Still No COLA for Seniors
By NCPSSM | March 4, 2010
Last night the Senate rejected passage of a $250 one-time payment to seniors on Social Security who’ve been living without a cost of living adjustment this year. To say this vote was disappointing doesn’t sum up our reaction. Especially when you consider how many of the Senators who voted against $250 for seniors…had no problem voting for bank bailouts and Wall Street rescues.
Here’s our President/CEO, Barbara Kennelly’s reaction:
“The Senate has unfortunately ignored the reality that despite a relatively low rate of general inflation, seniors’ costs are going up. Health care costs especially are rising rapidly, and the elderly on fixed incomes spend a significantly larger share of their income on health care. $250 may not sound like much, but for millions of American seniors this one-time payment was desperately needed assistance. Assistance which should be as big a priority as Wall Street bailouts and tax breaks for millionaires.”
For the millions of seniors who rely upon Social Security as their only source of income, and millions more who rely upon it for at least half of their income, a cost of living adjustment in their Social Security benefits is not a luxury, it’s a necessity. Here’s just a sampling of comments from some of our members this month…
“I really need a COLA increase each year as that is my main source of income. If I lost that I wouldn’t have any way to make it. Please find some way to get around this 100% false idea of zero (0%) inflation. Everything I have to buy, the price keeps going up. I asked in the local bank where the zero inflation was. They said it must be another country and not here!” George P from North Carolina
“I have had cancer 3 times and the $1,500 [SS check] only covers my monthly rent and my insurance. At age 83 I cannot work any longer. My savings is fast being used up.” Helen R from Tennessee
No cost of living adjustment (COLA) this year not only froze Social Security checks at last year’s level, but also reduced many checks as Part D prescription drug premiums and other health care costs rose. 47 members of the Senate understand this and voted in support of a COLA fix; however, it wasn’t enough for passage. Clearly, our work is far from over…and we’ll continue to urge Congress to pass a COLA fix for seniors this year.
If you’d like a more political analysis of last night’s vote try this Firedog Lake post which lists the Senators’ votes.
Topics: Social Security | Comments »
Scrub Out the Seniors
By NCPSSM | March 3, 2010
So much for beginning a civil and open dialogue on our debt, deficit, Social Security, Medicare and taxes. Presidential Fiscal Commission co-chair, former Senator Alan Simpson, told CNBC just days after his appointment that seniors over 60, and the organizations who represent them (including ours) should be “scrubbed out” of the equation.
“You remember the last time we corrected Social Security, and people calling me. Let me tell you, everything that Bush and Clinton or Obama have suggested with regard to Social Security doesn’t affect anyone over 60, and who are the people howling and bitching the most? The people over 60. This makes no sense. You’ve got scrub out (of) the equation the AARP, the Committee for the Preservation of Social Security and Medicare, the Gray Panthers, the Pink Panther, the whatever.”
But he didn’t stop there.
“Those people are lying when everything that was proposed last year, year before, year before didn’t affect any over 55. Now, anything I’ve heard so far doesn’t affect anyone over 60. Where does the howling come from? These people don’t care a whit about their grandchildren…not a whit.”
Unfortunately, the Senator missed a critical fact from the 2005 debate to privatize Social Security. America’s seniors understood very well what President Bush’s privatization scheme would and wouldn’t do. They opposed it because they want their adult children and grandchildren to have the same retirement protections afforded to current beneficiaries. That’s a fact, not a lie.
You can watch the full interview here:
Topics: Social Security, entitlement reform | Comments »
Don’t Forget Social Security and Medicare
By NCPSSM | March 3, 2010
We’re at a very important legislative crossroads on Capitol Hill. Congress is about to make another attempt at health care reform, a Presidential Commission has been appointed which will target Social Security and Medicare for cuts while at the same time Americans are still struggling in this difficult economy. I went to the Senate today and talked to the Democratic Steering Committee about the challenges ahead and about how important it is to remember the vital role Social Security and Medicare continue to play for millions of Americans…especially during this recession. I’ve posted my remarks here:
“First, health care reform. We are at a crossroads – a moment when history can be made.
You have an opportunity to provide health insurance to millions without it and to help millions to be able to afford the health care they already have.
I represent seniors across these United States. I spent the last year talking to seniors & will continue to educate seniors about the importance of health care reform and especially how important it is to the future of Medicare.
