Republicans AND Democrats Lining Up Behind Major Changes To Social Security

[Bluebear]

Is there a new, bipartisan consensus forming on Capitol Hill about whether (and how) to scale back Social Security benefits? A surprising number of signs point to "yes" -- and that has many progressives looking ahead a few months to what they believe could become a serious fight.

Several of the most powerful members of the House -- Republicans and Democrats -- have recently voiced real support for the idea of raising the retirement age for people middle-aged and younger as part of a larger plan to reduce long-term deficits, inching closer to what not too long ago was the third rail of American politics.

The strongest backer of this plan is House Minority Leader John Boehner, who recently told a Pennsylvania newspaper, "I think raising the retirement age going out 20 years so you're not affecting anyone close to retirement, and eventually getting the retirement age to 70 is a step that needs to be taken."

There's no big surprise there. The Republican minority in the House doesn't have a lot of power, but if Boehner had his druthers, he might well take things quite a bit further. He's the one, after all, who won't take Social Security privatization off the table if Republicans retake the House.

It's the Democrats who have progressives feeling queasy.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer explicitly put the idea on the table as well in a speech last month. "We should consider a higher retirement age or one pegged to lifespan," Hoyer said.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/07/republicans-and-democrats-endorse-major-changes-to-social-security.php

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. Goddamn all those people, both parties.

Raise the retirement age? Oh fucking wonderful.

We need to rattle some cages.

Now.

[w4rma]

7. Damn the DLCers and all the Repukes. (nt)

[NorthCarolina]

25. +1000. Why DLC New Dems are so often given a pass is beyond me

The DLC New Dems ARE the impetus behind the changes to Social Security. The GOP does not call the shots right now. But I am sure this is one area where they will bind with the DLC conservatives, giving them the numbers they need to cut entitlements. For the conservatives (DLC and GOP) next act, they will allow the "Bush tax cuts" to expire (news facetime), then will quickly cobble together new legislation to replace it that is equally generous to their big money benefactors.

[defendandprotect]

65. Good question . . . let's keep asking it -- !!

[Hannah Bell]

52. [phone] 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00000000000

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

62. I'd be happy to work til I'm 70

but I just got laid off, not too many job openings when you're over 60.

Raising the retirement age when employment is declining? I'm not sure this makes any sense.

Rattle cages? Writing my rep and senators doesn't accomplish anything, they still support H-1b visas and outsourcing.

:hi:

[defendandprotect]

66. 70 graduates for every one opening.... Social Security retirement at 65 was

intended to open up positions -- and think it's a good idea --

an insane idea right now to go to 70 -- IMO.

[Sherman A1]

70. +1000

:banghead:

[Divine Discontent]

2. we are amongst many fools in this country, and they are GOP and too often,

Democrats! I wish the progressive Dems would raise a righteous fury about this call to raise the RA to 70! God forbid they actually just raise the amount that is earned that can be taxed.

[Citizen Worker]

13. The democrats would scream like hell if there wasn't a

"democrat" as president. Recall how the democrats went after Bush when he was campaigning across the country to privatize social security? Bush's effort failed miserably but now we have a "democrat" in the White House. My bet is that the so called progressives in the congress will try and work out some sort of "compromise" which is just short hand for the working class getting the shaft once again.

[Spike from MN]

59. Exactly.

Anytime I hear a Dem use the word "bipartisanship," it's invariably used as an excuse for selling us out.

[defendandprotect]

67. Wasn't it more an uprising from public that stopped Bush? But Obama going after it now ...

I think will blindside the public -- they're not going to see this coming!!

In fact, we've talked very little about this at DU -- we've known about it for

months!!

[saracat]

3. Disgusting.

[old mark]

4. What ever happened to the idea of congressional term limits?

Some of those fuckers ought to be unemployed for a while...

Of course they have stashed away so much money from bribes...er, lobbyists...they don't have to worry about retiring early...many of them are retired already, and still on the job.


mark

[Ishoutandscream2]

5. Wish I could recommend this

+100000000000000000

[old mark]

6. Just send me a few dollars instead.

(Thanks!)


mark

[bluestateguy]

11. I support that

When people retort by saying that term limits insult voters' intelligence I say "Uh yeah, voters aren't very bright"

[Obamanaut]

14. We could limit their terms in November of even number years, but

we don't.

We keep incumbents at a rate greater than 90%, because most of us vote for 'the name you know.' They know that's how many of us make our selection, so they don't care.

[Freddie Stubbs]

19. Didn't have enough votes the last time anyone pushed for it:

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/1995/roll277.xml

[TBF]

31. Either that or make them work until aged 70 on minimum wage. nt

[G_j]

37. bagging groceries

or what?
McDonald's?
if they (we?) are lucky..

