More stories

  • in

    Frank Bisignano, Trump’s Pick to Lead Social Security Administration, Faces Senators

    Frank Bisignano, the Wall Street veteran being considered to lead the Social Security Administration, will go before the Senate on Tuesday morning, where lawmakers will demand answers about his plans for an agency recently thrown into tumult.The plans being laid by the Trump administration for the typically staid agency — long viewed as a third rail of government — have prompted widespread outcry given its crucial work: It delivers billions of dollars in retirement, survivor and disability payments to 73 million people each month. The agency typically evolves slowly, aware that missteps could potentially cut off cash to people who rely on it.But in the month or so since a team from Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency arrived at the agency, it has taken a series of rapid fire actions, including significant job cuts and policy changes that have rattled many advocates and employees, who fear the changes could make it difficult for vulnerable people to access benefits.Some concerned Democratic lawmakers recently sent a letter to Mr. Bisignano asking him to promise not to privatize any of the agency’s components.“We are gravely concerned about the current trajectory of the S.S.A. and more specifically, that those charged with leading it might profit off its destruction,” Senators Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Ron Wyden of Oregon wrote.Mr. Bisignano, who described himself in an interview on CNBC as “fundamentally a DOGE person,” has spent much of his career as a fixer for major financial institutions hoping to improve their back-end processes. He said he planned to bring the same approach to Social Security.“The objective is not to touch benefits,” he said in the interview. “The objective is to figure out, there could be fraud, waste and abuse in there. And we build A.I. to find fraud, waste and abuse for a living. It’s going to be a tech story.” More

  • in

    Social Security Leader Warns of Halt to Agency’s Work, Before Backtracking

    The acting commissioner of the Social Security Administration made a startling warning Friday that he might have to shut down the system that undergirds the agency, and then backtracked after a judge said he had misinterpreted a court order.Leland Dudek, the acting commissioner, issued the warning in a series of interviews with news outlets, including Bloomberg News and The New York Times, in response to the judge’s order Thursday that barred Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency team from access to sensitive records.In the interviews, Mr. Dudek suggested that he was interpreting the ruling to mean that the entire system used for the agency’s work might need to shut down, since he considered many employees, including himself, to be affiliated with DOGE.“At the very least, it means shutting down my broad unit, the C.I.O. and general counsel,” Mr. Dudek said Friday morning. “I don’t know how I can run an agency doing that. I guess I would have no choice but to terminate everyone’s access.”Mr. Dudek told The New York Times then that he would comply with court orders and had already terminated the access for DOGE workers, as required, and was waiting for more court guidance. While Mr. Dudek later confirmed that the agency’s work would continue, the mere possibility of a drastic halt at an agency that sends payments to more than 73 million people each month set off alarm bells among some lawmakers and beneficiary advocates. Forty percent of older Americans rely on Social Security as their primary source of income and would face economic hardship if benefits were not paid out on time, said John Hishta, senior vice president of campaigns at AARP.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Top Social Security Official Leaves After Musk Team Seeks Data Access

    The departure of the acting commissioner is the latest backlash to the Department of Government Efficiency’s efforts to access sensitive data.The top official at the Social Security Administration stepped down this weekend after members of Elon Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency sought access to sensitive personal data about millions of Americans held by the agency, according to people familiar with the matter.The resignation of Michelle King, the acting commissioner, is the latest abrupt departure of a senior federal official who refused to provide Mr. Musk’s lieutenants with access to closely held data. Mr. Musk’s team has been embedding with agencies across the federal government and seeking access to private data as part of what it has said is an effort to root out fraud and waste.Social Security payments account for about $1.5 trillion, or a fifth, of annual federal spending in the United States. President Trump has pledged not to enact cuts to the program’s retirement benefits, but he has indicated that he is willing to look for ways to cut wasteful or improper spending from the retirement program that pays benefits to millions of Americans.An audit produced by the Social Security Administration’s inspector general last year found that from 2015 to 2022, the agency paid almost $8.6 trillion in benefits and made approximately $71.8 billion, or less than 1 percent, in improper payments that usually involved recipients getting too much money.Mr. Musk’s team at the Social Security Administration was seeking access to an internal data repository that contains extensive personal information about Americans, according two people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity out of fear of retaliation. The agency’s systems contain financial data, employment information and addresses for anyone with a Social Security number.“S.S.A. has comprehensive medical records of people who have applied for disability benefits,” said Nancy Altman, president of Social Security Works, a group that promotes the expansion of Social Security. “It has our bank information, our earnings records, the names and ages of our children, and much more.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    JD Vance, Elon Musk and the Future of America