Medicare is not sustainable over the long run unless the cost of health care is slowed. If you don’t pass this bill again the individual beneficiaries and government will not be able to sustain the Medicare program.
The other issue I would like to mention briefly is the Commission President Obama has created by executive order.
The National Committee fought hard against a commission. I strongly believe in ‘regular order’ and had real problems with the fast-track process in the original commission. But we have this comission now and we’re going to live with it. I urge you as leaders of the Senate not to put the Commission on autopilot and forget it.
Past Congresses have worked hard to keep SS out of deficit discussions.
They recognized SS is an insurance program workers earned by their hard work & payroll deductions.
I just sat through hours of focus groups with people of all ages. They understand SS is something they paid for and earned. And they’re counting on it as the basis for their retirement. The ones that are in their 50s know they need SS as a basic part of their retirement, especially in these economic times.
I was in Congress during the 1983 Commission. At the time I had a daughter who was still in college. Today she’s 50 and retirement isn’t so far away any more. Any changes that are made to SS will need to be phased-in slowly so today’s workers can plan for them.
I strongly urge you to stay in close touch with Commission members. Urge them to tread very carefully where SS is concerned.
The recommendations they make will affect our nation for generations.”
Topics: Barbara B. Kennelly, Medicare, Social Security, entitlement reform, healthcare | Comments »
Debt, Deficits, Social Security and More…
By NCPSSM | March 1, 2010
If you generally skip by budget or economic headlines in favor of something more easily comprehendible, we suggest today you make an exception. Here are excerpts from three articles which together provide must-read perspectives on our debt/deficits, Social Security and Medicare.
Saul Friedman, Grey Matters columnist, takes former Senator and Debt Commission co-chairman, Alan Simpson, to task for perpetuating the myth that Social Security has anything to do with current budget deficits.
“Social Security’s long term fiscal problem has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with Social Security’s role in the deficit. For, as I have emphasized in my column for years, Social Security costs the budget not one cent-aside from the one percent it spends on its thousands of employees and field offices. Indeed, Social Security helps finance the deficit by loaning the treasury money, for which it earns interest (about $700 million a year.) If what’s owed to Social Security must be cut as part of deficit reduction, will that help Social Security?
Nevertheless, Simpson’s statements help perpetuate the myth among right-wingers that Social Security contributes to the deficit.”
CEPR economist, Mark Weisbrot, offers this analysis of what’s truly driving our deficit and debt:
“For the long term, as the CBO has emphasized, the vast majority of the deficit and debt problem is just rapidly-rising health care costs. Of course, we could be like other developed countries and have universal health care, and pay about half of what we are now paying per person. That is the average for the other high-income countries. This would take care of our long-term federal debt problems.
Another significant contributor to our long-term debt is the military. On an annual basis, we spent 5.0 percent of GDP on just the Defense Department budget last year. Before 9/11, the CBO had projected just 2.4 percent for 2009. The difference is more than twice the long-term shortfall in our Social Security system, and it is based on an understatement of military spending. Maybe we need to focus on protecting our airports from already existing terrorists rather than recruiting more by occupying foreign countries. Maybe we don’t need hundreds of military bases all over the world.
But thanks to the power of what President Eisenhower famously named the “military industrial complex,” President Obama has exempted the military from any spending freeze. Thanks to the two most powerful lobbies in Congress — insurance and pharmaceutical — getting health care costs under control is still a distant dream. And then there’s the people who make the nation’s major economic decisions and actually brought us this mess – Goldman Sachs and their Wall Street friends: they want to put Social Security on the chopping block to pay for their crimes (and bonuses). Anybody see a pattern here? It’s not the debt that threatens our future.”
So, ultimately this brings us back around to health care reform. The New York Times details the “Cost of Doing Nothing in Health Care”:
“Hands off my health care,” goes one strain of populist sentiment. But what if?
Suppose Congress and President Obama fail to overhaul the system now, or just tinker around the edges, or start over, as the Republicans propose — despite the Democrats’ latest and possibly last big push that began last week at a marathon televised forum in Washington.
Then “my health care” stays the same, right?
Far from it, health policy analysts and economists of nearly every ideological persuasion agree. The unrelenting rise in medical costs is likely to wreak havoc within the system and beyond it, and pretty much everyone will be affected, directly or indirectly.
