Super Committee Members Say The Only Deficit Deal They’ll Make Is Benefit Cuts for the Middle Class & Lower Taxes for the Rich
The Republican supercommittee Co-Chair couldn?t be clearer about his party?s priorities for deficit reduction?the GOP will only agree to a deficit plan that includes massive cuts in middle-class benefits combined with even lower taxes for the wealthy. With just days left before its deadline, it is obvious that the only deal that will come from this supercommittee is one that slashes benefits to middle class Americans while cutting taxes for the rich. In other words, a doubling down of the failed fiscal policies which got us here in the first place.You?ve got to give Rep. Jeb Hensarling credit. At least, he?s made the GOP?s position crystal clear — there will be no discussion of shared sacrifice or a balanced approach in this supercommittee. With just days left before the committee?s deadline Hensarling proudly and defiantly told CNBC the GOP won?t support adding even one penny of new net revenue. Here?s TPM?s coverage:
?We have gone as far as we feel we can go,? Hensarling said. ?We put $250 billion of what is known as ?static revenue? on the table, but only if we can bring down rates [but] any penny of increased static revenue is a step in the wrong direction. We can only balance that with pro-growth reform and frankly the Democrats have never agreed to that?. if we can?t get any type of reforms in health care, which has helped drive the nation towards insolvency, then, no, there?s no reason to frankly put any static revenues on the table.?When Hensarling says ?static,? he means revenue that will actually, predictably come into the Treasury. Republicans claim in a Laffer-ite way that their preferred tax policy will create enough economic growth to raise revenues even if the math says it won?t. Democrats reject that kind of analysis. In a moment of candor, Hensarling said Republicans would fight to make sure they never have to harm their own interests. If they refuse to raise taxes and the committee fails then they?ll also focus their efforts on changing the enforcement mechanism ? put in place to force both parties to compromise ? to make sure that the part they don?t like gets changed before it kicks in in January 2013.
As a reminder, here is what the GOP tax plan offered in the supercommittee actually includes:
?the Republican proposal would significantly shift tax burdens from high-income to lower- and middle-income taxpayers. High-income taxpayers would benefit enormously from the proposed cut in tax rates, while lower- and middle-income taxpayers would suffer disproportionately from the proposed reductions in tax expenditures, since the plan shields the main tax expenditure for the highest-income Americans ? the highly preferential treatment of capital gains and dividend income. Not a First Step Toward Balanced Deficit Reduction- Center for Budget and Policy Priorities
So while some Democrats on the supercommittee have already offered up billions in cuts to benefits for millions of average Americans–even that capitulation isn?t enough. Republicans want even more benefit cuts for the middle class to pay for even lower taxes for the wealthy. The only deal that these not-so supercommittee members will sign onto is yet another bad deal for working Americans who?ve already sacrificed in an economy that benefits the wealthiest among us. Permanent tax cuts for millionaires (passed either now or by yet another committee later) and gutting Medicare is the only offer Hensarling says the GOP will accept:
Rep. Jeb Hensarling said Tuesday Republicans will not alter their supercommittee offer until Democrats put forward a plan to reform entitlements. ?What I haven?t seen, again, is a commitment to structural reform of a program that I believe fundamentally is beginning to ration health care for my parents, would not be around for my children and is helping drive our country into insolvency,? Hensarling told reporters.
If this is the best proposal this supercommittee can come up with then members should just WALK AWAY. Working Americans have made it clear they don?t support cutting vital programs like Social Security and Medicare in the name of deficit reduction. They know these programs didn?t cause this economic mess but they certainly do improve the lives of the very people who?ve suffered most in this economy. In fact, the vast majority of Americans want the wealthy to finally pay their share through higher taxes, not lower.Unfortunately, it?s clear America?s plan is not the deal even being discussed by the supercommittee. Today, Washington?s fiscal hawks even went so far as to promise supercommittee members that, you, the American people will support their efforts targeting the middle-class for benefit cuts:
“This group can do it. And they need to know, if they are bold, if they are brave, if they go big, we will stand with them, and the American people will stand with them,” said Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D.
We know the average working American won?t stand by this time. The anger and frustration we hear every day is growing. But clearly Washington still hasn?t heard it. So, now is the time for you to ensure your voice cuts through Congressional efforts to destroy Social Security and Medicare under the guise of deficit reduction. Don?t let Washington be deluded into believing that it?s OK?you really won?t mind if Congress destroys America?s safety net.
