Sanders introduces bill to strengthen Social Security

[cali]

WASHINGTON, Sept. 14 – Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) today introduced legislation to strengthen Social Security by applying the payroll tax that most Americans already pay to those with annual incomes above $250,000.

The measure is cosponsored by Sens. Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Al Franken (D-Minn.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.).

Rep. Peter DeFazio introduced the companion bill in the House. He joined Sanders and other senators at a Capitol Hill press conference where they also voiced concern that Social Security benefits are in jeopardy as a powerful new congressional super committee looks for ways to cut deficits by up to $1.5 trillion over the next decade.

“We are here today to send a loud and clear message to this super committee: do not cut Social Security,” Sanders said.

<snip>

http://vtdigger.org/2011/09/14/sanders-introduces-bill-to-strengthen-social-security/

[frazzled]

1. Yeah, what good is it if the Republicans just shoot it down?

That, by the way, is how scores of people here reacted to the President's proposal to raise taxes on the wealthy the other day: it sucked because the Republicans will reject it. So turnabout is fair play.

This plan stinks because it can't pass. Let's at least be consistent.

[NorthCarolina]

3. That is expected from the GOP, but what odds do you give for Obama to come out in support of this

proposal? I think the plan is great, what REALLY stinks is that we have a Democratic President who will not give this proposal any more support, verbal or otherwise, than the GOP will. If Obama DOES come out in support of it I'll eat my words, but I'm pretty confident that won't be necessary.

[frazzled]

7. You've totally missed the point

I'm saying that fair's fair when you're criticizing a plan. Even when the President does come out with something truly progressive, it's put down here, because of its inability to pass.

And by the way, Obama has brought up the lifting of the cap on SS taxing many times. It's clear it won't pass. His touting it will only make it not pass MORE, since the entire aim of the Republicans is to oppose anything he supports. Sometimes, his quietness on a matter is actually a way of HELPING it. This was always his first preference for a SS fix, and he's said it at about 30 different Town Halls.

[NorthCarolina]

8. Campaign Obama talked of raising the cap back in 2007.

I don't believe he has repeated that same call post election; at least my google search could not find a reference to where he had advocated it outside of his presidential campaign. If you have a link I'd be happy to follow it and see.

[frazzled]

14. How about April 19, 2011

Tue Apr 19, 2011 3:42pm EDT

* Obama says tweaks can sustain program (Adds context, comments)

By Kim Dixon

WASHINGTON, April 19 (Reuters) - U.S. President Barack Obama on Tuesday backed boosting the amount of individual income subject to Social Security taxes, one of the first concrete proposals he has endorsed to put the retirement program on a stronger fiscal footing.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/19/usa-obama-socialsecurity-idUSN19806820110419

Don't like that source: how about firedoglake, with a transcript of a town hall meeting in Virginia this year?

So we do have to stabilize Social Security’s finances, but we can do that with some relatively modest changes — unlike health care, where we’ve got to get in and work with providers and really get some much more substantial reforms. With Social Security, it’s just a matter of tweaking how it currently works.

Now, politically, it’s hard to do. Politically, it’s hard to do. For example — I’ll just give you one example of a change that would make a difference in Social Security. Right now you only pay a Social Security tax up to a certain point of your income. So a little bit over $100,000, your Social Security — you don’t pay Social Security tax.

Now, how many people are making less than $100,000 a year? Don’t be bashful. (Laughter.) The point is, for the vast majority of Americans, every dime you earn, you’re paying some in Social Security. But for Warren Buffett, he stops paying at a little bit over $100,000 and then the next $50 billion he’s not paying a dime in Social Security taxes.

So if we just made a little bit of an adjustment in terms of the cap on Social Security, that would do a significant amount to stabilize the system. And that’s just an example of the kinds of changes that we can make. (Applause.)

http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/04/19/obama-reaffirms-desire-to-lift-social-security-payroll-cap/

I could go on and find a dozen transcripts of a dozen places he's said this in the last two years. If you want more, I'll do it. But you should be getting the point by now.

[NorthCarolina]

15. Then he will no doubt come out in full support of Sanders proposal right?

He will undoubtedly campaign on how the GOP will fight this proposal, but it's the right thing to do, and give him a 2nd term and Democrats in Congress to work with and they WILL pass this legislation. There is no question that a great majority of Americans want the changes to the cap that Sanders is proposing, couple that with Obamas apparent unwavering support of same, it should be a cake walk to a second term.

[chill_wind]

16. Exactly!

Or so you would think.

A majority of Americans do not want entitlement cuts.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/poll-majority-dont-want-entitlement-cuts-to-reduce-deficit.php

They would back him for taking a stand with Dems on this.

