See how Bill Cassidy actually votes — against your values.
DeepSyte scores Bill Cassidy's record on the issues you care about — not party, not press releases. Take the 2-minute values quiz to see your personal alignment.
Sign in and take the values quiz to see how Bill Cassidy's votes line up with your views.
Prediction track record
We haven't made any vote predictions for Bill Cassidy yet. Predictions are generated for bills with tagged effects; they show up here as soon as the predict-votes job covers this rep's upcoming docket.
Consistency insights
Bill Cassidy · statement ↔ vote record
55
Consistency score
Based on 3 data points across public statements and recorded votes · AI analysis of public records
118-sjres-38·Consistent
A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Federal Highway Administration relating to "Waiver of Buy America Requirements for Electric Vehicle Chargers".
75/100
What they said
Aug 19, 2026
Senator Cassidy advocates for a long-term, congressionally-led strategy to compete with China through strengthened trade enforcement, modernized customs authorities, resilient Western Hemisphere supply chains, and environmental standards that prevent Chinese manufacturers from gaining competitive advantage.
Voted Yea on A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Federal Highway Administration relating to "Waiver of Buy America Requirements for Electric Vehicle Chargers".
Senator Cassidy's statement emphasizes strengthening trade enforcement, modernizing customs authorities, and ensuring that foreign manufacturers cannot gain competitive advantage through lower standards. The joint resolution disapproves a waiver that temporarily exempts EV chargers from Buy America requirements, effectively tightening domestic content rules. The YES vote on this amendment aligns with Cassidy's stated position on trade enforcement and preventing foreign competitive advantage. However, this is an amendment vote on a disapproval resolution rather than a direct passage vote on affirmative trade legislation, and the statement does not explicitly address EV chargers or Buy America waivers, creating some granularity mismatch.
A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Federal Highway Administration relating to "Waiver of Buy America Requirements for Electric Vehicle Chargers".
45/100
What they said
Aug 19, 2026
Senator Cassidy advocates for a long-term, congressionally-led strategy to compete with China through strengthened trade enforcement, modernized customs authorities, resilient Western Hemisphere supply chains, and environmental standards that prevent Chinese manufacturers from gaining competitive advantage.
Voted Yea on A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Federal Highway Administration relating to "Waiver of Buy America Requirements for Electric Vehicle Chargers".
Both the statement and bill address U.S. economic competition and supply chain resilience, but they target different mechanisms. Cassidy's op-ed emphasizes strengthening trade enforcement, modernizing customs, and building Western Hemisphere supply chains to counter Chinese competitive advantages—including environmental standards enforcement. The joint resolution disapproves a waiver that temporarily relaxed Buy America requirements for EV chargers, effectively tightening domestic content rules. A YES vote on this procedural disapproval aligns with Cassidy's stated goal of preventing foreign manufacturers from gaining competitive advantage and strengthening domestic supply chains. However, the vote is procedural rather than substantive passage, and the bill addresses a narrow EV charger procurement rule rather than the broader congressional strategy Cassidy advocates for, creating ambiguity about whether the vote reflects support for the underlying policy or reflects procedural positioning.
Senator Cassidy expresses concern about Social Security insolvency projected for 2032 and advocates for congressional action to address the program's financial crisis. He proposes creating a sovereign wealth fund independent of the Social Security Trust Fund as a solution.
Both the statement and bill address Social Security policy, but they target different specific questions. Cassidy's statement focuses on addressing long-term insolvency (projected 2032) through structural reform via a sovereign wealth fund. The bill addresses benefit reductions for individuals with government pensions by repealing the government pension offset and windfall elimination provision—a narrower, targeted benefit expansion for a specific population. Cassidy's YES vote on this amendment is consistent with supporting Social Security benefit protections generally, but the amendment does not directly address the insolvency crisis or sovereign wealth fund approach he advocates. The vote is procedural (amendment), which limits clarity on his substantive intent regarding the broader bill.
Pairs with ambiguous language and high uncertainty are withheld until more data is available. Procedural, cloture, and amendment votes are excluded — they don't cleanly signal substantive support or opposition.
Pro analysis
AI rep analysis — Pro
Get an AI-narrated read on Bill Cassidy's full voting record against your stated values — aligned themes, conflicts, notable votes, and what to watch for.
We haven't extracted campaign positions for Bill Cassidy yet. Once their campaign website or position pages are processed, this card will track what they said vs how they voted.
Crossing the aisle
Passage votes where Bill Cassidy broke ranks with ≥75% of Republicans. Threshold catches substantively partisan splits; unanimous-ish or close votes are excluded.
Cassidy Sounds Alarm of Looming Social Security Deadline, Discusses Health Care Affordability at Semafor Future of Health Forum | U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy
Position: Senator Cassidy supports increased price transparency in health care through the Patients Deserve Price Tags Act and warns that Congress must act urgently to address Social Security's projected insolvency, cautioning that delays will worsen the fiscal situation.