“People think if we do nothing, we will have what we have now,” said Karen Davis, the president of the Commonwealth Fund, a nonprofit health care research group in New York. “In fact, what we will have is a substantial deterioration in what we have.”
Nearly every mainstream analysis calls for medical costs to continue to climb over the next decade, outpacing the growth in the overall economy and certainly increasing faster than the average paycheck. Those higher costs will translate into higher premiums, which will mean fewer individuals and businesses will be able to afford insurance coverage. More of everyone’s dollar will go to health care, and government programs like Medicare and Medicaid will struggle to find the money to operate.
So when someone tells you health care reform is bad for Medicare remember that without it, Medicare will face devastating reforms as budget cutters look for savings in federal spending even though system wide costs will continue to skyrocket unchecked.
And when someone tells you Social Security is to blame for our deficits, remind them its American workers who fund Social Security NOT the federal government. In fact, the $2.5 trillion dollar surplus improved our federal debt picture throughout the past decade of borrow and spend policies.
Topics: Budget, Medicare, Social Security, entitlement reform, healthcare | Comments »
“No” is NOT an Option for Seniors in Medicare
By NCPSSM | February 26, 2010
While “just say no” is a popular political slogan and now even a Congressional strategy for some in Washington, the effects of saying no to health care reform will be felt much sooner than later for millions of American seniors.
Starting Monday, doctors serving patients in Medicare will face a 21% pay cut because the so-called “doc fix” was just one of many reforms lost when healthcare reform was shelved.
Current law says reimbursement rates for doctors must be based on a formula tied to the economy’s health. A “doc fix” was included in health care reform legislation to provide a longer-term solution rather than the annual rite of temporary fixes. However, no health care reform has meant no doc fix of any kind. Now physicians have to decide, take the 21% pay cut or close their practices to Medicare patients.
CNN reports on the American Medical Association’s response to what this “just say no” approach in health care reform will mean for seniors:
“To our physicians, we are providing information on their Medicare participation options, including how to remove themselves from the Medicare program,” said James Rohack, president of the American Medical Association.
and according to Dr. Edward Kornel, a New York neurosurgeon:
Kornel said consumers should prepare for some difficult days ahead. “If doctors drop Medicare patients, these people will be forced to go to clinics where it’s hard to get appointments, the waits are long and you get far less attention than you would otherwise get,” said Kornel. “I think this situation is headed for disaster.”
Democratic leaders in the Senate attached a temporary doc fix to the unemployment legislation due for a vote yesterday. However, Republican lame-duck Senator Jim Bunning, is blocking that vote from happening.
Modern Healthcare described it this way:
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) had fast-tracked legislation meant to temporarily extend a number of expiring provisions, part of which includes the so-called “doc fix,” as well as an extension to COBRA subsidies, unemployment insurance and a host of smaller Medicare items. Most of those provisions are set to expire at the end of the month. The Democrat-backed bill would allow those provisions to carry on for at least one month at a cost of $9.2 billion. But according to several sources, Republican leaders want to see that the package is fully paid for first. An attempt late last year to pass a longer-term bill that would have effectively scrapped the sustainable growth-rate formula, or SGR, also failed to pass the Senate.
“Just Say No”, “Starve the Beast”, “Keep the government out of my Medicare”… catchy slogans with serious repercussions for America’s seniors.
Pay cuts for doctors and reduced physician access, a growing doughnut hole in Medicare Part D, escalating premiums and cost sharing and ultimately insolvency for a program burdened with the same skyrocketing health care costs seen system wide. These are the real-world implications of this “just say no” approach and America’s seniors may pay the biggest price for inaction…and soon.
Topics: Medicare, healthcare | Comments »
Cutting Social Security Isn’t the Answer
By NCPSSM | February 18, 2010
The President signed an Executive Order creating a Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. There will be 18 members:
6 appointed by the President-2 we already know Co-Chairs former GOP Senator Alan Simpson (Wyoming) and former Clinton chief of staff Erskine Bowles.
The Leadership of both parties will also appoint 6 Senators and 6 House members – equally divided between Democrats and Republicans. Although, the GOP wants taxes taken off the table of any discussion and are threatening to not name anyone.
