From the category archives: entitlement reform
The Democratic Platform released today clearly shows that the differences between how the Democratic and Republican parties will approach the future of Social Security couldn’t be starker. The GOP platform promises to consider all benefit cut options, refuses to lift the payroll tax cap and suggests sending Americans’ earned benefits to Wall Street through privatization. The Democratic Party platform, on the other hand, offers the strongest statement on strengthening Social Security seen in decades. By pledging to fight efforts to “cut, privatize or weaken” Social Security, supporting expansion of the program, lifting the payroll tax and exploring a new COLA formula for seniors, the Democrats have tackled head-on the critical challenges facing millions of average Americans.
“For too long, many in Washington have ignored the retirement crisis facing Americans nationwide. The Democratic Party’s platform acknowledges what average Americans and their families understand first-hand – Social Security is an economic lifeline to millions which should be improved. Boosting Social Security’s benefits to provide economic security while also extending the program’s solvency can be done at the same time. The Democrats get that.
The National Committee proudly worked closely with the Democratic Platform Committee and DNC Chair Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz to ensure efforts to improve the current cost of living allowance (COLA) formula are investigated. The current formula isn’t measuring seniors’ expenses properly and they’ve seen no increase for too many years, while their expenses (especially health costs) continue to grow. We need a COLA for the elderly and are happy to see Democrats address that reality in this 2016 platform.”...Max Richtman, NCPSSM President/CEO and Democratic Platform Committee Member
It’s also very telling that while the GOP buried their cuts and privatization plans for Social Security under the Platform’s Government Reform heading, the Democrats addressed Social Security, as they should, as part of their plan to restore economic security for average Americans. That’s been Social Security’s fundamental role for more than 80 years -- providing an economic lifeline impacting the lives of virtually every American family.
A new National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare Foundation report also released today, called Social Security Spotlight, illustrates very clearly the huge economic impact Social Security benefits have in every state and county throughout the nation. This research can be especially helpful during the 2016 election cycle for voters, journalists, policy makers and campaign staff as the future of Social Security is debated.
GOP Presidential candidate, Donald Trump, has chosen one of Congress’ most aggressive Social Security privatization supporters to serve as his Vice President. Indiana Governor and former Congressman, Mike Pence’s record on issues important to seniors, particularly cutting benefits to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid couldn’t be worse:
“By choosing Governor Mike Pence as his running mate, presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump has sent a very clear message to America’s seniors that their priorities will hold little weight in a Trump administration. During his decade-plus tenure in the U.S. Congress, Mike Pence consistently voted in favor of legislative efforts to cut benefits in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. He has a long history of blaming earned benefit programs for America’s economic woes and supporting middle-class benefit cuts to protect tax cuts for the wealthy. Few members of Congress have an anti-seniors voting record as consistently strong as Mike Pence.
Mike Pence was one of Congress’ biggest proponents of privatization. He supports cutting Social Security benefits by raising the retirement age, reducing the COLA, means-testing and turning Medicare into “CouponCare.” As he told CNN, ‘I’m an all of the above guy. I think we need to look at everything that’s on the menu,’ and the record shows he has done just that by supporting every form of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefit cut proposed in the past decade.
The National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare scored Mike Pence at 0% on issues important to seniors during the 2011-2012 Congress since he voted for multiple pieces of legislation that would cut benefits and programs that protect senior’s health and financial security.”...Max Richtman, NCPSSM President/CEO
As leader of the Republican Study Committee, the House’s far-right wing caucus, during the Bush administration, Pence doubled-down on President George Bush’s failed privatization efforts by calling for an even larger private accounts scheme to be implemented sooner, putting Americans at even greater fiscal risk than the President’s doomed plan. The Washington Times reported in 2005:
“The Bush plan allows workers to divert 4 percent of their wages into investment accounts, and to choose from a set of investment strategies. But the conservatives are leaning more toward a plan sponsored by Rep. Paul Ryan, Wisconsin Republican, which would allow diversion of 6 percent of wages.
‘Conservatives want to see personal retirement accounts that have immediate relevance to younger Americans, that they can see the value, and that will require that they be big and that they be implemented in the final bill without delay,’ said Rep. Mike Pence, Indiana Republican and chairman of the 100-member Republican Study Committee (RSC).”
Incredibly, even though Pence was among Congress’ most vocal fiscal hawks, he was willing to use deficit spending to pay for their Social Security privatization scheme but not to improve Social Security’s long-term funding or protect seniors’ benefits:
“Mr. Pence said conservatives would be willing to accept borrowing money to pay for the transition costs, but “so long as we can achieve the fundamental reform of personal Social Security account for retirement.” He said the RSC will convey those principles to House Republican leaders early next week, and said they believe they have muscle to back up those principles.”
