The Urgent Need To Address Medicare and Social Security’s Solvency And The 2012 Elections

[TomCADem]

I know a lot of folks are attacking President Obama for considering cuts to Medicare and Social Security in return for tax increases. The White House was willing to (1) gradually raising the eligibility age for Medicare from 65 to 67, over a longer period of time and (2) adjust the formula for cost-of-living increases to Social Security, saving money in that program. Coupled with relatively some tax increases, this would have helped the fiscal condition of both programs.

John Boehner in his letter to his colleagues announcing his most recent withdrawal from debt talks ultimately denounced President Obama’s proposals as a failure to “fundamentally change” change entitlement programs, as well as denouncing his insistence on raising taxes. What does “fundamental change” mean? While many folks are angry about President Obama’s willingness to consider cuts, what are the Republicans pushing on the right under the code word “fundamental change”?

It is not a secret. The Republicans want to turn Medicare into a voucher program as outlined in the Ryan plan where seniors simply get a check to buy insurance, and if that check is not enough, then they cover the difference. Also, as outlined in Bush’s social security reform, Republicans want to gradually change social security into a national 401(k). Finally, since Republicans know that the American public does not approve of these radical changes, Republicans like Romney and Bachmann are pushing for Cut, Cap, & Balance, which pushes for a constitutional amendment that limits spending and limits the ability of Congress to raise taxes, which would essentially mandate that Medicare and Social Security be “fundamentally changed.”

As the facts in recent days demonstrate, Republicans are not really interested in the debt. They are more interested in making structural changes in our government and social safety net programs that reflect their ideological beliefs. They don’t want cuts. They want to end the programs as we know it. And, Republicans are getting closer and closer to achieving their goals. The Ryan Medicare voucher plan easily passed the House, and it had a lot of Republican supporters in the Senate, and Cut, Cap and Balance plan has Republican presidential contenders lining up to support it.

President Obama knows this. I think he knows that if he reaches a deal that makes Medicare and Social Security fiscally solvent, then this saps the energy from those who insist on “fundamental change,” which means to end these programs. Making tweaks in the program that put the programs into the black would undermine the revolutionary zeal of current Republicans.
Of course, many Republicans know this, which is why the debt limit talks collapsed again. They don’t want to make Medicare and Social Security to be solvent. They want them to bleed red ink, so they can justify their attempts to kill these programs. Thus, liberals should be urgently concerned about making sure Medicare and Social Security are solvent, because running these programs in the red makes them vulnerable.

In short, I think there should be more taxes on the table to fund entitlements. But, are we going to get that with the current make-up of Congress? No. This is why elections count, and the 2010 elections are the direct cause of the ongoing right wing assault on unions, financial reform, environmental protections, health care reform, and of course, entitlements like Medicare and Social Security.
There is a vast difference between what the Democrats are considering and the Republicans are demanding. The Democrats want to preserve and protect the Medicare and Social Security, and they understand that making these programs more fiscally sound either through increasing taxes or cutting benefits will do so. Republicans want to “fundamentally” end these programs, which is why they want these programs to bleed red ink.

This is why the 2012 elections are important. We need to elect Democrats to Congress and throw out the Tea Partiers that are bringing our nation to the brink of ruin in order to pursue a narrow ideological agenda. We need to hold Republicans accountable, which means we mean to stop blaming Democrats for crises that have been invented by the Republicans. At the end of the day, voters put Republicans in office, which empowered them to hold our nation hostage, and sitting out elections will not empower the left. We need to win and we need to get more Democrats elected.

The crisis we face are a direct result of the 2010 elections. We need to win elections in 2012.

[Wilms]

1. Why are you saying, "adjust the formula for cost-of-living increases to Social Security"?

Why is that needed? Please provide links.

Thanks

[dkf]

2. The reason they bleed red ink is because of the demographics of a maturing pay as you go system.

Over funding does nothing to help these programs if you did not put those funds in assets that can be sold.

The future population will simply be too burdened with the remnants of our debts to cover all this and that is the cold hard reality.

[TomCADem]

6. You Are Right, Which Is All The More Reason To Deal With It Now

Because as the demographics of our population ages, the red ink will just get larger, and the tax burden that the American public will need to swallow will become larger. This will bolster Republican demands for "fundamental change," which is code for ending these programs as we know them, rather than simply tweaking the program with formula modifications. President Obama's Editorial in USA Today shows that he understands the big picture issue you discuss.

[sabrina 1]

8. Please stop doing this. There is zero reason to 'deal with this now'

and I can't believe I'm seeing this on a democratic board. Does loyalty to a president mean more than facts, seriously? I am asking in all seriousness.

What you are saying goes against every single respected economist in the country. What you are saying is what the righwing think tanks have been sayind for decades, and they have been wrong.

SS had zero to do with creating the deficit and it does NOT belong in this discussion. We suspected it was there in order to cave to Republicans, there was no other reason for that.