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA) discussed a wide range of pressing issues as Congress comes to a close, ranging from health care affordability to Social Security’s looming insolvency, to the future of college athletics, during this week’s Semafor Future of Health Forum. As Chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, Cassidy highlighted the recently passed bipartisan Patients Deserve Price Tags Act, which gives patients and employers greater transparency into health care costs. Cassidy also warned that the clock is ticking for Congress to address Social Security’s looming insolvency, stressing that delaying action will only make the issue more difficult and expensive to solve.
“Health care is one of the few things in which you don’t know how much it’s going to cost when you walk in the door,”said Dr. Cassidy. “Our Patients Deserve Price Tags Act will do that for the patient. And it’ll do it in a way which prevents a lot of the arbitrage to maximize profits for intermediaries, but to maximize savings for the patient, the employer, and the employee.”
“The window is closing, closing, closing,” said Dr. Cassidy. “But the longer you wait to fix Social Security, the worse it gets. And it doesn’t just get worse marginally. It gets worse a percentage point, another percentage point, and so on.”
Cassidy, Kaine Join NewsNation to Discuss Bipartisan Solution to Social Security’s Looming Insolvency | U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy
Position: Senators Cassidy and Kaine advocate for addressing Social Security's looming insolvency through creation of a separate investment fund modeled after the National Railroad Retirement Investment Fund, which would invest in the broader economy to generate returns and help fund future benefit obligations.
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA) joined U.S. Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA) on NewsNation to discuss Social Security’s looming insolvency and the need for Congress to act now. The senators warned that if Congress continues to stall, Social Security benefits could be cut by nearly 28.5% in just six years, making the issue even harder to solve as time goes on. Cassidy outlined his plan to create a separate investment fund, modeled after the National Railroad Retirement Investment Fund, to strengthen Social Security’s long-term solvency. Kaine expressed his support for Cassidy’s proposal, which he said could help make Social Security solvent for the next 50 to 75 years.
“Set up an investment fund like your 401k, parallel to the Social Security trust fund, put money into it and allow it to grow with the power of the US economy. This money grows and ends up paying 65% of the obligation to our nation’s retirees. We could evergreen Social Security,” said Dr. Cassidy.
Cassidy has been outspoken in the media on the need to rescue Social Security from insolvency. He has outlined his plan to create a sovereign wealth fund independent of the Social Security Trust Fund. He has written extensively on his proposal in the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, State Affairs, and the Washington Examiner. On the U.S. Senate floor, Cassidy has repeatedly called on Congress to act to save the program, and challenged the U.S. Senate to stop being good politicians and start being good senators. Most recently, Cassidy and U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) published an op-ed in the Washington Examiner calling on their colleagues to join their bipartisan effort to address Social Security’s looming insolvency.
Cassidy on NewsNation: “Congress Needs to Get Down to Work and Address Social Security This Year!” | U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy
Position: Senator Cassidy calls for Congress to urgently address Social Security's insolvency crisis this year by considering multiple bipartisan proposals, including his own sovereign wealth fund plan, rather than blocking discussion of potential solutions.
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA) joined NewsNation to discuss the need for Congress to take urgent action to consider solutions to protect current and future retirees from a 22-28% benefit cut when Social Security goes insolvent in just six years. Cassidy urged colleagues to stop blocking the process to merely consider bipartisan solutions and do their job to fix Social Security this year.
“People are objecting to doing their job. They can offer their own proposal. That’s what’s frustrating. Congress needs to get down to work. Congress needs to fix Social Security this year,” said Dr. Cassidy.
“I’ve got my own plan. Bernie Sanders has his. Bernie Moreno has his. Give us all the chance to put them forward. I have senators objecting to merely agreeing to consider the issue!” continued Dr. Cassidy.
Cassidy has been outspoken in the media on the need to rescue Social Security from insolvency. He has outlined his plan to create a sovereign wealth fund independent of the Social Security Trust Fund. He has written extensively on his proposal in the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, State Affairs, and the Washington Examiner. On the U.S. Senate floor, Cassidy has repeatedly called on Congress to act to save the program, and challenged the U.S. Senate to stop being good politicians and start being good senators. Most recently, Cassidy and U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) published an op-ed in the Washington Examiner calling on their colleagues to join their bipartisan effort to address Social Security’s looming insolvency.
Cassidy on Fox Business: Congress Needs to Have the Guts to Step Up, Address Social Security | U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy
Position: Senator Cassidy advocates for establishing a sovereign wealth fund (separate from the Social Security Trust Fund) to address Social Security solvency and prevent future benefit cuts. He calls on Congress to act now through a deliberative process rather than delay.