[frazzled]

18. Where you gonna move the goal post next?

How about this: breaking news from 1 hour ago:

President Barack Obama is set to announce his deficit reduction plan on Monday, and he will avoid making any changes to Social Security, The Wall Street Journal reports.

"As the president has consistently said, he does not believe that Social Security is a driver of our near- and medium-term deficits," spokeswoman Amy Brundage said in a statement to the Journal.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/after-failed-grand-bargain-obama-deficit-plan-to-avoid-social-security-2011-9#ixzz1XzIOoIJn

Social Security, in other words, is NOT on the table in the President's debt reduction plan.


Secondly, every article on the Sanders/DeFazio bill (which by the way, has to make it to the floor in both houses--let's see what Boehner and the boys do with that in the House, eh) states that:

The legislation also follows through on a proposal that President Barack Obama made in 2008 when he was running for the White House.

“Social Security is the most successful government program in our nation’s history. For 76 years, through good times and bad, Social Security has paid out every benefit owed to every eligible American,” Sander said. “The most effective way to strengthen Social Security for the next 75 years is to eliminate the cap on the payroll tax on income above $250,000. Right now, someone who earns $106,800 pays the same amount of money into Social Security as a billionaire. That makes no sense. The Keeping Our Social Security Promises Act will ensure the long-term solvency of Social Security without cutting benefits or raising taxes on the middle class.”

You're going to have to come up with new imaginary things the president will or won't do in the future. Cause I've disproved everything you think he's done in the past. You could at least thank me for setting the record straight. You asked for examples of when he ever supported lifting the cap on income for SS, and I gave you several examples from just this year. So now you want him to prove himself further. I give you the just announced debt reduction plan in which Social Security is kept totally sacrosanct. But I imagine you'll just have more suspicion. That's your problem.

[chill_wind]

21. You didn't answer North Carolina's final question.

So he can be expected to fully support this, yes or no?

And speaking of moving goalposts... Social Security was anything but sacrosanct in his debt reduction plan discussion a mere few weeks ago.

"What I emphasized to the broader group of congressional leaders yesterday is now is the time to deal with these issues. If not now, when? I've been hearing from my Republican friends for quite some time that it is a moral imperative for us to tackle our debt and our deficits in a serious way. I've been hearing from them that this is one of the things that's creating uncertainty and holding back investment on the part of the business community. And so what I've said to them is, let's go. And it is possible for us to construct a package that would be balanced, would share sacrifice, would involve both parties taking on their sacred cows, would involved some meaningful changes to Medicare, Social Security, and Medicaid that would preserve the integrity of the programs and keep our sacred trust with our seniors, but make sure those programs were there for not just this generation but for the next generation; that it is possible for us to bring in revenues in a way that does not impede our current recovery, but is fair and balanced.

(...)

"With respect to Social Security, Social Security is not the source of our deficit problems. Social Security, if it is part of a package, would be an issue of how do we make sure Social Security extends its life and is strengthened? So the reason to do Social Security is to strengthen Social Security to make sure that those benefits are there for seniors in the out-years. And the reason to include that potentially in this package is if you’re going to take a bunch of tough votes, you might as well do it now, as opposed to trying to muster up the political will to get something done further down in the future."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/07/11/press-conference-president

It was not off the table, although he insisted on being deliberately vague on what he would or would not entertain in the actual way of fixing it when asked. While we're setting the record straight.

[NorthCarolina]

23. How did I move the goal posts?

You confirmed to me that he had, in fact, publicly endorsed raising the payroll cap on FICA Tax on several occasions since 2007 (thank you for the research), which IS essentially Sanders proposal. So, how is speculating that he would undoubtedly come out in verbal support of the Sanders/DeFazio bill, which "follows through on a proposal that President Barack Obama made in 2008", considered moving the goal posts? To the contrary, it would seem to be expected, or simply common sense. THAT's my problem.

[Telly Savalas]

19. But "adjustment" is code for destroying Social Security

The only reason he wants to raise Social Security revenue by adjusting the cap is so that it will add more dramatic flair when he finally cancels Social Security and passes a law requiring senior citizens to live in work camps.

[frazzled]

24. Are you nuts?

I've given you two examples where he explicitly describes the "adjustment" as raising the income cap on taxes for SS--meaning wealthy people will have to pay into Social Security on more than the current first $106,000 in income.

And you interpret this to mean that he is canceling Social Security and sending old people to work camps? Or are you just being facetious. Unless you want to be seen as a crackpot, you should use the sarcasm smilie.

[chill_wind]

25. "Technical adjustment" historically has been code for SS Cola cuts

Nothing new for Third Way Democrats advocating for it since Clinton.

On Using the Chained CPI for Social Security Cost of Living Adjustments
(Dean Baker)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x612538


"Greenspan told the committee that the gap was between 1-2 percentage points annually, so that after a decade, his plan would cut annual Social Security payments by more than 10 percent. And, the great thing was that Congress could do this cut by claiming it was just a technical adjustment."

