Dems Back Bigger Social Security Increases--(See what happens when the Dem LEFT Yells Louder )

[KoKo]

Dems back bigger Social Security increases
By Matthew Heimer

At various times over the last couple of years, it looked as though Democrats and Republicans might agree on a plan to slow the growth of Social Security benefits. Earlier this month, President Obama officially backed away from that proposal. And now, some of his fellow Democrats are tacking in the opposite direction—rallying behind a plan that would most likely increase the annual inflation adjustments for retiree benefits.

The proposal got more exposure this week when Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon endorsed it, after chairing a hearing on the topic in the Senate Subcommittee on Economic Policy.

At issue is how to calculate the annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) for Social Security beneficiaries. Annual increases are currently linked to the standard Consumer Price Index. But some economists and legislators have argued that retirement-age people’s cost of living has consistently risen faster than inflation in recent years, thanks predominantly to expenses related to health care and assisted housing. They’ve argued in favor of pegging COLAs to a so-called CPI-E (the “E” is for “elderly”) that would translate, in most years, into a bigger inflation raise for retirees than standard CPI would dictate.

Sen. Mark Begich, an Alaska Democrat, introduced a bill in 2012 that would adopt the CPI-E. The bill proposes to pay for the expanded benefits by making Social Security’s payroll tax applicable to all of the earnings of higher-income taxpayers. (Currently, only the first $117,000 of income is taxed.) The Washington Post’s Greg Sargent reports this week that the bill has the backing of seven other Democratic senators and about 70 Democrats in the House.

The odds of passage in today’s Washington, of course, are teensy. Many GOP leaders have backed the use of a “chained” CPI, which would result in a lower annual inflation increase than traditional CPI. (The president had previously supported this idea, but dropped it from his most recent budget proposal.) Sargent notes that both Merkley and Begich face reelection this year, and that a proposed expansion of Social Security could provide a way of rallying progressives and retirees in a year when GOP candidates are perceived by many to have the electoral upper hand.

http://blogs.marketwatch.com/encore/2014/03/14/dems-back-bigger-social-security-increases/

[Berlum]

1. "Screw America's elders. They can pull themselves up by their own damn support hose." - Republicons

[geretogo]

18. Chinese

Good cartoon but the words should be in Chinese . We don't manufacture
boot straps or much of any thing else here .

[MannyGoldstein]

2. Wrong AGAIN

The Moonbat Left is far too tiny to have any effect whatsoever, except every two years when they massively depress Democratic voter turnout because of their enormous chorus demanding ponies.

[fascisthunter]

4. bunch of insignificant commie pinkos

- Archie in the Bunker

[bvar22]

11. "They are willing to bravely support any progressive bill as long as there's no chance it can pass",

....especially during Election Season!

The primary tactic in this game is Villain Rotation. They always have a handful of Democratic Senators announce that they will be the ones to deviate this time from the ostensible party position and impede success, but the designated Villain constantly shifts, so the Party itself can claim it supports these measures while an always-changing handful of their members invariably prevent it.

One minute, it’s Jay Rockefeller as the Prime Villain leading the way in protecting Bush surveillance programs and demanding telecom immunity;

the next minute, it’s Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer joining hands and “breaking with their party” to ensure Michael Mukasey’s confirmation as Attorney General;

then it’s Big Bad Joe Lieberman single-handedly blocking Medicare expansion;

then it’s Blanche Lincoln and Jim Webb joining with Lindsey Graham to support the de-funding of civilian trials for Terrorists;

and now that they can’t blame Lieberman or Ben Nelson any longer on health care (since they don’t need 60 votes), Jay Rockefeller voluntarily returns to the Villain Role, stepping up to put an end to the pretend-movement among Senate Democrats to enact the public option via reconciliation.

<more>

http://www.salon.com/2010/02/23/democrats_34/

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

20. Villain Rotation...indeed!

[GoneFishin]

21. Regarding the Public Option, I seem to remember POTUS, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi playing

musical pass-the-buck so no single person would have to take the heat.