But please do not try to sell democrats this nonsense.

[TomCADem]

11. It Is Not Nonsense When The Ryan Plan Passes The House and Is Supported...

...by a majority of Republicans in the Senate. It is not nonsense when a Republicans, including the current crop of GOP candidates supports that Cut, Balance crap along with a constitutional amendment that would lock in tax cuts.

As Democrats, we cannot be afraid to discuss the cost of these programs, and SHOULD, to explain that tax cuts are not without a cost. Look at the polls. For a while, a majority of folks were against tax increases, and now we are getting some movement, because people see the connection between declining tax revenues and benefits. Instead, under Bush, Republicans were happy to get their tax cuts, and Democrats did not push too hard so long as they got their benefits.

It was a Faustian bargain. A deal with the devil. We cannot shy away from discussing costs, because it is only by connecting the impact of tax cuts to these programs that people will support tax cuts. Otherwise, you get Republicans selling tax cuts as being cost free when this is a lie.

I personally think that we need more taxes in any long term debt plan, and that cuts should be spread out over the future. But, we need to start discussing the real, human costs of tax cuts on education, Medicare and Social Security, which means being prepared to discuss how much these programs cost, and how we can make them solvent over the long term.

Otherwise, the American people will be susceptible to the get rich quick schemes of the Republicans where they sell privitization as a cure all. They want these programs to bleed red ink, so they can kill them. They tried in the not too distant fast. They will try in the not too distant future unless we demonstrate that we can fix these programs on our terms.

[sabrina 1]

14. As I said, this is BS, and no democrat is buying it.

Tell it to those who have not taken the trouble to learn the facts about these programs, but here, most people know when a scam is in progress, especially when it's being done by members of your own party, and no amount of talking points, excuses, salesmanship, will change the facts.

Handing over other people's lunch money to the schoolyard bullies, is for one of two reasons:

A) You are working for them or ...

B) You are afraid of them and someone else needs to take over and deal with them in the only way you can deal with bullies.

Which one do you think applies here?

[grahamhgreen]

3. We need to take the house and senate back, but would we be better off with someone else i

in the white house?

[bowens43]

4. sure ...just like the 2008 and 2010 elections....

I'm sorry but I'm convinced it makes no difference at all. It's just a big game, Dems and Cons are playing. The bottom line is that no one is on our side...

[TomCADem]

7. Use The Sarcasm Emote When You Say There Is No Difference Between Republicans and Democrats

Otherwise, folks will think that you are serious there is no difference and that elections do not make a difference.

[suston96]

5. The problem is NOT insolvency - 27 years down the road.......

The problem is that they - Social Security and Medicare - are being blamed for the runaway deficit and are targeted as the instant solution to that deficit. Here is the reason they are the targets:

There is but one government checkbook. ALL cash coming into the government, including Social Security and Medicare taxes, are posted to that US Treasury checkbook.

ALL bills and debts of the United States are paid out of that same US Treasury checkbook. The biggest checks being paid? Social Security and Medicare.

What is the source of those Social Security and Medicare funds? Taxes on workers and their employers.

The real problem? JOBS! JOBS! JOBS!.

Certainly NOT questionable insolvency 27 years down the road - which might happen only if those JOBS JOBS JOBS are slow in being created.

The problem with Social Security and Medicare that needs to be addressed right now? You got it:

JOBS! JOBS! JOBS!

[mmonk]

9. There is some need to address medicare but not social security

and not urgent when the antidote to the problem is jobs. You are what the shock doctrine seeks. Their ushering in a new reality and people who can be easily marshalled.

[TomCADem]

10. You Are Right. Medicare Is The Big Problem Now, But Social Security Should Be Addressed...

...on our terms as soon as we can, which means within the next few years. Otherwise, in future years, it will be tougher to resolve social security. My point is that Medicare is creating a huge problem right now, which is what creates an environment where Republicans can advance the Ryan voucher plan.

With social security, we should not be afraid to aggressively address social security's long term financial health:

http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=6064&type=0

<>

Put another way, at my age, I will be just starting my retirement as we hit that cliff you see in that graph. So, selfishly, I'd like us to fix it so that I don't get slammed with cut depicted in that graph.

[mmonk]

12. In my opinion, expanding those under it would drive down costs

The thing which makes the US system the most expensive and least available to its people is the for profit private health insurance system and the pharmaceutical industry with no government purchasing power or regulation to drive it down. As it drives costs up, it makes more efficient systems such as medicare more expensive as well.

[EFerrari]

13. Forget it. Medicare is the most cost effective delivery system

we have. Social Security is funded for another 25 years. That argument is wrong and Obama is steering us in the WRONG DIRECTION.

Plus, 2010 happened because this administration IGNORED unemployment. That's what the polls showed. Independents broke for the Republicans and Independents cared about JOBS.

Obama is still IGNORING jobs. While he continues down this path, forget about 2012 because no door knocking is going to put people to work unless he pays his volunteers.