Use our Legislative Action Center to Send your Member an Email
Or
Make a Call Using our National Committee Hotline
1-800-998-0180
Super Committee Sleight of Hand
The Congressional Super Committee has just over a week to present its deficit reduction plan. Incredibly, it appears any illusion of finding a proposal with ?shared sacrifices? or a ?balanced approach is just that?an illusion. So far, the only agreement that has support from members of both parties is that middle-class Americans will face benefit cuts immediately. When it comes to tax loopholes for corporations and tax breaks for the wealthy it appears some on the super committee would rather pass that buck on to yet another committee(s) to worry about sometime next year. Simply put?the middle-class sacrifices again. The wealthy are let off the hook again.
With a little over a week left to reach a deal, members of the Congressional deficit reduction panel are looking for an escape hatch that would let them strike an accord on revenue levels but delay until next year tough decisions about exactly how to raise taxes. ?There could be a two-step process that would hopefully give us pro-growth tax reform,? Representative Jeb Hensarling of Texas, the top Republican on the panel, said Sunday on the CNN program ?State of the Union.? Deficit Panel Seeks to Defer Details on Raising Taxes- New York Times
What are those ?pro-growth? tax reforms Super Committee members want the tax writing committees in Congress to consider, next year? A permanent tax cut for the wealthy, even below the Bush tax cut rate, higher taxes for low- and middle-income taxpayers, and taking revenues off the table for future deficit reduction.
?the Republican proposal would significantly shift tax burdens from high-income to lower- and middle-income taxpayers. High-income taxpayers would benefit enormously from the proposed cut in tax rates, while lower- and middle-income taxpayers would suffer disproportionately from the proposed reductions in tax expenditures, since the plan shields the main tax expenditure for the highest-income Americans ? the highly preferential treatment of capital gains and dividend income. Not a First Step Toward Balanced Deficit Reduction- Center for Budget and Policy Priorities
This Super Committee sleight of hand would guarantee even more sacrifice will made by those who can least afford it yet any possible sacrifice by the nation?s wealthiest is deferred, and in this political climate, likely ignored. If you have any doubt about the chances that true tax reform would even be considered next year, rest assured, those chances are virtually nil. You don?t have to believe us. Even the author of the no tax pledge isn?t worried:
Grover G. Norquist, the president of Americans for Tax Reform, whose antitax pledge has been signed by most Republicans in Congress, said in an interview, ?I am not losing any sleep? over the Republicans? latest proposal. Mr. Norquist said he was confident that, ?at the end of the day, the Republican House will not pass a tax increase.” ?As a face-saving measure,? Mr. Norquist said, the deficit reduction panel ?could give lots of instructions to the tax-writing committees.? In complying with those instructions, he said, the House and the Senate could pass very different bills.
National Committee President/CEO, Max Richtman, has urged seniors to get involved now. Write, call or use Facebook and Twitter to contact their Members of Congress.
?Some members of the Congressional Super Committee apparently believe they?ve found a way to dodge their full responsibilities and continue Washington?s failed fiscal policies by passing more benefit cuts for the middle class this year but delaying tax reform until next year. Super Committee members of both parties appear eager to cut billions from Medicare, and change the COLA formula to cut Social Security benefits for all current and future beneficiaries. Yet, incredibly, some on the Super Committee are still looking for ways to protect the wealthy from paying their fair share toward deficit reduction. If the Super Committee employs this escape hatch political strategy then their mythology of ?shared sacrifice? and ?balanced approached? will finally be laid bare for all to see. America?s middle class will be offered up as sacrificial lambs at the altar of deficit reduction. This Super Committee sleight of hand would guarantee that wealth and politics will trump the income and health security of America?s seniors, both now and in the future. Outside of the Beltway, the debate is over. Over 70% of the American people of all ages and political stripes soundly rejected the idea that cuts in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid should be part of a deficit reduction package and these citizens have said they?ll hold Congress accountable for policies which continue to target the middle-class and poor.?Max Richtman, President/CEO
Boston Rally is the Tip of the Iceberg
More than 3,000 people converged on Boston this week to demand that Congress reject cuts to vital programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid in the name of deficit reduction.National Committee President/CEO, Max Richtman, told the crowd ” Get engaged?today not tomorrow– because time is running out. Your presence here in Boston will hopefully become the rallying call that spreads nationwide”. We think it already has…After the rally, protestors jammed the streets of Boston marching to the offices of Senators John Kerry and Scott Brown where they delivered thousand of postcards telling them “Hands Off – NO Cuts”.
