1952, by voice votes in both chambers.89
P.L. 761—83rd Congress, Social Security Amendments of 1954
H.R. 9366, the Social Security Amendments of 1954, was signed by President Eisenhower on
September 1, 1954. In his 1953 State of the Union Message, the President recommended that
“OASI should promptly be expanded to cover millions of citizens who have been left out of the
84 Congressional Record, June 16, 1952, House, p. 7293.
85 Congressional Record, June 17, 1952, House, Roll call no. 106, not voting 46, p. 7387.
86 Congressional Record, June 26, 1952, Senate, p. 8141.
87 Congressional Record, June 26, 1952, Senate, p. 8155.
88 U.S. Congress, Conference Committee, 1952. Social Security Act Amendments of 1952, conference report to
accompany H.R. 7800, 82nd Cong., 2nd sess., July 5, 1952, H.Rept. 2491 (Washington, DC: GPO, 1952), p. 9.
89 Congressional Record, July 5, 1952, House, p. 9670. Also see, Congressional Record, July 5, 1952, Senate, p. 9523.
Congressional Research Service
18
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
Social Security system.” The Social Security Amendments of 1954 extended mandatory coverage
to, among others, some self-employed farmers, engineers, architects, accountants, and funeral
directors, all federal employees not covered by government pension plans, and farm and domestic
service workers not covered by the 1950 amendments, and it extended voluntary coverage to
ministers and certain state and local government employees already covered by staff retirement
systems. The bill also raised the wage base for the OASI tax to $4,200; raised the tax rate to
3.5%, each, for employers and employees beginning in 1970, and to 4.0%, each, beginning in
1975, with the tax rate for the self-employed continuing at 1.5 times the employee rate (or 75% of
the combined employee-employer rate). OASI benefits for recipients were raised by roughly
15%, with the maximum individual benefit rising from $85 to $98.50 a month, and a revised
benefit formula was provided for future retirees that increased benefits by roughly 27%, with the
maximum benefit rising from $85 a month to $108.50. The bill also put the disability freeze into
effect (see discussion of House action on the 1952 amendments below), with disability
determinations to be made by the appropriate State agencies, permitted a recipient to earn up to
$1,200 a year without deductions, eliminated the earnings test for people aged 72 or older, and
dropped the five years of lowest earnings from average monthly wage determinations for benefit
computation purposes.
House Action
On June 1, 1954, Representative Smith (D-VA) and other farm area Democrats objected to
bringing H.R. 9366 to the floor under a closed rule because coverage of farmers was included in
the bill. Representative Smith stated, “I object to the feature of this bill that prohibits you from
offering any amendment. I think that requires a little discussion and a little understanding. We all
agree that on an ordinary tax bill it is not feasible or practical to write it on the floor of the House,
and therefore we have adopted the theory that we have closed rules on tax bills ... all we asked for
in the Rules Committee was that the individual members of this House be given an opportunity to
offer amendments to designate what classifications of persons should be included.”90 On June 1,
1954, by a vote of 270 (171-R, 98-D, 1-I) to 76 (5-R, 71-D),91 debate of the closed rule was cut
off, and the closed rule was then adopted by voice vote.
The House bill also included provisions extending mandatory coverage to all self-employed
professionals but doctors (dentists and other medical professionals would have been covered).92
The House passed H.R. 9366 on June 1, 1954, by a vote of 356 (181-R, 174-D, 1-I) to 8 (2-R, 6D).93
Senate Action
H.R. 9366 as reported by the Finance Committee included the coverage of farm and domestic
service workers, ministers, state and local government employees covered by a retirement system,
and a small number of professionals. It also increased the earnings test threshold to $1,200 a year;
reduced the age at which the earnings test no longer applied to 72; and increased the lump-sum
90 Congressional Record, June 1, 1954, House, in floor remarks by Rep. Smith, p. 7423.
91 Congressional Record, June 1, 1954, House, Roll call no. 77, not voting 87, p. 7425.
92 The American Dental Association and the American Medical Association (AMA) strongly opposed Social Security
coverage for their groups. The AMA said it was incompatible with the free enterprise system. Congressional Record,
August 13, 1954, Senate, in floor remarks by Sen. Millikin (R-CO), p. 14422.
93 Congressional Record, June 1, 1954, House, Roll call no. 78, not voting 68, p. 7468.
Congressional Research Service
19
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
death benefit from $255 to $325.50. During the Senate debate on H.R. 9366, nine amendments
were adopted, six were rejected, and six were presented and then withdrawn.94
Among the amendments adopted on the floor by the Senate was a provision by Senator Long (DLA) to require the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare to study the feasibility and costs
of providing increased minimum benefits of $55, $60, and $75 a month under the Social Security
program. On August 13, 1954, Senator Long’s amendment was agreed to by voice vote.95
Among the amendments defeated were the Johnston (D-SC) amendment to reduce the Social
Security eligibility age to 60; the Stennis (D-MS) amendments that would have left the coverage
of farm workers unchanged; and the Humphrey (D-MN) amendment to increase the widow’s
benefit to 100% of the primary insurance amount. On August 13, 1954, Senator Johnston’s
amendment was rejected by voice vote.96 On August 13, 1954, the Stennis amendments were
rejected en bloc by voice vote.97 On August 13, 1954, Senator Humphrey’s amendment was
rejected on a division vote.98
Among the amendments that were presented and then withdrawn was an amendment by Senator
Lehman (D-NY) to extend Social Security coverage, increase benefits, add permanent and total
disability and temporary disability Social Security benefits, and to make other changes.99
On August 13, 1954, the Senate passed H.R. 9366, by voice vote.100
Conference Action
The conferees, among other things, accepted a provision mandatorily covering self-employed
farmers, accountants, architects, engineers, and funeral directors, but excluding lawyers, doctors,
dentists, or other medical professionals, and extended coverage to federal employees not covered
by staff retirement systems.
Both chambers agreed to the conference report without amendments by voice vote on August 20,
1954, the last day of the session.101
P.L. 880—84th Congress, Social Security Amendments of 1956
H.R. 7225, the Social Security Amendments of 1956, was signed by President Eisenhower on
August 1, 1956. The amendments provided benefits, after a six-month waiting period, for
permanently and totally disabled workers aged 50 to 64 who were fully insured and had at least 5
years of coverage in the 10-year period before becoming disabled; to a dependent child 18 years
or older of a deceased or retired insured worker if the child became disabled before age 18; to
female workers and wives at the age of 62, instead of 65, with actuarially reduced benefits;
reduced from 65 to 62 the age at which benefits were payable to widows or parents, with no
94 Wilbur J. Cohen, Robert M. Ball, and Robert J. Myers, “Social Security Act Amendments of 1954: A Summary and
Legislative History,” Social Security Bulletin, vol. 17, no. 9, September 1954, pp. 3-18, at https://www.ssa.gov/policy/
docs/ssb/v17n9/v17n9p3.pdf.
95 Congressional Record, August 13, 1954, Senate, p. 14442.
96 Congressional Record, August 13, 1954, Senate, p. 14433.
97 Congressional Record, August 13, 1954, Senate, p. 14435.
98 Congressional Record, August 13, 1954, Senate, p. 14444.
99 Congressional Record, August 13, 1954, Senate, p. 14419.
100 Congressional Record, August 13, 1954, Senate, p. 14446.
101 Congressional Record, August 20, 1954, House, p. 15544. Also, Congressional Record, August 20, 1954, Senate, p.
15414.
