HR-10235-119
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Sponsored by Linda Sánchez (D-CA)
What it does
This bill would change how Social Security widow's and widower's benefits are calculated for surviving spouses who also worked and earned their own retirement or disability benefits. Instead of the current dollar-for-dollar offset that often reduces survivor benefits to nearly nothing for two-income households, it would let eligible widows and widowers receive the greater of the deceased spouse's full benefit or 75 percent of the combined benefits (their own plus their deceased spouse's), subject to a cap. It also holds Supplemental Security Income (SSI) recipients harmless so this change does not reduce their SSI eligibility or payment amount, and applies to benefits payable after December 2026.
Who benefits
Surviving spouses who both worked and paid into Social Security during their marriage, particularly widows and widowers in dual-earner households whose survivor benefits are currently reduced due to offset rules; this disproportionately affects women, who make up the majority of Social Security survivors. Lower- and middle-income two-earner couples would see the largest relative gains, and current SSI recipients are protected from losing eligibility due to the benefit increase.
Who is hurt
The Social Security Trust Fund would bear increased long-term payout costs, which could affect the program's overall solvency timeline and, indirectly, all current and future beneficiaries who rely on the fund's stability. Single-earner households and widows/widowers without a substantial work history of their own would see no benefit from this change, potentially widening the gap between dual-earner and single-earner survivor outcomes.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the current offset formula effectively penalizes two-income households and surviving spouses who worked outside the home, often reducing survivor benefits nearly to the level of a single earner's benefit despite years of separate payroll tax contributions. They contend this disproportionately harms women, who historically face survivor benefit reductions after a spouse's death, and that raising the calculation to 75 percent of combined benefits better reflects actual household contributions and helps prevent poverty among elderly widows and widowers.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that increasing survivor benefits without an offsetting revenue source would add to Social Security's long-term funding shortfall, which the Social Security Trustees already project will lead to benefit cuts within the next decade absent reform. They contend that expanding benefits for one group of retirees without addressing overall solvency shifts costs onto future beneficiaries and taxpayers, and that targeted relief should be paired with financing mechanisms rather than enacted in isolation.
Constitutional context
Congress has broad authority under the Taxing and Spending Clause (Art. I, §8, cl. 1) to structure Social Security benefit formulas, an authority the Supreme Court has consistently upheld as a matter of legislative discretion in cases like Flemming v. Nestor (1960), which held that Social Security benefits are not contractual property rights protected from modification.
Checks and balances
Congress sets the benefit formula through statute; the Social Security Administration implements the calculation administratively, and courts have historically deferred to Congress's broad discretion over benefit structures.
Historical precedent
Congress has periodically adjusted Social Security survivor and spousal benefit formulas, most notably through the Social Security Amendments of 1983, which addressed solvency and benefit calculation changes affecting widows and widowers.