Congress Should Reject Benefit Cuts Whether or Not GOP Agrees to New Revenue
Anger at Potential Cuts Boiling Over Outside Beltway
Responding to press reports that the Congressional ?Super Committee? is considering benefit cuts in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, Max Richtman, President/CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM) called on Congress today to reject cutting benefits to middle-class and poor Americans regardless of whether the GOP agrees to new government revenue. The ?Super Committee? is scheduled to report its proposal to cut the deficit by November 23.
?The people who talk about ?shared sacrifice? pretend that all Americans sit down at the deficit debate table on an equal footing. The fact is the incomes of middle-class workers have stagnated for three decades, and those of the wealthiest one percent have increased by over 275%. The Super Committee should reject harmful benefit cuts touching the lives of virtually every American family whether or not Republicans agree to increase government revenue. In Washington, ?shared sacrifice? and ?balanced approach? have become code for expecting everyday Americans to compound their sacrifice in the hopes that our nation?s corporations and wealthy might also be asked to give up a tax break here or there. The middle-class and poor in our nation have sacrificed enough. Outside of the Beltway, the debate is over. Over 70% of the American people reject the idea that cuts in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid should be part of a deficit reduction package and these citizens have said they?ll hold Congress accountable. It?s time for them to listen to their constituents.? Max Richtman, NCPSSM President/CEO
What Journalism USED to be…
Reading so much main-stream media coverage of Social Security and Medicare (or truly lack thereof) each day has honestly proven to be a very depressing experience. The Washington echo-chamber is clearly in full force these days (remember the run-up to the Iraq war?) and anti-Social Security foes appear to be reaping the rewards of a $Billion dollar investment.That’s why reading a story that actually shows some historical memory, independent thought and analysis beyond quotes offered in the latest Pete Peterson funded News Release is a welcome breath of fresh air.Put this Salon story at the top of you “must share” list today!
How the rich created the Social Security ?crisis?
Now and then, George W. Bush told the unvarnished truth?most often in jest. Consider the GOP presidential nominee?s Oct. 20, 2000, speech at a high-society $800-a-plate fundraiser at New York?s Waldorf-Astoria. Resplendent in a black tailcoat, waistcoat and white bow tie, Bush greeted the swells with evident satisfaction.?This is an impressive crowd,? he said. ?The haves and the have-mores. Some people call you the elites; I call you my base.?Any questions?Eight months later, President Bush delivered sweeping tax cuts to that patrician base. Given current hysteria over what arecent Washington Post article called ?the runaway national debt,? it requires an act of historical memory to recall that the Bush administration rationalized reducing taxes on inherited wealth because paying down the debt too soon might roil financial markets.Eleven years later, the Post warns in a ballyhooed article, reading like something out of Joseph Heller?s ?Catch-22,? that Social Security?the 75-year-old bedrock of millions of Americans? retirement hopes?has ?passed a treacherous milestone,? gone ?cash negative,? and ?is sucking money out of the Treasury.?Anybody who discerns a relationship between these events, that is, between a decade of keeping the ?have-mores?? yachts and Lear jets running smoothly and a manufactured crisis supposedly threatening grandma?s monthly Social Security check must be some kind of radical leftist.That, or somebody skeptical of the decades-long propaganda war against America?s most efficient, successful and popular social insurance program. It?s an effort that?s falsely persuaded millions of younger Americans that Social Security is in its last days and made crying wolf a test of ?seriousness? among Beltway courtier-pundits like the Post?s Lori Montgomery, who concocted an imaginary front page emergency out of a relatively meaningless actuarial event.All in service, alas, of a single unstated premise: The ?have-mores? have made off with grandma?s money fair and square. They have no intention of paying it back. That?s the only possible interpretation of the Post?s admonition that ?the $2.6trillion Social Security trust fund will provide little relief. The government has borrowed every cent and now must raise taxes, cut spending or borrow more heavily from outside investors to keep benefit checks flowing.?Little relief? In fact, the law?s working precisely as intended. After 28 years of generating huge payroll tax surpluses to cover the baby boomers? retirement benefits, the system must now begin to draw upon