Third Way leaders tell progressives to "wise up" and then admit to benefit cuts. Gloating?

[madfloridian]

If you are still harboring doubts that they are controlling the dialogue from the White House, read on. This is the group that recently applauded President Obama for tackling the "third rail" of politics.

They posted their recent rant at Politico, and they appear to be gloating a little that they have the president's ear and we don't.

Progressives, Wise up on Social Security

Jon Cowan is president and Jim Kessler is vice president for policy at Third Way, a progressive think tank.

That sound you’re hearing is the collective gasps of more than 200 progressive organizations who thought they successfully lobbied President Barack Obama to keep Social Security reform off the table in budget negotiations.

It's like Ha Ha, he listened to us and not to you, Progressives. The name is different, but the tone is the same condescending one used by the DLC for decades toward us.

More:

This is why the president is right and groups like the Strengthen Social Security Coalition — a 200-strong patchwork of progressive organizations that say “hell no” to any discussion of reform — ought to wise up and buck up the president so Social Security reform gets done in the coming weeks.

Wise up and buck up? We just did that, but not in the way they think.

Their ideas are presented once they finish gloating that they have the president's ear. Do I sound angry? Good, I am.

Third, Social Security reform can be progressive. Our own plan includes means-testing of Social Security benefits; an increase in payroll taxes on the wealthy; a minimum benefit for low-income seniors; and a new program to supplement people’s private retirement savings funded through changes in the estate tax.

It also includes ideas that trim benefits that progressives probably won’t like — but each side has to give. Our plan includes an adjustment to yearly cost-of-living payments through a slight change in the way inflation is calculated.

A slight change in the way inflation is adjusted? Like the last two years when there has been no cost of living raise for Social Security?

Congratulations, Third Way, for having the president's ear....because progressives most certainly do not.

[RandomKoolzip]

1. Third Way can go fuck themselves Three Ways.

[xchrom]

3. +1

[meegbear]

4. +1

[JVS]

23. +3

[closeupready]

27. +4

nt

[slay]

37. +5

they are like the new DLC - fuck them and their bullshit.

[a2liberal]

63. +6

:)

[defendandprotect]

75. +7

along with any "Dem" working with them --

[Fearless]

79. +8

FTR sounds fun! :P

[Enthusiast]

88. PLUS FUCKING ONE! nt

[Jack Rabbit]

102. + another one

"Third way" and "progressive" is an oxymoron.

[theaocp]

2. Thanks, Mad'.

I have some advice for Third Way: take a long walk off a short pier.

[unblock]

5. unblock tells third way to wise up and accept a return to reasonable tax rates for the rich.

[slay]

39. Indeed!

n/t

[slipslidingaway]

6. knr and ...

http://www.thirdway.org/

From January 2011 - 9 page pdf
http://content.thirdway.org/publications/363/Third_Way_Idea_Brief_-_Saving_Social_Security.pdf

Saving Social Security
By Jim Kessler and David Kendall


Also ....

Obama's Chief of Staff - Third Way Board Member William Daley

http://www.thirdway.org/press_releases/135

Statement from Third Way President Jonathan Cowan on the Appointment of William Daley as White House Chief of Staff

“Appointment of Third Way Board Member William Daley Sends a Clear Message: Obama Will Govern and Campaign from the Center”

[Bluenorthwest]

7. They are not a third way just the tired old Republican way

Seen it and seen it they support nothing but Republican policy. The estate tax and a chained COLA! Are they Bob Dole's new outfit or what?

[Hell Hath No Fury]

8. Extremely important information, Mad -

Thanks for bringing it up. :applause:

God I hate those fuckers. :mad:

[defendandprotect]

76. Thanks, Mad -- as always!!

:applause:

[woo me with science]

9. K&R nt

[Octafish]

10. The War & Money Party types are always finding ways to diss the Liberals and Progressives.

Why? It costs money to do things, like bringing change.

[madfloridian]

11. You are right. They sound like they think they ARE the party, and we aren't.

And it seems they may be right after all.

