2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumCompromise or betrayal? By Joan Walsh
If Democrats cut Social Security, they're breaking a campaign promise and fostering cynicism about politics
BY JOAN WALSH
Time magazine named President Obama its 2012 Person of the Year, and it makes sense. Just two years ago he came out of the 2010 shellacking battered, his chance at a second term diminished. Instead he put together an astonishing coalition of Americas future, and became the first president in 75 years to win more than 50 percent of the vote twice. Aware of historic second-term overreach, most notably when George W. Bush tried to privatize Social Security, Obama says he nonetheless has an ambitious agenda for the next four years.
It would be sad if he launched it by doing what Bush never did: cutting Social Security benefits for seniors by agreeing to a change in cost of living calculations called the chained CPI.
Once a topic for only the wonkiest of wonks, now the intricacies of the chained CPI are being debated by the hackiest of hacks. The bottom line is this: The longer you live, the less your benefits would grow. We still dont know how it would work; anonymous White House sources have promised any deal would include protections for the poorest seniors, the disabled and veterans.
It doesnt much matter. If he agrees to benefit cuts, the president is breaking a Democratic campaign promise and sacrificing gains he and his party made in November. Make no mistake: In 2014, Republicans will make them the party that slashed Social Security. And honestly, if they go ahead with it, theyll deserve it.
As always, columns about the fiscal cliff negotiation must start with a warning: Many trial balloons go up in the air and crash. Weve already seen that happen with the shocking suggestion that the president might agree to a hike in the age of Medicare eligibility. Obama is dealing with such extremist opponents that he could promise to divorce Michelle Obama and marry Michele Bachmann and know hell never have to do it, because House Speaker John Boehner doesnt have control of his wingnut caucus.
-snip-
http://www.salon.com/2012/12/19/compromise_or_betrayal/
cui bono
(19,926 posts)There. I said it.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Unforgivable, paradigm changing, Party ending betrayal.
Filibuster Harry
(666 posts)tax of 4.2% expire to 6.2%. That decrease applied to ALL people on their first $ 110,100 of wages no matter how much you earned. It replaced the Working Pay Credit which only applied to the first $ 20,000 of wages of those people who qualified for it -- NOT EVERYBODY.
budkin
(6,703 posts)He "promised" that nothing would change to Social Security. Guess Obama didn't get the message. Oops.
forestpath
(3,102 posts)shows a serious lack of moral center.
I have had my differences with President Obama, but I always though of him as a decent man. But no decent person would go after the most vulnerable in our society to protect the wealthy.
That is what Republicans do.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)But then, again, it's obvious that they're not working for US.
lucca18
(1,242 posts)"If he agrees to benefit cuts, the president is breaking a Democratic campaign promise and sacrificing gains he and his party made in November. Make no mistake: In 2014, Republicans will make them the party that slashed Social Security."