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA) joined Fox Business to discuss his plan to protect current and future retirees from a 22-28% cut to Social Security benefits in six short years. Cassidy urged Congress to step up and put a process in place to consider solutions for solvency.
“What I am suggesting is we set up an investment fund. You called it a sovereign wealth fund. You could call it the nation’s 401k, and you set it up, separate from the Social Security Trust Fund, you put money in it, and you allow it to grow with the nation’s economy,” said Dr. Cassidy.
“We just need Congress to have the guts to step up and take action now and not continue to postpone until it’s too late. And they can’t even pass a bill to even discuss ideas. That’s the big problem,” continued Dr. Cassidy.
Cassidy has outlined his plan to rescue Social Security from insolvency by creating a sovereign wealth fund independent of the Social Security Trust Fund. He has written extensively on his proposal in the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, State Affairs, and the Washington Examiner. On the U.S. Senate floor, Cassidy has repeatedly called on Congress to act to save the program, and challenged the U.S. Senate to stop being good politicians and start being good senators. Most recently, Cassidy and U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) published an op-ed in the Washington Examiner calling on their colleagues to join their bipartisan effort to address Social Security’s looming insolvency.
Cassidy on Fox Business: Voters Must Demand Answers on Social Security | U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy
Position: Senator Cassidy advocates for a plan to address Social Security insolvency by establishing a sovereign wealth fund with $1.5 trillion in investment over five years, with returns flowing back to the fund while guaranteeing current benefit levels for recipients.
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA) today joined Fox Business’ Varney & Co. to discuss his plan to save Social Security and urged voters to demand answers from political candidates about how they will protect the program.
“Put $1.5 trillion in [a separate investment fund] over five years and let all the returns flow back to it. In the meantime, you guarantee that whatever the Social Security recipient is scheduled to receive, they continue to receive,” said Dr. Cassidy.
“Voters should demand of their senator or the person running for Senate in their state: ‘Do you want to fix it now?’” continued Dr. Cassidy.
Cassidy has outlined his plan to rescue Social Security from insolvency by creating a sovereign wealth fund independent of the Social Security Trust Fund. He has written extensively on his proposal in the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, State Affairs, and the Washington Examiner. On the U.S. Senate floor, Cassidy has repeatedly called on Congress to act to save the program, and challenged the U.S. Senate to stop being good politicians and start being good senators. Most recently, Cassidy and U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) published an op-ed in the Washington Examiner calling on their colleagues to join their bipartisan effort to address Social Security’s looming insolvency.
ICYMI: Cassidy, Durbin Release Joint Op-Ed Calling on Congress to Join Their Bipartisan Effort to Address Social Security | U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy
Position: Senators Cassidy and Durbin call on Congress to act urgently on Social Security's insolvency through bipartisan legislation, arguing that delay will only make solutions harder and that the program faces automatic benefit reductions in six years without congressional action.
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA) and Dick Durbin (D-IL) today published an op-ed in the Washington Examiner calling on their colleagues to join their bipartisan effort to address Social Security’s looming insolvency. With the program facing an automatic 22 percent reduction in benefits in just six years if Congress fails to act, Cassidy and Durbin argue there is no excuse for further delay.
Read the full op-ed here or excerpts below:
There will never be a convenient time to address Social Security. Waiting only guarantees that the solutions available tomorrow will be harder than the ones available today. Social Security is an American promise, and Congress seems unmotivated or unwilling to do the hard work required to keep it.
Of course, every member of Congress says Social Security must be protected. They agree that retirees deserve the benefits they have earned. Yet year after year, Congress fails to seriously engage in the bipartisan work necessary to preserve the program, even as the deadline for action grows closer.
The suggestion that Congress should take more time is detached from reality, detached from the concerns of the American people, and detached from the job we were sent to Washington to do: tackle tough issues. Social Security does not have more time.
History is not going to remember whether Congress voted on a bill to merely set up a process by which to consider a solution. It will remember whether Congress acted before retirees faced unnecessary reductions to the benefits on which they depend.
Cassidy and Durbin recently delivered a joint speech emphasizing the need for congressional action to address Social Security’s looming insolvency. The senators introduced the PROMISE Act which would establish a bipartisan process to address Social Security, merely setting up a process for Congress to consider debating proposals.
ICYMI: Cassidy Urges Congress to Develop a China Strategy Built to Last in Foreign Affairs Op-Ed | U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy
Position: Senator Cassidy advocates for a long-term, congressionally-led strategy to compete with China through strengthened trade enforcement, modernized customs authorities, resilient Western Hemisphere supply chains, and environmental standards that prevent Chinese manufacturers from gaining competitive advantage.
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA) today published an op-ed in Foreign Affairs outlining a durable strategy for United States trade competition with China. Cassidy argues that the U.S. cannot afford a short-term or partisan approach to its most consequential strategic competitor. Instead, America must strengthen its economic and national security foundations at home and use that strength to compete with China and win.
