A invoice to vary Supplemental Security Income advantages for aged, blind and disabled Americans is a primary step in updating a program that has not been altered in a long time, Ohio Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown mentioned.

Brown launched the invoice, the SSI Savings Penalty Elimination Act, on Thursday with Ohio Republican Sen. Rob Portman.

The proposal would increase asset limits that stop roughly 8 million Americans who obtain these federal advantages from having significant financial savings put aside.

Currently, this system has a $2,000 cap for people and $3,000 for {couples}. The laws seeks to boost these limits, which haven’t been up to date since 1989, to $10,000 and $20,000, respectively.

More from Personal Finance:
How taxes on wages for Social Security might change
Seniors have excessive hopes for prescription drug pricing reform
How altering work necessities might assist SSI beneficiaries

Moreover, the invoice additionally would index these caps to inflation, so they’d be adjusted yearly, very similar to Social Security advantages, and primarily based on Consumer Price Index knowledge.

“Rising costs and inflation is hurting all Americans, but especially our nation’s seniors and those with disabilities,” Portman mentioned in a press release. “Yet the Supplemental Security Income program that serves these vulnerable populations hasn’t been updated in decades and punishes them for trying to save responsibly.”

Updating this system’s asset limits would “expand economic opportunity and mobility for people with disabilities,” a J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. Policy Center report discovered.

Many SSI beneficiaries are wanting to see modifications to this system, which has not been altered in a long time. That consists of growing advantages, that are under or near the federal poverty stage. The common month-to-month profit for all recipients is at present $625.50. They additionally wish to see modifications to guidelines that discourage beneficiaries from working by slicing their advantages.

“I want to do much, much more,” Brown mentioned of SSI reform, in a Tuesday interview with CNBC.com

The lawmaker beforehand proposed a extra complete invoice, the SSI Restoration Act, which might make these modifications to this system.

Both senators from Ohio are hoping to get the invoice handed as a part of different laws. Brown mentioned he expects unanimous Democratic help, whereas Portman’s help will assist encourage Republican votes.

“We’re looking at different avenues, different vehicles,” Brown mentioned. “I’m very committed to this and more as we move forward.”

“It is long-past time for Congress to once again update SSI’s asset limits, which have become overly restrictive and prevent the accumulation of even modest personal savings,” Bill Sweeney, senior vp at AARP, mentioned in a press release.

The Supreme Court just lately dominated that Puerto Rico residents aren’t eligible for SSI advantages.

“[SSI] should apply to everybody who’s eligible, and it should be national in scope,” Sen. Brown mentioned. “And when I say national, I really do mean national.”

The efforts to reform SSI are a part of Brown’s job “to give voice to people in my state who don’t have much of a voice,” he mentioned.

That consists of different points, just like the expanded baby tax credit score and pupil loans.

Monthly baby tax credit score funds for as much as $300 per baby for eligible households expired in December. However, households are nonetheless benefiting from that once they filed their tax returns this spring, Brown mentioned.

“We’re not giving up on it,” Brown mentioned of efforts to resume the improved credit score and month-to-month funds.

“I have not done anything that got the response at home and around the country that that did,” he added.

Moreover, on Tuesday morning, Brown hosted a Senate committee assembly the place debtors shared their experiences with pupil loans.

“I am urging the president to do everything he can,” Brown mentioned of pupil mortgage reform issues. “And I hope we can do something in Congress, but with this 50/50 majority we probably can’t.”