:shrug:

[madfloridian]

12. "Benefit cut by another name".....TPM. "prevention of de facto benefit increases."

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/whats-in-a-name-dems-support-social-security-benefit-cut----by-calling-it-something-else.php?ref=fpb

"Social Security benefit cuts may be a bridge too far for House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). But what if Republicans and Democrats alike just agreed to refer to a benefit cut by another name.

That's how key negotiators have decided to treat one policy proposal, popular in Washington, that would simultaneously raise tax revenues and reduce Social Security benefits. As explained at length here, the idea is to peg federal Cost of Living Adjustments to a new, stingier measure of inflation."

.."Reducing the COLA is something top Obama administration officials have wanted to do for a long time.

"The Consumer Price Indices currently used for indexation employ an outdated procedure that overstate inflation," said Jason Furman, now the Deputy Director of the National Economic Council, in 2007 expert testimony before the Senate Budget Committee. "If all federal programs and taxes were switched to by the end of a decade the government would save more than $40 billion, with the bulk of the savings divided roughly equally between preventing de facto Social Security benefit increases and tax cuts that Congress never intended. Over time the savings would continue to grow."

Not benefit cuts, but the prevention of de facto benefit increases."

Well, they have already starting benefit cuts.... through the payroll tax cuts.

So they are going after what I consider a sacred program in two ways...cutting benefits and slowing down the cost of living raises.

[Buns_of_Fire]

34. I believe there have been no COLAs for the last two years, anyway.

95% of nothin' is still nothin'.

[chill_wind]

13. A shady front organization for Republican neocons masquerading as neo-libs

is what they're really sounding like.

Talking up telecom immunity

In January 2008, Matt Renner reported that Third Way was working with Senate Democrats to help sell a controversial measure granting retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies. The measure "is the major sticking point over the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) legislation that is currently stalled in the Senate." During a meeting with Senator Jay Rockefeller's legislative aide for military and national security issues, Third Way's Matt Bennett suggested "talking points to help make the case for telecom immunity." Bennett said, "We thought it would be a bad idea to allow these companies to be held legally liable for cooperating with the government ... you want to encourage the cooperation of not just the telecom industry, but all other industries in the future." <1>

Third Way would not disclose whether the group receives telecom funding, but some of its board members do have telecom ties. Reynold Levy, for example, formerly served as AT&T's senior officer in charge of government relations. <1>

Third Way calls for more troops, more propaganda

On May 18, 2007, The Hill reported that "A new security study released by the Third Way, a Democratic-leaning think tank," and authored by two former Clinton administration officials, discusses how to rebuild U.S. credibility overseas. "American voters yearn for an alternative to the Bush administration's aggressive foreign policy stance," say the Brookings Institution's William Galston and Harvard's Elaine Kamarck, "but neither Democrats nor Republicans are articulating a different path." Their study calls for "a robust military response to the terrorist threat," along with "a massive public relations effort akin to the Cold War propaganda machine."

more at Sourcewatch:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Third_Way_organization



or maybe simply what amounts to an agreement for "splitting the difference" with the Republican party.

Rightweb profile has a lot more background.

(...)

PPI was founded in 1989 by Will Marshall and Al From as a project of the Third Way Foundation.<3> Closely associated with the Democratic Leadership Council (DCL), a prominent supporter of Sen. Joseph Lieberman (ID-CT), PPI says its mission "arises from the belief that America is ill-served by an obsolete left-right debate that is out of step with the powerful forces reshaping our society and economy." PPI claims to advocate "a philosophy that adapts the progressive tradition in American politics to the realities of the information age and points to a 'third way' beyond the liberal impulse to defend the bureaucratic status quo and the conservative bid to simply dismantle government."<4>

Marshall and From are both long-standing proponents of "third way" policies that include free-market reforms and get-tough foreign policies. One of PPI's five strategies includes "confronting global disorder by building enduring new international structures of economic and political freedom."<5>