Beyond privatization, Pence’s comments make it clear there isn’t a Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid benefit cut he won’t embrace:
“I think everything has to be on the table...I think it’s absolutely imperative, whether it’s Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid.”
“With regard to entitlements we’re going to have to take some deep cuts in domestic spending.” CNN, 2010
“I was tea party before it was cool.” Indianapolis Monthly, 2011
On health issues, Pence’s record is just as anti-senior as his Social Security stance. He aggressively opposed the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and fought for its repeal, which would worsen Medicare’s solvency and take away billions in added benefits and cost savings for seniors. He voted against the creation of a prescription drug benefit (Part D) in Medicare, opposes allowing the re-importation of prescription drugs and allowing Medicare to negotiate for lower drug prices, he supported legislation that would deny non-emergency treatment for lack of a Medicare co-pay, and most importantly supports the GOP/Ryan budget which would destroy Medicare in favor of “Couponcare,” giving seniors a voucher to take shopping for insurance rather than protecting traditional Medicare’s guaranteed coverage.
In spite of his leadership in Congress against the ACA, as Governor he reluctantly acknowledged the healthcare needs of Indiana citizens and adopted Medicaid expansion, yet not without putting the GOP political spin on it. As Politico reported, Pence incredibly claims the expansion was actually an elimination of Medicaid.
“In fact, a summary of the proposal describes it as a move to “eliminate traditional Medicaid” for non-disabled Hoosiers.
And by adding a requirement that Indiana residents must pay a premium, Pence promised to preserve citizens’ dignity:
“So the Indiana plan will charge small premiums—up to 2 percent of an individual's income—which will make only a tiny impact on the state's balance sheets, but will send a clear message to those layabouts; Pence talked about giving people the "dignity to pay for their own health insurance." (I'm sure that Pence declines to take a government handout in the form of the mortgage interest deduction, because that would undermine his dignity.)...American Prospect
While Donald Trump has promised on the campaign trail that he won’t cut Social Security and Medicare benefits, he continues to surround himself with advisors and now a running-mate with polar opposite intentions. At the same time, his promise to “not touch” benefits has been noticeably absent in recent campaign appearances. In fact, his most recent comments to an AARP survey take a very different tone:
“As our demography changes, a prudent administration would begin to examine what changes might be necessary for future generations.”...Donald Trump, AARP, June 27, 2016
That’s why NCPSSM President/CEO, Max Richtman, urges seniors and their families to beware of candidates who make promises on the campaign trail they have no intention of keeping once they get your vote:
"They say actions speak louder than words – and there’s no doubt about it -- Donald Trump’s choice of Mike Pence as his Vice-Presidential running mate speaks volumes to American seniors.”
Each day 10 thousand Americans become eligible for Medicare. The aging of the baby boom generation certainly isn’t a surprise to anyone and yet, instead of boosting programs to serve this increased need, Republican Congressional leaders continue to slash and now eliminate programs designed to help millions of aging Americans and their families.
The latest target is one of the nation’s most effective consumer resources for seniors, the Medicare State Health Insurance Assistance Program (SHIP).
“The SHIP network provides critical information upon which people with Medicare rely to make informed decisions about their coverage options and enrollment decisions,” says Judith A. Stein, Executive Director, Center for Medicare Advocacy, Inc. “The SHIPs are critical to providing assistance with these increasingly complicated choices. People with Medicare and their families from all over the country depend on SHIPs as the key source of unbiased guidance.”
Incredibly, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved a Fiscal Year 2017 budget appropriations bill that completely eliminates the $52.1 million in funding for SHIP.
“Senate appropriators have turned their backs on a growing number of people who will need SHIP services to navigate the complexities of Medicare coverage by proposing to eliminate program funding. This kind of penny-wise, pound-foolish lawmaking will threaten the economic security of millions of Medicare beneficiaries and their families.”…Max Richtman, NCPSSM President/CEO
“Understanding the complexities and decisions required for Medicare is an overwhelming, isolating experience for seniors, people with disabilities, and caregivers who don’t know where to get help. For millions of Americans, their only option for that help is their SHIP. If SHIPs disappear, there is no replacement for the critical services they provide. The loss of SHIPs threatens the economic security and the health of all current Medicare beneficiaries and the thousands who become eligible every day.”…James Firman, President and CEO of the NCOA
"Eliminating SHIPs would leave millions of older Americans, people with disabilities, and families who need help comparing coverage options, appealing denials, applying for financial assistance, and navigating an evolving and increasingly complex program stranded—with nowhere to turn. With 10,000 Baby Boomers aging into Medicare each day, it is imperative that the U.S. House of Representatives reject this unprecedented, nonsensical cut."…Joe Baker, President of the Medicare Rights Center
In case you have any doubt about the need for SHIP services consider this: today’s Medicare beneficiary must choose among more than 20 prescription drug plans, an average of 19 Medicare Advantage plans, as well as various Medigap supplemental insurance policies—all with different premiums, cost sharing, provider networks, and coverage rules. SHIPs also help beneficiaries resolve fraud and abuse issues, billing problems, appeals, and enrollment in low-income health assistance programs. In 2015, SHIPs provided one-on-one assistance to more than seven million individuals and in the past decade, the number of beneficiaries receiving personalized counseling from SHIPs has tripled.