Congressional Research Service
20
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
reduction; extended coverage to lawyers, dentists, veterinarians, optometrists, and all other selfemployed professionals except doctors;102 increased the tax rate by 0.25% on employer and
employee each (0.375% for self-employed people) to finance disability benefits (thereby raising
the aggregate tax rate ultimately to 4.25% each for employees and employers); and created a
separate Disability Insurance (DI) Trust Fund. The Social Security program now consisted of
OASDI.
House Action
Major House Ways and Means Committee provisions provided benefits to disabled persons aged
50 or older and reduced the age at which women could first receive OASI benefits to 62.
Although some Members maintained that not enough time was spent in working out the details of
these two controversial provisions, H.R. 7225 was brought to the floor under suspension of the
rules, which barred floor amendments and required a two-thirds vote for passage. H.R. 7225 was
passed by the House on July 18, 1955, by a vote of 372 (169-R, 203-D) to 31 (23-R, 8-D).103
Senate Action
At Senate Finance Committee hearings on the House-passed bill, the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare, Marion Folsom stated that the Administration was opposed to reducing
the retirement age to 62 for women and providing disability benefits. According to Congress and
the Nation, Senator Folsom said that OASI had stayed actuarially sound without excessive taxes
because it had been restricted to one purpose with “predictable costs”: providing income for the
aged.104 Spokesmen for the AFL-CIO and several other groups maintained that union experience
with welfare plans and federal studies dating back to 1937 showed that disability insurance was
both administratively and financially sound.
On June 5, 1956, the Senate Finance Committee reported H.R. 7225 after eliminating the
Disability Insurance program and the tax increase to pay for it and limiting retirement benefits at
age 62 to widows only.
On July 17, 1956, Senator George (D-GA) offered an amendment reinstating the DI program and
the tax increase to finance it. The amendment provided for a separate DI Trust Fund (instead of
operating the new program out of the OASI Trust Fund). The amendment was passed by a vote of
47 (6-R, 41-D) to 45 (38-R, 7-D).105
Also, on July 17, 1956, the Senate agreed to Senator Kerr’s (D-OK) amendment to permit women
to receive benefits at age 62 at actuarially reduced rates. The amendment passed by a vote of 86
(40-R, 46-D) to 7 (5-R, 2-D).106
On July 17, 1956, the Senate passed H.R. 7225 by a vote of 90 (45-R, 45-D) to 0.107
102 P.L. 881-84th Congress, the Servicemen’s and Veterans’ Survivor Benefit Act (H.R. 7089), extended coverage of the
Social Security system to members of the uniformed services on active duty on a permanent contributory basis
beginning in 1957. It was signed into law on August 1, 1956.
103 Congressional Record, July 18, 1955, House, Roll call no. 119, not voting 29, pp. 10798-10799.
104 Sen. Folsom stated that until the ultimate costs were known, whether it was possible to make disability
determinations good enough to avoid “fraudulent’ claims for benefits, and whether disability pensions might
discourage individual rehabilitative efforts, adding disability insurance to OASI would risk “overburdening and thus
wrecking” the Social Security system. Congress and the Nation: 1945-1964, p. 1251.
105
Congressional Record, July 17, 1956, Senate, not voting 4, p. 13056.
106 Congressional Record, July 17, 1956, Senate, not voting 3, p. 13073.
107 Congressional Record, July 17, 1956, Senate, not voting 6, p. 13103.
Congressional Research Service
21
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
Conference Action
The House on July 26, 1956,108 and the Senate on July 27, 1956,109 cleared the conference report
on H.R. 7225 without amendments by voice votes.
P.L. 85-840, Social Security Amendments of 1958
H.R. 13549, the Social Security Amendments of 1958, was signed by President Eisenhower on
August 28, 1958. The amendments raised recipients’ benefits an average of 7%, with benefits
ranging from $33 to $127 per month for future recipients; increased maximum family benefits
from $200 to $254; raised the wage base from $4,200 to $4,800 a year; increased the tax rate by
0.25% on employers and employees each and 0.375% for the self-employed; provided benefits to
dependents of workers receiving disability benefits; and permitted the aged dependent parents of
an insured deceased worker to receive survivors’ benefits even if the worker’s widow or
dependent widower or child were alive and also eligible for benefits.
House Action
Most of the controversy over H.R. 13549 pertained to public assistance programs. There was
relatively little controversy over the proposed OASDI provisions. During debate on H.R. 13549,
Representative Reed (R-NY) stated that the bill would strengthen the actuarial soundness of the
Social Security program.110
On July 31, 1958, the House passed H.R. 13549 by a vote of 374 to 2.111
Senate Action
On August 15, 1958, Senator Yarborough (D-TX) offered an amendment to increase benefits by
10%, rather than 7% as proposed in H.R. 13549. Senator Yarborough stated that in many states
old-age public assistance payments were higher than the “Social Security payments the people
have earned by putting their money into the Social Security fund.”112
Proponents of the amendment mentioned that a 10% increase would alleviate erosion of benefits
due to inflation. Opponents of the amendment argued that many persons getting Social Security
also received income from other sources. Some opponents of the amendment maintained that it
would jeopardize the enactment of the bill. Senator Yarborough’s amendment was rejected by a
vote of 32 (6-R, 26-D) to 53 (33-R, 20-D).113
On August 16, 1958, Senator Kennedy (D-MA) offered an amendment to increase Social Security
benefits by 8% (rather than 7%). The Kennedy-Case amendment was rejected by voice vote.114
108 Congressional Record, July 26, 1956, House, p. 14828.
109 Congressional Record, July 27, 1956, Senate, p. 15107.
110 Congressional Record, July 31, 1958, House, p. 15740.
111 Congressional Record, July 31, 1958, House, Roll call no. 149, not voting 54, pp. 15775-15776.
112
Congressional Record, August 15, 1958, Senate, p. 17798.
113 Congressional Record, August 16, 1958, Senate, not voting 11, pp. 17971-17972.
114 Congressional Record, August 16, 1958, Senate, p. 17985.
Congressional Research Service
22
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
On August 16, 1958, Senator Morse (D-OR) offered an amendment to increase Social Security
benefits by 25%, provide health insurance, and make other changes. Senator Morse’s amendment
was rejected by voice vote.115
On August 16, 1958, Senator Humphrey (D-MN) offered an amendment to provide health
insurance. (Senator Morse’s amendment was based in part on this Humphrey amendment.)
Senator Humphrey withdrew his amendment.116
On August 16, 1958, Senator Kennedy offered an amendment for himself and Senator Smathers
(D-NJ) to eliminate the dollar ceiling of $255 on the lump-sum death benefit and restore the 3-to1 ratio between the death benefit and the regular monthly benefit. The amendment was rejected
by voice vote.117
On August 16, 1958, Senator Revercomb (R-WV) offered an amendment to provide full Social
Security retirement benefits at age 62, for both men and women. Senator Revercomb’s
amendment was rejected by voice vote.118
The Senate passed H.R. 13549 on August 16, 1958, by a vote of 79 (37-R, 42-D) to 0.119
House Concurrence
On August 19, 1958, the House by a voice vote agreed to the Senate amendments.120
P.L. 86-778, Social Security Amendments of 1960
H.R. 12580, the Social Security Amendments of 1960, was signed by President Eisenhower on
September 13, 1960. Health care for the aged was the primary issue in 1960. At the crux of the
debate was the question of whether the federal government should assume major responsibility
for the health care of the nation’s elderly people, and, if so, whether medical assistance should be
provided through the Social Security system or through the public assistance programs (i.e.,
charity approach).
The 1960 amendments provided more federal funds for old-age assistance (OAA) programs so
that states could choose to improve or establish medical care services to OAA recipients. In
addition, the legislation known as “Kerr-Mills” established a new voluntary program (under
jurisdiction of the OAA program) of medical assistance for the aged, under which states received
federal funds to help pay for medical care for persons aged 65 or older who were not recipients of
OAA but whose income and resources were insufficient to meet their medical expenses.
