Obama Faces Democratic Opposition To Social Security Cuts

New York Times:

President Obama is eager to seek a bipartisan solution to ensure the long-term solvency of Social Security, people who have spoken with him say, but he is running into opposition from his party's left and from Democratic Congressional leaders who contend that his political capital would be better spent on health care and other priorities.

Read the whole story: New York Times

Comments

[peacegurl48]

I have contributed thousands and thousands of dollars over 38 years of work and I want my money if I ever get to retire. This is "entitlement" that American workers have EARNED.

[lysistrata]

SS has a huge surplus, nothing wrong with SS. To President Obama, hands off SS, if it is not broke don't fix it.

The wars and bailouts should not be financed with payroll deductions the rich don't have to pay.

[research]

The GOP always says the want a Flat Tax.

Here's their opportunity.

Remove the income cap on SS.

[LuckyLeif]

Bottom line truth: $11 Trillion in the hole now, and $45 Trillion of unfunded liabilities near term. Radical fiscal overhaul required to avoid bankruptcy, according to former Comptroller General, a Democrat:

http://allanerickson.wordpress.com/2009/02/23/david-walker-just-told-the-president-the-real-score/

[research]

Kucinich is pushing to put the federal reserve under control of the treasury.

It's a great idea.

[jeffgolin]

It's a shame to see Obama"s bipartisanship offensive turn into Republican bootlicking, all because of the tyranny of the small minority that the Senate rules allow. How are we voters supposed to express our will if the losers keep running our government?

[jeffgolin]

This wimpness is turning Obama into Clinton II, and when it fails the Republicans will send in Newt and Cokie Roberts to say we told you so, as they have already starting to do, to declare a new Contract on America and it will all be over in 2 years, just like Clinton found out. We don't need another 6 years of Republican misrule. Let's stop it right here. How are the seniors going to spend if they are broke, and help fix the economy. One thing you can be sure, if we get money it will get spent, unlike the bankers.

[1will]

This man has absolutely no idea what he's doing. Covering up a lack of knowledge and piss poor planning with charisma is not going to get us out of this recession.

[Emlyn]

If you are talking about President Obama - shame on you! Remember, we didn't get where we are in a month's time - it took years. Getting out of this recession-­depression won't be tomorrow. The republicans are so unAmerican. They don't care a bit about the people of this country;' only how much they can give their rich friends.

[Pacifist2]

The terrible part of all this is it is unnecessary. SS is intact. Medicare Part D needs to be reformed so that it is less of a giveaway to drug companies. If we create universal coverage using Medicare and cost or price controls we do not have to increase taxes to pay for it.

I feel sorry for all of the old people this has frightened. I am angry that the suggested changes divide the generations. There is no reason to reduce benefits or to raise age of eligibility. This is so unnecessary.

[Independent voter]

Don't mess with social security and medicare hobama

[YouDisgustMe]

hobama...so creative and so original.

[osamamania]

Obama faces Democratic Opposition?

Never in a million years will any left wingnut oppose anything the Messiah does or says.

Cases in point:
Wow, Obama has kept the Bush Administrations policy of bombing civilians.

Wow, Obama has kept the Bush Administrations practice of keeping emails private.

Wow, Obama has kept the Bush Administrations policy of Rendition.

Wow, Obama has created warmongers out of anti-war left wing hippies.

Wow, Obama keeps Bush Administrations policy of keeping detainees away from court rooms.

Change we can believe in folks!! GO OBAMA!

[research]

Yeah, Obama is exactly like Bush.

We democrats and liberals NEVER criticize Obama.

And other conservative GOP fantasies.

Nobody's perfect.

Obama is INFINITELY BETTER THAN BUSHCO.

[katekid]

Cough, bigotmania more like it.
You got whooped, Sis. Snap out of it!

[Emlyn]

Another Republican. Be quiet. We listen to your party for eight years and look where it goe us.

[111]

President Obama - do not touch Social Security or Medicare. We know there is more than enough money in Social Security to cover every retiree. We know that, starting with Reagan (one of your heroes), surpluses in Social Security has been taken away and used for other purposes.