The core principles of the "third way movement" are set forth in the DLC/PPI's 1996 publication, The New Progressive Declaration: A Political Philosophy for the Information Age. In it they argue that enduring progressive values must be adapted to include uncompromising support for free market and free trade economics, a strong military with a global presence, an end to the politics of entitlement, a rejection of affirmative action, an embrace of competitive enterprise, and a reduction of the government’s role in development policy.<6> Expressing the opinion of many progressive Democrats, Robert Kuttner of the American Prospect wrote that the political approach of the DLC amounts to "splitting the difference with a Republican administration."<7>

http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Progressive_Policy_Institute

At any rate, not sure what the word is that we should use for taking your funders' money and hiring insurance industry hacks...

Third Way's Jon Cowan Needs To Account For Anne Kim and David Kendall
by: AdamGreen
Tue Jun 09, 2009 at 10:16

http://www.openleft.com/diary/13692/third-ways-jon-cowan-needs-to-account-for-anne-kim-and-david-kendall

[madfloridian]

14. I wonder who gave them such power over the party? Think about it..

How did they gain such power?

[madrchsod]

24. i wonder what paul simon would think of his students today?

[chill_wind]

28. That's a tough one. Because we've been so adamantly informed

that none of their legacy policy overtures and ideology could ever- possibly- get traction in the admin of what even Frank Rich knows is the most liberal living democrat ever in the history of the whirrled!! and I thought every Serious Democrat on DU knew that!! Didn't you?

[defendandprotect]

81. Try this ... Bradley Foundation -- more rw $$$

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1442301&mesg_id=1448621

Comes from a post further down on this thread --

[madrchsod]

21. this is what is left of the party of fdr and lbj?

my parents party that gave them hope in the great depression?

the party that gave them social security and medicare?

the party that fought and won civil rights for all americans regardless of color?



all those pretty speeches we heard meant nothing... absolutely nothing at all.

[Supersedeas]

46. another PUMA group

[somone]

77. This is a must-read

[defendandprotect]

78. Thank you -- and also note this post from further down thread ....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1442301&mesg_id=1448621

[Enthusiast]

89. PLUS ONE! nt

[Tom1960]

15. ok....I'm convinced....

You sold me "Third Way". I will sit the election out unless there is a primary challenger to Obama that wins. I recently read, (sorry, I can't find the link now, but it was on DU) that Third Way and DLC are basically opposed to any type of "populism". As I read that, I hear "we are not about the business of the 'people', but rather 'winning elections'." I can get to that. So win the election without my vote, and the people that I can influence to stay home in 2012.

I think I am just about fed up with elected "leaders" not leading according to Democratic Policy tradition and reason. They can win without me. If a third party can make a place at the table, fine. I am not willing to support the transformation of our culture into a theocracy, a plutocracy or a theocratic plutocracy.

I am convinced that this group does not represent the will of the people and so therefore they do not represent my interests.

[jtown1123]

16. Dean Baker Ripped Third Way a New Ass Hole this a.m...Enjoy!

http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/cheap-tricks-on-social-security

[ooglymoogly]

20. +1 Excellent article...thanx

[chill_wind]

30. "To term this a crisis would be like saying that Bill Gates had a crisis

because he dipped into his $50 billion in assets to build some new play houses for his kids."

Good stuff. Saying they are being somewhat deceptive is being too kind.

Thanks for the link.

[slipslidingaway]

32. Thanks ... please post this as a stand alone thread. n/t

[jtown1123]

35. Will do.

[defendandprotect]

80. Thank you!! -- :)

[madfloridian]

50. Thanks for the link. Great article.

:hi:

[Enthusiast]

90. Good one. Thanks....nt

[ooglymoogly]

17. These are the fukers we have to target

come next elections, Dinos and Bluedogs. Half of them were eliminated last election. The key to who these folks are and what they are all about, lies in the last sentence of the OP. When you consider SS needs no tinkering to remain wildly successful, this is all just so much blatant fraud on the folks who payed into this system all their lives.