[JHB]

58. I still don't think term limits would help as much as people think...

The way I see it, term limits would strengthen the hand of "permanent Washington", professional staffers and such. They'd be the ones with the institutional memory, the ones who know all the tricks on how to get things done (or not done), and how to slip things into legislation. And when one patronemployer goes home due to limits, they just shop themselves around to the new crop. Rest assured the lobbyists will know who to go to.

All that would do is take the real power even farther away from the voters. For all the problems and frustrations with the current system, that "solution" doesn't seem promising to me at all.

[TBF]

63. Absolutely correct -

when I worked in legal support in DC we saw it with vendors. They'd wine & dine whomever they could get to - whether it was the attorneys, paralegals, or secretaries. It didn't matter to them as long as they got the work (deliveries, copying etc...). It is the system that is inherently flawed, and all the behavior follows because it is rewarded ...

[slay]

8. Hey how bout we end these POINTLESS WARS instead?

seriously - that's who i'm voting for next election - whoeever's for ending the wars and NOT messing with SS.

[NorthCarolina]

27. Not going to happen as long as the Conservatives hold sway over DC

Ending the wars, better health care, cleaner environment, better education, a more modern infrastructure....all these things that could be, will not happen as long as the conservatives control the message and the tone in DC, and in the MSM. Nothing will change for the better until such time as America reaches a breaking point, wakes up and begins the process of replacing Conservative DLC New Dem and Blue Dogs with Liberal/Progressive legislators that will return the party to being an advocate for the people.

[defendandprotect]

39. It's corporate money that's holding sway . . . and elected officials selling out to them --

candidates pre-bribed and pre-owned --

[laughingliberal]

9. K & R nt

[spin]

10. If our government would stop raiding the Social Security fund ...

to finance useless wars and tax cuts, we wouldn't have this problem.

Raiding of Social Security and the 2000 Election Campaign
by Allen W. Smith / December 8th, 2009

***snip***


Because of all the rhetoric and news coverage of the Social Security trust fund issue during the campaign, and in the early months of the George W. Bush presidency, the American people came to believe that the Social Security trust fund was no longer being raided. But nothing changed with the inauguration of George W. Bush. Despite his pledge to protect the Social Security money, Bush spent every dime of Social Security surplus revenue that came in during his presidency. He used it to fund his big tax cuts for the rich, and much of it was spent on wars.

The news media had given extensive coverage to the Social Security debate in the 2000 election campaign, and to President Bush’s early promises to not raid the trust fund. However, Bush’s failure to honor his promises, with regard to Social Security, just never seemed to get much news coverage, leaving most Americans to believe that the raiding of the trust fund ended after George W. Bush took office. On the contrary, Bush raided and spent a total of $1.37 trillion of Social Security surplus during his eight years as president. In his last year, he spent $192.2 billion, which averages out to more than $526 million per day.

During a speech on April 5, 2005 in Parkersburg, West Virginia, Bush openly admitted to the fact that all of the Social Security surplus revenue had been spent. He said, “There is no trust fund, just IOUs that I saw firsthand that future generations will pay—will pay for either in higher taxes, or reduced benefits, or cuts to other critical government programs.” Bush’s words in this speech bore little resemblance to what he had said about Social Security during the 2000 campaign. But his motives were difference in 2005. He was trying to sell his privatization plan, and he thought that by spilling the truth he might further his effort to privatize Social Security.

There would be no Social Security funding problem for at least the next 25 years, if the government had not raided the trust fund. If the trust fund held the $2.5 trillion of surplus Social Security revenue, in the form of real marketable bonds, as it should, it could continue to pay full Social Security benefits until at least 2037. So the obvious solution is for the government to make arrangements to repay the $2.5 trillion it owes to the trust fund.

Dr. Allen W. Smith is a Professor of Economics, Emeritus, at Eastern Illinois University. He is the author of seven books and has been researching and writing about Social Security financing for the past ten years. Read other articles by Allen, or visit Allen's website.
http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/12/raiding-of-social-security-and-the-2000-election-campaign/

If we do fix Social Security once again, we have to make damn sure the politicians can't get their filthy paws on the money.

[defendandprotect]

40. Social Security doesn't have a problem . . . it's a success, it's healthy . . . runs Surplusses

every year -- if the money that was borrowed from the trust fund was retuturned

SS would be infinitely soluable!!

If not -- still no problems until 2038 or longer --

But elites keep grabbing the surplus every year -- that's how Bush paid for tax cuts

for elites and for his wars!!

[Hannah Bell]

53. it's not "raiding". by law, all surplus SS collected MUST be borrowed into the general budget

in exchange for us securities.

that's the LAW, & it's been the law since SS was established.

This kind of misreporting, imo, is done to confuse people.

The crime isn't in borrowing the SS surplus. Intra-account borrowing & repayment is standard & non-problematic, in other government accounts as well as SS -- within reason.

