Deficit-cutting ax may fall on Social Security: Should voters know before they vote in the midterms?

[Karmadillo]

Is the Catfood Commission going to announce its recommendations before the midterms or after? Seems like it should be before. That would give candidates an opportunity to reveal in advance how they would vote on the commission's recommendations.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/David-R.-Francis/2010/0726/Deficit-cutting-ax-may-fall-on-Social-Security

By David R. Francis / July 26, 2010

The Social Security system today faces a threat greater than the drive for partial privatization by George W. Bush.

"That's not hyperbolic," says Nancy Altman, codirector of Social Security Works, a group dedicated to preserving the system that provides income for 50 million retirees, the disabled, millions of children, and more. Her fear is that President Obama's bipartisan National Com­mis­sion on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform will recommend cuts in Social Security benefits as one means to reduce the burgeoning federal budget deficit. If 14 of 18 commissioners agree on a deficit-cutting plan, it could be passed at a lame-duck session of Congress without the extensive hearings and discussions that normally precede such an important measure.

"There would be little chance for the public to have an influence," says Ms. Altman.

Public opinion polls consistently show that Americans don't want Social Security trimmed. The median retiree benefit at present is about $14,000 a year, hardly lavish. But Altman suspects the commission might sell Congress a plan to cut benefits, along with other deficit-reducing measures, as a necessity, albeit an unpopular one.

<edit>

But, Altman says, each year of delayed eligibility amounts to a 6 or 7 percent benefit cut. She proposes instead boosting the amount of income subject to payroll tax from its present level of $105,800 a year, diverting revenues from a revived estate tax to Social Security, and adding a new tax on financial transactions in order to boost Social Security benefits by 5 percent.

Merely making all income subject to the payroll tax would cure the problem, says Mr. Baker.

more...

[Nite Owl]

1. After midterms

it was either November or December. Obama told them he agreed with whatever they came up with even before they supposedly come up with it. No hearings, up or down vote. They are hoping that a lame duck congress will feel freer to vote on this cutting fiasco.

[w4rma]

6. And Obama packed the Catfood Commission full of Social Security haters.

It's a stacked deck and Obama got caught cheating.

[ProSense]

2. "Should voters know before they vote in the midterms?"

I don't get the point of that question. So far all people are doing is speculating, the commission's report isn't due until December. Still, how is any of this supposed to impact their vote? That is, to what end?

[tabatha]

3. Exactly.

With the republicans you can bet that SS will be cut.

[amborin]

5. no, the general consensus is that a Dem will cut SS, in exchange for a tax increase

[w4rma]

7. Sounds like a huge loser plan to me. (nt)

[tabatha]

8. That is unsupportable.

[girl gone mad]

4. What's to get?

People deserve to know what the recommendations are going to be and how their congressperson plans to vote.

[napi21]

10. At the very least, I suggest everyone ask their candidaes how they would vote on a SS cut!

I disagree with ANY CUTS to SS, but I am biased becasue I am now on that program, but I don't want to see my two sons shafted or anyone else! As I understand the real world, SS has no problem until 2044 and that would be AFTER the baby boomers have retired and mostly died. There's no reason to do any cuts!

The other MAI PROBLEM I see with this BS is that back in the 80's Reagn did the same thing with a commission, and they made a lot of changes in anticipation of the baby boomers retirement. They increased the amount withheld from your pay, extended the retirement age, and planned for a surpluss to cover the problem. I was working just FINE until Shrub decided there was a surpluss and he surely couldn't have THAT! The SOB "returned the $$ to the people", except he returned it to the wrong people! So now, when we need the surpluss, it's GONE, and it went mostly to the wealthy through his tax cuts!

Sometimes I'd like to strangle all these AH's!

[Dan]

16. of course your congress person is going to lie...

Maybe instead of asking someone whose vested interest is to lie to you ...another approach might be to start an online petition...;

One where voters could pledge to vote against their particular congress person - if they vote to support a cut in Social Security.

The pledge would give the potential voters the opportunity to vote for any member of their party, but to state without question - that they will not vote for any congress person that supported and voted for a cut.

The pledge would indicate that this one single issue is so important that it would override the other worthwhile contributions of said congress person.

This is especially true - given that they can raise the contribution income limit on paying into social security.

Now it would be a matter of honor - but their names would be available on the pledge, and the question is - who do you trust more, your congress person or a fellow citizen?

I would pledge this - if Social Security is cut, while I would never vote for a person of the GOP, I would definitely vote for a Democratic challenger to Obama in 2012. And, if Obama won - then I would not vote for him nor any congress person that supported said cut.

I guess I have repeated myself enough... smile.

[dflprincess]

13. How odd that the deadline is after the midterms

You'd almost think the administration was trying to put something over on us. :sarcasm:

Face it, if they weren't planning to screw the working and middle classes again the recommendations would come at the end of October.

[ProSense]

14. "Face it, if they weren't planning to screw the working and middle classes

again the recommendations would come at the end of October."

OK, if you've made up your mind, you have the information you need to determine how you will vote.

The fact is that Democrats are campaigning against Republican's attempt to cut or privatize Social Security, but evidently that isn't enough for some.

[dflprincess]

19. Because no politician has ever campaigned on one thing

and done the opposite once elected. You know - like claiming to be opposed to mandated insurance coverage and then deciding that requiring people to buy shoddy products from the same old crooks was "reform".

Besides, I don't believe any members of the catfood commmission are campaigning for anything - but they are meeting behind closed doors (whatever happened to the "transparency" we were promised) and we do know that Pelosi has agreed to give their recommendations an up & down vote. No debate allowed as that might alert the public to what they're up to.

[jtown1123]

24. Nancy Pelosi

Could turn out to be Social Security's biggest ally. She does not support cuts to Social Security or increasing the retirement age. This Fire Dog Lake article explains that the Speaker has the authority not to allow their recommendations to be voted on in a lame duck: http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/07/23/how-house-progressives-can-stop-the-catfood-commission-from-slashing-social-security/

Another hope is that 14 out of the 18 commission members won't agree. That's starting to look unlikely since I think only Jan Schakowsky, Javier Becerra, and maybe Baucus won't go for Social Security cuts...I don't remember if I am forgetting anyone else.

[SugarShack]

9. Well I'm for raising the cap on soc. sec. tax up from 105K to 500K

Problem solved

[Kat45]

11. Welcome to DU, SugarShack. n/t

[upi402]

22. $500K? Just eliminate it!

Why should people making millions get a break that we don't?

[SammyWinstonJack]

23. +1

:thumbsup: Of course that WILL NOT be proposed.

No WAY No How!

Just squeese the 'lesser' people out of their benefits that they WORKED DAMN HARD FOR! :grr:


Greedy rich a$$hole$ got theirs and now they want ours as well! :argh:

[Fumesucker]

12. Of course voters should be kept in the dark..

What on Earth would possess you to ask such a ridiculous question?

/sensible Democrats

[Skink]

15. Wikileaks has its work cut out.

[Karmadillo]

17. Kick

nt

[laughingliberal]

18. We should, of course, pin our reps down about where they stand on this. It is this Congress who...

will be voting on it in their lame duck session. Pulling the covers now would be smart. I don't see anyone doing it, though.

[WinkyDink]

20. But Arne Duncan needs more money!

[upi402]

21. End the FICA tax cap of $106K income, tax the richest 5% more

stop the BS war spending, and end the Delaware tax loophole for big oil - hell we can do a LOT of sane things before screwing the working class out of what we honestly worked for all our lives. But don't criticize the Democratic Party here on DU for betraying us yet again! Oh noes!!!