A means test is just a Machiavellian way to turn SS, a wildly successful insurance program, into a government charity entitlement program that can be done away with, at the whim of any nutbag with a consensus among pugs and Dinos in government.

The one thing that is truly fair is to eliminate the cap. But as we see, the most obvious plus and reality based option for SS, is rarely mentioned and has never been seriously considered. Gee I wonder why.

[defendandprotect]

18. kr

[KamaAina]

19. A "progressive" think tank?

I guess to Politico, anything to the left of the Fuehrerbunker is "progressive". :eyes:

[KamaAina]

22. Get a load of their "honorary co-chairs"

More DINOs than a race track in Bedrock. :eyes:

http://www.thirdway.org/co_chairs

But Clyburn? Jared Polis? And Giffords?! :cry:

[chill_wind]

31. And the Emeritus also has a couple notable faces. n/t

[madfloridian]

42. In this case emeritus means they lost their election.

But they keep on going right no matter what.

[mzmolly]

25. "Social Security reform can be progressive"

"Third, Social Security reform can be progressive. Our own plan includes means-testing of Social Security benefits; an increase in payroll taxes on the wealthy; a minimum benefit for low-income seniors; and a new program to supplement people’s private retirement savings funded through changes in the estate tax."

[chill_wind]

40. Do you support means testing of ss benefits

as a feasible solution, mzmolly? And more to their initial premise that such reform as that is called for right now, because

"First, Social Security is in deep financial trouble."--

Do you also maintain that idea?

:shrug:

[mzmolly]

41. Some suggest there is already a means test.

http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/02/means-testing-social-security

Well, it turns out that Social Security is already means tested: your benefit level is calculated as 90% of your first $749 in monthly pre-retirement earnings, 32% of earnings up to $4,517, and 15% of your earnings above that. This means that high-income earners get a smaller benefit as a percentage of their income than low earners do.

I'd need more information before making a blanket rejection.

[chill_wind]

43. Some interesting stuff here.

Some of which cites Dean Baker's CEPR.

Mean testing would also raise the cost of the program. The retirement program currently has very low costs. If the administrative expenses rose to the level of the disability portion of the Social Security program, the higher costs would likely exceed any savings from a means test.

On net, a means test would appear to be a dubious way to reduce the cost of Social Security.

more:

Means Testing For Social Security

http://www.businessinsider.com/means-testing-for-social-security-2011-3

[mzmolly]

44. Doesn't sound like it would do much good on the savings end.

But, I'm not opposed in principle.

Thanks for the article/analysis. :hi:

[chill_wind]

48. For a while I was one thinking

hell yeah! Why not? Until I was seeing some of the arguments by DUer's of how Republicans would try to treat it as a welfare program they would further find ways to eviscerate, and reading things like this summary. Thanks for looking at it, mzmolly. :hi:

[21st Century FDR]

26. Fuck the DLC - or whatever they call themselves now

They can change the name every week if they want, but they can't change the fact that they are treasonous assholes with contempt for the American people.

[bvar22]

64. Most cold blooded reptiles shed their skin from time to time,

but it is still the same old crooked snake underneath the shiny new packaging.

[Enthusiast]

91. "treasonous assholes with contempt for the American people."

I can't come up with a more accurate assessment.

[Le Taz Hot]

29. K & R

As always, well deserved.

[KoKo]

33. Isn't "Third Way" the latest incarnation of the disbanded "DLC?"

Sure sounds like it from this article. sheesh.....

[slay]

38. Looks that way to me

like how Blackwater and Haliburton changed names - this looks to be same old DLC crap.

[NorthCarolina]

96. I think they prefer to be called "New Dems" though. n/t

[Jakes Progress]

36. Obama to liberals: Go fuck yourselves. Oh. And send me some money.

[nxylas]

45. Is it a coincidence that Tony Blair talked constantly about a "Third Way"?

It does rather reinforce the Obama=Blair theory that has been advanced on DU in the past.