The crime was in jacking up fica high enough to generate a surplus that expanded for 30 years, generating $2.5 trillion in borrowed $ + interest, far beyond the mandated one-year cushion -- & then implicitly claiming the borrowings couldn't be repaid, so even more money must be collected from workers, or benefits cut.

The crime is happening NOW. Contact your congresspeople & tell your friends & family to do the same. It really is grand theft they're trying to get away with, & if they pull it off it will be one of the biggest thefts in the history of the republic.

[bluestateguy]

12. I am for one big change

Lift the FICA earnings cap. Do it gradually, but in due time you will have more money coming into the system if all income is taxable for SS/Medicare and not just your first $106,000.

[Ganja Ninja]

18. You would think that a liberal democratic party would demand this a a prerequisite for any cutting

of Social Security. A liberal Democratic Party that is.:argh:

[ThomThom]

15. Why can't they just move the cap up a little

When I first started working as a teenager a promise was made that if I put this money with them I would get it back.
In fact early retirement makes sense because it opens up jobs for younger people.
Privatize never, only greedy foolish republicans could support privatization.
Just raise the cap, my generation is already paying for our parents and ourselves don't punish us again because our government couldn't keep their fat fingers off of our money.

[defendandprotect]

41. They can . . . but notice how many here believe right wing propaganda that Social Security

isn' a success, has has some kind of a problem!!!

That's simply right wing propaganda --

and Dems are now using it to do what the GOP hasn't been able to do under Bush!!

[ThomThom]

51. So is it propaganda or a real attempt? Your post seems to be playing

both sides. Either it's propaganda or the Dems are falling into line to make the republican position a reality.

[defendandprotect]

64. It is right wing propaganda . . .

being used by the DLC-corporate wing of the Dem Party now --

And it is certainly Democrats now -- which must be quite clear to you -- that

are taking over the assignment . . . !?

[marmar]

16. We really are on our own.....

We, the People, will have to look inward and assert ourselves. We can't depend on politicians to do the right thing. In the end, we are a greater force than they are.

[NorthCarolina]

26. You're right. Neither of todays viable political parties represents the interest of the people.

eom

[unhappycamper]

17. Why don't you just take my Social Security and buy Enron stock?

That will save all the paperwork. :sarcasm:

[EnviroBat]

24. Why don't they just take my social security

and pay off my God Damn student loans. Never realized I was signing into a life of indentured servitude to the federal government when I borrowed for a shit education. I must have been high on something. Now they want my social security that I've been paying into for 24 years or so. Forgive my student loans and they can have it!

[defendandprotect]

42. Right -- remember Bush wanted to move Social Secuirty money to Wall Street . . .!!

"faith-based" Social Security!!

[conscious evolution]

20. What else did you expect when both partys

are bought and paid for by corporate interests?
Anyone who think the Republican and Democratic partys are looking out for the interests of the people are fucking fools and idiots.

[riskpeace]

29. Exactly

And if they thought that before April 20, 2010, then surely the events in the Gulf have removed any and all doubt.

They bought the government fair and square. What could we do for the Gulf Coast with the $100 billion we are dumping into Afghanistan. Sorry for us!

PS -- Thanks to the beautiful and classy Michelle Obama for coming to visit us in Panama City Beach and showing the nation that our beaches are clean!

[defendandprotect]

43. Evidently a lot of people here . . .

still don't get that --

[donco6]

21. Finally! They both found something they can agree on:

Screwing us.

[Lost4words]

28. They have pulled a Pearl Harbor on the working class for 30 years

With the worlds uber wealthy assuming the role of the Imperial Navy. A calculated cold blooded sneak attack to break our backs and our will.

Kruschevs quote, "Americas Downfall will come from within!" He was spot on, funny isnt it. Pure communism doesn't work and pure capitalism doesn't work. What works HYBRIDS!

What strikes me as odd is that the Soviet Unions long involvement in Afghanistan hastened their collapse and where are we and what are we doing now? Same stupid thing.

Not to F*ing bright.

[donco6]

22. Dupe

[EnviroBat]

23. Do they realize the negative impact this will have on the younger workforce?

These idiots don't think beyond step 1 about ANYTHING. It's hard enough for people to find jobs because there aren't any. Now they want people of retirement age to "stick it out" a little longer, and further choke the life out of the jobs market. I hate these fuckers in congress, democrat and republican alike.

[blindpig]

30. There will be a 'divide and conquer' by age strategy

People gonna have to have solidarity, they will try to piece off the Boomers and stick it to the young. This Boomers stands with the young.

[TBF]

32. Absolutely -

of course they've already made sure Boomers will only have middling health care through private delivery...

[unkachuck]

33. I will not, can not....

....support ANY political party or politician that tampers with or begins to destroy SS and Medicare benefits, for the elderly through the yet unborn....there will be no multi-level of benefits; one Social Security and Medicare package for everyone!!

