Voters Won't Allow Congress to Cut Social Security

[SoDesuKa]

I can't imagine people supporting a Congress member who has voted to cut their monthly benefit. Ordinary people may not pay much attention to politics, but they won't ignore a policy change that affects their Social Security check. They'll notice.

Obama's Grand Compromise is supposed to entice Republicans to agree to new taxes in exchange for cuts in Medicare and Social Security. But a deal like that means a big turnover in the House and Senate because voters will certainly punish those responsible - including Obama himself.

However, it's political suicide for the Republicans even to allow this to come to a vote. The Tea Party will crucify them if they vote No, and ordinary voters will retaliate against them if they vote Yes. Even a small cut in monthly benefits will end an individual voter's loyalty. But if the average monthly benefit reduction is more than say, twenty dollars, that Congress member can forget being re-elected.

In short: Vote to cut Social Security, start planning a career change.

[Tx4obama]

1. Dems in Congress & Obama have NOT said they are cutting benefits

The White House has stated that Washington Post article was not accurate.

[ProfessionalLeftist]

5. Obama has not said he's not cutting benefits.

And I'm not convinced that the Dem Congress and Senate's "outrage" isn't just pretentious Kabuki theater so they can later shrug and say "oh well we tried, we're so sorry". Nor should anyone else be convinced of such. It's better to be HEARD loud and clear on this matter NOW than to sit there and wait for someone ELSE ("them") to be your voice.

Use your own voice. They need to hear OUR voices on this. Not just their own. Complacency is a sure path to getting screwed. We have TWO things to fight these cuts with: OUR VOICES, and our VOTES. Time to start using both. I believe that is the point of the OP.

WHAT kind of 'cuts' to social security is Obama talking about? Well we don't KNOW do we?

And should we wait with our thumbs up our butts until after he makes a backroom deal with Republicans to find out - after it's too late? NO. He and Congress and the Senate need to hear from Americans in NO UNCERTAIN TERMS that cuts to SS or Medicare will result in NO VOTES for them.

Does that matter to them? I don't know. But it's all we've got and to sit there and refuse to use the tools at hand because some politicians said this or that is really just dumb. Politicians yak all the time. But it's their ACTIONS that ultimately matter. And it's our ACTIONS, not our complacency while hoping "they" will protect us and walk their cheap talk, that we have got to bring to bear on theirs, no matter what they say.

[WinkyDink]

10. Finagling the COLA calculation will do it well enough.

[Shandris]

13. Exactly, that's not a 'benefit'

He can very easily fuck the COLA and 'not cut benefits', although in reality it screws the American People over.

[brooklynite]

12. President Obama has also Not said that he's NOT selling the National Parks to strip-miners...

Shouldn't you be sending another letter to Congress?

[JDPriestly]

6. I remember listening to a Friday on-line talk between the president

and his supporters in which Obama said he supported a public option.

We later learned that he had already agreed there would be no public option.

So, I don't trust Obama one second. That's just a tiny example of his backtracking and reneging on promises.

Of course, Obama does not get to dictate the decisions, but he could at least really stand pat. Instead, he wants to appear to be the great compromiser.

He does not understand that the people he is compromising against, in other words, the people who will suffer because of his compromises, are his own voters, his own supporters.

Harry Truman double-crossed the unions during his first term. He was re-elected but by an incredibly close margin. That is because labor did not get out to vote for him.

Obama could well lose the votes of Democratic seniors with his compromising on Social Security and Medicare. That could mean no second term for him and some very bad things for the country.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[freshwest]

2. Teapartiers will return with pride to the private sector after destroying the public sector.

They want the government in the hands of corporations, they want it 'drowned in the bathtub,' nothing left. So why would they care about re-election. Time to face their philosophy straight up.

There are some elderly teapartiers, as they lose their benefits, still won't vote for a progressive to get them what they want. They'll blame their troubles on the same groups they hate already.

There is no reasoning with these people based on the common good, the national interest. They don't believe in that. As long as we continue in denial about their roots, they will win.

"Vote to cut Social Security, start planning a career..."

That's the bravado of another era. They've already taken Koch Brothers, oil and gas company, health and pharmaceutical monies, and money from foreign investors.