those funds to help pay current benefits?the vast majority still covered by current payroll tax receipts.?Rather than posing any sort of crisis,?explains Dean Baker of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, ?this is exactly what had been planned when Congress last made major changes to the program in 1983 based on the recommendations of the Greenspan commission.?Again, this is the beneficiaries? money, invested by the Social Security trustees in U.S. Treasury bonds drawn upon ?the full faith and credit of the United States.? Far from being ?meaningless IOUs? as right-wing cant has it, they represent the same legally binding promise between the U.S. government and its people that it makes with Wall Street banks and the Chinese government, which also hold Treasury Bonds.A promise not very different, the Daily Howler?s Bob Somerby points out, from the one implicit in your bank statement or 401K (if you?re lucky enough to have one). Did you think the money was buried in earthen jars filled with gold bullion and precious stones?Raise taxes, cut spending or borrow? What other options does the U.S. government, or any government, have?On his New York Times blog, Paul Krugmandissects the Catch-22 logic behind the Post?s bogus crisis. You can?t simultaneously argue ?that the trust fund is meaningless, because SS is just part of the budget, then claim that some crisis arises when receipts fall short of payments, because SS is a standalone program.? For practical purposes, it?s got to be one or the other.So is Social Security a ?Ponzi scheme?? No, it?s group insurance, not an investment. You die young, somebody else benefits. Its finances have been open public record since 1936. Do fewer workers support each beneficiary? Sure, but who cares? It?s denominated in dollars, not a head count. The boomers were nearing 40 when the Reagan administration fixed the actuarial tables. No surprises there.Are longer life expectancies screwing up the numbers? Not really. Most of the rise is explained by lower infant and child mortality, not by old-timers overstaying their welcome. Kevin Drumpoints out that gradually raising the payroll tax 1 percent and doubling the earnings cap over 20 years would make Social Security solvent forever.But that?s not good enough for the more hidebound members of the $800-a-plate set. See, over 75 years Social Security has provided a measure of dignity, security and freedom to working Americans that just annoys the hell out of their betters.
–Arkansas Democrat-Gazette columnist Gene Lyons is a National Magazine Award winner and co-author of “The Hunting of the President” (St. Martin’s Press, 2000). You can e-mail Lyons at [email protected].More Gene Lyons
Super Committee Members Say The Only Deficit Deal They’ll Make Is Benefit Cuts for the Middle Class & Lower Taxes for the Rich
The Republican supercommittee Co-Chair couldn?t be clearer about his party?s priorities for deficit reduction?the GOP will only agree to a deficit plan that includes massive cuts in middle-class benefits combined with even lower taxes for the wealthy. With just days left before its deadline, it is obvious that the only deal that will come from this supercommittee is one that slashes benefits to middle class Americans while cutting taxes for the rich. In other words, a doubling down of the failed fiscal policies which got us here in the first place.You?ve got to give Rep. Jeb Hensarling credit. At least, he?s made the GOP?s position crystal clear — there will be no discussion of shared sacrifice or a balanced approach in this supercommittee. With just days left before the committee?s deadline Hensarling proudly and defiantly told CNBC the GOP won?t support adding even one penny of new net revenue. Here?s TPM?s coverage:
?We have gone as far as we feel we can go,? Hensarling said. ?We put $250 billion of what is known as ?static revenue? on the table, but only if we can bring down rates [but] any penny of increased static revenue is a step in the wrong direction. We can only balance that with pro-growth reform and frankly the Democrats have never agreed to that?. if we can?t get any type of reforms in health care, which has helped drive the nation towards insolvency, then, no, there?s no reason to frankly put any static revenues on the table.?When Hensarling says ?static,? he means revenue that will actually, predictably come into the Treasury. Republicans claim in a Laffer-ite way that their preferred tax policy will create enough economic growth to raise revenues even if the math says it won?t. Democrats reject that kind of analysis. In a moment of candor, Hensarling said Republicans would fight to make sure they never have to harm their own interests. If they refuse to raise taxes and the committee fails then they?ll also focus their efforts on changing the enforcement mechanism ? put in place to force both parties to compromise ? to make sure that the part they don?t like gets changed before it kicks in in January 2013.
