Obama's tax deal and the future of Social Security

[Enrique]

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/12/obamas-tax-deal-and-future-social-security

It’s worth pointing out once again that last week’s tax deal is hardly the victory for the American people it is made out to be. One of the biggest chunks -- thirteen percent of the total monies — comes from Social Security and Medicare in the form of a one-year cut in payroll taxes. The government promises to pay back what it is taking from the Social Security trust fund by borrowing the money, then floating bonds to guarantee repayment.

This one year abeyance might not seem like much. But with the coming of a right-wing Republican House, under pressure from the further fringes in the Tea Party, it does not augur well for the future of the program. From its inception under FDR, the Republicans have dreamed of getting rid of Social Security, along with such other things as the Federal Reserve, the income tax, the Department of Education and the UN.

“Social Security’s dedicated funding base is jeopardized by this deal in an unprecedented way and there is a grave risk now that the retirement benefits of America’s workers will have to compete with our other priorities for a share of the general budget,” said Texas Congressman Loyd Doggett at a press conference cheld by the National Committee to preserve Social Security and Medicare. ”It would result in Social Security being as dependent on annual Congressional action as public television or our National parks.”

(...)

However, there is a potential remedy. In 2012, the economy should be stronger than it is today, argues Robert Greenstein, executive director of the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

In addition, Congress likely will have enacted some significant budget cuts, and the nation likely will be debating the sort of further cuts that various commissions have recently proposed, including cuts in Social Security and Medicare benefits for elderly widows and seriously disabled people with incomes as low as $20,000. At that point, the President will need to make clear that he will veto any legislation extending the high-end tax cuts or the weakening of the estate tax beyond its 2009 parameters, and he should use the bully pulpit to take this case to the country.

If only we could count on our president to do something like this at all, much less in an election year.

[villager]

1. "...he should use the bully pulpit to take this case to the country."

Yeah, well.

[Sheepshank]

2. Not gonna let you rain on today's parade

thanks for trying

[brentspeak]

3. The unrec bots are hoping DADT diverts everyone's attention

[derby378]

5. How does a man trap a monkey?

Shaka Zulu Civics 101: Put something shiny in a gourd with a narrow neck. Monkey reaches into gourd, grabs shiny object, cannot withdraw hand from gourd because neck is wide enough to allow hand to pass, but narrow enough to trap a clenched fist. Monkey's only escape is to let go of shiny object.

But will he? How bad does he want that little shiny object?

[customerserviceguy]

4. 'In 2012, the economy should be stronger than it is today...'

Sure, maybe in time for the general election, but this is going to be debated less than a year from now, as Rethug House members talk about the "expiring payroll tax cut" in the same breathless terms that our President and our nominally Democratic Congress have talked about the expiring Bush tax cuts.

We haven't seen the end of this. All the reich wingers have to do is sit on their hands for the next year, just like they have for the last two, and the economy will still be in the tank, 'validating' the need to extend the payroll tax holiday. Of course, the Repukes will find the need to 'pay' for it with spending cuts from those least able to afford them.