The National Committee has long opposed creation of a commission targeting Social Security and Medicare for cuts to balance the federal books. Our President/CEO, Barbara Kennelly, issued this statement today:
“President Obama inherited an economic nightmare. It’s a nightmare America’s seniors are living each and every day thanks to skyrocketing health care costs, no COLA, shrinking home values, decimated savings and a shaky economy. Seniors and their families want fiscal sanity returned to Washington; however, we should not be considering cuts to the very programs keeping millions afloat during this recovery.
Social Security is not to blame for the nation’s fiscal problems and has not contributed one dime to our nation’s bleak debt and deficit picture. To the contrary, Social Security’s trust fund surplus has been used for years to help balance the federal books. Our hope is that this Presidential Commission will rise above the political rhetoric, do the right thing, and ensure Social Security does not become a piggy bank to pay for the fiscal failures of the past. The future of generations of Americans depends on it.”
Topics: Barbara B. Kennelly, Medicare, Social Security, entitlement reform | Comments »
Target: Social Security
By NCPSSM | February 17, 2010
There are a number of important blog posts and articles to recommend to anyone who’s rightfully concerned about ongoing efforts to reduce our debt & deficits on the back of Social Security.
First, news from Congressional Quarterly on what President Obama’s Commission is beginning to look like. White House staff “briefed” concerned organizations yesterday but CQ learned more than we did.
“President Obama plans to name former Wyoming Republican Sen. Alan K. Simpson and former Clinton White House Chief of Staff Erskine Bowles as co-chairmen of his deficit commission, according to sources on and off Capitol Hill.
The announcement could come as early as Thursday. The White House did not immediately return e-mail messages or phone calls seeking comment.A Democratic congressional aide said the White House has told congressional leaders that Bowles and Simpson have accepted the offer.”
Dean Baker offers just one glimpse into Senator Simpson’s history with Social Security, namely supporting privatization and COLA cuts:
“It is not good news that President Obama picked former Senator Alan Simpson as one of the co-chairs of his deficit commission. Simpson is not just your run of the mill Republican. He is an extreme foe of Social Security.
The plan was to cut the size of the annual COLA to 1 percentage point less than the CPI. This may sound trivial, but it would add up over time. Someone who was retired 5 years would see their benefits cut by roughly 5 percent, 10 years by 10 percent, and 20 years by 20 percent. This is real money.”
Over at Daily Kos, New Deal Democrat, offers a lengthy record of candidate Obama and President Obama’s comments on Social Security. While we don’t necessarily agree with all of his conclusions, this post does offer a detailed compilation of comments that help provide some context for why we’re even having this conversation now.
Which is the bottom line question–Why with staggering unemployment facing us for some time to come, investment and savings income still reeling from the market collapse, home values decimated and skyrocketing health care costs eating seniors alive are we looking at cutting the very programs which are keeping millions from poverty? Especially when, contrary to a billion dollar campaign to persuade us otherwise, Social Security is not responsible for our debt/deficits.
We highly recommend you read the Center for Economic and Policy Research’s latest paper, The Budget Deficit Scare Story and the Great Recession , for some perspective on this debate and its potential impact on millions of Americans, young and old alike.
**Just in: please also check out the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities’ new deficit analysis, Where Today’s Large Deficits Come From. They say:
“Some critics charge that the new policies pursued by President Obama and the 111th Congress caused the huge federal budget deficits that the nation now faces. In fact, the tax cuts enacted under President George W. Bush, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the economic downturn together explain virtually the entire deficit over the next ten years.”
Topics: Social Security, entitlement reform | 1 Comment »
The Roadmap to Privatization
By NCPSSM | February 3, 2010
It appears the GOP Budget philosophy is…if at first you don’t succeed with a failed idea try, try again (and again, and again.) This week the ranking Republican on the House Budget Committee, Paul Ryan, reintroduced his “Roadmap for America’s Future”.
In short, it is a budget plan which decimates Social Security and Medicare in the name of deficit reduction. The only thing new about this strategy, is the fact that Rep. Ryan isn’t shy about acknowledging that he believes seniors should foot the bill for our current economic nightmare.
Ezra Klein described the plan this way:
To move us to surpluses, Ryan’s budget proposes reforms that are nothing short of violent. Medicare is privatized. Seniors get a voucher to buy private insurance, and the voucher’s growth is far slower than the expected growth of health-care costs. Medicaid is also privatized. The employer tax exclusion is fully eliminated, replaced by a tax credit that grows more slowly than medical costs. And beyond health care, Social Security gets guaranteed, private accounts that CBO says will actually cost more than the present arrangement, further underscoring how ancillary the program is to our budget problem.