What do they care of career in government? Their future is assured.

And as far as people noticing their check is cut, the checks of those who can influence anything, won't be cut so it'll be noticeable. They'd get bled dry slowly, while those with the most to lose, the poor who depend on the programs that are not getting press, are getting the same treatment insurance agencies do, 'headchopping.' But no one will cry as we're set against each other, one by one.

Sorry to be so gloomy, but it's just one of those nights. Thanks for reminding us of just how crazy this is getting.

[RaleighNCDUer]

3. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! That's SO funny!

As if the voters have any say in it.

Sure, voters will notice. And by the time they do, and by the time they take action, the damage is done.

The idea it to STOP them from doing it. Voting them out after the fact does diddlysquat.

[SoDesuKa]

8. Constituent Service

I'd agree that it often appears that Congress members get away with anything. However, I also think that the world of opportunity waiting for them when they leave office may be more apparent than real. Piss people off, and your future may not be as golden as you think. Look at how long it took Alberto Gonzalez to find a job. For all we know, he's still looking for work.

[RaleighNCDUer]

14. Well, he can have my sympathy when he's forced to live a tiny

one-bedroom apartment such as my 17 year, 40hr/wk job allows ME to live in.

You don't REALLY think Gonzalez is hurting, do you? I have little doubt he could get along just fine if he never worked another day in his life.

[Raine]

4. Seriously I don't think they care that much about re-elections

they have nice big fat jobs waiting for them with all the big corps they have sold their souls to. x(

[SoDesuKa]

7. Life After Congress

Politicians who don't care whether or not they get re-elected will be replaced by candidates who do care about the job that voters send them there to do. The term of office in the House of Representatives is only two years, and a member without much seniority can't do much except follow orders.

There's been so much bad news out of Washington over the past 10 years that voters are disaffected. This doesn't mean that they're indifferent to policy changes that affect them personally, such as cutting Social Security. I can't say your pessimism about voters is entirely unjustified, but I think people are not as somnolent as they appear to be.

[customerserviceguy]

9. They won't notice subtle changes

That's the thinking here. Changes in the COLA calculation would take a decade to produce any real savings, and are so gradual that most will not pick up on them. If we have 5.5% inflation annually for the next ten years, and people get a 5.1% raise in their COLA's, they will not figure out that they're losing a lot of money at the end of that decade.

Congress is betting on getting away with this for that reason.

[starroute]

15. Only we're not likely to have 5.5% annual inflation

There's been no COLA increase in Social Security for the last two years -- and seniors are very aware of that, especially since the amount they have to pay for Medicare keeps increasing (though it's been covered so far by a special federal income tax credit.)

There are strong deflationary pressures on the economy, and aside from food and energy, the CPI is likely to continue fairly flat. So instead of seeing generous COLA increases of 5% a year, seniors are likely to see little or no increase going forward -- and they will be directly impacted by any further reduction in that increase.

[customerserviceguy]

16. If you're right

and the inflation rate is low, then the 'loss' from a COLA rejuggling will not make much impact. It only seriously erodes Social Security checks when inflation is what used to be considered a fairly modest level in a good economy.

I wish I could share your optimism about inflation, the two rounds of quantitative easing have yet to rear their ugly heads, and if we ever do get anywhere near a full-employment economy (dumbed down to about 5-6% unemployment), we'll see inflation come roaring back. People who are about 40 years old and younger really have no living memory of what high inflation is like, but those of us who have vivid memories of the late 1960's and all of the 1970's still remember what life was like when your income couldn't keep up with your outflow. All of today's seniors remember that era, and some recall the post-WWII inflation, as well.

[mmonk]

17. Voters are easily fooled.

They invest themselves too deeply in politicians.

[Obamanaut]

18. Nearly half of the current congress are millionaires, some multi. Any or

all can become well paid lobbyists, or get money for speaking engagements, or become consultants.

Do you REALLY think they depend on this current job? I'm sure they like it for the power/perks, but depend? I don't think so.

They have also seen that, historically, most voters vote for "the name you know". Most will keep their jobs, regardless of what they do or don't do. The others? They will prosper as well.