[bvar22]

23. Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas was the one who took the full heat.

During her Democratic Primary in Arkansas 2010,
she was proudly campaigning as "the one who killed the Public Option".
She was handsomely rewarded for her treachery with an Oval Office Endorsement in this Democratic Primary against a popular Democrat who supported the Public Option, Lt Gov Bill Halter.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4217874


One of the other BIG Players in the battle to kill the Public Option and to silence those asking for a Medicare Expansion was Democratic Senator Max Baucus, who actually had people arrested for suggesting that Medicare be expanded.

Baucus Healthcare Plan: Arrest Doctors, Nurses
The senior senator from Montana is ordering the arrest of doctors and nurses.

Medical practitioners who have shown up at Baucus-chaired "roundtable discussions" to demand consideration of a real fix -- the single-payer, genuinely-public reform that assures all Americans will have health care while at the same time holding down costs -- are being taken into custody and removed from the hearing rooms.

At the first Finance Committee session last week, Dr. Margaret Flowers and seven others were taken into custody when they urged Baucus to include witnesses who support single-payer.

Max Baucus was just recently rewarded for his treachery with the PEACH of all Presidential appointments...Ambassador the CHINA. There are well heeled Democrats who would KILL for THAT appointment.
Old Max will NOW be able to over stuff those offshore accounts!

...and WHO can forget Old Joe Lieberman.
After his debacle in Connecticut, running AGAINST The Democrat,
he had nothing to lose, so former Chairman of the DLC Took One for Team DLC.
For his performance as Health Care Judas in the Kabuki Theater of The Senate,
he was given a standing ovation and welcomed back into the loving arms of the Democratic Party,
given back his tenure, perks, Committee Chairs...and even his spot in the parking lot.

They DO take care of their own.


You will know them by their WORKS!

[GoneFishin]

24. Well, at least in one case BO took names and kicked asses to bulldoze through the obstructionists.

When Dennis Kucinich was planning to vote against the ACA because it lacked a public option, all that was needed was a ride on Air Force 1 and a good spanking, and Voila, Dennis complies, with nothing evident to show for it in return.

[bvar22]

25. Those who think that President Obama does NOT know how to play hardball...

...are mistaken.
He made it to the top of the pile....in CHICAGO!!!!
He knows how to get what he wants.

[cheapdate]

34. Nancy Pelosi fought hard for more than a year

for the House health care reform bill, which included a public option. She fought for it up to the very end. As time ran out, she was forced with the choice of either accepting the senate replacement bill or walking away with nothing.

[cheapdate]

35. Such a cynical picture of elected Democrats

unfairly characterizes and dismisses the dedicated efforts of senators such as Jack Reed, Sheldon Whitehouse, Sherrod Brown, Bernie Sanders, Daniel Akaka, Ed Markey, Elizabeth Warren, Ron Wyden, Jeff Merkley, Al Franken, Kirsten Gillibrand, Amy Klobuchar and others to create sane, compassionate, and progressive public policy.

We should speak out against politicians -- Democrat or Republican -- when they act against our ethics, values, or the common interest. But we should speak out just as loudly in support of those leaders who fight for what's right. They need our support.

Skepticism is healthy in proper measure. Cynicism leads to disengagement, which does nothing but concede the game to the powers that be.

I have serious disagreements with Feinstein, Rockefeller, Schumer, et. al. But more importantly, I have strong areas of agreement with Ron Wyden, Jack Reed, Sherrod Brown, et. al.

[bvar22]

36. I don't think it unfairly characterizes the Progressive Wing at all.

...but it DOES explain why the Progressive Wing has been blocked at every turn,
and lays the blame squarely where it belongs...on the 3rd Way/DLC Wing of the Democratic Party.

Until we can rid ourselves of this cancer,
a handful of 3rd Way/DLC Senators can block ANY and ALL progressive measures from the Democratic Wing.