As a reminder, here is what the GOP tax plan offered in the supercommittee actually includes:
?the Republican proposal would significantly shift tax burdens from high-income to lower- and middle-income taxpayers. High-income taxpayers would benefit enormously from the proposed cut in tax rates, while lower- and middle-income taxpayers would suffer disproportionately from the proposed reductions in tax expenditures, since the plan shields the main tax expenditure for the highest-income Americans ? the highly preferential treatment of capital gains and dividend income. Not a First Step Toward Balanced Deficit Reduction- Center for Budget and Policy Priorities
So while some Democrats on the supercommittee have already offered up billions in cuts to benefits for millions of average Americans–even that capitulation isn?t enough. Republicans want even more benefit cuts for the middle class to pay for even lower taxes for the wealthy. The only deal that these not-so supercommittee members will sign onto is yet another bad deal for working Americans who?ve already sacrificed in an economy that benefits the wealthiest among us. Permanent tax cuts for millionaires (passed either now or by yet another committee later) and gutting Medicare is the only offer Hensarling says the GOP will accept:
Rep. Jeb Hensarling said Tuesday Republicans will not alter their supercommittee offer until Democrats put forward a plan to reform entitlements. ?What I haven?t seen, again, is a commitment to structural reform of a program that I believe fundamentally is beginning to ration health care for my parents, would not be around for my children and is helping drive our country into insolvency,? Hensarling told reporters.
If this is the best proposal this supercommittee can come up with then members should just WALK AWAY. Working Americans have made it clear they don?t support cutting vital programs like Social Security and Medicare in the name of deficit reduction. They know these programs didn?t cause this economic mess but they certainly do improve the lives of the very people who?ve suffered most in this economy. In fact, the vast majority of Americans want the wealthy to finally pay their share through higher taxes, not lower.Unfortunately, it?s clear America?s plan is not the deal even being discussed by the supercommittee. Today, Washington?s fiscal hawks even went so far as to promise supercommittee members that, you, the American people will support their efforts targeting the middle-class for benefit cuts:
“This group can do it. And they need to know, if they are bold, if they are brave, if they go big, we will stand with them, and the American people will stand with them,” said Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D.
We know the average working American won?t stand by this time. The anger and frustration we hear every day is growing. But clearly Washington still hasn?t heard it. So, now is the time for you to ensure your voice cuts through Congressional efforts to destroy Social Security and Medicare under the guise of deficit reduction. Don?t let Washington be deluded into believing that it?s OK?you really won?t mind if Congress destroys America?s safety net.
Use our Legislative Action Center to Send your Member an Email
Or
Make a Call Using our National Committee Hotline
1-800-998-0180
Super Committee Sleight of Hand
The Congressional Super Committee has just over a week to present its deficit reduction plan. Incredibly, it appears any illusion of finding a proposal with ?shared sacrifices? or a ?balanced approach is just that?an illusion. So far, the only agreement that has support from members of both parties is that middle-class Americans will face benefit cuts immediately. When it comes to tax loopholes for corporations and tax breaks for the wealthy it appears some on the super committee would rather pass that buck on to yet another committee(s) to worry about sometime next year. Simply put?the middle-class sacrifices again. The wealthy are let off the hook again.
With a little over a week left to reach a deal, members of the Congressional deficit reduction panel are looking for an escape hatch that would let them strike an accord on revenue levels but delay until next year tough decisions about exactly how to raise taxes. ?There could be a two-step process that would hopefully give us pro-growth tax reform,? Representative Jeb Hensarling of Texas, the top Republican on the panel, said Sunday on the CNN program ?State of the Union.? Deficit Panel Seeks to Defer Details on Raising Taxes- New York Times
What are those ?pro-growth? tax reforms Super Committee members want the tax writing committees in Congress to consider, next year? A permanent tax cut for the wealthy, even below the Bush tax cut rate, higher taxes for low- and middle-income taxpayers, and taking revenues off the table for future deficit reduction.
?the Republican proposal would significantly shift tax burdens from high-income to lower- and middle-income taxpayers. High-income taxpayers would benefit enormously from the proposed cut in tax rates, while lower- and middle-income taxpayers would suffer disproportionately from the proposed reductions in tax expenditures, since the plan shields the main tax expenditure for the highest-income Americans ? the highly preferential treatment of capital gains and dividend income. Not a First Step Toward Balanced Deficit Reduction- Center for Budget and Policy Priorities
This Super Committee sleight of hand would guarantee even more sacrifice will made by those who can least afford it yet any possible sacrifice by the nation?s wealthiest is deferred, and in this political climate, likely ignored. If you have any doubt about the chances that true tax reform would even be considered next year, rest assured, those chances are virtually nil. You don?t have to believe us. Even the author of the no tax pledge isn?t worried:
Grover G. Norquist, the president of Americans for Tax Reform, whose antitax pledge has been signed by most Republicans in Congress, said in an interview, ?I am not losing any sleep? over the Republicans? latest proposal. Mr. Norquist said he was confident that, ?at the end of the day, the Republican House will not pass a tax increase.” ?As a face-saving measure,? Mr. Norquist said, the deficit reduction panel ?could give lots of instructions to the tax-writing committees.? In complying with those instructions, he said, the House and the Senate could pass very different bills.
