Politics Plus

Social Security is at risk, and we need to act to protect it.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi holds the fate of Social Security in her hands.

The Speaker must use her power to make three appointments to President Obama’s Deficit Commission to name lawmakers who will vote against raising the retirement age and re-computing the cost of living. If she doesn’t, President Obama’s Deficit Commission will recommend both of these things. The result will be reduced Social Security benefits for future retirees who will need every penny of retirement income they can get.

There’s no question that the President’s Commission has its sights aimed at Social Security. Alan Simpson, Obama’s Republican co-chair, famously trashed AARP for its advocacy for seniors and supported Social Security privatization. He lays the blame for the deficit on seniors: "How did we get to a point in America where you get to a certain age in life, regardless of net worth or income, and you’re ‘entitled’?"

The answer, of course, is that Americans earn those benefits after a lifetime of contributions. Since most of us will eventually grow old (if we’re not there already), this attempt to frame the issue in us-versus-them terms is puzzling. Simpson’s prejudices aside, seniors have much lower average incomes than working-age Americans, leaving most dependent on Social Security benefits that are less than what minimum-wage workers earn. That’s why polls show that most people — Republicans and Democrats — are happy to pay modestly higher payroll taxes to preserve Social Security benefits.

You would hardly think this was an option listening to Obama’s appointees. Alice Rivlin, a Democratic appointee, has already announced that her answer to the deficit includes raising the Social Security retirement age. This is a benefit cut, plain and simple. The two-year increase we’re going through right now reduces monthly benefits for a senior who retires at 65 by 13%, or $150. Raising the retirement age further, from 67 to 70, would reduce benefits by 30%, and the pain would be borne by younger workers, not today’s seniors – so we wouldn’t be doing our children or grandchildren any favors.

With fewer than half of workers on a path to a secure retirement, Social Security benefits are needed now more than ever. And despite alarmist attempts to portray Social Security as a system in crisis, there’s no reason its benefits shouldn’t be there for future generations. Social Security has a long-term shortfall equal to just 0.7% of GDP. To put this in perspective, this is only slightly more than the cost of extending the Bush tax cuts to the top 1% of taxpayers. The system can be brought into long-term balance by modest revenue adjustments, without cutting critically-needed benefits.

The Deficit Commission was set up with rules requiring a vote by 14 of the 18 commissioners for any recommendation. Blocking cuts to Social Security thus requires five commissioners. It is fair to assume that every Republican will support such cuts, since opposition to "entitlements" is part of their party mantra (though it does not extend to entitlements that take the form of tax breaks like lower capital gains rates or mortgage interest deductions for second homes).

So where will five votes against Social Security cuts come from? One vote will be union leader Andy Stern’s. He has announced that his special role on the Commission will be to defend Social Security. Sen. Dick Durbin should be a vote against such cuts, since he is among a handful of truly progressive senators who understand how hard it is to survive – as one-third of retired Americans do – with no income beyond Social Security.

Sen. Max Baucus is a wild card. He opposed the Conrad-Gregg deficit commission bill because, he said, it put a big target on the back of Social Security. But to say that Baucus is not reliably progressive is to state the obvious. He has made deals to help pass the Bush tax cuts for the rich, to kill the public option in the health care bill, and to enact a series of business tax cuts in the Bush and Obama stimulus bills that have left progressives groaning.

That leaves Speaker Pelosi’s three appointments. If even one of her appointees is not unshakably opposed to Social Security benefit cuts, it could be disastrous. If two of Pelosi’s appointees are not iron-clad opponents of raising the retirement age, the Commission will recommend it, Congress will take it up swiftly after the November election, and the right wing will have won another victory, cutting another big hole in the safety net… [emphasis added]

Inserted from <Huffington Post>

Please call Nancy Pelosi’s office and tell them that ALL of her appointments to the Deficit Commission must be staunch supporters of Social Security who oppose raising the age requirement and cutting the benefits.  Tell them that the way to manage Social Security is to raise the cap, so the rich will pay their fare share.  Tell them that, through the years of “trickle down” economics, nothing trickled down.  It all gushed up.  Tell them to balance the budget by cutting welfare for the rich, not by stealing people’s hard earned benefits.

Pelosi’s telephone number is (202) 225-0100.  Or you can contact her through a web form by clicking here.

Please spread this far and wide.  It is too important to ignore.

