A message from the Senior Citizens League-A very irresponsible message by the way.

I recently received this e-mail.

“Dear Richard,

Momentum is growing fast. We recently asked you to call your senators and ask them to support S. 3078, the Social Security Emergency Inflation Relief Act.

We need your help again.

A companion bill, H.R. 6193, has been introduced in the House of Representatives. This important legislation would increase Social Security benefits by $200 per month from January through June 2026.

The Senior Citizens League”

---

Social Media says seniors shouldn’t pay property taxes, or any taxes, but they want more from other taxpayers. What Emergency Inflation? Irresponsible vote buying at its finest.

What S. 3078 does — payment and beneficiaries

• The bill would authorize a $200 per month “economic recovery” payment to eligible recipients of certain benefit programs (e.g., Social Security retirement/disability under Title II; Supplemental Security Income (SSI); Railroad Retirement; veteran disability compensation or pension; certain civil-service annuities), for the period January 1, 2026 through June 30, 2026. Congress.gov+2Statesman+2
• The payments are intended to be in addition to the ordinary cost-of-living adjustment (COLA), not a replacement. Investopedia+2Statesman+2
• Sponsors describe the measure as “emergency inflation relief” to help seniors, veterans, and disabled beneficiaries whose fixed incomes are squeezed by rising costs. Elizabeth Warren+2Congressman Steven Horsford+2

🔎 What the bill text says about funding

• The bill directs the U.S. Department of the Treasury to disburse the additional payments. Congress.gov+1
• It authorizes “such sums as may be necessary” to make the payments and to cover the administrative costs needed for agencies (e.g., Social Security Administration, Railroad Retirement Board, Department of Veterans Affairs) to implement them. Quiver Quantitative+2Congress.gov+2

⚠️ What’s not spelled out — where the money actually comes from

• The bill does not designate a specific “off-setting” revenue source (e.g., a new tax or dedicated fee) to pay for the $200 monthly boosts. There is no explicit provision requiring e.g. increased payroll taxes, benefit reductions elsewhere, or trimming other spending to cover the cost. A plain reading simply authorizes the Treasury to spend “such sums as may be necessary.” Congress.gov+2Congress.gov+2
• The bill does not appear to include a “pay-fors” package. The Congressional-text summary shows no offset or new dedicated funding stream. Congress.gov+2Congress.gov+2
• No public cost estimate from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has apparently been published for S. 3078 yet — at least none referenced on the bill’s public page as of now.