The 1960 amendments also contained a number of OASDI provisions. The amendments made
disability benefits available to workers under the age of 50; established a new earnings test
whereby each dollar of yearly earnings between $1,200 and $1,500 would cause only a 50-cent
reduction in benefits with a dollar-for-dollar reduction in benefits for earnings above $1,500;
liberalized requirements for fully insured status so that to be eligible for benefits a person needed
only one quarter of covered work for every three calendar quarters (rather than one for every two
115 Congressional Record, August 16, 1958, Senate, p. 18005.
116 Congressional Record, August 16, 1958, Senate, p. 18008.
117 Congressional Record, August 16, 1958, Senate, p. 17986.
118
Congressional Record, August 16, 1958, Senate, p. 17982.
119 Congressional Record, August 16, 1958, Senate, not voting 17, p. 18014.
120 Congressional Record, August 19, 1958, House, p. 18540.
Congressional Research Service
23
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
quarters, as under the old law), elapsing after 1950 and before retirement, disability, or death; and
raised the survivor benefit of each child to 75% of the parent’s PIA.
House Action
H.R. 12580 as reported by the Ways and Means Committee contained two medical care
provisions for elderly people. The first provision provided the states with additional funding to
improve or to establish medical care programs for old-age assistance recipients. The second
provision established a new federal-state program (under a new title of the Social Security Act)
designed to assist aged persons who were not eligible for public assistance but who were unable
to pay their medical bills.
The Ways and Means Committee rejected H.R. 4700, introduced by Representative Forand (DRI), which would have provided insurance against the cost of hospital, nursing home, and
surgical services for OASDI recipients, by a vote of 17 to 8.121
Proponents of H.R. 12580 said that it provided medical assistance for every aged person in any
state that implemented a medical assistance program. Representative Thompson (D-NJ), a
supporter of the Forand bill stated that under H.R. 12580 people would be “denied the
opportunity of contributing to their old-age health insurance coverage while employed and would
be forced to rely upon charity after their working days were over.”122 He contended further that
“even this charity ... is contingent upon the action of the separate states.”123
The House passed H.R. 12580 on June 23, 1960, by a vote of 381 (137-R, 244-D) to 23 (7-R, 16D).124
Senate Action
The Senate deleted the bill’s new title, and instead adopted an amendment by Senator Kerr (DOK) and Senator Frear (D-DE) that amended Title I of the Social Security Act to provide medical
services for medically needy aged persons.
On August 20, 1960, Senator Javits (R-NY) offered an amendment to provide federal matching
grants to states to enable them to give health care to needy persons aged 65 or older. (This
proposal was more generous than the provisions—also based on the public assistance, i.e., charity
approach—already in the report by the Finance Committee.) On August 23, 1960, Senator Javits’s
amendment was rejected by a vote of 28 (28-R) to 67 (5-R, 62-D).125
Also on August 20, 1960, Senator Anderson (D-NM) offered an amendment to use Social
Security as well as the public assistance program for the aged to provide health care to the elderly.
On August 23, 1960, Senator Anderson’s amendment was rejected by a vote of 44 (1-R, 43-D) to
51 (32-R, 19-D).126
121 See Social Security Administration (SSA), “Chronology: 1960s,” March 31, 1960, at http://www.ssa.gov/history/
1960.html.
122 Congressional Record, June 22, 1960, House, in floor remarks by Rep. Thompson, p. 13846.
123 Congressional Record, June 22, 1960, House, in floor remarks by Rep. Thompson, p. 13845.
124
Congressional Record, June 23, 1960, House, Roll call no. 143, not voting 24, pp. 14054-14055.
125 Congressional Record, August 23, 1960, Senate, Roll call no. 305, not voting 5, p. 17176.
126 Congressional Record, August 23, 1960, Senate, Roll call no. 307, not voting 5, p. 17220.
Congressional Research Service
24
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
On August 23, 1960, the Senate passed by voice vote Senator Byrd’s (D-WV) amendment to
permit men to retire at the age of 62 with actuarially reduced benefits. (The amendment was later
dropped in conference.)127
The Senate passed H.R. 12580 on August 23, 1960, by a vote of 91 (31-R, 60-D) to 2 (1-R,
1-D).128
Conference Action
The conferees agreed to the medical care provisions in the Senate-passed bill (i.e., no new title for
a program for aged persons not eligible for OAA benefits). The medical provisions became
known as the Kerr-Mills program, named for Senator Robert Kerr (D-OK) and House Ways and
Means Committee Chairman Wilbur Mills (D-AR).
The House agreed to the conference report on August 26, 1960, by a vote of 369 (132-R, 237-D)
to 17 (8-R, 9-D).129
The Senate agreed to the conference report on August 29, 1960, by a vote of 74 (31-R, 43-D) to
11 (1-R, 10-D).130
P.L. 87-64, Social Security Amendments of 1961
H.R. 6027, the Social Security Amendments of 1961, was signed into law on June 30, 1961, by
President Kennedy. In general, the amendments made many of the changes in the Social Security
program recommended by President Kennedy in his February 2, 1961, message to Congress, in
which he outlined a program to restore momentum to the national economy.131 The amendments
raised the minimum benefit to $40 per month; permitted men to claim retired worker’s benefits at
the age of 62, instead of 65, with actuarially reduced benefits; liberalized the insured status
requirement so that, subject to the 6-quarter minimum and the 40-quarter maximum, an individual
was fully insured if he had one quarter of coverage for every calendar year that elapsed between
January 1, 1951, or age 21, whichever was later, and the year before he died, became disabled, or
reached retirement age; increased benefits to a surviving aged widow, widower, or dependent
parent of an insured deceased worker from 75 to 82.5% of the benefit the worker would have
been entitled to if alive; changed the earnings test so that an aged recipient had no benefits
withheld if earnings were $1,200 a year or less, $1 withheld for each $2 earned between $1,200
and $1,700, and a $1 reduction in benefits for each additional dollar of earnings above $1,700;
and raised the employer and employee tax rates by 0.125% and the self-employed tax rate by
0.1875%.132
House Action
In the House, the principal point of dissension was the provision in H.R. 6027 that lowered the
eligibility age for men from 65 to 62. Several Republicans opposed the provision on the basis that
127 Congressional Record, August 23, 1960, Senate, p. 17234.
128 Congressional Record, August 23, 1960, Senate, Roll call no. 309, not voting 7, p. 17235.
129 Congressional Record, August 26, 1960, House, Roll call no. 197, not voting 44, p. 17893.
130 Congressional Record, August 29, 1960, Senate, Roll call no. 314, not voting 15, p. 18096.
131 Wilbur J. Cohen and William L. Mitchell, “Social Security Amendments of 1961: Summary and Legislative
History,” Social Security Bulletin, vol. 24, no. 9, September 1961, p. 8, at https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v24n9/
v24n9p3.pdf.
132 Congress and the Nation: 1945-1964, p. 1255.
Congressional Research Service
25
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
it would likely start a trend toward “compulsory retirement” at age 62. Speaking for himself and
most of the minority committee members, Representative Curtis (R-MO) stated, “The reason [we
are] against the age 62 [provision] is this: our older people are having a hard enough time now to
stay in the labor market. This provides further incentive to drive them out.”133
On April 20, 1961, Representative Curtis made a motion to recommit H.R. 6027134 and substitute
a measure that cut out the provisions for lowering the first eligibility age for men, increased
benefits for widows, and raised the minimum benefit from $33 to $40. The motion was rejected
by voice vote.135 Note that the provisions raising the minimum benefit and increasing benefits for
widows were already in H.R. 6027 as reported out of committee.