Here’s a hat tip to Hat-Tip on this, because I saw it at his place before finding it in my daily research this morning.

Brooklyn prosecutors on Monday cleared ACORN of criminal wrongdoing after a four-month probe that began when undercover conservative activists filmed workers giving what appeared to be illegal advice on how to hide money.

While the video by James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles seemed to show three ACORN workers advising a prostitute how to hide ill-gotten gains, the unedited version was not as clear, according to a law enforcement source.

"They edited the tape to meet their agenda," said the source.

O’Keefe and Giles – who visited ACORN offices in several cities, including its Brooklyn headquarters – stirred controversy when they posted the videos on their Web site.

They were hailed as heroes by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and their footage led several government agencies to temporarily cut funding for ACORN as the prosecutors opened an investigation.

"On Sept. 15, 2009, my office began an investigation into possible criminality on the part of three ACORN employees," Brooklyn District Attorney Charles Hynes said in a one-paragraph statement issued Monday afternoon.

"That investigation is now concluded and no criminality has been found."… [emphasis added]

Inserted from <NY Daily News>

I hope that the idiots in Congress who put their tail between their legs and passed the Defund ACORN Act, a bill of attainder, are properly chagrined that they participating in smearing this fine organization on the word of a GOP criminal.

On the 27th of last month, I proclaimed Jim Bunning a GOP sweetheart.  The GOP continues to use him to sow havoc in the most despicable way!

Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY) is already infamous for blocking a temporary extension of unemployment and COBRA benefits for out of work Americans. But included in that package is legislation to prevent a mandatory pay cut for doctors–and by standing in its way, he’s triggered a 21 percent fee reduction to doctors seeing Medicare patients starting today.

Republicans say they support a temporary measure to avoid the cuts, but they have been unable [unwilling] to rein in Bunning, and, as such, the Senate has failed to act on a House bill that staves them off.

The American Medical Association warned of this last week: "A Medicare meltdown now seems certain, as the U.S. Senate has left early for the weekend, abandoning seniors, military families and baby boomers," reads an AMA statement from Friday. "The Senate failed to repeal the Medicare physician payment formula that will cause a drastic 21 percent payment cut to physicians who care for Medicare and TRICARE patients. On Monday, the 21 percent cut goes into effect, forcing many physicians to limit the number of Medicare and TRICARE patients they see in order to keep their practice doors open."

On a conference call with reporters this afternoon Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) put it this way: "By his actions, Bunning has prevented people from receiving Unemployment, health care access, transportation projects from going forward, and Doctors who provide Medicare services from getting paid."

Today, for the seventh time, Bunning objected to a request for unanimous consent to temporarily extend benefits. In addition to cutting doctor’s fees, his exploitation of the Senate’s filibuster rules has cost thousands of out-of-work Americans their benefits and has even put thousands of federal employees out of work.

Democrats hope to resolve the issues in a longer-term way by passing jobs bill (which includes benefits extensions and a so-called "doc-fix" for Medicare reimbursement rates) next week. In the mean time they’re bracing for Bunning and the GOP to take as many steps as possible to delay legislative progress… [emphasis added]

Inserted from <TPM>

Lawrence O’Donnell and Chris Hayes discussed the ripple effects.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The GOP strategy here is to create public dissatisfaction in the hope that they can blame Democrats for their perfidy.  Rachel Maddow covers who this hurts and ties it in with GOP obstruction.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Personally I think that Bunning is getting tired of his roll as target to cover for the GOP leaders orchestrating this outrage.  He’s clearly getting quite testy!

Since last week, Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY) has been obstructing legislation to extend unemployment benefits, telling Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) “tough sh*t” when Merkley pleaded with Bunning to drop the hold on the Senate floor. Bunning blocked the measure because of “a dispute over how [the bill] should be funded,” leaving 400,000 Americans in limbo after the benefits expired at midnight on Sunday. Today, an “angry” Bunning refused to answer questions about his hold, running away from an ABC reporter and taking refuge in a senator’s only elevator. Shouting “Excuse me!,” Bunning would not say whether he was concerned about people losing their benefits…

…Off camera, when ABC producer Z. Byron Wolf tried to engage Bunning, he said, “I’m not talking to anybody” and gave Wolf the middle finger…

Inserted from <Think Progress>

In a Politics Plus exclusive, Bunning was photographed in the act of giving the finger, as seen above. 😉