“Long-term challenges require long-term solutions, and Congress is the branch best suited to crafting such solutions. Congress can provide the consistency and predictability needed to align U.S. economic, trade, and national security goals into the future,” wrote Dr. Cassidy.
“Congress must take the lead. It can do so by permanently strengthening trade enforcement, modernizing customs authorities, building resilient supply chains throughout the Western Hemisphere, and ensuring that manufacturers in China cannot gain a competitive advantage by simply ignoring environmental standards,” said Dr. Cassidy.
Read the full op-ed here or excerpts below:
A China Strategy That Lasts: Congress Must Lead to Compete with Beijing
For decades, Beijing has used trade not only as a means to generate economic growth but also as a geopolitical tool to attract investment, strengthen its industrial base, expand its economy, and support its military. It has done so by integrating national security, economic security, energy policy, and environmental policy.
Trade enforcement, even if codified in legislation, cannot on its own counter Chinese incursions into the Western Hemisphere. The United States must also provide countries with attractive alternatives to economic dependence on Beijing.
Near-shoring production in the Americas would diversify supply chains away from China, strengthen regional economies, improve U.S. access to critical minerals, and reduce U.S. and global dependence on Chinese manufacturing.
China uses trade as an instrument of geopolitical competition. To respond, the United States should keep its trade policy focused on one goal: curbing China’s ability to undermine the United States’ economy and military infrastructure, along with those of U.S. allies.
Previously, Cassidy has advanced this approach through policies like the Foreign Pollution Fee Act, which would hold China accountable for its unfair trade practices while strengthening American manufacturing and reducing dependence on foreign adversaries.
Cassidy Calls Congress’s Bluff on Social Security | U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy
Position: Senator Cassidy advocates for Congress to establish a formal process to consider and debate solutions to Social Security's projected insolvency, which he warns will result in a 22–28% benefit cut within six years. He has proposed a sovereign wealth fund mechanism as one potential solution.
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA), today sought unanimous consent on the U.S. Senate floor to establish a process for Congress to consider solutions to prevent a 22-28% cut to Social Security benefits for 75 million Americans in six short years. An objection prevented the U.S. Senate from even beginning consideration of the resolution. Cassidy then countered the objection.
“[The resolution] does not predetermine the outcome. It just says that Congress must consider a solution—anyone’s solution—Democrat or Republican, Left and Right. It just asks us to do our job to consider the solution to then go through regular order on the Senate Finance Committee to be considered by all,” said Dr. Cassidy.
Cassidy has outlined his plan to rescue Social Security from insolvency by creating a sovereign wealth fund independent of the Social Security Trust Fund. He has written extensively on his proposal in the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, State Affairs, and the Washington Examiner. On the U.S. Senate floor, Cassidy has repeatedly called on Congress to act to save the program. Most recently, he challenged the U.S. Senate to stop being good politicians and start being good senators.
CASSIDY, DURBIN DELIVER JOINT SPEECH URGING SENATE TO TAKE ACTION BEFORE SOCIAL SECURITY BECOMES INSOLVENT | U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy
Position: Senators Cassidy and Durbin advocate for Congress to establish a bipartisan process to address Social Security's projected 2032 insolvency, arguing that delay increases the cost of solutions and that a procedural framework is necessary to develop policy options.
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA) and Dick Durbin (D-IL) delivered a joint speech on the U.S. Senate floor emphasizing the dire need for congressional action to address Social Security’s looming insolvency. The Social Security trust fund is expected to become insolvent in 2032, resulting in an automatic reduction in benefits for millions of Americans. The Senators have introduced the bipartisan Protecting Retirement Opportunities and Maintaining Income Security for Everyone (PROMISE) Act, legislation that would establish a bipartisan process to address Social Security’s looming insolvency. The legislation merely sets up a process for Congress to consider debating proposals.
“Mr. President, people won’t even set up a process! We’re not talking about a solution. We’re talking about a process that would come to a solution!…It is important for our country that Congress tackle this issue. And when I say our country, I mean the people who live here, whether they are older or whether they are younger; they’re relying upon Congress to step up to its responsibility,” said Dr. Cassidy.
“So, to my colleagues who oppose this approach, who say we need more time to do it, I want to back up Senator Cassidy. It costs money over time. It costs benefits over time. The solution becomes more expensive over time. The longer you wait, the more expensive it becomes to save Social Security. And we absolutely, positively have to save it,” said Senator Durbin.
We have been trying to set up a process, a process whereby Congress would consider a solution.
Not prescribe a solution, consider a solution for Social Security. A process that would have members of the House and members of the Senate come together fully open for input from stakeholders, from citizens, to have something to present.
Among all the proposals that are out there, two proposals, three proposals, and whatever we put up would not be the final solution, necessarily.