The House passed H.R. 6027 on April 20, 1961, by a vote of 400 (149-R, 251-D) to 14 (14-R).136
Senate Action
In the Senate, debate focused on Senator Cotton’s (R-NH) amendment made on June 26, 1961, to
increase the earnings test limit to $1,800 a year.137 Senator Kerr (D-OK) said that Senator
Cotton’s amendment failed to provide increased OASDI taxes to pay for the additional $427
million to $615 million that would be paid out each year under the proposed amendment.138
Senator Kerr stated that “an amendment which would result in the impairment of the fiscal
integrity of the fund should not be pressed.”139
Senator Hartke (D-IN) offered a substitute amendment that provided a slightly less generous new
earnings test limit ($1,700). The substitute amendment was passed June 26, 1961, by a vote of 59
(3-R, 56-D) to 30 (30-R).140 Provisions to finance this change were agreed to by unanimous
consent.141
On June 26, 1961, Senator Hartke’s amendment to broaden the definition of disability was
rejected by voice vote.142
The Senate passed H.R. 6027 90 (33-R, 57-D) to 0 on June 26, 1961.143
Conference Action
Both chambers cleared the conference report by voice votes June 29, 1961.144
133 Congressional Record, April 20, 1961, House, in floor remarks by Rep. Curtis, p. 6471.
134 Congressional Record, April 20, 1961, House, p. 6492.
135 Congressional Record, April 20, 1961, House, p. 6495.
136 Congressional Record, April 20, 1961, House, Roll call no. 40, not voting 17, p. 6495.
137 Congressional Record, June 26, 1961, Senate, p. 11309.
138 Congressional Record, June 26, 1961, Senate, p. 11314.
139 Congressional Record, June 26, 1961, Senate, in floor remarks by Sen. Kerr, p. 11310.
140 Congressional Record, June 26, 1961, Senate, Roll call no. 83, not voting 11, p. 11318.
141 Congressional Record, June 26, 1961, Senate, p. 11325.
142 Congressional Record, June 26, 1961, Senate, p. 11327.
143 Congressional Record, June 26, 1961, Senate, Roll call no. 85, not voting 10, p. 11328.
144 Congressional Record, June 29, 1961, House, p. 11791, and, Congressional Record, June 29, 1961, Senate, p.
11693.
Congressional Research Service
26
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
Proposed Social Security Amendments of 1964
H.R. 11865, the proposed Social Security Amendments of 1964, was passed by both the House
and the Senate but the conference committee could not reach agreement, adjourning on October
3, 1964, without making any recommendations.
The proposed Social Security Amendments of 1964 as passed by the House contained a 5%
across-the-board Social Security benefit increase; extended the child’s benefit to age 22 if he or
she were in school; allowed widows to retire at age 60, with actuarially reduced benefits;
provided limited benefits to persons aged 72 or older who had some Social Security coverage but
not enough to meet the minimum requirements of existing law; and extended Social Security
coverage to groups of persons who previously had been excluded. The House-passed bill
contained no provision relating to hospital insurance for the aged.
The proposed Social Security Amendments of 1964 as passed by the Senate contained a hospital
insurance program, the so-called King-Anderson bill; increased benefits: raised the earnings base;
liberalized the earnings test; changed the eligibility requirements for the blind; and permitted
religious groups to reject Social Security coverage if they had religious objections to social
insurance.
House Action
H.R. 11865, the proposed Social Security Amendments of 1964, was reported out of the Ways
and Means Committee on July 7, 1964. The bill was debated under a rule that permitted only
committee amendments. No amendments were offered.
On July 29, 1964, the House passed H.R. 11865 by a vote of 388 to 8.145
Senate Action
The Finance Committee approved H.R. 11865 on August 21, 1964. The committee rejected
several amendments that would have created a hospital insurance program for the aged through
the Social Security program.
On August 31, 1964, Senator Gore (D-TN) offered an amendment to Senator Long’s (D-LA)
amendment146 to increase the proposed across-the-board benefit increase to 7% (instead of the
proposed 5% increase) and to liberalize the earnings test.147 Senator Gore’s amendment included
the 1963 King (D-CA)-Anderson (D-NM) bill (H.R. 3920/S. 880), which would have provided
hospital insurance benefits for the aged under the Social Security program.
On September 2, 1964, the Gore amendment passed by a vote of 49 to 44.148
On September 3, 1964, the Senate passed H.R. 11865 by a vote of 60 to 28.149
Conference Action
The conference committee on H.R. 11865 could not reach agreement. The conferees from the
Senate voted 4 to 3 to insist on including the hospital insurance provisions; the conferees from the
145 Congressional Record, July 29, 1964, House, Roll call no. 193, not voting 35, pp. 17298-17299.
146 Congressional Record, August 31, 1964, Senate, p. 21103.
147
Congressional Record, August 31, 1964, Senate, p. 21086.
148 Congressional Record, September 2, 1964, Senate, Roll call no. 558, not voting 7, p. 21318.
149 Congressional Record, September 3, 1964, Senate, Roll call no. 561, not voting 12, p. 21553.
Congressional Research Service
27
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
House, by a 3 to 2 vote, refused to accept such provisions.150 The conference committee
adjourned on October 2, 1964.
P.L. 89-97, Social Security Amendments of 1965
H.R. 6675, the Social Security Amendments of 1965, was signed into law on July 30, 1965, by
President Lyndon Johnson. Although a federally operated health insurance program covering the
entire nation was considered by the Franklin Roosevelt Administration in 1935, it was not
explicitly endorsed until January 1945, when President Roosevelt’s budget message called for an
“extended Social Security including medical care.” Such a plan was submitted to Congress by
President Truman in November 1945, but neither chamber acted on the proposal, in large part due
to strong opposition by the AMA. The controversy surrounding the establishment of a federal
health insurance program for the aged was finally ended by the 1965 amendments (H.R. 6675),151
which established a basic two-part health insurance program called Medicare (Title XVIII of the
Social Security Act). The costs of hospitalization and related care would be met in part by a
compulsory program of Hospital Insurance (HI, Part A), financed by a separate payroll tax. The
program would serve recipients of the Social Security and railroad retirement programs, aged 65
or older. A voluntary Supplementary Medical Insurance (SMI) plan (Part B) would help pay
doctor bills and related services, for all persons aged 65 or older, financed through monthly
premiums paid by the recipient and a matching federal payment from general revenues.
The amendments also provided a 7% across-the-board increase in OASDI benefits, extended
compulsory self-employment coverage to doctors, made child’s benefits available through age 21
if the child were a full-time student (under prior law, they were available only through age 17),
permitted widows to receive actuarially reduced benefits at age 60 rather than age 62, provided
benefits to divorced wives and widows under certain conditions, increased the earnings test
amount to $1,500 with $1 withheld for every $2 earned up to $2,700, and provided that an insured
worker would be eligible for disability benefits if his or her disability was expected to end in
death or to last for 12 consecutive months, instead of indefinitely. The 1965 amendments also
increased the payroll tax rate and the taxable wage base. In addition, P.L. 89-97 reduced the
number of quarters of work necessary for persons aged 72 or older to have insured status (from 6
quarters to 3 quarters for a worker and from 6 quarters to 3 quarters for a wife who reached age
72 in or before 1966, to 4 quarters for a wife who turned 72 in 1967, and to 5 quarters for a wife
who attained age 72 in 1968).