The above merely explains HOW a handful of duplicitous DLC/3rd Way "Democrats" have been able to hijack what remains of the Democratic Party I joined 47 years ago.



[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font][/center] [center] [/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]

[cheapdate]

39. I think that's about halfway true.

It purports to explain why the Progressive Wing has been blocked at every turn and many of its observations are accurate. Rockefeller is a tool.

But given the article's title "The Democratic Party’s deceitful game", and considering statements such as "Democrats perpetrate the same scam over and over...", and "This is what the Democratic Party does; it’s who they are" -- I think the writer is making a broader, general implication that there are no genuine progressive actors in the Democratic Party; that it's all theater and all elected Democrats are complicit in "perpetrating" a "scam".

I think the article was deliberately intended to promote cynicism and disengagement from the Democratic Party. That's my opinion.

[swilton]

56. There are always a few bad apples

....to spoil the Democratic barrel

[adirondacker]

52. Wow! I missed that one. Doesn't come off as very libertarian either. hmmm. nt

[swilton]

55. Precisely

surprise, surprise ....wait what year is this??!!

[Douglas Carpenter]

40. EXACTLY!! Working people and retirees are demanding cuts in their benefits and the moonbat left is

blocking it at every turn!!

[sabrina 1]

51. How do they explain it when Dems win then? It's so confusing trying to keep up with

where the moonbat left actually stands regarding winning and losing.

Do you think it was the moonbats who supported Christie, the Republican, over the Democrat in NJ? Or remember Florida, I find it hard to believe that such a small contingency of moonbats helped the Republicans win, so who WERE those guys who helped Republicans get elected?

[MannyGoldstein]

53. Christie is a man we can do business with, silly

Even our President knows that, and refused to endorse his moonbat opponent.

That's a different case.

Yes, it's very, very complicated. All of those seeming-contradictions aren't. Honest.

[Jackpine Radical]

3. This is how we need to campaign.

Don't just drag our feet as we're pushed to the right; fight back with an active push to the left.

Here are a few suggestions for the Progressive Platform:

Increase the COLAs

Support unions

Institute a single-payer health care system

Legalize and tax pot

Enact & publicize protections against corporate predators.

Disband corporations that commit egregious violations of environmental laws

Build a national rail system, a modern Internet infrastructure, etc. with a new WPA, putting everyone to work, & fuckin' NATIONALIZE them as monopolies.

Pour significant research funding into alternative energy, battery technology, etc.

Scale back our hypertrophied military

Increase the number of private jobs by shortening the work week without cuts to weekly wages

[Segami]

6. +1

[jwirr]

14. I would support that platform.

[Enthusiast]

19. +1 an entire shit load!

[KoKo]

26. I agree...and refine a Populist Message that touts FDR's Principles..

in modern language. The Right always wins "their people" with their eloquent Southern Style Populist for the 1% language cloaked in Religion...while they rape the people under their boots.

Given the Climate Change Events (yes I will say that) around the USA and the Corporate Events (Spills and Pipeline Explosions causing Environmenta Degradation for Homeowners, Fisherman, Hunters and Nature Lovers) by our Oil, Coal and Nat Gas Companies. Disaster Spills along with this horrendous Winter and Drought and Fires in CA it would seem we Dems could Seize the Moment to point out how bad things are out there in America. Then there's the Banking Fraud the Spying and Surveillance.

We need to put this all together in a PACKAGE to refute the lovely, enticing language of the Southern/Western Wing of Politics and come BACK AT THEM with some FDR STYLE...New Deal II Language.

This is our Opportunity...we can see what's happened and it will only get worse but we need to CONNECT THE DOTS for AVERAGE FOLKS. Give them a NARRATIVE...that THEY ARE LOSING! Not to listen to the SNAKE OIL Salespersons.