It could be replaced by any other member of the Senate with an amendment in the nature of a substitute.
And, Mr. President, people won’t even set up a process! We’re not talking about a solution. We’re talking about a process that would come to a solution, maybe, that still has to get 60 votes in the United States Senate.
Folks say, “We need more time.”
Dick Durbin just chuckled. He goes, “They’ve had 44 years. They’ve had 44 years, how much more time do they need?”
I’ve got a couple cartoons just to make the case. I think that if we don’t set up this process, Congress will be kicking granny off the cliff.
That was made famous long ago. There it is.
And Congress will not set up a process by which to address the issue.
75 million retirees, widows, widowers, others rely on Social.
In 6 years, the program, the trust fund goes insolvent.
And when that happens, according to the actuaries, there will be either an almost 29% benefit reduction or a 40% increase in payroll taxes on working Americans.
If that trust fund goes insolvent, and that benefit is cut 28.5% as the actuaries say it will, the rate of poverty among Americans over age 65 will increase by 50%.
Congress made a promise, and some people want to ignore it.
She paid in, she earned it, she relies on it. But…if you ask, “Should we do something about Social?” Apparently, for some people, the time to do something on Social is never.
They don’t want to take a tough vote, even if that vote only sets up a process.
Doesn’t even propose a solution. A process whereby Congress is required to fix the issue.
By the way, Social has always been important. It’s even more important now that Americans are living longer.
And every year we delay to fixing it, fixing Social, the amount of cuts required to balance it increase. The amount of taxes required to fix it increase. The amount of money we have to borrow to fix it increases.
There is no good thing about waiting, except that it allows Congress to dodge its responsibility.
I want to compliment my colleague from Illinois. He came up to me and goes, “Bill, I’m leaving the Senate. We need to make a run.”
But, by the way, we have a solution, but we’re not saying it has to be our solution.
All we’re trying to do is set up a process by which solutions can be considered.
And running out the clock, it may be politically convenient, but it is the wrong thing to do. Congress’s obligation to the American people, to the people that rely upon Social Security, is to act and is to act now.
I have another cartoon here just to make the point.
It’s not just older people affected; it is younger people.
Sorry, young folks, you’re getting left behind. Because some say it’s not our problem.
The Social Security system is going insolvent, and these folks can pay into it, they’ll never receive a benefit.
These young Pages here, they don’t recognize it yet, but they’re contributing every month on the wages they’re getting to a system that will not be there for them unless we do something now.
So, before I defer to my colleague, I’ll say once more: all we’re doing is setting up a process to propose solutions that may or may not pass, that any Senator can bring their own bill and have it as an amendment in the nature of a substitute.
And it’s up to Congress to find a solution.
Now, history will decide whether Congress took up the responsibility of addressing the issue or whether because it was politically advantageous, politically expedient, to kick the can down the road once more, even though the road’s about to end in a dead end.
Or, in the case of one of our cartoons, with the cliff here, they built a bridge and decided not to finish it.
Here, the folks who need to get across the bridge of Social Security will get to it someday.
That’s the point, Mr. President.
Let’s set up a process to be considered.
We’re talking about the PROMISE Act, which is a Dick Durbin, lead author, Bill Cassidy bill.
Now, there may be another way, but let’s set up the process.
With that, I defer to my colleague.
What a treat it is to be on the floor of the Senate with a colleague on the Republican side of the aisle, working together, to try to solve a problem.
It doesn’t happen much around here. You see these empty desks?
They’re empty almost all the days, week in, week out, month in, month out.
We do important things like nominations. There’s nothing that’s trivial about that.
But we don’t tackle the issues that really affect the people at home with their families.
75 million Americans rely on it.
Half of them, it’s their only source of income. So, a Social Security check means a lot.
So, the experts on Social Security tell Dr. Cassidy and myself that just in a few years, six years, Social Security will be unable to make full promise payments. It’ll be cut by 22% in terms of benefits.
The average Social Security check now is around $2,400 a month. If you reduce that by 22%, it means that people receiving Social Security will receive about $450 to $500 less a month. If that is your only source of income, imagine for a moment that $2,400 just lopped off from the monthly payment.
How does if affect you? Paying your rent, paying your mortgage, paying your utility bills, paying what it might take at a grocery store to get by.
It’s going to be a real hardship, as Senator Cassidy said.
For the citizens of America, it means that those under the poverty level will increase by 50%.
We have to do something about it.
And the bill that I’ve introduced with Senator Cassidy basically doesn’t pick a solution, although we can come up with a couple. It doesn’t pick a solution. It just says, don’t waste any time.
Let the American people engage in this conversation with you and vote on some alternatives. Now, vote is a word that used to be part of being a senator.
Not so much anymore. Except when it comes to nominations, there aren’t a lot of votes on substantive issues around this chamber. I know a little bit about this.