Further, a new federal-state medical assistance program established under Title XIX of the Social
Security Act replaced the Kerr-Mills law (medical assistance for the aged that was enacted in
1960). The program was to be administered by the states, with federal matching funds. The new
Medicaid program was available to all people receiving assistance under the public assistance
titles (Title I, Title IV, Title X, and Title XIV) and to people who were able to provide for their
own maintenance but whose income and resources were insufficient to meet their medical costs.
House Action
A federal hospital insurance program, or “Medicare,” had been passed only once by the Senate, in
1964, and then by a narrow margin. It had never been approved by the Ways and Means
Committee and thus had not been put to a House vote. The 1964 congressional elections,
150 SSA, “Social Security Legislation,” Commissioner’s Bulletin, no. 17, October 3, 1964.
151 President Johnson flew to Independence, Missouri, to sign H.R. 6675 in the presence of Harry S. Truman, the first
President to propose a national health insurance program.
Congressional Research Service
28
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
however, brought 42 new Northern Democrats into the House, almost all of them Medicare
supporters.152
The Ways and Means Committee began holding executive sessions on H.R. 1, a bill to establish a
social insurance program for hospital and related care for the aged, on January 27, 1965. The
committee reported H.R. 6675 on March 29, 1965,153 with all 17 Democrats favoring the bill and
all 8 Republicans opposing it.154
House floor debate centered on the Medicare proposal. Supporters said it was long overdue.
Critics opposed its compulsory nature, argued that it would be financed by a “regressive” payroll
tax, and said it would endanger the Social Security cash benefit program. Republican spokesmen
instead wanted a voluntary health plan (as opposed to a mandatory social insurance approach)
with a Medicaid-like program underpinning it to provide medical assistance for the needy aged.
On April 8, 1965, the House rejected Representative Byrnes’s (R-WI) motion to recommit H.R.
6675 to the Ways and Means Committee with instructions to substitute the text of H.R. 7057, a
bill that Representative Byrnes had introduced a week earlier. H.R. 7057 was not offered as an
amendment because the rule did not permit such action. H.R. 7057 provided for all
hospitalization, nursing home, medical and surgical care to be financed through a voluntary
system with payment split between the patient and general revenues, rather than from a tax on the
payrolls of employers. The motion to recommit was rejected by a vote of 191 (128-R, 63-D) to
236 (10-R, 226-D).155
On April 8, 1965, the House passed H.R. 6675 by a vote of 313 (65-R, 248-D) to 115 (73-R, 42D).156
Senate Action
On June 30, 1965, the Finance Committee reported its version of H.R. 6675. The committee
approved the bill by a vote of 12 (2-R, 10-D) to 5 (4-R, 1-D).
On July 7 and 8, 1965, three moves to expand H.R. 6675 were rejected. Senator Ribicoff’s (DCT) amendment to remove all time limits on length of hospital stays under Medicare was rejected
by a vote of 39 (13-R, 26-D) to 43 (12-R, 31-D).157 Senator Miller’s (R-IA) amendment to
provide for an automatic 3% increase in Social Security pensions whenever a 3% increase
occurred in the “retail” price index was rejected by a vote of 21 (15-R, 6-D) to 64 (9-R, 55-D).158
Senator Prouty’s (R-VT) amendment to provide benefit increases ranging from 75% in the lowincome brackets to 7% in the upper-income brackets was rejected by a vote of 12 (10-R, 2-D) to
79 (18-R, 61-D).159 In addition, Senator Curtis’s (R-NE) amendment to provide that the Medicare
152 Congressional Quarterly Almanac: 1965, Washington, Congressional Quarterly, Inc., p. 236.
153 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Ways and Means, Social Security Amendments of 1965, report to accompany
H.R. 6675, 89th Cong., 1st sess., March 29, 1965, H.Rept. 89-213 (Washington, DC: GPO, 1965).
154 Congressional Quarterly Almanac: 1965, Washington, Congressional Quarterly, Inc., p. 236. See also Peter A.
Corning, The Evolution of Medicare, prepared under contract with the Social Security Administration, Chapter 4: The
Fourth Round-1957 to 1965, https://www.ssa.gov/history/corning.html.
155 Congressional Record, April 8, 1965, House, Roll call no. 70, not voting 5, pp. 7443-7444.
156 Congressional Record, April 8, 1965, House, Roll call no. 71, not voting 5, p. 7444.
157
Congressional Record, July 7, 1965, Senate, Roll call no. 165, not voting 18, p. 15835.
158 Congressional Record, July 8, 1965, Senate, Roll call no. 166, not voting 15, p. 15869.
159 Congressional Record, July 8, 1965, Senate, Roll call no. 167, not voting 9, p. 15909.
Congressional Research Service
29
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
patient pay a deductible based on ability to pay was rejected by a vote of 41 (25-R, 16-D) to 51
(4-R, 47-D).160
On July 7, 1965, Senator Byrd’s (D-WV) amendment to lower the age at which workers could
receive Social Security benefits to 60 (rather than age 62, the existing minimum) was agreed to
by voice vote.161
On July 8, 1965, Senator Kennedy’s (D-NY) amendment to prohibit federal payments to any
hospital not meeting the standards required by the state or local government was passed by voice
vote.162
On July 9, 1965, Senator Hartke’s (D-IN) amendment to liberalize the definition of blindness
under the Social Security program, provide benefits to blind workers with at least 6 quarters of
Social Security coverage, and permit blind workers to receive benefits regardless of other
earnings was passed by a vote of 78 (28-R, 50-D) to 11 (11-D).163
On July 9, 1965, Senator Hartke’s amendment to eliminate the time limit on hospital care under
the proposed program was agreed to by voice vote.164
On July 9, 1965, Senator Smathers’s (D-FL) amendment to raise payroll taxes to finance the
benefits provided in floor amendments passed by a voice vote.165
On July 9, 1965, Senator Curtis (R-NE) offered an amendment to strike Medicare, Parts A and B,
from the bill. The amendment was rejected by a vote of 26 (18-R, 8-D) to 64 (11-R, 53-D).166
Senator Curtis also reintroduced, in a slightly different form, his amendment to provide a
deductible based on the Medicare patient’s ability to pay. This amendment, too, was rejected by a
vote of 40 to 52.167 In addition, Senator Curtis moved to recommit H.R. 6675 with instructions to
strike out the portions related to Medicare and substitute a plan patterned after the health
insurance program used by retired federal employees, but financed from current premiums. The
motion to recommit H.R. 6675 was rejected by a vote of 26 (18-R, 8-D) to 63 (10-R, 53-D).168
H.R. 6675 was passed by the Senate on July 9, 1965, by a vote of 68 (13-R, 55-D) to 21 (14-R, 7D).169
Conference Action
On July 27, 1965, the House adopted the conference report by a vote of 307 (70-R, 237-D) to 116
(68-R, 48-D).170
160 Congressional Record, July 8, 1965, Senate, Roll call no. 168, not voting 8, p. 15927.
161 Congressional Record, July 7, 1965, Senate, p. 15794.
162 Congressional Record, July 8, 1965, Senate, p. 15904.
163 Congressional Record, July 9, 1965, Senate, p. 16115.
164 Congressional Record, July 9, 1965, Senate, p. 16130.
165 Congressional Record, July 9, 1965, Senate, p. 16138.
166 Congressional Record, July 9, 1965, Senate, Roll call no. 170, not voting 10, p. 16100.
167 Congressional Record, July 9, 1965, Senate, Roll call no. 174, not voting 8, p. 16119.
168
Congressional Record, July 9, 1965, Senate, Roll call no. 175, not voting 11, p. 16126.