Let’s see, seniors have to find private insurers who will accept their vouchers which will by definition cover less and less of what health care actually costs. In other words, let’s ignore any effort to reign in the skyrocketing costs of health care nationwide in favor of shifting all of those skyrocketing costs directly to seniors. This is a roadmap for disaster.
The CBO said this about the Ryan plan:
Both the level of expected federal spending on Medicare and the uncertainty surrounding that spending would decline, but enrollees’ spending for health care and the uncertainty surrounding that spending would increase.
Under the Roadmap, the value of the voucher would be less than expected Medicare spending per enrollee in 2021, when the voucher program would begin. In addition, Medicare’s current payment rates for providers are lower than those paid by commercial insurers, and the program’s administrative costs are lower than those for individually purchased insurance. Beneficiaries would therefore face higher premiums in the private market for a package of benefits similar to that currently provided by Medicare.
Moreover, the value of the voucher would grow significantly more slowly than CBO expects that Medicare spending per enrollee would grow under current law. Beneficiaries would therefore be likely to purchase less comprehensive health plans or plans more heavily managed than traditional Medicare, resulting in some combination of less use of health care services and less use of technologically advanced treatments than under current law. Beneficiaries would also bear the financial risk for the cost of buying insurance policies or the cost of obtaining health care services beyond what would be covered by their insurance.
As for Social Security, the GOP Roadmap leads to the same privatization dead-end for seniors, who are already reeling from Wall Street excesses and collapse which have decimated their nest-eggs. Once again, just as we saw in President Bush’s failed privatization plan, long-term solvency isn’t the goal. The goal is to turn Social Security over to Wall Street through the creation of Social Security private accounts.
Texas Rep. Jeb Hensarling describes it as a little “re-engineering” of the social contract.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
That “re-engineering” would put your Social Security in the hands of the same Wall Street money managers the federal government just bailed out. What would your Social Security look like now, if we had privatized the system two years ago? Here’s what CAP reported back in 2008, before the worst of the economic collapse…
As a Center for American Progress Action Fund report found, under a Bush-style privatization plan, a October 2008 retiree would have lost $26,000 in the market plunge. If the U.S. stock market had behaved like the Japanese market during the duration of that retiree’s work life, “a private account would have experienced sharp negative returns, losing $70,000 — an effective -3.3 percent net annual rate of return.” And this doesn’t take into account the full plunge of the stock market, which dipped below 7,000 in March 2009.
As the Cunning Realist pointed out, failed investment banks Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers were both “blue chips, the sort of companies that proponents of private accounts insisted any new system would be limited to.” Can you imagine the mess that would have occurred — and the leverage those companies would have held — had not only the financial system’s health, but the retirement accounts of untold seniors, been tied up in them?
The Center for Economic and Policy Research found that, “as a result of the collapse of the housing bubble, the vast majority of baby boomers will be approaching retirement with little wealth outside of Social Security.” Privatization opponents would have had seniors sacrifice that safety net as well.
Destroying Social Security and Medicare, under the guise of deficit reduction, isn’t about creating sound economic policy it’s just more of the same old privatization politics, rewrapped, repackaged and rejected by the American people just two years ago.
Are our collective memories really so short? Because the truth is…this roadmap puts America’s seniors on a highway to hell.
Topics: Uncategorized | 1 Comment »
Budget Breakdown for Seniors
By NCPSSM | February 1, 2010
Policy analysts all over town are pouring over the President’s budget searching for answers about funding levels for their issues and programs. What’s up, what down? The President summed up the budget challenges this morning…
Of course, seniors want to know about Social Security and Medicare. Here is what the White House has to say in it’s Fact Sheet for Seniors:
To support our Nation’s seniors, the Budget will:
Protect Social Security. The President recognizes that Social Security is indispensable to workers, people with disabilities, seniors, and survivors and is probably the most important and most successful program that our country has ever established. Based on current forecasts, Social Security can pay full benefits until 2037. The President is committed to making sure that Social Security is solvent and viable for the American people, now and in the future. He is strongly opposed to privatizing Social Security and looks forward to working in a bipartisan way to preserve it for future generations.
