This is the first in a series of articles about the 2020 election, its aftermath, and implications for social insurance policy.
Despite a relentless attempt to undermine the results of the 2020 election, our nation is preparing for the start of a new Administration and the 117th Congress.
The National Academy of Social Insurance plays a valuable nonpartisan role in this process by providing policymakers, journalists, educators, other leaders, and the public with knowledge about the nation's social insurance programs. We work with Academy Members and partners to provide objective, evidence-based analyses, policy options, and answers to questions facing policymakers.
Read More…We recently learned of the passing of two Academy Members: Thomas Golden and Michael Wiseman.
Academy Founding Member Dr. Philip R. Lee passed away last month. The New York Times obituary described him aptly as “a fighter for social justice.”
As Phil wrote in the summer 2015 issue of Generations, the journal of the American Society on Aging: “Medicare was my entrée into a long and exciting career in health policy. The efforts I was involved in to advocate for, implement, and refine the program had a profound impact on me.” He noted that, as a proponent of universal health care legislation in the 1960s, he was “repeatedly accused of being a socialist.”
Read More…
The COVID-19 pandemic has laid bare major weaknesses and gaps in our existing social insurance ecosystem.
The National Academy of Social Insurance is responding with the launch of three new Task Forces to examine critical social insurance issues over the next year.
Read More…
Among Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s many legal accomplishments was her role in successfully challenging gender discrimination in the Social Security Act.
In 1974, as a law professor at Columbia University and founder of The Women’s Rights Project at the American Civil Liberties Union, she filed suit against Caspar Weinberger, then Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, on the basis that Social Security’s treatment of surviving spouses violated the equal protection and due process clauses of the U.S. Constitution.
At issue was the Social Security Act’s provision of surviving spouse benefits (Section 402(g)). In this case, the plaintiff was a widower who claimed that he should receive survivor benefits determined the same way as for widows, so that he would be able to care for their child.
Read More…