169 Congressional Record, July 9, 1965, Senate, Roll call no. 176, not voting 11, p. 16157.
170 Congressional Record, July 27, 1965, House, Roll call no. 203, not voting 11, pp. 18393-18394.
Congressional Research Service
30
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
On July 28, 1965, the Senate adopted the conference report by a vote of 70 (13-R, 57-D) to 24
(17-R, 7-D).171
P.L. 89-368, Tax Adjustment Act of 1966
H.R. 12752, signed by President Johnson on March 15, 1966, raised income taxes to help pay for
the Vietnam War. It extended OASI benefits of $35 per month to persons over the age of 71 who
were not covered, but with the benefit reduced by the amount of payments received under
government pension plans, veteran’s or civil service pensions, teacher’s retirement pension plans,
or welfare programs.
House Action
The House passed H.R. 12752, the Tax Adjustment Act of 1966, by a vote of 246 (46-R, 200-D)
to 146 (88-R, 58-D).172 The bill did not contain any Social Security provisions.
Senate Action
During the floor debate on H.R. 12752, Senator Prouty (R-VT) offered an amendment to extend a
minimum Social Security payment of $44 a month to all persons aged 70 or older who were not
then eligible for benefits (an estimated 1.8 million persons at a cost of $760 million in
FY1967).173
On March 8, 1966, Senator Long (D-LA) moved to table the Prouty amendment but his motion
was rejected by a vote of 37 (1-R, 36-D) to 51 (30-R, 21-D).174
On March 8, 1966, the Senate passed the Prouty amendment by a vote of 45 (21-R, 24-D) to 40
(9-R, 31-D)175 and adopted by a vote of 44 (25-R, 19-D) to 43 (6-R, 37-D) a motion by Senator
Prouty to table Senator Mansfield’s (D-MT) motion to reconsider the vote on passage of the
amendment.176
On March 9, 1966, the Senate passed the Tax Adjustment Act of 1966 by a vote of 79 (24-R, 55D) to 9 (4-R, 5-D).177
Conference Action
On March 10, 1966, the conferees included the Prouty amendment in the final version of H.R.
12752, but changed the monthly benefit to $35.
On March 15, 1966, the House adopted the conference report on H.R. 12752 by a vote of 288
(68-R, 220-D) to 102 (59-R, 43-D).178
171 Congressional Record, July 28, 1965, Senate, Roll call no. 201, not voting 6, p. 18514.
172 Congressional Record, February 23, 1966, House, Roll call no. 20, not voting 41, pp. 3719-3720.
173 Congressional Record, March 8, 1966, Senate, in floor remarks by Sen. Prouty, pp. 5289-5292.
174 Congressional Record, March 8, 1966, Senate, Roll call no. 46, not voting 12, p. 5298.
175 Congressional Record, March 8, 1966, Senate, Roll call no. 47, not voting 15, p. 5298.
176
Congressional Record, March 8, 1966, Senate, Roll call no. 48, not voting 13, p. 5301.
177 Congressional Record, March 9, 1966, Senate, Roll call no. 52, not voting 12, p. 5485.
178 Congressional Record, March 15, 1966, House, Roll call no. 36, not voting 41, p. 5801.
Congressional Research Service
31
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
On March 15, 1966, the Senate adopted the conference report on H.R. 12752 by a vote of 72 (23R, 49-D) to 5 (4-R, I-D).179
P.L. 90-248, Social Security Amendments of 1967
H.R. 12080, the Social Security Amendments of 1967, was signed by President Johnson on
January 2, 1968. The amendments provided a 13% across-the-board increase in benefits; raised
the taxable wage base from $6,600 to $7,800; increased the payroll tax rate from 4.4% on
employers and employees each to 4.8% in 1969; raised the minimum benefit from $44 to $55 per
month; raised the earnings test limit to $1,680 a year instead of $1,500 (recipient lost $1 in
benefits for every $2 earned between $1,680 and $2,880, and lost $1 for each additional dollar
earned above $2,880); added benefits for disabled widows and widowers at age 50, with a stricter
definition of disability; liberalized the definition of blindness for disability payments; and
clarified the definition of disability.
President Johnson had called for a 15% across-the-board increase in OASDI benefits and
numerous other changes in the Social Security Act. The proposals were embodied in H.R. 5710,
introduced in the House on February 20, 1967, by the Committee on Ways and Means chairman,
Wilbur Mills (D-AR).
House Action
The Ways and Means Committee held hearings on the Administration’s bill (H.R. 5710) in March
and April 1967. On August 7, 1967, it reported a new bill, H.R. 12080, that included most of the
Administration’s Social Security proposals, notably a provision that raised the earnings test limit
from $1,500 to $1,680.180
On August 17, 1967, Representative Utt (R-CA) moved to recommit H.R. 12080. The motion was
rejected by voice vote.181
On August 17, 1967, the House passed H.R. 12080 by a roll call vote of 416 (182-R, 234-D) to 3
(1-R, 2-D).182 The bill was debated under a closed rule prohibiting floor amendments.
Senate Action
On November 14, 1967, the Senate Finance Committee reported a heavily amended bill that
contained several OASDI provisions as recommended by the Administration rather than as
modified by the House. The Senate bill provided a 15% across-the-board Social Security
increase, in contrast to the 12.5% increase in the House bill.
On November 17, 1967, Senator Prouty (R-VT) offered an amendment to finance the higher
benefits out of general revenues rather than Social Security taxes. The amendment was rejected
by a vote of 6 (3-R, 3-D) to 62 (23-R, 39-D).183
179 Congressional Record, March 15, 1966, Senate, Roll call no. 57, not voting 23, p. 5960.
180 Wilbur J. Cohen and Robert M. Ball, “Social Security Amendments of 1967: Summary-and Legislative History,”
Social Security Bulletin, vol. 31, no. 2, February 1968, p. 3, at https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v31n2/
v31n2p3.pdf.
181
Congressional Record, August 17, 1967, House, p. 23132.
182 Congressional Record, August 17, 1967, House, Roll call no. 222, not voting 3, p. 23132.
183 Congressional Record, November 17, 1967, Senate, Roll call no. 327, not voting 32, p. 33078.
Congressional Research Service
32
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
On November 17, 1967, Senator Metcalf (D-MT) offered an amendment to delete from H.R.
12080 a more stringent definition of disability. The Metcalf amendment was passed by a vote of
34 (6-R, 28-D) to 20 (16-R, 4-D).184
On November 21, 1967, Senator Williams (R-DE) offered an amendment to implement the
Finance Committee’s recommended payroll tax increase in January 1968 (before the general
election) rather than in January 1969. The amendment was defeated by a vote of 27 (22-R, 5-D)
to 49 (4-R, 45-D).185
On November 21, 1967, the Senate, by a vote of 22 (17-R, 5-D) to 58 (9-R, 49-D), rejected a
Republican proposal offered by Senator Curtis (R-NE) and Senator Williams (R-DE) substituting
the 12.5% OASDI benefit increase and financing plan contained in the House bill for the 15%
benefit increase and financing plan recommended by the Finance Committee.186
On November 21, 1967, Senator Bayh (D-IN) offered an amendment to raise the earnings test
limit from $1,680 to $2,400. The amendment passed by a vote of 50 (14-R, 36-D) to 23 (10-R,
13-D).187
The Senate passed H.R. 12080 on November 22, 1967, by a 78 (23 R, 55-D) to 6 (4-R, 2-D) roll
call vote.188
Conference Action
The conference report on H.R. 12080 was filed on December 11, 1967. All of the major Senate
floor amendments were dropped from the bill. The conferees split the difference between many of
the other provisions.
The House adopted the conference report on December 13, 1967, by a vote of 390 (167-R, 223D) to 3 (1-R, 2-D).189
The Senate adopted the conference report on December 15, 1967, by a vote of 62 (26-R, 36-D) to
14 (3-R, 11-D).190
P.L. 91-172, Tax Reform Act of 1969
H.R. 13270, the Tax Reform Act of 1969, was signed by President Nixon on December 30, 1969.
