[...] It is a rare proposal in that it would likely lead to both lower benefits paid to seniors and higher taxes paid by most people who pay federal income tax. As such, it could allow Republicans to argue they are tackling federal entitlement programs such as Social Security, and permit Democrats to say they are increasing taxes as part of any budget deal that is reached. It could be easier for both parties to agree on than a significant overhaul to the Medicare proposal or an increase of taxes on wealthier Americans. … – Change To Inflation Measurement On Table As Part Of Budget Talks – Aides
Of course.
Naturally.
Pres. Obama and Democrats have to put everything on the table even when Republicans won’t put anything. For Democrats it’s just plain stupid, but you see it will provide cover for both parties as they try to keep their separate ideological purity intact, except it helps Republicans a lot more than Democrats, if you ask me.
It begins with changing how the Consumer Price Index is calculated (h/t David Dayen), which reportedly could save around $220 billion over the next decade, not exactly chump change.
From a press release from the Strengthen Social Security Campaign:
Social Security COLA Change Being Considered by Obama Administration and Congressional Budget Negotiators Would Cut Benefits, Betray Seniors and Families, Experts Charge
(Washington, D.C.) — Obama Administration and Congressional budget negotiators are considering a proposal that would cut the Social Security benefits of current and future retirees by changing the formula used to calculate the cost-of-living adjustment (COLA), which would be a betrayal to all Social Security beneficiaries charged several policy experts today. It also would cut the benefits of people with disabilities and their families, children who have lost parents, and all other beneficiaries.
The Congressional Budget Office estimates adoption of the so-called “Chained-CPI,” which would be used to determine Social Security’s annual COLA, would cut benefits by $112 billion over 10 years. The Social Security Administration Chief Actuary estimates the effects of this change would be that beneficiaries who retire at age 65 and receive average benefits would get $560 less a year at age 75 than they would under current law and get $1,000 less a year at age 85 – a 3.7 percent cut and a 6.5 percent cut, respectively. [See analysis here] The proposal will cut $1.6 trillion over Social Security’s 75 year valuation period – mainly from the oldest of the old, primarily women and disproportionately poor.
Much more at Strengthen Social Security.
Here’s the contact information for the White House.
will cntact wh. how stupid. nothing good can come out of this debt deal. its not worth it
Monumentally stupid.
If enough people contact the White House it could be stopped.
yes- but how many people even know about this or any fo these other ideas being floated? i would say page the aarp but they seem shoddy these days on ss
This just broke open today.
As for AARP, people often forget that they represent GOPers too, some of whom believe entitlements should be on the table. I’m making no excuses for them, but they do have a goal of keep as many people in AARP as possible.
It’s a *very* good reason to have a strictly progressive Strengthen Social Security org.
I contacted the White House. The people doing the negotiating are totally divorced from reality. I think all of them should try living on what many seniors do. This should not even be on the table – period.
To quote my favorite Democrat: “Shame on you, Barack Obama!”
i emailed the wh. everyone do it! paging the aarp
It has been obvious from the get-go that Obama WANTS to be the guy who cuts social security. This does not surprise me at all. I KNOW that he is going to mess with it, cuz that is what he wants to do. Obama is a rightwing con man. Sorry folks, but this guy could give a rip about “the American people”. This just infuriates me! I made my first SS payment when I was 12 and I am closing in on 70 now and have just retired. All those years of paying in, and a guy who says he is a Democrat is going to screw it all up.
I’ve used the link to contact the WH. At least we can let them know we’re watching.
Somewhere today I read about the “death of the Republican party” (related to social issues), followed by “Third party?” Not that I actually think the Rep party is disappearing, but it made me stop and wonder about the scenario of the Dem party continuing its move to the Right, and finally morphing into the Rep party. Would that mean the “third party” would be even further Right, or would it come from the Left? Or maybe both would happen? Or yet again, maybe DC will just get honest and admit most of them are playing on the Corporate Team, and we’ll have different corporations run their own parties and candidates. Or maybe they’ll divide up by sector: the Financial Party, Health Care Insurance Party …
Bad scenario. Sorry.
The current government is starting to resemble the old politboro in the Soviet Union. They were completely divorced from reality and the lives of average people. Nothing they said mattered, nothing they did mattered, it was all smoke and mirrors. Smoke and mirrors came to the fore during the George W. Bush administration and has stayed with us even now that he’s gone; well. he’s not really gone, he’s just a little darker. A new party is imperative or we will go the way of every other country with one party rule.
I’ve been convinced of the need for a third party, or more, for quite some time. I’m not sure it will happen.
Either that, or progressives need to find some other way to band together to put pressure on the two major parties. I don’t see anyone managing that, either, though there seem to be some attempts.
The rulers of Russia were just as divorced from reality. The term “Potemkin Village” comes from that time.
In this country, we seem to have had waves of populism and elitism. We’re definitely in the latter sort of wave now. I hope for not much longer.