Social Security And Medicare Finances Hit Hard By Recession

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Social Security And Medicare Finances Hit Hard By Recession stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

MARTIN CRUTSINGER | May 12, 2009 09:54 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »
I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, second from right, speaks at a news conference at the Treasury Department in Washington, Tuesday, May 12,2009, after the annual spring meeting of the Social Security and Medicare Trustees to discuss the financial situation of the Social Security and Medicare trust funds. From left are, Social Security Administration Commissioner Michael Astrue, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, Geithner, and Labor Secretary Hilda Solis. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

WASHINGTON — Social Security and Medicare are fading even faster under the weight of the recession, heading for insolvency years sooner than previously expected, the government warned Tuesday. Social Security will start paying out more in benefits than it collects in taxes in 2016, a year sooner than projected last year, and the giant trust fund will be depleted by 2037, four years sooner, trustees reported.

Medicare is in even worse shape. The trustees said the program for hospital expenses will pay out more in benefits than it collects this year, just as it did for the first time in 2008. The trustees project that the Medicare fund will be depleted by 2017, two years earlier than the date projected in last year's report.

The trust funds _ which exist in paper form in a filing cabinet in Parkersburg, W.Va. _ are bonds that are backed by the government's "full faith and credit" but not by any actual assets. That money has been spent over the years to fund other parts of government. To redeem the trust fund bonds, the government would have to borrow in public debt markets or raise taxes.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, the head of the trustees group, said the new reports were a reminder that "the longer we wait to address the long-term solvency of Medicare and Social Security, the sooner those challenges will be upon us and the harder the options will be."

Geithner said that President Barack Obama was committed to working with Congress to find ways to control runaway growth in both public and private health care expenditures, noting the promise Monday by major health care providers to trim costs by $2 trillion over the next decade.

However, Republicans pointed to the newly dire assessments as evidence the Obama administration has failed to come forward with actual entitlement reform to close the funding gaps.

"Instead of getting existing public programs in order right now, some are saying we should create a new government-run health insurance plan," Sen. Chuck Grassley, the top Republican on the Finance Committee, said in a reference to the administration's health care proposals. "When we can't afford the public health plan we have already, does it make sense to add more?"

House Republican leader John Boehner said the trustees report "confirms what we already knew: Our nation cannot afford to continue this reckless borrowing and spending spree."

Story continues below

The findings in the trustees report, the annual checkup given the two benefit programs, did not come as a surprise. Private economists had been predicting that the dates the programs would begin to pay out more than they take in and the dates the trust funds would be insolvent would occur sooner given the economic recession.

The deep recession, the worst the country has endured in decades, has resulted in a loss of 5.7 million jobs since it began in December 2007. The unemployment rate hit a 25-year high of 8.9 percent in April.

Fewer people working means less being paid into the trust funds for Social Security and Medicare.

The Congressional Budget Office recently projected that Social Security will collect just $3 billion more in 2010 than it will pay out in benefits. A year ago, the CBO had projected that Social Security would have a much higher $86 billion cash surplus for the 2010 budget year, which begins Oct. 1.

The trustees report projected that Social Security's annual surpluses would "fall sharply this year," then remain at a reduced level in 2010 and be lower in the following years than last year's projections. The report said that the Social Security annual surplus would be eliminated entirely in 2016, reflecting increased demands from the wave of 78 million baby boomers retiring.

That means Social Security will have to turn to its trust fund to make up the difference between Social Security taxes and the benefits being paid out beginning in 2016. The trustees projected the trust fund would be depleted in 2037, four years earlier than the 2041 date in last year's report.

At that point, the annual Social Security taxes collected would be enough to pay for three-fourths of current benefits through 2083. To tap the trust fund, the government would have to increase borrowing or raise taxes because Social Security bonds exist only as bookkeeping entries.

While the smaller surpluses that will begin this year will not have any impact on Social Security benefit payments, the government will need to borrow more at a time when the federal deficit is already exploding because of the recession and the billions of dollars being spent to prop up a shaky banking system.

Medicare's condition is more precarious, reflecting the pressures from soaring health care costs as well as the drop in tax collections.

The options available to deal with the Social Security shortfall include raising the payroll tax that funds Social Security, such as removing the cap on income subject to the tax, or cutting benefits in some fashion such as raising the retirement age.

The administration is pushing Congress to pass legislation this year to extend health care coverage to some 50 million uninsured Americans, preferring to tackle health care before Social Security.