    Beneath all the furor around Donald Trump’s appointments — Matt Gaetz down and out, Pete Hegseth down but maybe coming back, the Kash Patel drama waiting the wings — the most important figures in this administration’s orbit have not changed since Election Day: Besides the president himself, the future of Trumpism is still most likely to be shaped and stamped by two men, JD Vance and Elon Musk.Not just because of their talent and achievements, and not just because Vance is the political heir apparent and Musk would be one of the world’s most influential men even if he didn’t have the ear of the president-elect. It’s also because they represent, more clearly than any other appointee, two potent visions for a 21st century right, and their interaction is likely to shape conservatism for the next four years and beyond.Musk is the dynamist, the believer in growth and innovation and exploration as the lodestars of American civilization. His dynamism was not always especially ideological: The Tesla and SpaceX mogul was once a Barack Obama Democrat, happy to support an active and sometimes spendthrift government so long as it spent freely on his projects. But as Musk has moved right, he has adopted a more libertarian pose, insisting on the profound wastefulness of government spending and the tyranny of the administrative state.Vance meanwhile is the populist, committed to protect and uplift those parts of America neglected or left behind in an age of globalization. Along with his support for the Trumpian causes of tariffs and immigration restriction, this worldview has made him more sympathetic than the average Republican senator to certain forms of government investment — from longstanding programs like Social Security to new ideas about industrial policy and family policy.Despite this contrast, the Musk and Vance worldviews overlap in important ways. Musk has moved in a populist direction on immigration, while Vance has been a venture capitalist and clearly has a strong sympathy for parts of the dynamist worldview, especially its critique of the regulatory state. Both men share a farsighted interest in the collapsing birthrate, a heretofore-fringe issue that’s likely to dominate the later parts of the 21st century. And there is modest-but-real convergence between the Muskian “tech” worldview and Vance’s more “neo-trad” style of religious conservatism, based on not just a shared antipathy toward wokeness but also similar views about the intelligibility of the cosmos and the providential place of humankind in history.So you can imagine a scenario, in Trump’s second term and beyond, where these convergences yield a dynamist-populist fusionism — a conservatism that manages to simultaneously aim for the stars and uplift and protect the working class, in which economic growth and technological progress help renew the heartland (as Musk’s own companies have brought jobs and optimism to South Texas) while also preserving our creaking social compact.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Trump Picks Frank Bisignano to Lead Social Security Administration

    President-elect Trump announced on Wednesday night that he had chosen Frank Bisignano, the chairman of the payment processing behemoth Fiserv, to be the commissioner of the Social Security Administration, a sizable federal agency with more than 1,200 field offices and almost 60,000 employees.“Frank is a business leader, with a tremendous track record of transforming large corporations,” the president-elect said in a post on social media. “He will be responsible to deliver on the Agency’s commitment to the American People.”Mr. Bisignano vaulted into one of the most coveted positions in the New York finance world in his late 20s as a senior vice president of what was then known as Shearson Lehman Brothers, the investment bank whose collapse in 2008 helped set off a global recession. After nearly five years at the bank in the late 1980s, he moved to other major Wall Street banks, first to Morgan Stanley, then to Citigroup and then JPMorgan Chase & Company.Mr. Bisignano was listed as the second-highest-paid chief executive in the country in 2017, one of the few to have been compensated more than $100 million that year and to have received more than 2,000 times the average employee’s salary at his firm, First Data Corporation, which later merged with Fiserv.Mr. Bisignano has a long history of political giving, mainly to Republicans. Federal campaign finance reports show that his wife, Tracy Bisignano, donated nearly $1 million to Mr. Trump’s campaign in October. But in November 2023, he had thrown $15,000 behind the presidential campaign of Chris Christie, a Republican former governor of New Jersey who ran on an anti-Trump bid but later dropped out of the race.Earlier on Wednesday, Mr. Trump uploaded an elaborate biography of Mr. Bisignano to social media and congratulated him and his family without mentioning the post to which Mr. Bisignano was being named. The president-elect made a clarification an hour later, ending the speculation on what Mr. Bisignano’s next job would be. More