"...many progressives looking ahead a few months to what they believe could become a serious fight."

....this will be the fight of a lifetime....it will re-define politics in this country for generations!

[unkachuck]

34. dupe...n/t

[bvar22]

35. We reformed the Democratic Party the Old Fashioned Way.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

We BOUGHT it!!!
Hahahahahahahaha!

[defendandprotect]

44. Absolutely . . . .

and we've been getting that news for more than 40 years from liberal organizations

reporting to us --

If it takes Americans now more than 40 years to absorb a message, how long is it going

to take them to react?

[Raksha]

46. That's for damn sure!!!

[county worker]

36. All that needs to be done to lower the deficit is to stop the wars and raise taxes on the wealthy.

I want to hear that in the House.

[defendandprotect]

38. Anyone think that Democrats were going to protect us from anything??? Sen. Whitehouse in 2012????

Grayson for VP?

[EmeraldCityGrl]

45. We can't let this happen. Time to get all radical on their asses!

I've started getting campaign calls from Patty Murray and Suzan Delbene. They either stand up against this or I refuse to donate time or money.

[Kablooie]

47. Well, there goes one Democratic talking point this election.

Can't say, 'vote for the Republican and lose your Social Security' anymore.

Some of the Democrats just can't wait to share the blame.

[lonestarnot]

48. Well take shit away from the richies who don't need it. Over a certain income.

That would be the only group I would support raising the retirement age on, and leave the rest alone. Once they get started they'll steal all the money they can.

[joe_sixpack]

49. Exactly my thoughts.

Why do Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Dick Cheney, Labron James, Paul Allen, or any other wealthy person need to collect social security at all?

[lonestarnot]

50. Why should anyone making CEO wage get social security? It is fucking ridiculous. And it appears we

have a bunch of richie riches in this country if everyone is going to vote repukeliCON as they are pipedreaming. Could get SS out of any hole in the future. :D

[Hannah Bell]

54. because they paid in, just like you. better raise their income taxes so they can repay what

they stole with their other hand.

[lonestarnot]

68. Are you sure they paid it all in, and I don't give a crap if they did. i'd like to see them lose it

just for lying and trying to fuck with it.

[Hannah Bell]

73. that's a different issue.

[Warren Stupidity]

61. There is no reason to take 'shit' away from anyone.

And how that suggestion will work it is this: 'richies' will be defined to be some portion of the middle class, people who are also depending on SS to provide a substantial portion of their retirement income. The actual rich, people who have enough income producing assets to live comfortably forever, of course don't need or care about that SS check, but if you open the door to means testing SS benefits the bar to qualify will get lower and lower and lower until hardly anyone can do the limbo.

Everyone pays in. Everyone gets a check. The genius of medicare and social security is that we are all in the same boat.

[JHB]

55. Hmmm...raising the retirement age 20 years out. You know who that affects?

Me. And everyone else at the tail end of the Baby Boom or afterward.

Check me on this: isn't the (supposed) big crisis for SS due to all the Boomers that will be receiving it?
So Boehnhead's bright idea is to leave the "problem cohort" unaffected but cut it for everyone who will become eligible for it just as the demographic pressure on it is getting relieved.

First off, the underlying assumption is bogus. Then, his "solution" ignores his own assumptions about the cause of the "crisis".

Just another effing "divide and conquer" gambit. Screw over the younger generations but keep it "safe" for older ones. Noooooo, that won't stir up resentment at all, won't it? :sarcasm:


Remind these people you are here and if they pull this shit you will make sure they feel the pain at election time. Even Democrats. Maybe especially Democrats. (What ever happened to taking an issue like this and using it to bash the Republicans' heads in?)

[Hannah Bell]

56. resentment is what the fuckers do best. no one should imagine for a moment it's not deliberate.

[Fast Dude]

57. “The word bipartisan means some larger-than-usual deception is being carried out”

~ George Carlin (May 12, 1937 – June 22, 2008)

He was correct as usual.

[mdmc]

60. “The word bipartisan means some larger-than-usual deception is being carried out”

yesyesyes

[Better Believe It]

69. Massive cuts in Medicare and Medicaid. Not exactly the healthcare reform we wanted and expected.

So the politicians want further Medicare cuts on top of the 500 billion in cuts they propose under the Health Insurance Industry Protection Act!

[alarimer]

71. Start with Congress.

All of those fucking sellouts need to go.

[hatrack]

72. Why don't we just raise the retirement age to 100?

Think of all the problems it would solve - to say nothing of the spring in our collective step at the thought of America's new-found fiscal probity as we headed off to our jobs at the cart corral at Wal-Mart (smelling of liniment a bit, but still . . . ) or Quintiles (granted, experimental epilepsy drugs at age 91 aren't necessarily exactly what the doctor ordered, but at least we'll all be earning our keep.