The trustees report is likely to set off renewed debate over Social Security and Medicare. Critics have charged that the Obama administration has failed to tackle the most serious problems in the budget _ soaring entitlement spending.

The administration on Monday revised its federal deficit forecasts upward to project an imbalance this year of $1.84 trillion, four times last year's record, and said the deficits will remain above $500 billion every year over the next decade.

WASHINGTON — Social Security and Medicare are fading even faster under the weight of the recession, heading for insolvency years sooner than previously expected, the government warned Tuesday. S...
WASHINGTON — Social Security and Medicare are fading even faster under the weight of the recession, heading for insolvency years sooner than previously expected, the government warned Tuesday. S...
Filed by Nick Sabloff
 
Comments
1725
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (28 pages total)

1) There are many, many people wealthy people who are on Medicare, regardless of income.
If they can afford quality private insurance they should not be on Medicare.
2) Haven't seen a word about the trillions that the Iraq war has cost.
3) The Social Security "surplus" will not exist forever. Read the article again.
If we keep spend more than we take in the surplus will disappear. If you have
high unemployment you take in less taxes but the needs of the public
remain. Figure it out. The solution is not to cut out needed programs and
vital health insurance but to curb the unnecessary costs promoted by the for-profit
insurance companies and the pharmaceutical industry.

4) Kudos to "forebode."
5)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:42 AM on 05/13/2009

The Bush Budget consumed 3% of GDP.The Obama Budget is 4 times worse,plus you dont raise razes during a recession.The more business gets taxed ,the higher the unemployment.If you make 35,000 a year and a welfare recipiant makes 10,000,should we give you 30,000 and the welfare person 15,000(Would you be willing to do this)Please be honest

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:27 PM on 05/13/2009
- Jane48 I'm a Fan of Jane48 18 fans permalink
photo

This is so funny. You are hilarious. THE BUSH BUDGET refused to include the WARS!!!
It was a lie, along with everything else the Bushies did. Don't get bushed is the lesson.

Secondly, let's talk about the welfare all the corporations have received for the last 8 years. Zillions of dollars has gone to corporate welfare, including health s/care companies. They've all been feeding off the trough. So let's get real. Stop picking on the little guy who has forever been the victim of the corporate feeding frenzy. Let's look at the real robbers in this society...the robber barons.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:03 PM on 05/13/2009
- jacw20 I'm a Fan of jacw20 3 fans permalink

There is no Trust Fund for either Social Security or Medicare, there are 42 Trillion dollars of IOUs that are owed back to those programs from the gov't but the money has already been spent on other gov't programs.

That is the real problem, if the fund managers had invested those funds, even with the current market downturn, both programs would be in better shape. As it is now, Madoff didn't have the largest Ponsi scheme in history. Medicare and Social Security are the largest Ponsi schemes ever constucted.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:45 PM on 05/13/2009
- jdw1981 I'm a Fan of jdw1981 44 fans permalink
photo

Update: DENNIS KUCINICH SLAMS OBAMA'S PLAN as "UNCONSCIONABLE RIP-OFF" (5/13):

The Obama administration's plan announced yesterday to save trillions in healthcare costs is an "unconscionable rip-off of the American people," Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) argued Tuesday.

Kucinich slammed the administration's deal, brokered with insurers, labor, healthcare providers, and other parties to save $2 trillion over the next 10 years as another bailout for a major industry.

"This is an unconscionable rip-off of the American people. This is a BAILOUT OF THE NATIONAL INSURANCE INDUSTRY," Kucinich, an advocate of a single-payer, government run system said Tuesday on National Public Radio.

"Just like we bailed out the banks, we're bailing out the insurance industries," he argued. "And so I emphatically disagree with the approach that the White House is taking. In the end, it's going to mean more taxpayer dollars going to the insurance industry."

Kucinich lamented that the "savings" touted by the administration are simply a diminished rate of profits for insurance corporations; he believes healthcare is a "basic right" that should be provided for free by the government.

"People should not exist for the healthcare companies, healthcare should exist for us," he said, urging the Obama administration to put a single-payer option on the table while pushing for healthcare reform.

http://briefingroom.thehill.com/2009/05/12/kucinich-slams-obama-healthcare-savings-unconscionable-rip-off/

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:51 AM on 05/13/2009
- TJCole I'm a Fan of TJCole 179 fans permalink
photo

Dennis is the man....!