I’ve given more than half of my life to Congress. 14 years in the House, 30 years in the Senate.
I know what you’re saying. Sounds like a career politician.
Well, maybe I am. And proud of it.
And particularly proud of serving in this chamber. I’ve seen some glorious things happen in this chamber on a bipartisan basis.
But it takes a couple senators, maybe more, to stand up and say, “We’ve got to do something that’s risky and controversial, but important.”
This is not the first time I faced Social Security. When I was a member of the House, elected in ’82, came to serve in ’83, I was told that in a matter of months, Social Security would run out of money.
You’re a brand-new member of Congress, scared to death you won’t be reelected, and they tell you you’ve got to make a big change in the biggest social program in America.
But you know what? We did it. Our goal was simple.
50 years of solvency in Social Security.
Can we change Social Security and guarantee 50 years of solvency? We made a lot of changes.
And you know what we got for it? 2032.
1983 to 2032, we kept our word. 50 years. It’s not too much to ask this Congress to fix Social Security and keep it solvent for 50 years.
We can do it. The longer we wait to do it, the more difficult it becomes.
I look back on voting for that, and I thought it was the end of my political career, which was only a few months old.
But it turned out no member of Congress, Democrat or Republican, in 1983 and ’84 lost an election because they voted for Social Security changes.
The American people expect us to make the best choices we can. And they accepted what we did, and we bout 50 years of solvency.
That’s an amazing thing when you consider how important this program is.
And so, what Senator Cassidy and I have suggested is a process which basically says we won’t go by the Senate rules.
I might add, I was going to show it, but I think it violates the Senate rules.
The Senate is a chamber of tradition.
Down here, a few of you can see it, is a brass spittoon. A brass spittoon.
It’s been held onto as part of the tradition of the Senate.
Well, we have traditions in the rules that make things almost impossible to pass except after a long period of time. Weeks go by sometimes. Days certainly go by. Trying to get a measure on the floor to an actual vote.
The Senate rules are not kindly. They’re tough.
So, the bill that I introduced basically cuts through some of this red tape of delay and says we’ll move after several weeks to consider alternative Social Security.
The bottom line is it isn’t enough to get a majority in the Senate under the current rules, and it isn’t changed at all under our proposal.
You still need 60 votes to ultimately pass any change in Social Security.
Well, Democrats don’t have 60 votes.
Republicans don’t have 60 votes, but together we think we can reach that goal.
Now, I’ve been a little disappointed but not surprised that some of my colleagues that I’ve talked to about this said they thought it was a good idea, but on reflection they’ve decided it’s too risky, that we’re moving things too fast.
The Senate’s never been accused successfully of moving too fast on almost anything.
We take our time. That’s why we’re here.
The Senate is different than the House, and I served in both and respect both.
So, to my colleagues who oppose this approach, who say we need more time to do it, I want to back up Senator Cassidy.
The solution becomes more expensive over time. The longer you wait, the more expensive it becomes to save Social Security. And we absolutely, positively have to save it.
Too many people are counting on it.
I’ll bet you the folks who gather here today have many relatives of their own who count on Social Security, either because they’re disabled or elderly.
I understand that in my own family.
So, it is a great day in the Senate when a Democrat and a Republican stand on the floor and don’t criticize one another, but actually talk about working together.
It’s been a real pleasure for me, I’d say to Senator Cassidy, to be part of the Cassidy–Durbin Team.
We’re both ending our Senate careers on January 3rd of next year. We hoped that this would be one of the things we could achieve before we left.
I’m still not giving up completely.
But I had to step up and make a proposal with Senator Cassidy to get my colleagues in conversation.
The conversation about Social Security has increased dramatically since we started this effort.
The more expensive it becomes the longer we wait.
And I yield back to Senator Cassidy.
CASSIDY: Thank you, Senator Durbin.
And Senator Durbin is referring to what is called the PROMISE Act.
Again, it is a bill which sets up a process to come to a solution. It doesn’t dictate what the solution is.
We have colleagues who are objecting to coming up with a process.
And so, it is important for our country that Congress tackle this issue. And when I say our country, I mean the people who live here, whether they are older or whether they are younger, they’re relying upon Congress to step up to its responsibility.
Thank you, Senator Durbin. We’ll continue to push on this.
It is important for our Congress, important for our country, important for our people.
Cassidy Delivers Floor Speech Urging Congress to Pass PROMISE Act to Protect Social Security | U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy
Position: Senator Cassidy advocates for passage of the bipartisan PROMISE Act, which establishes a congressional process to address Social Security's solvency crisis and preserve benefits. He also proposes a 'Big Idea' policy creating an investment fund modeled after the Federal Railroad Retirement System.
(Click here to watch and here to download.)