Not a day goes by that we don’t hear horror stories of seniors and their families who face severe economic hardship and even bankruptcy because of a bad choice made in their healthcare options. That’s exactly why SHIP is so vitally important.
We’re proud to join a coalition of aging organizations including; The Center for Medicare Advocacy, Medicare Rights Center, and National Council on Aging (NCOA) to fight for a reversal of this outrageous Senate move to eliminate seniors’ access to desperately needed SHIP services.
We urge you to call your Senators and Representative and tell them: Americans Need SHIP.
As Hillary Clinton declared victory after winning four of the six primaries last night, the Democratic ticket for President solidified. While Donald Trump has been in that position for a while now, his campaign has now entered rough political waters...again.
And so it will likely go until November...
Unfortunately, what’s lost as the media and political punditry focus on the horserace, who’s stuck their foot in it today and the inevitable mud-slinging that Trump has already promised to begin on Monday, are the important policy differences between candidates. There are plenty of them, especially on economic issues impacting average Americans.
Bernie Sanders’ campaign ensured that issues of income inequality, economic security and fairness, social justice and boosting Social Security remained top of the political agenda. He vowed to continue that effort:
“Our campaign from day one has understood some very basic points and that is first, we will not allow right-wing Republicans to control our government. And that is especially true with Donald Trump as the Republican candidate. The American people, in my view, will never support a candidate whose major theme is bigotry, who insults Mexicans, who insults Muslims and women, and African-Americans.
But we understand that our mission is more than just defeating Trump; it is transforming our country. The vast — the vast majority of the American people know that it is not acceptable that the top one-tenth of 1 percent owns almost as much as wealth as the bottom 90 percent. We are going to change that. And when millions of Americans are working longer hours for lower wages, we will not allow 57 percent of all new income to go to the top 1 percent...
We will not allow Donald Trump to become President of the United States."
When it comes to Social Security and Medicare, the differences between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are stark. Clinton supports expanding benefits, while Trump promises he won’t cut Social Security. That position has given the GOP party establishment heartburn but Trump has repeatedly acknowledged the GOP can’t win by promising benefit cuts and so he’s not:
"As Republicans, if you think you are going to change very substantially for the worse Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security in any substantial way, and at the same time you think you are going to win elections, it just really is not going to happen," Mr. Trump said, adding that polls show that tea partyers are among those who don't want their entitlements changed." Donald Trump, 2013 CPAC speech, Washington Times
“You know the Republicans also have to get elected, you do know that. And if you watch Bernie, and if you watch Hillary, they don't only want to not cut, they want to increase Social Security.” Donald Trump, Morning Joe, February 2016
And yet his policy staff says the Trump administration is open to “entitlement changes.”
“After the administration has been in place, then we will start to take a look at all of the programs, including entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare. We’ll start taking a hard look at those to start seeing what we can do in a bipartisan way.”
“...I think that whoever [is] the next president is going to have a horrible time in dealing with this, because those entitlements will race to the front of all the economic issues we have in this country.” Sam Clovis, Trump campaign Chief Policy Advisor, May 2016
You can read more about the Trump campaign positions here, here and here.
Hillary Clinton has a long history of fighting the privatization of Social Security and Medicare, something Donald Trump supported in his first Presidential campaign. These days, that position alone is not enough but Clinton has also articulated a real plan to boost benefits, provide caregiving credits, lift the payroll tax cap and improve spousal benefits. She also opposes Trump’s plan to repeal the Affordable Care Act which means seniors in Medicare would lose billions in drug savings, well-care visits, lower premiums and improved care.
There will be many more months to draw clear comparisons between these candidates’ positions on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid as the Presidential campaign moves to the conventions and their platform debates.
The National Committee’s SeniorVote 2016 will keep you updated and candidates’ accountable on their plans for programs which touch the lives of virtually every American family.You can sign up for email alerts to be sure the latest news comes straight to your mailbox.
In an effort to regain control of the GOP political debate, House Speaker Paul Ryan, unveiled the first of six policy papers, this one on reducing poverty, to prove the Republican Party has ideas beyond building walls and attacking judges. Let’s just say, the event didn’t go quite as planned.