Kennedy's Quick Win for Social Security

(Dean Baker 2009)

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08/26/kennedys_quick_win_for_social_security/

[tblue]

9. I'd rather he fight the fight. nt

[demosincebirth]

12. +1

[HereSince1628]

4. It's OK go down in defeat, but you can't rally around defeatism

I don't kid myself that the DC dems are progressive, but I'm all for shaking the bushes to see if there are any believers in the New Deal left in DC.

[mdmc]

2. r

[dennis4868]

5. and it's dead on arrival...

next?

[Cool Logic]

6. It is not clear to me why he would introduce such legislation without first consulting with...

with Al Gore, regarding that lock box he used to advocate.

As it is, the additional revenue would simply be plundered in the same manner as the original #2.7 trillion.

[Booster]

13. Because NONE of them want to lock up all that lucious money

to where they can't get their hands on it.

[chill_wind]

10. Sounds good to me!

Under the proposed legislation, the wealthiest Americans would pay the same payroll tax already assessed on those with incomes up to $106,800 a year. Social Security officials have calculated that the simple change would keep the retirement program strong for another 75 years.

The legislation also follows through on a proposal that President Barack Obama made in 2008 when he was running for the White House.

“Social Security is the most successful government program in our nation’s history. For 76 years, through good times and bad, Social Security has paid out every benefit owed to every eligible American,” Sander said. “The most effective way to strengthen Social Security for the next 75 years is to eliminate the cap on the payroll tax on income above $250,000. Right now, someone who earns $106,800 pays the same amount of money into Social Security as a billionaire. That makes no sense. The Keeping Our Social Security Promises Act will ensure the long-term solvency of Social Security without cutting benefits or raising taxes on the middle class.”

http://vtdigger.org/2011/09/14/sanders-introduces-bill-to-strengthen-social-security/

Obama's already out there stumping for the jobs bill, whole parts of which he and all of us ALSO ALREADY KNOW gophers are very likely not going to pass. That isn't keeping him from doing what he feels he needs to do to try to keep raising public support and awareness.

If he truly supports protecting and strengthening SS as he says he does he should stop talking so much about killing sacred cows :-( and give the co-sponsors of this bill in his own party (and Bernie) a hand and give it some airtime while he's out there and at it. I believe he would get thunderously positive support for it at those rallies. And what a nice thing it would be if he would aggressively support Democrats and the majority American people on this issue.

[Peregrine Took]

11. + 1.

[moondust]

17. K/R

[chill_wind]

20. LOL Sanders:

“While some of you may think that this is a terribly radical idea, let me confess that we stole this idea from a candidate for president of the United States,” Sanders said. “You may remember his name. (He) was called Barack Obama.”

Liberals fear payroll-tax holiday will undermine Social Security
By Mike Lillis - 09/14/11 01:58 PM ET

Liberal lawmakers in both chambers are hammering the Obama administration for pushing a payroll-tax holiday they say threatens Social Security.

(read the whole thing)

Sanders and DeFazio say they have a better way. The pair introduced legislation Wednesday to expand the level of income subject to the Social Security tax — currently capped at $106,800 — to include income higher than $250,000. The lawmakers say the proposal would fully fund Social Security for the next 75 years — 38 years longer than the program is estimated to remain fully solvent under current formulas.

“We have to guarantee that we will continue this program as far as anyone can predict, and this one simple step will actually do that,” DeFazio said. “It’s fair. It fixes the program forever. No more discussion about raising the retirement age. No more discussion about cutting benefits. No more discussion about privatization. Just fix the existing Social Security compact and ensure it for all future Americans.”

more: http://thehill.com/homenews/news/181519-liberal-dems-fear-obama-payroll-tax-holiday-will-undermine-social-security

Mr. President-- let's get this done!

[Dragonfli]

22. A very good srategy, create and support a bill that will work, keep pushing it as hard as you can

And people will have to pay attention, if he keeps pushing and repeating the truth of the merits of the plan, it will get through the smokescreen and be heard by more and more people until soon many will be educated in the solution and begin lobbying for it on there own

from the ground, using letters to representatives and op eds as well as discussions among their peers until it takes on a life of its own among those that still care and would rally to make it manifest by the force of a larger more commited and eventualy monolithic voice. The lesser people that they fear when commited to single mindset a simple plan, a simple truth spoken by the village as one rather than the wisper of one brow beaten individual can make manifest large things.

[chill_wind]

27. Agree. Good strategy and needs buzzed up much more. n/t

[WI_DEM]

26. Mr. President urge Congress to PASS THIS BILL!

[chill_wind]

28. Kick!