[Overseas]

47. +1

[1StrongBlackMan]

31. I would completely support most of this ...

i.e., Increase the COLAs (and remove the cap), Support unions, Enact & publicize protections against corporate predators, Disband corporations that commit egregious violations of environmental (and/or economic) laws, Pour significant research funding into alternative energy, battery technology, etc., Build a national rail system, a modern Internet infrastructure, etc. with a new WPA, putting everyone to work, & fuckin' NATIONALIZE them as monopolies.

But I'm not so sure these would be wise campaign issues:

Institute a single-payer health care system, Legalize and tax pot, Scale back our hypertrophied military.

And I have no idea how this can be accomplished:

Increase the number of private jobs by shortening the work week without cuts to weekly wages

[Jackpine Radical]

37. "And I have no idea how this can be accomplished::

Increase the number of private jobs by shortening the work week without cuts to weekly wages

The French, Germans & Scandinavians did it.

[Overseas]

46. Yes please! +1

[Eleanors38]

48. Let's have a convention with beer & BBQ to start this^^^

[WillyT]

5. HUGE K & R !!! - THANK YOU !!!

[truedelphi]

7. Good to hear that this might be the case. However, Social Security has been slashed already!

When I was involuntarily signed up for Social Security, age nineteen,the deal was, I paid into the system and then at age 65 I would see some benefits.

Now I have to wait until 67. This raising of the age before us Baby Boomers can attain full bennies is an invisible, sleight of hand, financial rape and plundering of senior citizens.

Let's try and do that to the Congress critters. So you wanna get your bennies, Mr or Mrs Honorable Rep? How about waiting until you are 87?

Or age 88.

I have watched friends go into the system at age 62 or 63, and they are penalized at 15% or so each year. So they see a total diminishing of their bennies, since if they wait til 67, they are doing without heat or AC for those years. Or having enough food or needed medicines ..

[cui bono]

9. True. I was in Paris when they were still protesting the raising of their retirement age.

I missed the biggest of them but was in one towards the end.

Here it goes unnoticed.

[truedelphi]

12. But at the time, we Americans did have some fabulous news and media discussions of

Whoever was the 1990's equivalent of Lindsey Lohan.

[cui bono]

8. "Many GOP leaders have backed the use of a “chained” CPI"

Hm... wonder where they got that idea?

This is the problem with Obama having offered up SS. Now they can use that and say it was a Dem idea to begin with, a Dem president brought it up. FUCK. Such a HUGE screw up from Obama. Well, screw up for us, for him... I don't really know any more. How could he not know what he was doing. He's not stupid.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

16. The GOP came up with the idea in the first place

that's where they came up with it.

Obama asked what he could get for it in terms of significantly increased taxes on the rich and they said "nothing", so it's completely off the table now.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[cui bono]

17. Yeah, just like they came up with the idea for the ACA. They will now say it is a Dem idea.

No Dem should ever have put SS on the table. Now it is a starting point. At least ACA was moving forward. SS cuts is moving backward.

Dems should always say "hell no" when asked to cut SS. Remember when Bush brought it up and had to shut up about it immediately? That's how it's supposed to be. But now that Obama has, as a Dem, put it on the table in negotiations, it is open season.

Hopefully this push back can negate that, but it will take some time.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

22. I'm not terribly worried...

According to AARP's polling, 60% of even Republican retirees are against changing the CPI. And understand, what is pulling Democrats down these days are old racists (and that the kids who are all for Democrats don't often vote).

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[cui bono]

29. So Obama is an old racist? He's the one who put it on the table, not the citizenry.

People are against a lot of things that legislators pass.

The point is that the Dems should never, ever, put SS on the table. They did and now it is fair game since it's been talked about. It is no longer something the Republican's are afraid to bring up. And that's a bad thing whether or not you are worried about it.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

41. I think you have it the exact opposite...

The GOP leadership has been asking for this. Begging. But even GOP voters are against it.