[chill_wind]

49. Will Marshall is an honorary VP for a Tony Blair international think-tank.

"Called “Bill Clinton’s idea mill,” PPI’s policy analysis and proposals were the source for many of the “New Democrat” innovations that figured prominently in national politics over the past two decades. The Institute also has been integral to the spread of “Third Way” thinking to center-left parties in Europe and elsewhere. Marshall is an honorary Vice-President of Policy Network, an international think tank launched by Tony Blair to promote progressive policy ideas throughout the democratic world."

http://progressivefix.com/will-marshall

I haven't seen the specific DU discussions of the Obama Blair equations, but PPI/Third Way definitely intersects in the above.

And Marshall has definitely intersected with neocon interests in the past as more than just a signatory to the PNAC stuff. I posted snippets of this the other day, but they're worth knowing about by reading more fully at the link:

Although Marshall calls himself a "centrist," he has associated himself with neoconservative organizations and their radical foreign policy agendas. At the onset of the Iraq invasion, Marshall signed statements issued by the Project for the New American Century calling for the removal of Saddam Hussein, advocating that NATO help "secure and destroy all of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction," and arguing that the invasion "can contribute decisively to the democratization of the Middle East."

Marshall's credentials as a liberal hawk have been well established by his affinity for other PNAC-associated groups, including the U.S. Committee on NATO and the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq. Marshall served on the board of directors of the U.S. Committee on NATO alongside such leading neoconservative figures as Robert Kagan, Richard Perle, Randy Scheunemann, Paul Wolfowitz, Stephen Hadley, Peter Rodman, Jeffrey Gedmin, Gary Schmitt, and the committee's founder and president Bruce Jackson. At the request of the Bush administration, Jackson also formed the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, which, with former DLC chairman Joseph Lieberman serving as co-chair with Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), aimed to build bipartisan support for the liberation, occupation, and democratization of Iraq. Marshall, together with former Democratic Sen. Robert Kerrey of Nebraska (who coauthored "Progressive Internationalism"), represented the liberal hawk wing of the Democratic Party on the committee's neocon-dominated advisory board. Other advisers included James Woolsey, Eliot Cohen, Newt Gingrich, William Kristol, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Joshua Muravchik, Chris Williams, and Richard Perle.

On February 25, 2003, Marshall joined an array of neoconservatives marshaled by the Social Democrats/USA (SD/USA)—a wellspring of neoconservative strategy—to sign a letter to Bush calling for the invasion of Iraq. Marshall and others asked the president to "act alone if that proves necessary" and then, as a follow-up to a military-induced regime change in Iraq, to implement a democratization plan. The SD/USA letter urged the president to commit his administration to "maintaining substantial U.S. military forces in Iraq for as long as may be required to ensure a stable, representative regime is in place and functioning." Others signing the SD/USA letter included Jackson, Kagan, Woolsey, Hillel Fradkin, Rachelle Horowitz, Penn Kemble, Nina Shea, Michael Novak, Clifford May, and Ben Wattenberg.

http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Marshall_Will

[KoKo]

54. Great Read...Many Thanks!

[chill_wind]

69. Ain't it something?

But there's more. See sulphurdunn's post #56. And post #65. Following the money.

:hi:

[Odin2005]

58. Blair basically copied Bill Clinton's DLC crap and applied it in the UK.

[spanone]

47. fuck politico

[tavalon]

51. Unfortunately, the only person who can topple this imperialist administration won't

primary Obama and if any one else does, the WH goes to the Republicans. Though, given what's been pulled this week by this tone deaf administration, maybe it's time for our guy to stop being such a loyal party Democrat and be the People's Democrat.

[KoKo]

53. We are between the "Fire and Fying Pan"..."Rock & Hard Place"...

I don't think Primary Candidate could get enough money and support. It would be like running Kucinich (who has morals and priciples) against the "Sun God," chosen one of the Democrats.

It will not work...but, what else can we do? We've done what we could with marches and building what we "THOUGHT"...thought...was the Progressive Internets for Dems and AARADIO and supporting what all we could.

None has worked the way we hoped.