Protect and Improve Medicare. The President recognizes that Medicare is a sacred trust with America’s seniors and supports policies that will strengthen the Medicare program and extend the life of the Medicare trust fund. The Budget includes new Medicare and Medicaid demonstration projects that evaluate reforms to provide higher quality care at lower costs, improve beneficiary education and understanding of benefits offered, and better align provider payments with costs and outcomes. Special emphasis will be placed on demonstrations that improve care coordination for beneficiaries with chronic conditions, that better integrate Medicare and Medicaid benefits for beneficiaries enrolled in both programs, and that provide higher value for dollars spent.
Reduce Social Security Backlogs, Improve Customer Service, and Cut Waste. The Budget proposes $12.5 billion for the Social Security Administration (SSA), an increase of $925 million, or 8 percent, above the 2010 enacted level of $11.6 billion. This amount includes resources to increase staffing in 2011 and will allow SSA to provide services faster with a focus on key service delivery areas, such as processing initial retirement and disability claims, and disability appeals. It will enable SSA to lower the initial disability claims backlog and the appeals hearing backlog. The Budget also dedicates a significant amount of funds to Social Security program integrity efforts so that the right amounts are paid to the right person at the right time.
Fight Waste and Abuse in Medicare and Medicaid. Reducing fraud, waste, and abuse is an important part of restraining spending growth and providing quality service delivery to beneficiaries. In November 2009, the President signed an Executive Order to reduce improper payments by boosting transparency, holding agencies accountable, and creating incentives for compliance. This Budget puts forward a robust set of proposals to strengthen Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP program integrity efforts, including proposals aimed at preventing fraud and abuse before they occur, detecting it as early as possible when it does occur, and vigorously enforcing all penalties and recourses available when fraud is identified. It proposes $250 million in additional resources that, among other things, will help expand the Health Care Fraud Prevention & Enforcement Action Team (HEAT) initiative, a joint effort by the Departments of Health and Human Services and Justice. As a result, the Administration will be better able to minimize inappropriate payments, close loopholes, and provide greater value for beneficiaries and taxpayers.
In addition, to help those most affected by the recession, the Budget will extend emergency assistance to seniors and families with children, Unemployment Insurance benefits, COBRA tax credits, and relief to states and localities to prevent layoffs.
The emergency assistance referenced here is a one-time payment of $250 to seniors who did not receive a Social Security cost-of-living increase for the first time since its creation. This is something seniors desperately need as they continue to struggle thru this economic recession.
Tribune’s Swampland blog has a concise ‘Winners and Losers’ description. Of course, now it’s Congress’ turn to craft budget resolutions of its own. Or as CBS News puts it:
“Staffers all over the Capitol are pouring over each proposed cut and each spending proposal carefully to start picking which battles need to be fought.”
Topics: Budget, Medicare, Social Security | Comments »
Fast-track Commission Derailed in Senate
By NCPSSM | January 26, 2010
… Seniors Applaud today’s Senate Vote Defeating Conrad/Gregg’s Fast Track Commission
Following is our press statement after the vote:
“America’s seniors understand what this commission proposal has been all about from the beginning—finding a way to balance the budget on the back of Social Security. For too long, fiscal hawks have tried to blame Social Security for the nation’s fiscal problems even though the program has not contributed one dime to our nation’s bleak debt and deficit picture. We are thankful the Senate saw through this political fiction. They are to be commended for refusing to turn over their legislative responsibilities to a fast-tracked process that would cut benefits absolutely essential to millions who depend on Social Security.” …Barbara B. Kennelly, President/CEO
National Committee members have been calling, writing, and emailing Congress expressing their opposition to the Conrad/Gregg Commission. The National Committee ran radio, print and internet ads this week and joined other seniors’ advocates to flood the Senate with thousands of letters and phone calls against the Conrad-Gregg Fast Track Commission proposal. They are strongly opposed to any efforts to reduce Social Security benefits in order to balance the federal budget. Social Security represents the bedrock retirement income of nearly every American providing a modest benefit of only $13,800 a year for the average retiree. It is the only source of retirement income for nearly 20 percent of retirees and represents over half the income of nearly two-thirds of beneficiaries.
Next up…White House proposals to create it’s own version of the “Debt” Commission, expected to be announced in the State of the Union address tomorrow night. More on that to follow!
Topics: Barbara B. Kennelly, Medicare, Social Security, entitlement reform | Comments »
« Previous Entries