Do not take away any benefits or medicare coverage. Stop dipping into our Social Security fund to pay for tax cuts, war, etc. Become a President of Change in this area at least.

http://econospeak.blogspot.com/2009/02/looting-social-security-with-old-bait.html?showComment=1234641600000

"The Social Security system has accumulated a vast surplus--now around $2.5 trillion and growing. This is the money pot the establishment wants to grab, claiming the government can no longer afford to keep the promise it made to workers twenty-five years ago. Actually, the government has already spent their money. Every year the Treasury has borrowed the surplus revenue collected by Social Security and spent the money on other purposes--whatever presidents and Congress decide, including more tax cuts for monied interests. The Social Security surplus thus makes the federal deficits seem smaller than they are--around $200 billion a year smaller. Each time the government dipped into the Social Security trust fund this way, it issued a legal obligation to pay back the money with interest whenever Social Security needed it to pay benefits.

[baxtron]

Bush needs that money to pay for the invasion of Iraq.

[research]

Incredible!

The GOP conservatives hate the Flat Tax?

Eliminate the SS cap entirely.

Give the GOP the flat tax they always wanted. .

[katekid]

President Obama, I don't mind you letting the GOP have a free peak into your "bipartisan" legislative panty drawer, once in awhile.
BUT DO NOT MUCK WITH SOCIAL SECURITY!

[1dogs2]

How about limiting early retirement (age 62) to those who really need it because of illness or joblessness? That seems to me a better alternative than other possibilities -- i.e., making the early benefit enough smaller than the full benefit to seriously discourage early retirement (which would punish people who really need to retire early) or raising the full retirement age again. Then require everyone to pay SS/Medicare taxes on their entire earnings rather than benefitting the wealthy by means of the ceiling on the amount of earnings liable to the tax (which is SOOO regressive and Republican).

In any event, SS isn't in any real trouble (never mind that the GOP seems to have persuaded a lot of anxious people that it is). The elephant in the room is Medicare and Medicaid, which cannot be cured without major, across-the-board health care reform (which the insurance and pharma companies and their Republican buddies will once again try to persuade people means "socialism").

[sandiegoconservative]

"To those who really need it"

How about to those who deserve it? Sounds like a better option to me, especially if you paid into the system for all those years in hopes of retiring some day.

[1dogs2]

I think I probably fall into your category of "deserving it," if paying into the system for 50+ years is the test. I just reached my full retirement age of 66 and received my first SS check. I cannot retire in spite of having saved up to 30% of my income for most of my highest income years; the crash took care of that. I will probably have to continue working at least part time for the rest of my life. That's okay because I'm healthy and able-bodied so far. People who are not able-bodied and healthy or who are unemployed and unable to find work need SS to survive. I'm not suggesting a "needs" test except for those who seek to retire early because a general needs test would undermine the very foundation of SS. If something has to give in order to ensure the continued health of SS, a mechanism to discourage early retirement except when needed seems to me a pretty good option.

[RTIII]

Dear President Obama,

Regarding the "compromise" you're looking for; the other side has already gotten its share of the compromise with three R administrations in a row cutting Social Security to the bone, and only one D administration that had an R congress for 6 of 8 years. That is, there were only two years in the last 28 in which there was anyone representing the Democratic (and the People's) position. So, it adds insult to injury to be "bipartisan" on this (or much any) issue at this time.
.

[PATina]

They talked about this article on Mo Jo.... and the story isn't about social security at all... but is trying to drive a wedge between President Obama and Nancy Pelosi. Just like w/ the Recovery Act.... they tried to make it seem as if Pelosi overstepped her bounds.... and then it came out that reps from the Administration were right there w/ her when they drafted the House Bill. Now they're saying Obama wants to cut social security (which I don't recall reading in his his book "Change We Can Believe in")... and Pelosi and company won't let him do it.

Pure speculation on my part.... but, I have a feeling him and Pelosi are more in sync re: social security.... but if it makes the Congressional Republicans feel better, then I think the two of them should continue to play "opposites".