I don't know... Maybe we have to wait until it all IMPLODES? And, then we can "pick up the pieces?"

But, without a "ready waiting organization" that can take charge...then what? :shrug:

I'm just laying out the problems...not saying that we don't need to Primary him...

[tavalon]

72. I was talking Howard Dean, but you make great points, all.

[defendandprotect]

82. What would we run Obama as in 2012 ... the anti-New Deal president?

I mean even W Bush could finally say ... "Fool me once" --

Obama has turned the Dem Party on its head --

And this after 2010 when the party was defeated because of back room deals by Obama

with Big Pharma and private H/C Industry -- trampling MEDICARE FOR ALL --

Destruction of the party in 2010 met by Obama with his new pledge to ...

COMPROMISE EVEN MORE!!

[girl gone mad]

52. k & r

[blkmusclmachine]

55. The monster has ripped the mask from its face for all to see:

The lies, and outright contempt, toward real Democrats/Progressives/Workers/the Middle Class and the Poor. That's the way the "DLC/New Democrat/Third Way" buddies roll.

[sulphurdunn]

56. The asshats who wrote this screed

are the Manchurian Democrats of Third Way a.k.a the DLC. They are both former staffers for Blue Dogs. Their primary funder is Pete Peterson. Peterson is one of Americas 400 richest people (billionaires). Also:

1. Fiscally conservative investment banker
2. Former commerce secretary under Dick Nixon.
3. Founder of the Peter G. Peterson foundation that advocates for reductions of federal deficits through cuts in entitlements, especially Social Security.
4, Former Chairman and CEO of Lehman Brothers, Bell&Howell and the Blackstone Group.
5. Paymaster for the staff of Obama's Cat Food Commission.

Then there are the Koch brothers. Sugar Daddies of the former DLC and most likely still laying some sugar on the Third Way.

William Daley, Obama's chief of staff is a Third Way board member. The White House staff is lousy with Third Way flunkies. Third Way is a Wall Street front group that runs the Democratic Party and the President of the United States. Sorry, but that's the way it is.

[madfloridian]

60. I think you are right....that is the way it is.

[chill_wind]

67. ! You're right. "Lead or Leave". I had to look it up.

Jonathan Cowan. Pete Peterson money. And later, Bradley Foundation money for Third Way.

[chill_wind]

84. If you made that an OP, I bet that would news to a lot more people

and might open a lot of eyes.

[Odin2005]

57. I hate these SOBs. As far as I'm concerned they are no different than Pukes.

And don't give me the "SCOTUS nominees" and "at least they give us control of Congress arguments. As long as they are the kingmakers it does not matter which party is in control.

[suffragette]

59. Sounds like Simpson Bowles proposal

That would be the one that failed to get even enough people on the Deficit Commission itself to support it, but apparently is the way Third Way wants to go.

Of course, the plan from Jan Schakowsky, a Democrat on the same commission who drafted a counter plan based on long-held Democratic values has never received one word of support from the President or the people surrounding him that I have seen.


And that "slight change in the way inflation is calculated."
That's another phrase for the chained Consumer Price Index (CPI).

Here's language that ties the two together from CBPP's aalysis of Simpson-Bowles.
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3402#_ftn14

Reducing Cost-of-Living Adjustments . Cost-of-living adjustments would fall by about 0.3 percentage points a year under the proposal to adopt a different measure of inflation — the chained Consumer Price Index (CPI) — which analysts generally regard as a more accurate measure of inflation for the economy as a whole. This change would start in December 2011 and would affect everyone on the benefit rolls at that time.


And WillyT has been posting more recent info on what exactly that would mean and it's not good.


Altogether, it is insupportable.

[chill_wind]

61. December 2011. That's fast. Jan Schakowsky dubbed it the "chain-saw CPI"

in the press somewhere yesterday. She was on MSNBC briefly tonight.
A big part of her message-- the focus should be far more on jobs, not deficits.

Thank you for the link. Yes- there it is.

[suffragette]

62. It is Simpson Bowles redux, isn't it?

Looks like they're trying to back door it in since it did not make it through the front door the first time around.