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA) delivered a speech on the U.S. Senate floor discussing his plans to secure the future of Social Security. Cassidy’s agenda includes the bipartisan PROMISE Act, which sets up a process for Congress to work toward a solution for Social Security. This is the first step toward ensuring that millions of Americans continue to receive the Social Security benefits they are owed. In his speech, Cassidy also outlined his “Big Idea” policy, which will include an investment fund modeled after the Federal Railroad Retirement System.
“I’m pleased to say that there’s new momentum on both sides, Republicans and Democrats, to find a solution and preserve benefits for those who have spent their lifetime earning them,” said Dr. Cassidy.
“My Democratic colleague from Illinois, Dick Durbin, and I just introduced the PROMISE Act along with a group of colleagues, Republican and Democrat. The PROMISE Act sets up a process. It doesn’t dictate a policy. It sets up a process that puts Congress on the clock to save Social Security,” continued Dr. Cassidy.
I’ve been working on Social Security for eight years now. Why?
One, it’s a guarantee, an international guarantee, made to Americans when they get to a certain age to retire.
It’s an earned benefit which says that after a lifetime of work and contribution, Americans can count on a measure of financial security.
Today, more than 75 million Americans rely on Social Security.
Others are widows or widowers and children.
Now, let’s just set the context.
A program that 75 million Americans rely on, 10 million baby boomers a day become eligible for, and in six years, if Congress does nothing, by law, their benefits will be cut almost 29%.
So let’s just say that once more.
If Congress does nothing in six years by law, benefits going to 75 million Americans and more at that time will be cut by almost 29%.
We’ve known this is coming. It’s because there’s been a continued drawdown for the Social Security Trust Fund.
By law, Social Security cannot pay out more than it receives.
Currently, it is receiving money from payroll taxes, but also from the trust fund.
When the trust fund goes belly-up in six years, and the only income is that which current workers are paying, then the amount going out has to fall, and it will fall 28.5% if we wait until then to fix things.
I’m pleased to say, though, that there’s now momentum on both sides, Republicans and Democrats, to find a solution to preserve benefits for those who have spent their lifetime earning them.
By the way, people ask, how is Social Security going bankrupt? I’ve been paying it my whole life! Everybody I know has been paying into it their whole life.
So why is it going bankrupt now?
I point out to people that when Social Security came along, there were like five kids per family. And now there’s like two kids per family. And when Social Security was first enacted, you didn’t get benefits until you were 65, but the average age of death was 62.
Now, people live until they’re 82, and they’re getting their hips replaced when they’re 75 to go bungee jumping in New Zealand.
So the point being is that people are living far longer and they’re living more actively. And as a result of that, we are drawing down that trust fund.
So my Democratic colleague from Illinois, Dick Durbin, he and I just introduced the PROMISE Act along with a group of colleagues, Republican and Democrat. And the PROMISE Act sets up a process.
It sets up a process that puts Congress on the clock to save Social Security.
What the PROMISE Act does, it says that Congress shall come up with multiple options to present to the Senate Finance Committee, or to the Ways and Means Committee on the House side, in order for them to consider it, have it scored, and be delivered to Congress in order to deliberate.
And then it says that the relevant committee, say Senate Finance, has seven working days to consider it, and then it comes to the floor, and then we have a vote on it.
That begs the question: Why do it now? Why not wait until the next Congress?
Because every year we wait, it gets harder and harder to fix Social Security. The amount of cuts required or the amount of taxes to be raised are more dramatic, more drastic, and more likely to harm an individual’s personal finances.
We’re just setting up a process.
Now, by the way, in full honesty, I have a policy I’ve been working on, but my policy will be one of several that will be considered.
My policy, we have something in it which we call the Big Idea. And our Big Idea, we look at a trust fund, we look at pension funds that are doing well, that are not going bankrupt, and are growing in line with the needs of the people whom they cover.
This would be the kind of pension fund that Exxon or Google or Deloitte & Touche has.
It’s called a pension investment fund, in which dollars are invested at an early stage, allowed to grow, and as those dollars grow over time, they meet the needs of the retirees as they become eligible for pulling those dollars down.
We’ve actually done that in the federal government.
Under George W. Bush, the federal railroad retirement system was going insolvent.
And so Congress voted to allow it to diversify the investments of this pension fund.
I think every Democrat voted for it in the Senate. Three Republicans voted no. And the concerns they had have been proven wrong.
Because what’s happened now with the Federal Railroad Retirement System, we still have more retirees relative to fewer workers, but that system is in the black because it invests in the strength of the U.S. economy, and the strength of the U.S. economy has been able to pay all future obligations.
What has Congress already done successfully with the Federal Railroad Retirement System? What is being done with major corporations that meet their pension benefit?
Kind of what you do with your own 401K. We can set up this investment fund to supplement the payroll taxes that are the primary source of funding for Social Security, we can meet that future obligation.
Now, let me go back to the PROMISE Act. I’m not dictating my proposal to be the answer. We’re dictating the process that can be considered so that any proposal can be brought up.