The new law included a 15% increase in Social Security benefits beginning in January 1, 1970.
House Action
On August 7, 1969, the House passed H.R. 13270 by a vote of 395 (176-R, 219-D) to 30 (10-R,
20-D).191 The bill did not contain any Social Security provisions.
184 Congressional Record, November 17, 1967, Senate, Roll call no. 329, not voting 46, p. 33119.
185 Congressional Record, November 21, 1967, Senate, Roll call no. 335, not voting 24, p. 33496.
186 Congressional Record, November 21, 1967, Senate, Roll call no. 337, not voting 20, p. 33510.
187 Congressional Record, November 21, 1967, Senate, Roll call no. 349, not voting 27, p. 33587.
188 Congressional Record, November 22, 1967, Senate, Roll call no. 350, not voting 16, p. 33637.
189
Congressional Record, December 13, 1967, House, Roll call no. 439, not voting 38, p. 36393.
190 Congressional Record, December 15, 1967, Senate, Roll call no. 392, not voting 24, p. 36924.
191 Congressional Record, August 7, 1969, House, Roll call no. 149, not voting 7, pp. 22808-22809.
Congressional Research Service
33
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
Senate Action
On December 5, 1969, Senator Long (D-LA) offered an amendment to raise basic Social Security
benefits by 15% beginning in January 1970.
Senator Long’s amendment was passed by a vote of 73 (23-R, 50-D) to 14 (14-R).192
A Byrd (D-WV)-Mansfield (D-MT) amendment to increase the minimum benefit to $100 for
single persons and to $150 for couples and to increase the taxable wage base from $7,800 to
$12,000 beginning in 1973 was passed December 5, 1969, by a vote of 48 (8-R, 40-D) to 41 (28R, 13-D).193
On December 5, 1969, Senator Williams (R-DE) offered a substitute amendment to provide a
10%, rather than a 15% benefit increase. The substitute amendment was rejected by a vote of 34
(33-R, 1-D) to 56 (5-R, 51-D).194
On December 11, 1969, the Senate passed H.R. 13270 by a vote of 69 (18-R, 51-D) to 22 (20-R,
2-D).195
Conference Action
The conferees agreed to increase Social Security benefits by 15%, effective January 1, 1970. The
House had not included the increase in H.R. 13270 but had approved an identical provision in
another bill, H.R. 15095. The conferees dropped the other provisions that were added on the
Senate floor.
On December 22, 1969, the House adopted the conference report on the Tax Reform Act, H.R.
13270, by a vote of 381 (169-R, 212-D) to 2 (2-R).196
On December 22, 1969, the Senate adopted H.R. 13270 by a vote of 71 (25-R, 46-D) to 6
(6-R).197
P.L. 92-5, Public Debt Limit Increase; Social Security Amendments
President Nixon signed H.R. 4690 on March 17, 1971. It provided a 10% across-the-board
increase in OASDI benefits, retroactive to January 1, 1971; raised the minimum benefit from $64
to $70.40 per month; increased the taxable wage base from $7,800 to $9,000 effective January 1,
1972; increased the OASDI tax rates on employers and employees to 5.15% each beginning in
1976 (from 5% scheduled to take effect in 1973 under prior law); and provided a 5% increase in
special benefits payable to individuals aged 72 or older who were not insured for regular benefits,
retroactive to January 1, 1971.
House Action
In 1970, a comprehensive Social Security bill (H.R. 17550) was passed by the House by a vote of
344 (166-R, 178-D) to 32 (32-D).198 H.R. 17550 increased benefits by 5%, provided for automatic
192 Congressional Record, December 5, 1969, Senate, Roll call no. 179, not voting 13, p. 37247.
193 Congressional Record, December 5, 1969, Senate, Roll call no. 177, not voting 10, p. 37240.
194 Congressional Record, December 5, 1969, Senate, Roll call no. 175, not voting 9, p. 37230.
195 Congressional Record, December 11, 1969, Senate, Roll call no. 223, not voting 6, p. 38396.
196
Congressional Record, December 22, 1969, House, Roll call no. 351, not voting 50, pp. 40899-40900.
197 Congressional Record, December 22, 1969, Senate, Roll call no. 273, not voting 23, p. 40718.
198 Congressional Record, May 21, 1970, House, Roll call no. 136, not voting 53, pp. 16587-16588.
Congressional Research Service
34
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
benefit increases with rises in the cost of living, and made other changes in the OASDI and
Medicare programs.
Senate Action
In the Senate, H.R. 17550 became a conglomerate bill containing import quotas and welfare
provisions as well. On December 29, 1970, the Senate separated Social Security changes from the
rest of the bill. H.R. 17550, with provisions raising benefits by 10%, providing a $100 minimum
monthly benefit, raising the taxable wage base from $7,800 to $9,000, and making changes in the
Medicare and Medicaid programs, was passed by the Senate on December 29, 1970, by a vote of
81 (35-R, 46-D) to 0.199 However, the House never agreed to a conference.200
Senator Long (D-LA), chairman of the Finance Committee and floor manager of H.R. 4690, said
that he had asked the House to take immediate action to raise Social Security benefits and as the
House had not responded, he was offering a benefit increase as an amendment to H.R. 4690, a bill
to increase the debt ceiling.201
On March 12, 1971, Senator Long’s amendment to provide a 10% increase in Social Security
payments, a $100 minimum monthly benefit, increases in earnings limitations, and other changes
passed by a vote of 82 (38-R, 44-D) to 0.202
The Senate, on March 12, 1971, passed H.R. 4690, after approving several Social Security
changes, including the benefit increase proposed by Senator Long, by a vote of 80 (37-R, 43-D)
to 0.203
Conference Action
Conferees accepted the Senate’s 10% benefit increase but reduced the $100 minimum benefit to
$70.40 and made several other modifications.
On March 16, 1971, the House adopted the conference report by a vote of 360 (150-R, 210-D) to
3 (3-R).204
On March 16, 1971, the Senate adopted the report by a vote of 76 (37-R, 39-D) to 0.205
P.L. 92-336, Public Debt Limit; Disaster losses; Social Security Act
Amendments
President Nixon signed H.R. 15390, a bill to extend the limit on the public debt, on July 1, 1972.
At the beginning of the year, the President included a number of Social Security proposals, along
with a controversial welfare reform plan, in H.R. 1. Congress at midyear used a more promising
vehicle to pass a separate 20% increase in Social Security benefits. The increase was added in the
Senate to a House-passed bill that raised the debt limit (H.R. 15390). The bill also provided for
future automatic increases in Social Security benefits when the consumer price index (CPI) rose
199 Congressional Record, December 29, 1970, Senate, Roll call no. 455, not voting 19, p. 43868.
200 Congressional Quarterly Almanac; 1971, pp. 421-425.
201 Congressional Record, March 12, 1971, Senate, p. 6374.
202 Congressional Record, March 12, 1971, Senate, Roll call no. 20, not voting 18, p. 6381.
203
Congressional Record, March 12, 1971, Senate, Roll call no. 23, not voting 20, p. 6390.