National Committee President/CEO, Max Richtman, has urged seniors to get involved now. Write, call or use Facebook and Twitter to contact their Members of Congress.
?Some members of the Congressional Super Committee apparently believe they?ve found a way to dodge their full responsibilities and continue Washington?s failed fiscal policies by passing more benefit cuts for the middle class this year but delaying tax reform until next year. Super Committee members of both parties appear eager to cut billions from Medicare, and change the COLA formula to cut Social Security benefits for all current and future beneficiaries. Yet, incredibly, some on the Super Committee are still looking for ways to protect the wealthy from paying their fair share toward deficit reduction. If the Super Committee employs this escape hatch political strategy then their mythology of ?shared sacrifice? and ?balanced approached? will finally be laid bare for all to see. America?s middle class will be offered up as sacrificial lambs at the altar of deficit reduction. This Super Committee sleight of hand would guarantee that wealth and politics will trump the income and health security of America?s seniors, both now and in the future. Outside of the Beltway, the debate is over. Over 70% of the American people of all ages and political stripes soundly rejected the idea that cuts in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid should be part of a deficit reduction package and these citizens have said they?ll hold Congress accountable for policies which continue to target the middle-class and poor.?Max Richtman, President/CEO
Boston Rally is the Tip of the Iceberg
More than 3,000 people converged on Boston this week to demand that Congress reject cuts to vital programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid in the name of deficit reduction.National Committee President/CEO, Max Richtman, told the crowd ” Get engaged?today not tomorrow– because time is running out. Your presence here in Boston will hopefully become the rallying call that spreads nationwide”. We think it already has…After the rally, protestors jammed the streets of Boston marching to the offices of Senators John Kerry and Scott Brown where they delivered thousand of postcards telling them “Hands Off – NO Cuts”.
Congress Should Reject Benefit Cuts Whether or Not GOP Agrees to New Revenue
Anger at Potential Cuts Boiling Over Outside Beltway
Responding to press reports that the Congressional ?Super Committee? is considering benefit cuts in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, Max Richtman, President/CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM) called on Congress today to reject cutting benefits to middle-class and poor Americans regardless of whether the GOP agrees to new government revenue. The ?Super Committee? is scheduled to report its proposal to cut the deficit by November 23.
?The people who talk about ?shared sacrifice? pretend that all Americans sit down at the deficit debate table on an equal footing. The fact is the incomes of middle-class workers have stagnated for three decades, and those of the wealthiest one percent have increased by over 275%. The Super Committee should reject harmful benefit cuts touching the lives of virtually every American family whether or not Republicans agree to increase government revenue. In Washington, ?shared sacrifice? and ?balanced approach? have become code for expecting everyday Americans to compound their sacrifice in the hopes that our nation?s corporations and wealthy might also be asked to give up a tax break here or there. The middle-class and poor in our nation have sacrificed enough. Outside of the Beltway, the debate is over. Over 70% of the American people reject the idea that cuts in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid should be part of a deficit reduction package and these citizens have said they?ll hold Congress accountable. It?s time for them to listen to their constituents.? Max Richtman, NCPSSM President/CEO
What Journalism USED to be…
Reading so much main-stream media coverage of Social Security and Medicare (or truly lack thereof) each day has honestly proven to be a very depressing experience. The Washington echo-chamber is clearly in full force these days (remember the run-up to the Iraq war?) and anti-Social Security foes appear to be reaping the rewards of a $Billion dollar investment.That’s why reading a story that actually shows some historical memory, independent thought and analysis beyond quotes offered in the latest Pete Peterson funded News Release is a welcome breath of fresh air.Put this Salon story at the top of you “must share” list today!
How the rich created the Social Security ?crisis?
