U.S. Sens. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., Bill Cassidy, R-La., Tim Kaine, D-Va., and Thom Tillis, R-N.C., — recently issued a statement regarding the looming insolvency of Social Security.
On its surface, the statement by these four senators was a call for responsible governance.
The senators warned that the Social Security Trust Fund is projected to run out of money by 2032 and they urged Congress to "legislate on hard issues," rather than delay action.
Yet the timing of this sudden urgency raises an uncomfortable, but important, question:
Why now? The answer points directly toward the need for congressional term limits.
For well over a decade, lawmakers have known that Social Security has been on an unsustainable path.
Trustees' reports have repeatedly warned of long-term shortfalls, and economists have sounded alarms about demographic pressures and funding gaps.
Although the program would continue to pay out benefits if the Trust Fund were allowed to run out in 2032, retirees would then face cuts of somewhere between 20% and 30%, devastating many families.
Despite this, Congress has consistently avoided confronting the issue in a meaningful way.
The fact that these warnings are not new makes the senators' recent statement less a revelation and more an admission that this is a problem that has been allowed to fester.
What makes this moment particularly revealing is that only one senator in this group, Tim Kaine, will still be in the Senate after this year.
He deserves credit for stepping forward on this issue. On the other hand, Sens. Cassidy, Tillis, and Durbin are all departing the Senate at the end of the current session.
This pattern is not coincidental.
Too often when political risk disappears, or when reelection is no longer a concern, courage becomes more abundant.
This dynamic exposes a structural flaw in Congress: lawmakers often avoid difficult decisions until they are insulated from the consequences of elections.
It is beyond disappointing that meaningful bipartisan engagement only seems to emerge when members are on their way out the door.
This behavior suggests that when the potential to seek reelection is on the table for politicians, the results are political caution, procrastination, and avoidance of responsibility.
Of course, there are still people in Congress who regularly show bravery and a willingness to take on a leadership role in efforts to solve tough issues.
I usually have opportunities to speak with some of them when I travel to Washington D.C. for meetings. We all see such examples pop up on news programs or in feeds that we follow.
Unfortunately, these members are the exceptions, and that is what makes them stand out.
If term limits were in place, I believe a far greater number of members would regularly find themselves in the same position these retiring senators are in now — free from the pressures of perpetual campaigning.
With more lawmakers approaching the end of their service at any given time, there would be more incentive to do the right thing for the sole reason that it is the right thing to do.
Congress might see more willingness to tackle politically tough issues such as protecting Social Security and addressing fiscal sustainability.
In other words, courage would no longer be the exception that appears only at the end of a career; it could become a more routine feature of legislative behavior.
The bipartisan nature of the recent statement by the senators is commendable, but it also underscores the irony: many lawmakers are only willing to speak plainly about Social Security when they are no longer accountable to voters.
This is not how a healthy representative democracy should function.
The public deserves leaders who confront hard truths throughout their tenure.
Although I would like to believe the efforts of these senators will be successful, history leads me to conclude this is improbable. Past conduct leads me to believe that Congress is unlikely to act until the situation reaches a crisis level.
This is why I believe the most viable path to addressing the inevitable Social Security shortfall is by appointing an independent, bi-partisan commission similar to the Greenspan Commission created by President Ronald Reagan in the early 1980s.
That commission did the hard work to develop recommendations which were adopted by Congress and extended the life of Social Security for roughly 50 years.
In the end, the statement of these four senators is valuable not only for its message about Social Security, but also for what it reveals about congressional behavior.
Their willingness to finally address a long-ignored crisis unintentionally indicts the institution in which they have served.
If more members of Congress were freed from the perpetual reelection cycle through term limits, perhaps we would see more honesty, more bravery, and more action on the issues that matter most to the American people.
For more information, please visit www.JoeFromTexas.com.
Joe from Texas is a family man with children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren. He's experienced tremendous success and lived the American Dream. His beliefs are both straightforward and deeply held. He believes in God, his family, and the United States of America. Read more Joe Penland, Sr. Insider articles Click Here Now.