204 Congressional Record, March 16, 1971, House, Roll call no. 20, not voting 68, pp. 6741-6742.
205 Congressional Record, March 16, 1971, Senate, Roll call no. 24, not voting 24, p. 6688.
Congressional Research Service
35
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
by 3% or more. To finance the increase, the taxable wage base was raised from $9,000 to $10,800
in 1973 and to $12,000 in 1974, with automatic adjustment thereafter. The Congressional
Quarterly Almanac reported that,
Backers of the Social Security benefits package decided to attach it to the debt increase bill
for two reasons: (1) President Nixon, who opposed a 20% increase as inflationary, would
be unlikely to veto a bill that contained a debt limit increase, and (2) H.R. 1, the bill under
which a benefit increase was then being considered, faced an uncertain future because of
controversy over its welfare provisions.206
House Action
On June 22, 1971, the House had passed H.R. 1 (see P.L. 92-603, below) which included
provision for a general benefit increase of 5%.
On February 23, 1972, Representative Mills (D-AR), chairman of the Ways and Means
Committee, introduced H.R. 13320, which provided for an immediate benefit increase of 20%.207
On June 27, 1972, the House passed H.R. 15390, providing only for an increase in the debt
ceiling, by a vote of 211 to 168.208
Senate Action
On June 29, 1972, Senator Aiken (R-VT) offered an amendment to the Church amendment to
increase Social Security benefits by 30%. Following Senator Long’s (D-LA) motion, Senator
Aiken’s amendment was tabled by a vote of 71 (31-R, 40-D) to 18 (8-R, 10-D).209
On June 30, 1972, an amendment by Senator Bennett (R-UT) to increase Social Security benefits
by 10% instead of 20% was rejected by the Senate by a vote of 20 (17-R, 3-D) to 66 (21-R,
45-D).210
On June 30, 1972, Senator Church’s (D-ID) amendment calling for a 20% benefit increase and
the automatic adjustment of benefits and the taxable wage base in the future was adopted by the
Senate by a vote of 82 (34-R, 48-D) to 4 (4-R).211 The amendment made benefit increases
automatic whenever the CPI rose by 3% or more in any calendar year.
On June 30, 1972, the Senate passed H.R. 15390 by a vote of 78 (36-R, 42-D) to 3 (1-R, 2-D).
H.R. 15390 was then sent back to the House.212
House Response to Senate Amendment
The House sent the debt ceiling bill to the conference committee on June 30, 1972, without
accepting the Senate-passed benefit increase. Immediate congressional action was necessary
because the debt limit was to revert automatically to $400 billion (from the existing $450 billion)
at midnight on June 30, 1972.
206 Congressional Quarterly Almanac: 1972, p. 399.
207 Congressional Record, February 23, 1972, House, p. 5269-5270.
208 Congressional Record, June 27, 1972, House, Roll call no. 237, not voting 53, pp. 22558-22559.
209 Congressional Record, June 29, 1972, Senate, Roll call no. 266, not voting 11, p. 23294.
210
Congressional Record, June 30, 1972, Senate, Roll call no. 267, not voting 13, pp. 23511-23512.
211 Congressional Record, June 30, 1972, Senate, Roll call no. 268, not voting 13, p. 23512.
212 Congressional Record, June 30, 1972, Senate, Roll call no. 272, not voting 19, p. 23545.
Congressional Research Service
36
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
Conference Action
On June 30, 1972, the conferees informally accepted the Senate-passed version of H.R. 15390.
Under House rules, however, House conferees could not agree to nongermane amendments added
by the Senate. Thus, the conference report was reported back to the House in disagreement.213
On June 30, 1972, Representative Byrnes (R-WI) called the proposed 20% increase
“irresponsible” and moved that the House concur with the Senate amendment but with the benefit
increase limited to 10%. The motion was rejected by a vote of 83 (63-R, 20-D) to 253 (73-R, 180D).214
On June 30, 1972, Representative Mills’s (D-AR) motion that the House concur with the Senatepassed amendment granting a 20% Social Security benefit increase and annual automatic cost-ofliving adjustments (COLAs) was accepted by a vote of 302 (108-R, 194-D) to 35 (28-R, 7-D).215
P.L. 92-603, Social Security Amendments of 1972
H.R. 1, the Social Security Amendments of 1972, was signed into law on October 30, 1972, by
President Nixon. From 1969 to 1972, Congress raised OASDI benefits three times. Benefits were
raised by 15% in 1969, 10% in 1971, and 20% in 1972 (discussed above, the latter with the
adoption of P.L. 92-336). P.L. 92-336 also provided for future automatic benefit increases, or
COLAs, starting in January 1975, whenever the consumer price index rose more than 3% in a
year. These benefit increases were amendments to bills dealing with other subjects. President
Nixon had requested a number of other Social Security liberalizations in 1969, but those
proposals were entangled with his controversial welfare reform plan. It was not until 1972, when
H.R. 1 became P.L. 92-603, that the requested Social Security recommendations became law.216
The 1972 amendments (H.R. 1) increased benefits for widows and widowers; raised the earnings
limit from $1,680 to $2,100 with automatic adjustment to average wages thereafter (benefits were
reduced by $1 for every $2 in earnings in excess of $2,100); reduced the waiting period for
disability benefits from six to five months; extended Medicare protection to disabled recipients
who had received benefits for at least two years; and provided a special minimum benefit of up to
$170 a month for those who had worked many years, but at low earnings. In addition, OASDI and
HI tax rate-increases scheduled for the periods 1973-1977, 1978-1980, 1981-1985, 1986-1992,
1993-1997, 1998-2010, and 2011 and years thereafter, were further raised.217
H.R. 1 also contained the President’s controversial Family Assistance Plan. The bill remained in
the Senate for more than a year because of controversy over welfare reform. The Senate finally
approved H.R. 1 with a provision for tests of rival welfare plans, but in conference all family
welfare provisions were dropped. In addition, the final version of H.R. 1 contained provisions
federalizing and consolidating adult public assistance programs for needy aged, blind, or disabled
persons in a new Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program.
213 Congressional Quarterly Almanac: 1972, pp. 402-403.
214 Congressional Record, June 30, 1972, House, Roll call no. 259, not voting 95, p. 23738.
215 Congressional Record, June 30, 1972, House, Roll call no. 260, not voting 95, pp. 23738-23739.
216 Congress and the Nation: 1969-1972, vol. III, p. 619.
217 Under P.L. 92-336, the tax rates had been reduced over then existing scheduled increases through 2010; rates under
P.L. 92-603 advanced the tax rate schedule and raised the out-year rates.
Congressional Research Service
37
Social Security: Major Decisions in the House and Senate Since 1935
House Action
Most of the debate on H.R. 1 dealt with the family welfare provisions, with little debate on the
OASDI and Medicare provisions.
H.R. 1 was passed by the House on June 22, 1971, by a vote of 288 (112-R, 176-D) to 132 (64-R,
68-D).218
Senate Action
On September 27, 1972, Senator Mansfield (D-MT) offered an amendment to increase the
earnings test limit from $1,680 to $3,000. The amendment was agreed to by a vote of 76 (32-R,
44-D) to 5 (4-R, 1-D).219
On September 28, 1972, Senator Percy’s (R-IL) amendment to require the Secretary of the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare to review the Social Security earnings test, and
report to Congress on the feasibility of eliminating it, was accepted by voice vote.220
On September 29, 1972, Senator Long (D-LA) offered an amendment to provide a federal SSI
program for needy aged, blind, or disabled persons (in place of the existing state adult assistance
programs). The amendment was passed by a vote of 75 (32-R, 43-D) to 0.221
On September 29, 1972, the Finance Committee’s amendment to guarantee every person who
worked in employment covered under the Social Security program for at least 30 years a
minimum monthly benefit of $200 ($300 for a couple) passed by a vote of 73 (30-R, 43-D)
to 0.222
On September 30, 1972, Senator Byrd’s (D-WV) amendment to lower to 60 the age at which
reduced Social Security benefits could be received and to 55 the age at which a woman could
receive red
This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.