Schakowsky gets it.

http://schakowsky.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2777:
On Social Security

Schakowsky:


“There is a better way than the Simpson-Bowles proposal – which relies heavily on benefit cuts instead of revenue increases.


“Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit. Addressing the Social Security issue as part of the deficit question is like attacking Iraq to retaliate for the 9/11 attacks – there is simply no relationship between the two and attempting to conflate them does a grave disservice to America’s seniors.

“Taking money from Social Security retirees whose average total income is $18,000 per year and average benefit is $14,000 ($12,000 for women) is simply wrong. It places them at fiscal risk and hurts the economy because they will be unable to purchase the goods they need. Americans in poll after poll have indicated their opposition to benefit cuts – particularly at a time when Wall Street bankers are making record bonuses.

The Schakowsky alternative does not contain any cuts to Social Security.
It ensures long-term solvency to Social Security by eliminating the wage cap on the employer side and raising it to 90% on the employee side, applying FICA to all wage income below the cap, and establishing a modest legacy tax on wealthier Americans.
Surplus funding that can be used to improve the extremely-modest benefits that are now provided.


Much more at link above.


Good to see you chill.
:hug:

[chill_wind]

66. ..

And you, suffragette! :hug:

[Enthusiast]

92. You make a very good point here.

"Of course, the plan from Jan Schakowsky, a Democrat on the same commission who drafted a counter plan based on long-held Democratic values has never received one word of support from the President or the people surrounding him that I have seen."



I love Jan Schakowsky!

[suffragette]

101. More from Schakowsky here

She's made the strongest points about this of any politician.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/suffragette/64

[Enthusiast]

103. Yeah, that's beautiful.

But how would that allow Wall Street criminals to take advantage of the tax payer? See, it's a bad plan.

[suffragette]

104. Well, there is that.

She's clearly not taking the Blairesque Third Way path to popularity and cozying up to the robber barons.

Guess that's why she's not on their dance card.

[Enthusiast]

105. No dance card for Jan! nt

[chill_wind]

65. Bradley Foundation $$ ! And a nice run-down on Board of Trustees.

Between 2000-2002. $225,000 from the Bradley Foundation.

http://mediamattersaction.org/transparency/organization/The_Third_Way_Foundation_Inc_/funders

Bradley Foundation. Whoohoo!

http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Bradley_Foundation

http://kochwatch.org/index.php?q=node/1302

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Foundation


----------------------------------------
All about the Board of Trustees.

The Third Way: Conservative Democrats’ Front for Wall Street and a Primrose Path to a Poorer Middle Class

April 5, 2011 by David Kingsley

http://tallgrassactivist.wordpress.com/2011/04/05/the-third-way-conservative-democrats%E2%80%99-front-for-wall-street-and-a-primrose-path-to-a-poorer-middle-class/

[defendandprotect]

74. Thank you -- !!!

Will save the info -- thank you for your work!!

And these destroyers are calling themselves "progressives" -- ????

[Samantha]

68. I really had to laugh when I saw how Politico signed these guys off

"Jon Cowan is president and Jim Kessler is vice president for policy at Third Way, a progressive think tank."

Note the title of their op-ed, "Progressives,Wise Up on Social Security" (signed)... "a progressive think tank." Just too funny.

The Third Way is in no way a progressive think tank; it is a regressive version of the defunct DLC. Ironically, one of the very attributes which tore that organization down in its final days was its raw arrogance and public display of pure hubris.

What can I say but the baby political apple did not fall far from the mother (or substitute your own more appropriate handle here) tree.

Sam

[madfloridian]

71. Heh heh

Interesting points.."it is a regressive version of the defunct DLC."

[chill_wind]

87. That's exactly how Third Way/PPI bills themselves.

At PPI, they are self-described "Pragmatic Progressives" on their masthead.