Now and then, George W. Bush told the unvarnished truth?most often in jest. Consider the GOP presidential nominee?s Oct. 20, 2000, speech at a high-society $800-a-plate fundraiser at New York?s Waldorf-Astoria. Resplendent in a black tailcoat, waistcoat and white bow tie, Bush greeted the swells with evident satisfaction.?This is an impressive crowd,? he said. ?The haves and the have-mores. Some people call you the elites; I call you my base.?Any questions?Eight months later, President Bush delivered sweeping tax cuts to that patrician base. Given current hysteria over what arecent Washington Post article called ?the runaway national debt,? it requires an act of historical memory to recall that the Bush administration rationalized reducing taxes on inherited wealth because paying down the debt too soon might roil financial markets.Eleven years later, the Post warns in a ballyhooed article, reading like something out of Joseph Heller?s ?Catch-22,? that Social Security?the 75-year-old bedrock of millions of Americans? retirement hopes?has ?passed a treacherous milestone,? gone ?cash negative,? and ?is sucking money out of the Treasury.?Anybody who discerns a relationship between these events, that is, between a decade of keeping the ?have-mores?? yachts and Lear jets running smoothly and a manufactured crisis supposedly threatening grandma?s monthly Social Security check must be some kind of radical leftist.That, or somebody skeptical of the decades-long propaganda war against America?s most efficient, successful and popular social insurance program. It?s an effort that?s falsely persuaded millions of younger Americans that Social Security is in its last days and made crying wolf a test of ?seriousness? among Beltway courtier-pundits like the Post?s Lori Montgomery, who concocted an imaginary front page emergency out of a relatively meaningless actuarial event.All in service, alas, of a single unstated premise: The ?have-mores? have made off with grandma?s money fair and square. They have no intention of paying it back. That?s the only possible interpretation of the Post?s admonition that ?the $2.6trillion Social Security trust fund will provide little relief. The government has borrowed every cent and now must raise taxes, cut spending or borrow more heavily from outside investors to keep benefit checks flowing.?Little relief? In fact, the law?s working precisely as intended. After 28 years of generating huge payroll tax surpluses to cover the baby boomers? retirement benefits, the system must now begin to draw upon those funds to help pay current benefits?the vast majority still covered by current payroll tax receipts.?Rather than posing any sort of crisis,?explains Dean Baker of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, ?this is exactly what had been planned when Congress last made major changes to the program in 1983 based on the recommendations of the Greenspan commission.?Again, this is the beneficiaries? money, invested by the Social Security trustees in U.S. Treasury bonds drawn upon ?the full faith and credit of the United States.? Far from being ?meaningless IOUs? as right-wing cant has it, they represent the same legally binding promise between the U.S. government and its people that it makes with Wall Street banks and the Chinese government, which also hold Treasury Bonds.A promise not very different, the Daily Howler?s Bob Somerby points out, from the one implicit in your bank statement or 401K (if you?re lucky enough to have one). Did you think the money was buried in earthen jars filled with gold bullion and precious stones?Raise taxes, cut spending or borrow? What other options does the U.S. government, or any government, have?On his New York Times blog, Paul Krugmandissects the Catch-22 logic behind the Post?s bogus crisis. You can?t simultaneously argue ?that the trust fund is meaningless, because SS is just part of the budget, then claim that some crisis arises when receipts fall short of payments, because SS is a standalone program.? For practical purposes, it?s got to be one or the other.So is Social Security a ?Ponzi scheme?? No, it?s group insurance, not an investment. You die young, somebody else benefits. Its finances have been open public record since 1936. Do fewer workers support each beneficiary? Sure, but who cares? It?s denominated in dollars, not a head count. The boomers were nearing 40 when the Reagan administration fixed the actuarial tables. No surprises there.Are longer life expectancies screwing up the numbers? Not really. Most of the rise is explained by lower infant and child mortality, not by old-timers overstaying their welcome. Kevin Drumpoints out that gradually raising the payroll tax 1 percent and doubling the earnings cap over 20 years would make Social Security solvent forever.But that?s not good enough for the more hidebound members of the $800-a-plate set. See, over 75 years Social Security has provided a measure of dignity, security and freedom to working Americans that just annoys the hell out of their betters.
–Arkansas Democrat-Gazette columnist Gene Lyons is a National Magazine Award winner and co-author of “The Hunting of the President” (St. Martin’s Press, 2000). You can e-mail Lyons at [email protected].More Gene Lyons