It's always good to go back to the district. I was there over the weekend. Among the many things was a family wedding. My 89-year old mother came up to me and said, John, does that Republican leader really mean to cut Social Security to pay for the war? And I said, well, apparently that's what he means. But I'll tell you this, Mom, and to every other mother and father out there that's on Social Security, no way, no how will the Republicans get their way, either privatizing Social Security, or cutting it to pay for the war. That's not going to happen. The Democrats have been for Social Security since 75 years ago when it was first established, and we remain strong to that commitment. It is there. It is the fundamental opportunity for retirees to have a foundation. No privatization and no cutting of Social Security, despite what the Republican leader might say.
Editor's note · Context
The speaker addresses concerns about potential cuts to Social Security and the commitment of Democrats to protect it.
Share
More from John Garamendi
The administration’s reliance on the Defense Production Act (DPA)—no doubt in consultation and coordination with lawyers representing Sable—is a serious misuse of a federal law meant to be invoked for national security reasons, not to…
There is now overwhelming evidence that Secretary McMahon has violated the law by dismantling and transferring congressionally mandated programs including ones that protect students from discrimination.
OMB’s guidance would provide little recourse to people subject to political retribution.
On this anniversary of the Jones Act, I recognize the vital role of our nation’s maritime industry and workforce.