[PATRICK]

70. A decade ago

they had a discussion section on their website. Wisely eliminated it for lack of interest if not the embarassment of their few members getting ridiculed by a semi-intelligent freeper. Also they revealed their snide attitude to real Democrats, presumably First and Second Way(Woe unto any Fourth way reformers!).

Some type of bland homogenized fairy tale land whose chief effect no one can take them seriously if they tried. Their link entitled "Experts" was rather touching in its innocent wonkish pretension. No discussion groups, no groups in fact anywhere. It looks like a whitebread Congressional staff some Indiana Dem cut loose when he ran from office.

Compare this to the ALEC think tank, juggernaut or Homeland.org and you can see the utter pathos of this vanity site taking itself seriously at all. Ten years of rot and the plastic bologna sandwich has lost none of its tasteless, inedible stillborn staleness. The experts still seem tragically young. I expect from here on out the photos will not be updated.

[defendandprotect]

73. "Third Way" calls itself "progressive" ... ? 1984 Newspeak -- ???? It's a RW org ...

Amazing how many people are willing to become destroyers for a buck -- !!

[Bryn]

83. I've been hearing a lot of "Third Way" .... how odd

Is it actually a 3rd Party? DU rules don't support this in Democratic Party. This sounds like cancer in Democratic Party that should be removed, seriously.

[JHB]

94. The term "third way" was coined back in the Clinton days...

...to imply something between the conservative/Reaganomic Republican agenda and "ultraliberals" who were "beholden to special interests" (like unions) and too "anti-business" for the "new economy". People using this term generally paint themselves as "centrists" and "pro-business moderates" in order to promote low-tax/deregulation/big-money-friendly neoliberal economic policies, and imply that people who disagree with those policies are irrational, ideologically-driven radicals while they themselves are just being reasonable and sensible.

The capital-letters Third Way is a Washington spin think tank promoting this agenda, as something of a successor organization to the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), which did pretty much the same thing. One can generally count on them to direct their harshest criticism at liberal Democrats. Criticism of Republicans, when it happens, is much more muted, diplomatic, pro forma, and milquetoast.

[Starry Messenger]

85. k&r

[Youth Uprising]

86. K&R

[Ruby the Liberal]

93. "Third Way, a progressive think tank"

:wtf:

[JHB]

95. It's a smokescreen/marketing term

1) it may technically be true on some social issues, and will give it a favorable first impression to people who don't know much about it but think that just because it's called "progressive" that means its on their side.

2) by calling themselves "progressive", they de facto define anyone to the left of them as a radical, and themselves as the calm and reasonable people.

[Ruby the Liberal]

97. #2 is what has me so pissed off

How DARE they?

No matter. I wear the "liberal" label gladly and with honor.

Just pisses me off.

[philly_bob]

98. 1 man's evaluation of 3rd way suggested changes to SS in article

The article lists 6 changes:

1. Means-testing of Social Security benefits

2. Increase in payroll taxes on the wealthy

3. A minimum benefit for low-income seniors

4. A new program to supplement people’s private retirement savings funded through changes in the estate tax.

5. Adjustment to yearly cost-of-living payments through a slight change in the way inflation is calculated.

6. Raise the retirement age to keep up with life expectancy.

Here's how I evaluate these:

1 Might be okay depending on the cutoff and paperwork; Is means-testing income or net worth? Not enough info to judge.
2 seems okay. (I believe it's also called raising income cutoff; in a thread on DU nearly everybody seemed to approve).
3 Slippery. Isn't there already a minimum? But probably OK.
4 Not enough info to judge.
5 and 6 are reprehensible.

The problem with both 1 & 3 is they seem to require seniors to file annual paperwork.

[KoKo]

100. Good Points you make about their proposals..thanks!

[malaise]

99. There is no Third Way - that was TOny Blair and his goons

three card trick.
It is undiluted neo-liberal fuckery!!

[Youth Uprising]

106. Check this post out from March by polichick.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x638077#638082">THE THIRD WAY is the biggest threat to the Democratic Party It's no coincidence that Obama has put Social Security and Medicare on the table. These bastards where pushing for it and he's doing their bidding.