The presiding officer has a proposal with Senator Warren. His proposal came up. So it might be his proposal, or more likely it’s going to be some sort of amalgamation.
But the only option that should not be an option is to do nothing.
Congress is being irresponsible, destructively irresponsible, if we don’t address Social Security. It’s driving our national debt. And if we cut benefits by 28%, that will double poverty among the elderly.
The promised benefit will not be delivered. By the way, if all we do is borrow, it’s going to tank our credit rating.
So, going back to my particular plan, folks say, well, what if the stock market goes down?
Under our plan, all risk is borne by the investment fund. No risk is borne by the individual. That individual gets all the benefits she’s been promised, even if the market goes up and down.
They ask me, are they putting the trust fund into the stock market? No way.
We have a separate investment fund, separate from the Social Security Trust Fund, and that’s where the investment goes.
Folks want to say, well, wait a second. I don’t trust Congress, and I don’t trust the president. You put a pot of money there, it’s like honey to a bear. They’re going to reach in and grab it.
We have guardrails all over the place, including an annual audit of how the money is invested and how the money is spent or not spent. And that audit is put online so the American people can keep track of what’s happening with their trust fund.
I will finish by saying this, Mr. President.
I like my plan. I think it’s a good plan.
I think it’s going to make it a lot easier to address the problem.
But the PROMISE Act is not about my plan. The PROMISE Act, which Dick Durbin and I introduced, is only setting up a process by which Congress is forced to take action before it gets any worse.
My proposal may be the one considered. It may be the presiding officers. It may be somebody else’s.
The only option that should not be taken is the option of doing nothing.
With that, I yield. Thank you.
Source: GDELT 2.0 GKG, filtered to a curated list of national outlets. Inclusion is not endorsement; opinion pieces and reported news are mixed.
Recent stock activity
Periodic transaction reports filed under the STOCK Act — disclosed by the rep, sourced from public filings.
No disclosed trades on record.
Source: open-data mirrors of the Senate eFD and House Clerk financial-disclosure systems. Disclosure within 30 days of trade is required by law (45 for spouse/dependent trades).
Top PAC donors · 2026 cycle
Political action committees that gave the most to this rep's principal campaign committee this cycle. PAC giving is direct organizational support — industry, ideological, or leadership.
1.AMERICAN ISRAEL PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE POLITICAL ACTION COIdeological7 contributionsPAC arm of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, federalized in 2021. Backs candidates of both parties who support U.S.-Israel security and economic ties.AI$77,063
2.CASSIDY LEADERSHIP FUNDLeadership4 contributionsMember-of-Congress leadership PAC affiliated with Senator Bill Cassidy — directs contributions to allied Republican candidates and causes.AI$41,166
3.WIN REDParty3 contributionsRepublican party committee — funds Republican candidates and coordinates national party support in federal elections.AI$35,400
4.NO LABELS PROBLEM SOLVERS POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (NO LAB2 contributions$24,500
5.CITIZENS FOR PROSPERITY IN AMERICA TODAY PACIdeological2 contributionsIdeological PAC — specific policy positions not inferable from the name alone.AI · low$23,350
6.ONE TEAM SENATE MAJORITY2 contributions$18,744
7.2019 SENATORS CLASSIC COMMITTEELeadership1 contributionMember-of-Congress leadership PAC — likely affiliated with a senator or senatorial group. Backs allied candidates and party priorities.AI$11,116
8.NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS POLITICAL ACTION COMMIT1 contribution$10,700
9.BI-COUNTY POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE1 contribution$10,000
10.REPUBLICAN SENATE PROBLEM SOLVERS FUND1 contribution$9,982
Source: OpenFEC (api.open.fec.gov) Schedule A receipts where contributor type is “committee.” Aggregated by contributing committee. Self-transfers from joint-fundraising / victory committees are excluded.
Top individual contributors · 2026 cycle
Itemized individual contributions over $200 to this rep's campaign committee, aggregated by donor employer. PAC giving is shown above; this section is people, not organizations.
1.INFORMATION REQUESTED PER BEST EFFORTS$58,403
2.GALLIANO MARINE SERVICE LLC$33,000
3.APOLLO$32,500
4.NEW YORK CANCER & BLOOD SPECIALISTS$28,500
5.BLACKSTONE$28,000
6.WELSH CARSON ANDERSON & STOWE$27,700
7.POSIGEN$27,500
8.APOLLO GLOBAL MANAGEMENT$25,000
9.HOSPITAL FOR SPECIAL SURGERY$21,500
10.BOUDREAUXS NEW DRUG STORE$21,000
Source: OpenFEC Schedule A receipts where contributor type is “individual,” aggregated by the donor's self-reported employer. This is a geographic / industry correlation, not a corporate endorsement.