Thanks for posting this...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:52 PM on 05/13/2009

Nader and Kucinich are the Eugene Debbs and Big Bill Haywood of our day, yet our media frames them as though they were the side-show freaks of politics. What is so laughable about uncomprimised men?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:16 AM on 05/14/2009
- emailers2 I'm a Fan of emailers2 6 fans permalink

WAIT!

What happened to all of the money paid into the fund since the 1980's that was not used for benefit payments. Remember? The money was used to buy T-bills (etc) and it was to be held in reserve for the retirement of the boomers.

Was this money included in the calculations released yesterday? Is this just a scare tactic to reduce benefits?

Another reduction for the many so the few can continue to receive huge bonuses, government bailouts and pay little to no tax.

I have seen this movie before.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:49 AM on 05/13/2009
- BeyondKen I'm a Fan of BeyondKen 4 fans permalink
photo

Why would you entitle an article "Recession Quickly Depleting Social Security, Medicare Funds" when the article clearly says Social Security is taking in more money than it gives out?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:46 AM on 05/13/2009
photo

the fund has been raided since the reagan years to cover short-falls in budget due to tax cuts for the wealthy - time to apply the employment tax to income at the highest levels again, say for people making over one million - that ought to draw in come needed $$$ - would spare most self-employeds who already pay twice, and generally have income under a million - would be a fair tax, bringing the % tax for this group of highly compensateds (THINK HEAD OF AIG, CITIBANK) more in line with the average wage earner -

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:30 AM on 05/13/2009
photo

I think we are rapidly approaching Sweden in the early 1990s. Out of control welfare which bankrupted the economy. If you want to blame anybody blame LBJ and his war on poverty. Socialism is nothing but trickle up poverty

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:29 AM on 05/13/2009
photo

yeah - i object to the kind of welfare that gave geo.w. $168,000,000 tax dollars to build a stadium - guaranteed profit, no risk, no payback - socialism!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:37 AM on 05/13/2009

Your missing his point.The Obama budget has no way of doing ANYTHING for us.We are all getting poorer very soon.Bush F***ed up,but his budget was only 3% of GDP.Obama budget is 4 times worse.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:30 PM on 05/13/2009

there is a difference between wealth distribution and post-WWII utopianism. the idea that age 60 retirement and ICU wards could be a birthright was only sustainable back when the world population was 3-4 billion, oil was hyperabundant, and the US was the undisputed industrial power: 1950 - 1967. Today we have far more people and far less everything, oil, timber, industrial metals, fresh water... Socialist spending models should not be scrutinized for their philosophy/teleology--that they are coddling and do not reward (this ongoing fratboy myth of) 'rugged individualism'--rather, simple pragmatics of letting the old and sick do what they do... e.g. die, must be embraced by the global community. the war on poverty makes perfect sense to me, but the War on Death and the War for 2 decades of unproductive life (Golf in Scottsdale, Arizona). societies that have a bit more history, philosophy, and perspective than ours, i.e. China and India, have had more time to understand that people get old, sick, and die. their governments do not delude the body politic into believing that a huge swath of their post-sexual lives will be subsidized simply for travel, writing memoirs, reading 1,000 page novels, and more or less frittering one's last days. Working until you die is not cruelty, it is maturity, it is grace.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:49 AM on 05/13/2009
- lacrosse I'm a Fan of lacrosse 4 fans permalink

So they screwed up Fannie, Freddie, Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security and we are supposed to hand them our healthcare system with that track record?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:27 AM on 05/13/2009
photo

GOP rule caused the funds to be depleted while income was constrained by their refusal to tax the top bracket at same rate as lower/average earners - no social security or medicare taxes are collected on income above @ 100,000 - we could continue to spare moderately high earners, just begin to collect the tax on incomes over some truly high level - like the 200,000,000 paid to the head of some insurance company -

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:33 AM on 05/13/2009
- BeyondKen I'm a Fan of BeyondKen 4 fans permalink
photo

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were private, for-profit corporations. They were brought down because they invested in mortgages issued by other private, for-profit corporations.

