General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhich Senate Democrats are likely to vote to cut Social Security?
Obama can't change Social Security on his own, so which Democrats are going to vote for this?
September 20, 2012
A major bloc of 29 senators took a strong stand today against any cuts to Social Security as part of a deficit reduction deal. "We will oppose including Social Security cuts for future or current beneficiaries in any deficit reduction package," the senators said in a letter circulated by Sen. Bernie Sanders, the founder of the Senate Defending Social Security Caucus. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Sen. Charles Schumer, the Senate's No. 3 leader, signed the letter. So did Sens. Mark Begich, Sheldon Whitehouse and Al Franken, who joined Sanders at a Capitol news conference.
Social Security has not contributed to the deficit or to the national debt, the senators said. The program that benefits more than 50 million retirees, widows, widowers, orphans and disabled Americans has a $2.7 trillion surplus and, according to actuaries, will be able to pay every benefit owed to every eligible recipient for the next 21 years.
"Contrary to some claims, Social Security is not the cause of our nation's deficit problem. Not only does the program operate independently, but it is prohibited from borrowing," the letter said. "Even though Social Security operates in a fiscally responsible manner, some still advocate deep benefit cuts and seem convinced that Social Security hands out lavish welfare checks. But Social Security is not welfare. Seniors earned their benefits by working and paying into the system," the letter added.
Social Security has not contributed to deficits because it has a dedicated funding stream. Workers and employers each pay half of a 12.4 percent payroll tax on the first $110,100 of a worker's wages. The tax rate for employees was reduced to 4.2 percent in 2011 and 2012, but is scheduled to return to 6.2 percent in January.
To read the letter, click here »
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=066FB085-5798-4E6C-ABA2-85549D84DFA6
When I see a letter signed by everyone from Harry Reid to Carl Levin to Joe Manchin, I'm thinking nothing is going to happen. Eleven more Senators and that's a filibuster. President Obama cannot change Social Security singlehandedly. That change would have to go through Congress. I doubt there are going to be Democrats, especially those up for re-election in 2014, who are going to put their careers on line.
Paul Ryan's reception by the AARP should be an indication that Social Security is still a political third rail.
Signatories:
Sens. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii), Tim Johnson (D-S.D.), John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Carl Levin (D-Mich.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.)
How President Obama and Mitt Romney compare on preserving Social Security for Americas seniors
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021488868
ProSense
(116,464 posts)flamingdem
(39,313 posts)An American coalition united around the simple proposition, Strengthen Social Security... Don't Cut It.
Our coalition is made up of over 300 national and state organizations representing over 50 million Americans. We are here to make sure that real people's voices are heard. We stand united behind seven commonsense principles.
Contact us at 202-454-6197
Strengthen Social Security
1825 K St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Seven Principles:
1) Social Security did not cause the federal deficit; its benefits should not be cut to reduce the deficit.
2) Social Security should not be privatized in whole or in part.
3) Social Security should not be means-tested.
4) Congress should act in the coming few years to close Social Securitys funding gap by requiring those who are most able to afford it to pay somewhat more.
5) Social Securitys retirement age, already scheduled to increase from 65 to 67, should not be raised further.
6) Social Securitys benefits should not be reduced, including by changes to the COLA or the benefit formula.
7) Social Securitys benefits should be increased for those who are most disadvantaged.
Read More About Our Seven Principles
Our Steering Committee:
AFL-CIO
Alliance for Retired Americans
American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees
American Federation of Teachers
Campaign for America's Future
Center for Community Change
Democracy For America
Economic Policy Institute
Food Research Action Center
Generations United
Latinos for a Secure Retirement
MoveOn.org Political Action
NAACP
National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare
National Council of Women's Organizations
National Gay and Lesbian Task Force
National Nurses United
National Organization for Women
National Senior Citizens Law Center
National Women's Law Center
OWL - The Voice of Midlife and Older Women
Service Employees International Union (SEIU)
Social Security Works
Sojourners
The Arc
United Cerebral Palsy
USAction
Voices for Americas Children
See the rest of our Coalition here
Learn more about our convening organization Social Security Works here
For Media Inquiries please contact Lacy Crawford at lcrawford@socialsecurity-works.org
ProSense
(116,464 posts)flamingdem
(39,313 posts)closeupready
(29,503 posts)heck, I'd go further than that, but I can sign this.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)will likely strong-arm Congress, but anyone wants to speculate about the Democrats who will likely sell out?
I mean, we could focus on them now before it's too late.
BlueToTheBone
(3,747 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)I was beginning to think the concern about Social Security is only related to Obama's position, not what Congress will do.
Conrad is a good candidate. Maybe Durbin.
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)Max Baucus.
tokenlib
(4,186 posts)The problem with "cuts" is that they will proclaim it as a "balanced" approach. The "big lie" of Social Security going broke has enough acceptance in the general populace that I fear they could get away with it.
Simpson-Bowles approach being sold as "reasonable" should be a warning sign--
ProSense
(116,464 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)there are 244 democrats in congress. these 29 = 12%.
Enrique
(27,461 posts)particularly the Senate Majority Leader.
But they might be going against the President of the United States. That's a whole other level of impressive.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)on edit, oops, he did, too sign it. My bad.