Donald Trump’s latest racist attack ended up dominating the day, much to Ryan’s consternation and leaving many conservatives lamenting Ryan’s support for Trump in the first place:
“The Caligulan malice with which Donald Trump administered Paul Ryan’s degradation is an object lesson in the price of abject capitulation to power. This episode should be studied as a clinical case of a particular Washington myopia — the ability of career politicians to convince themselves that they and their agendas are of supreme importance.”...George Will
The Ryan agenda on poverty is already well known -- Trump’s is basically non-existent. However, this political roadshow entitled, “A better way forward: Our vision for a confident America” was designed to put the Speaker in control of the party’s policy debate. It is heavy on campaign-style rhetoric and purposefully thin on details, since Republicans in the House apparently couldn’t agree on them:
“...the document focuses on painting a broad picture of a GOP-led social welfare system and the types of policies that could be created in the event a Republican is elected president. Many of the specific policy prescriptions aimed at addressing the problems identified in the paper were left out because members couldn’t agree on details such as how to prevent waste and fraud, according to aides.”...Washington Post
Of course, promising to eliminate poverty and providing the policy prescription needed to make that happen are two very different things. While this document provides scant details, even the broad strokes echo the harmful approaches proposed in past House GOP budgets which shred the safety net and cut benefits.
“Consistent with that philosophy, the plan includes a bevy of policies designed to make it much harder for people in need to access federal programs: tougher work requirements for food stamps, housing aid, or cash welfare; eliminating benefits conservatives believe are making improper payments...eliminating funding for early childhood education lifeline Head Start; sealing off tax credits from some low-income families; and further allowing states to cut certain programs as they see fit.”...Think Progress
Proposals impacting seniors and families include:
- Replacing benefits for children who receive SSI with “services”
- Blocking regulations that require financial advisors to provide counsel based solely on what’s best for their client rather than what’s most profitable for the advisor.
- Blocking the federal government from keeping the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation solvent.
- Reforming retirement security by loosening regulations and sending more of our savings to Wall Street. There is literally zero mention of Social Security retiree benefits in the nearly 1,100 words written on retirement security.
Social Security keeps millions of Americans out of poverty and contributes billions of dollars to our economy each year. You can’t have a serious conversation about addressing poverty in America while ignoring one of the nation’s most successful anti-poverty programs...that is, unless you refuse to acknowledge Social Security’s success in the first place.
Because today’s roll-out event was largely ignored in favor of Donald Trump’s latest racist comments and this first campaign paper provides so few details, we want to provide some other sources with analysis of the GOP poverty plan Speaker Ryan has addressed in the past. Hat tip to Media Matters for this compilation:
Paul Ryan: Federal Government "Does More Harm Than Good" When It Assists The Poor. During a discussion at CPAC 2016, Ryan and Bold Media founder Carrie Sheffield pushed a series of right-wing media-inspired myths. The two derided government assistance programs as "trapping people in poverty, by basically paying people not to work," and dismissed food and housing assistance programs started more than 50 years ago by President Johnson, commonly referred to as the "War on Poverty." Ryan also misleadingly claimed that "we basically have a stalemate on our hands" with regard to reducing poverty in the United States, despite 50 years of work and "trillions [of dollars] spent." [CSPAN3, 3/3/16]
CAP's Rebecca Vallas: While Paul Ryan's Talking Points "May Be Pitch-Perfect," His Policies Are A "Blueprint For Exacerbating Poverty, Inequality, And Wage Stagnation." The Center for American Progress' (CAP) Rebecca Vallas wrote that while "Republicans' sudden concern for struggling families is no doubt newsworthy ... unfortunately their policies remain nothing short of a blueprint for exacerbating poverty, inequality, and wage stagnation," in a January 7 Huffington Post blog. Vallas noted that "Ryan has voted against raising the minimum wage at least 10 times," "has consistently opposed legislation that would help families access paid family and medical leave," and has proposed cutting "critical programs that help keep struggling families afloat -- such as nutrition assistance, housing assistance, and Medicaid -- all to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations." [The Huffington Post, 1/7/16]
NPR: Ryan Seeks To Weaken Food Assistance Programs That Have Kept Millions Out Of Poverty. In response to Speaker Ryan's push to weaken the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP), NPR reported on December 29, 2015, that while Ryan claimed SNAP and other programs are "trapping people in poverty," the Council of Economic Advisers found that SNAP alone kept almost 5 million people out of poverty in 2014, the most recent available data, including 2 million children. [NPR, 12/29/15]
MSNBC's Steve Benen: Ryan's Policies Are "Brutal" For The Poor. MSNBC's Steve Benen explained on May 6, 2015, that while Paul Ryan claims to be "focused on poverty," his proposed remedies would be "brutal towards those actually in poverty." Benen added, "Ryan was, and is, perhaps best known for his far-right budget plan that cuts taxes for the wealthy by hundreds of billions of dollars, while slashing investments in programs that benefit working families." [MSNBC.com, 5/6/15]
Have a Social Security or Medicare question?