Social Security, a government project, currently has a huge surplus. Hardly what I'd call a 'screw-up'.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:50 AM on 05/13/2009
- lacrosse I'm a Fan of lacrosse 4 fans permalink

SS has a huge surplus? Did you read the article?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:35 PM on 05/13/2009
- vippy I'm a Fan of vippy 76 fans permalink

Time to print morre money and this time for a good cause. The government had their hands in this
till and robbed the till, now let them repay it, with interest. Hey, they did it for the banks and got nowhere, but without the people we would not need a government, ergo print more money!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:55 AM on 05/13/2009
- Gasparilla I'm a Fan of Gasparilla 33 fans permalink

As if the public didn't know exactly what was happening.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:02 AM on 05/13/2009
- evekendall I'm a Fan of evekendall 148 fans permalink
photo

Raise the ceiling for collecting FICA withholding. People making over $106,800 are paying a smaller percentage of their income into FICA than those making less than $106,800.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:41 AM on 05/13/2009
- lacrosse I'm a Fan of lacrosse 4 fans permalink

And are people who make over $106,800 getting more benefits than those below?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:07 AM on 05/13/2009
- Periwinkle I'm a Fan of Periwinkle 57 fans permalink

The social security fix is easy. Raise the FICA cap significantly and keep the money in a lock box. Medicare would fare better if the pool was increased (single payer) and more people were contributing. Big insurance is also ripping off Medicare so the Medicare plus programs have to go. Another thing to consider is unnecessary procedures and unnecessary medications. As Obama mentioned in one of his speeches, his grandmother underwent a hip replacement while suffering from terminal cancer. That sounds more like a doctor and hospital are milking a patient for every dime they can get more than anything else.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:36 AM on 05/13/2009
photo

or the family insisted, as many do, on every possible medical procedure available - that is often the case

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:35 AM on 05/13/2009
- bikerdude I'm a Fan of bikerdude 75 fans permalink
photo

Prohibit the government from "borrowing" this money. Tax ALL the income. The lower and middle classes have to pay a far larger share of this benefit than the filthy rich. If a millionaire with more than enough to live on can take his benefits, he should be taxed on whatever income he generates...at least to the same level as unemployment beneficiaries have to pay...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:21 AM on 05/13/2009

You're absolutely right on the mark with your statement.

If the government were - as was originally intended - unable to "tap into" the SS "surplus funds" there would be no talk of financial crisis for SS & medicare, ever. Also, if they repaid ALL the funds that have been borrowed from the SS Trust for other purposes, it would - once again - remain solvent in perpetuity. The SS Trust funds are NOT a government "hand out" or "welfare payment." It is the money American workers have individually paid into the SS Trust via FICA deductions throughout their entire working lives. It is similar to a non-interest bearing savings account or annuity, that pays out a minimal monthly amount, beginning at a certain point in time.

Additionally, Bush Inc. wanted to "privatize" SS and have the funds invested in the stock market. Imagine how much WORSE shape we'd all be in financially if THAT had happened. Now they want to suggest it again, are they completely insane? Put it back the way it was before Reagan messed with it.

Would you rather see all the (less than rich) people who are old or infirm living on the streets instead? Why not just line us up and shoot us, once we reach retirement age, or if we become disabled. At least that would be an honest approach, and would cause less suffering in the long term.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:55 AM on 05/13/2009
- Mecheng I'm a Fan of Mecheng 17 fans permalink

In 1998, Bill Clinton, much to his credit, stated that his top domestic agenda idea was to fix Social Security. It did not occur. Several years later, when George Bush implored Congress to fix Social Security, the Democrats said it was not broken. looks like Clinton and Bush were dead right on.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:06 AM on 05/13/2009
- morgan1 I'm a Fan of morgan1 18 fans permalink

The idea that SS and Medicare is going under is ludicrous. The interest alone on the total amount should assure it never goes broke. The reason for this is the govt. keeps borrowing from the SS fund to pay for departments and operations they lack money for. All these loans (Since Reagan) have not been paid back. Illegals who have never put a dime into the SS fund can draw on it (Cubans in particular)-- The SS fund also pays for any medical illegals need. All of this and more is Republicans doing and Democrats who are Republicans in disguise. Those people want to bankrupt the govt., outsource everything and leave this country in shambles.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:43 AM on 05/13/2009
- rich misty I'm a Fan of rich misty 1041 fans permalink
photo

Half of that is nothing but hate/lies with zero supporting documentation. The Federal Government does not give any welfare or support to undocumented "illegals", except for children, and people in distress (traveler with lost papers).

http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/immigration/

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:39 AM on 05/13/2009
- Gasparilla I'm a Fan of Gasparilla 33 fans permalink

Not to illegals, but elderly legal immigrants can get SSI, which is supplemental social security, without the minimum 40 quarters worked.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:28 AM on 05/13/2009
- jnratliff I'm a Fan of jnratliff 8 fans permalink