That means that Obama would have gotten a tax increases and the GOP would have gotten a SS cut, and Obama would have said it was the GOP which cut your SS. And the GOP base would abandon them over it. And so that would be reversed. And Obama would get his increases.

So the GOP, realizing all of this, simply said "no" right at the beginning.

So now Obama gets to shove GOP intransigence in the faces of the political press. Plus SS cuts have been taken off the table more or less permanently.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[cui bono]

42. No, I absolutely do not. Obama didn't make them publicly ask for it.

He's a terrible negotiator so he gave it to them for free, before they even started negotiating.

Look, I'm not going to keep arguing the same proven fact that Obama offered up SS. It's on the record. It's been proven true over and over again.

And guess what SS cuts have already taken place. The retirement age is now 67 instead of 65. Who signed that?

[ConservativeDemocrat]

44. The Heritage Foundation publicly asked for it...

...which is a GOP think tank. And it's been in various GOP budget proposals for decades.

I mean I guess you can say no one on the GOP side has screamed that it must be done now now now, but that's to be expected given how unpopular it is. Part of the trouble is that as soon as you start bringing up actuarial adjustments to retirement plans, even comedians like Jon Stewart break out the bore/snoozing jokes. It's very difficult to win an election on it.


> And guess what SS cuts have already taken place. The retirement age is now 67 instead of 65. Who signed that?

See? Even you, who are actually smart enough to care about these things don't know this stuff. Raising the retirement age for full benefits this way happened in 1983, so the answer to that question is Ronald Reagan.

Please don't tell me you're one of those DUers screwball enough to blame Barack Obama for what Ronald Reagan did. I'll be sorely disappointed.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

10. Gosh. Fancy that. A Democrat proposing something that is more than "not as bad".

They may be on to something here.

[n2doc]

13. I gotta wonder if Alex Sink had supported this, would things have turned out better for her?

That, and if she had supported the ACA. We will never know, though.

[KoKo]

27. Their Campaign Ops seem to urge them to move Right to outflank their RW Opponent

Yet time and again it falls flat if the choice is between Repug Light and Repug Right ...the choice goes to the Repug and not a Democrat who sounds like Repug Light.

In some races this strategy could work if the Repug is Left enough to pick him/her off with Dem Campaign Ops....but, it's not working in the rest of the country at large.

But, then...our Dem Party now only works with SWING STATE Dem Candidate in carefully chosen races.

I miss Dean's 50 STATE STRATEGY...it worked and had a chance to work better...UNTIL his views were too dangerous for the Party Control to deal with.

[myrna minx]

15. K&R

[LWolf]

28. Senator Merkley

is in no danger of losing support from the left; he's consistently reliable. It doesn't surprise me that he's signed on here.

[neverforget]

43. I love Senator Merkley! can't wait to vote for him

again in November! (Even though I've been called a Rand Paul loving, anti-Obama Libertarian on this board today by a member of the true believers brigade for disagreement on the NSA issue)

[LWolf]

50. There have to be epithets to call

people who don't back the party's corporate status quo.

Otherwise, you'd just have to evaluate candidates and issues on their merits, and where would we be then?

[4dsc]

30. "all of the earnings of higher-income taxpayers."

Now this is a campaign issue we can and should rally behind. Let republican defend the destruction of SS and see what happens.

[joanbarnes]

32. FIRST Raise the Cap=easy fix.

[closeupready]

33. Republicans tell us that we are swimming in more money

than ever.

Thus, Democrats should support making social security payments much bigger - the money is there.

K&R

[butterfly77]

38. K&R..

[joeglow3]

49. What good does removing the cap do?

All it does is increase what those people will receive in social security, as it is tied to what you paid in.

[doc03]

54. They support something they know damn well won't pass

just to score political points. Why not stop taxing SS benefits or at least raise the threshold to today's dollar. It was set at $34000 in 1983 in todays dollars it would be $79500 for a single taxpayer. I bet even Republicans would support that.