  • in

    How Donald Trump’s Presidency Could Impact Retirement Rules

    Readers had questions about individual retirement accounts, distributions and access to brokerage accounts if they moved away from the U.S. Here are some answers.Your retirement accounts may be the biggest component of your net worth. Or maybe those large balances are still only a goal, and you want to know if any changes coming in the next four years will help you get there — or get in your way.Of the 1,200 or so money-related questions we’ve received from readers in the days since the presidential election, many have been about retirement. We have some answers for what we know and context for what we don’t yet know. Most of them have nothing to do with Social Security; my colleague Tara Siegel Bernard answered questions about that program last week.But first, here’s an important caveat that is true in any administration, but especially in one like this: For things to change, President-elect Donald J. Trump has to want things to change, act on that desire and then succeed. If lawmakers are involved, they also have to have the desire, follow through and pass legislation.There will be plenty of noise, but in this particular category, it’s possible that not much of substance will look different four years from now.What did Mr. Trump say he wanted to change about individual retirement accounts or 401(k)s?Not much. Neither Mr. Trump’s campaign website nor the Republican Party platform that it pointed to said anything about I.R.A.s or workplace retirement accounts like 401(k)s, with one exception that probably wouldn’t affect many people.On his campaign website, Mr. Trump sounded off about environmental, social and governance, or E.S.G., funds and their place in workplace retirement plans. During his first term, the Labor Department issued a rule related to what sorts of funds an employer — which must act in employees’ best interest as a so-called fiduciary — can use in those plans.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Young Americans Can’t Keep Funding Boomers and Beyond

    You know the expression “OK, Boomer”? Better said as “Boomer OK.” That’s because the social safety net in the United States is increasingly favoring the old over the young. And this affects our political views and the security of future generations.Younger Americans have valid reason for disgruntlement: Big shifts in income and wealth are dramatically favoring their elders. Under almost every president since 1980, 80 percent of the real growth in domestic spending has gone to Social Security and health care, with Medicare the most expensive health program, according to calculations based on federal data. As a share of GDP, all other domestic outlays combined have declined.Our current tax system also largely does not help Americans, most of whom are younger, pay for their higher education. That wasn’t as big a deal in the 1960s or 1970s, when the average college graduate most likely had little or no student debt. Today, the average taken out each year is about seven times that in 1971, in part because state governments have stripped colleges and universities of funding. This is happening at a time when owning a house is increasingly out of reach. The median price has risen from about 3.5 times median annual income in 1984 to 5.8 times in 2022.So it shouldn’t come as a surprise that today, younger generations are more likely to fall into lower-income classes than their parents or grandparents. Nearly a half century ago, it was the reverse. And in 1989, the median net worth of Americans aged 35 to 44 was nearly 75 percent of those aged 65 to 74. By 2022, that ratio had fallen to one-third.The why is simple. Unlike most other spending, Congress effectively designed Medicare in 1965 and Social Security in the 1970s in such a way that outlays would increase forever faster than our national income. That’s partly because Medicare costs keep rising along with medical prices and new treatments and because Social Security benefits are designed to increase for each new generation along with inflation and wages. And we’re living longer, which means more years of benefits.Today, tax revenues are so committed to mandatory spending, largely for older Americans, and to interest on the national debt (which has quadrupled as a share of G.D.P. since 1980) that few revenues are left for everything else. So, unless we borrow to pay for it, there’s little for education, infrastructure, environment, affordable housing, reducing poverty, or the military.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Trump Dangles New Tax Cut Proposals With Real Political Appeal

    The most recent and costliest of Mr. Trump’s ideas would end income taxes on Social Security benefits.First it was a tax cut for hotel and restaurant workers in Nevada, a swing state where Donald J. Trump proposed exempting tips from taxes. Then, in front of powerful chief executives gathered in Washington, Mr. Trump floated cutting the corporate tax rate, helping to ease concerns in the business community about his candidacy.Now Mr. Trump is calling for an end to taxing Social Security benefits, which could be a boon for retirees, one of the most politically important groups in the United States.Repeatedly during the campaign, Mr. Trump and Republicans have embraced new, sometimes novel tax cuts in an attempt to shore up support with major constituencies. In a series of social-media posts, at political rallies, and without formal policy proposals, Mr. Trump has casually suggested reducing federal revenue by trillions of dollars.While policy experts have taken issue with the ideas, Mr. Trump’s pronouncements have real political appeal, at times putting Democrats on their back foot. Nevada’s two Democratic senators and its powerful culinary union have endorsed ending taxes on tips, while the AARP supports tax relief for seniors receiving Social Security benefits.“You do have to scratch your head a little bit when someone’s going around offering free lunches everywhere,” said Jesse Lee, a Democratic consultant and former Biden White House official. “We’re all for people having their lunch, but we have to raise taxes on the wealthy to pay for it.”The most recent and most expensive of Mr. Trump’s plans is ending income taxes on Social Security benefits, which could cost the federal government as much as $1.8 trillion in revenue over a decade, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. That would burn through the program’s financial reserves more quickly and hasten the moment when the government is no longer able to pay out Social Security benefits in full under current law.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More