Fact is the republicans have said and I quote. I would like to see government small enough to drown it in a bath tub.
They want to bankrupt government! They don't see that without our government we wouldn't have roads and bridges. We wouldn't have police and fire departments, or teachers.
As long as people believe in the republican for of really crapy government we will begin to look more and more like Somalia or mexico.
The kind of thing republicans think would make things better for them!
Problem is they are mostly cowards and without what we have now these people would be to scared to even come out of their houses.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:22 AM on 05/13/2009
- rich misty I'm a Fan of rich misty 1041 fans permalink
photo

Fanned and faved

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:49 AM on 05/13/2009
- bikerdude I'm a Fan of bikerdude 75 fans permalink
photo

I cosign what jnratliff says as well.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:23 AM on 05/13/2009
- forebode I'm a Fan of forebode 4 fans permalink

I truly believe the Republicans PLANNED this financial crisis. It was to serve several purposes. Since they ravaged this country and brought it to its knees while getting "theirs," they also intended to hurt the ordinary American as much as possible because they knew they created enough hurt and harm to the poor and middle class that voters would turn on the Republican party. It is the same psychology as people being evicted from a rental property so they tear the place up so the landlord will have to invest money in it to fix it up. In this case, the Republicans knew there are enough ignorant people in the populace that they can blame Obama for the recession, and the ignorant will "buy it." I have heard the conservative pundits call this economy "the Obama recession." Like hell it is. More like the Bush-Cheney and creepy cronies having ravaged the economy because they know their party will lose the election that happened last November. Another reason they did it was to economically wipe out as many middle class people as they can since the wealthy see the middle-class as they would see the "middleman" in a sale, a depletion of profits and wealth. It all comes down to class struggle. We all need to make sure the Repugs lose in the end by never being able to get on its feet politically again.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:58 AM on 05/13/2009
- lacrosse I'm a Fan of lacrosse 4 fans permalink

Too bad our government doesn't stop at roads and bridges. They think they should fund airports with 30 passengers and monitoring chinese prostitutes drinking habits. These are the things conservative republicans are against. If there wasn't such disgusting waste, smaller government wouldn't go bankrupt. Only a ridiculously large government, as we have now, does.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:32 AM on 05/13/2009
photo

Okay, that is just ignorant. What is being advocated is a smaller less intrusive government and not a omnipotent government that will have people at the helm that WILL abuse their power. Learn from history and maybe you will see that whenever there has been a large and powerful government it becomes tyranical. All those who advocate a larger government need to get out thieir Constitution and understand that it was meant to be a limitation of government and a guarantee of personal liberties. What we have going on today is just the opposite. Currently, the benevolent dictator is looking at regulating salaries in private companies that do not receive taxpayer dollars. It will go on and you stand and cheer not even knowing what you are cheeing for.

Have a nice day.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:33 AM on 05/13/2009
- pokemon I'm a Fan of pokemon 19 fans permalink
photo

Make all the people on SSI get a job, and stop giving kids SSI for ADHD and that might save a bit of the cash.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:56 AM on 05/13/2009
- bikerdude I'm a Fan of bikerdude 75 fans permalink
photo

What job? Where? People who think like you are eliminating jobs faster than ethical folks can create them. Instead, I say tax ALL the income at the present rate...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:25 AM on 05/13/2009
- vippy I'm a Fan of vippy 76 fans permalink

What jobs - the young need jobs! We need more fulltime jobs like we had in the 1980s.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:01 AM on 05/13/2009

wait until 2012 we will clean this mess up

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:53 PM on 05/13/2009
- forebode I'm a Fan of forebode 4 fans permalink

I work at a disability rights advocacy agency, and I can tell you that many of my clients would not be able to work, and the disability discrimination that is rampant among employers would see to it they never do get to work. ADHD pretty much requires that a child take certain pharmaceuticals to even get it under control so they can learn in school. My clients LIVE on ssi and ssdi because they have little other choice, and they are one SMALL disaster from being homeless. Pokeman, I think you better rethink your statement. Your statement reveals a lot of ignorance and poor consideration of people with disability. One good bump on the head and finding that the brain damage caused by traumatic brain injury keeps you out of work either because you can't perform it, or because your employer wants to employ only "perfect people," and you would be more than happy to find that at least you have ssi and ssdi to live on. Think before you say things like people who live on ssi should be required to take a job. Typical ignorant thinking that usually goes hand in hand with the kind of trash that stupidly votes against their own pocketbook by voting Republican.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:08 AM on 05/13/2009

Cut out medication for kids who have ADHD and depend on SSI for help?! Seriously??

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:29 AM on 05/13/2009
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (28 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect