Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
WH Petition: No cuts to Medicare and Social Security Benefits
we petition the obama administration to:
not cut Social Security and/or Medicare to simply keep taxes low on the wealthiest Americans
It is widely reported that the Democrats are about to finalize a deficit-reduction deal with Republicans. If true, it will cut Social Security payments over time. The cuts will increase as recipients grow older, reaching almost 10% at age 85.
As Presidents Reagan and Obama have said, Social Security has nothing to do with our country’s deficits. In fact, it is forbidden by law to contribute a penny to the deficit. It should not be cut in a deficit deal.
The wealthiest Americans received a windfall over the last decade, including more than $1 trillion in tax cuts which simply added to our debt. The rest of us got little but a terrible economy. True shared sacrifice means that the wealthy need to do their part this time; the elderly who are already hurting should not be hurt more.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/not-cut-social-security-andor-medicare-simply-keep-taxes-low-wealthiest-americans/wN1GL0PC
not cut Social Security and/or Medicare to simply keep taxes low on the wealthiest Americans
It is widely reported that the Democrats are about to finalize a deficit-reduction deal with Republicans. If true, it will cut Social Security payments over time. The cuts will increase as recipients grow older, reaching almost 10% at age 85.
As Presidents Reagan and Obama have said, Social Security has nothing to do with our country’s deficits. In fact, it is forbidden by law to contribute a penny to the deficit. It should not be cut in a deficit deal.
The wealthiest Americans received a windfall over the last decade, including more than $1 trillion in tax cuts which simply added to our debt. The rest of us got little but a terrible economy. True shared sacrifice means that the wealthy need to do their part this time; the elderly who are already hurting should not be hurt more.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/not-cut-social-security-andor-medicare-simply-keep-taxes-low-wealthiest-americans/wN1GL0PC
The President and other Democrats have stated repeatedly that Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022016846
They campaigned on protecting the program:
Obama-Biden
The President knows that guaranteed Social Security benefits are not handouts, but a bedrock of the commitment to retirement security America makes to our seniors. He believes that no current beneficiaries should see their basic benefits reduced, and he will not accept any approach that slashes benefits for future generations. President Obama stands firmly opposed to privatizing Social Security—the future security of hard-working Americans should not be dependent on the fluctuations of the stock market. That is why the President has called on Congress to develop a bipartisan plan that follows these principles:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021488868
The President knows that guaranteed Social Security benefits are not handouts, but a bedrock of the commitment to retirement security America makes to our seniors. He believes that no current beneficiaries should see their basic benefits reduced, and he will not accept any approach that slashes benefits for future generations. President Obama stands firmly opposed to privatizing Social Security—the future security of hard-working Americans should not be dependent on the fluctuations of the stock market. That is why the President has called on Congress to develop a bipartisan plan that follows these principles:
- Any reform should strengthen Social Security for future generations and restore long-term solvency.
- The administration will oppose any measures that privatize or weaken the Social Security system.
- While all measures to strengthen solvency should be on the table, the administration will not accept an approach that slashes benefits for future generations.
- No current beneficiaries should see their basic benefits reduced.
- Reforms should strengthen retirement security for the most vulnerable, including low-income seniors.
- Reform should maintain robust disability and survivors’ benefits.
Game Changer: Biden Guarantees No Changes in Social Security
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021226318
Now it's time to stand up for seniors against extremists.
What the millionaires want versus what the voters want
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/07/1162018/-What-the-millionaires-want-versus-what-the-voters-want
Republicans have no leverage, and it's time to stop throwing incentives and rewards at these hostage takers.
No Deal, Continued
<...>
First, you can only have a bargain, even potentially, if each side is willing to offer something better than the other side’s “threat point” — what it could get without a deal. For Obama, the threat point is letting all the Bush tax cuts expire, then proposing a middle-class tax cut that Republicans almost surely would not be able to block. The trouble with this proposal, from Obama’s point of view, is that it still doesn’t raise as much revenue as he wants, and that it also doesn’t provide stimulus via payroll taxes and extended unemployment benefits. But that’s what he can get at minimum.
So what are Republicans proposing? A “deal” that offers even less revenue, no stimulus, and comes at the price of big social insurance cuts. Why should Obama be interested?
OK, there might be something here if Rs were willing to take the debt ceiling off the table. But they aren’t; they’re only willing to extend things for a year. And here again, this is worse than Obama’s threat point: if there’s going to be a debt ceiling confrontation, he wants it early in his term, when he knows public opinion is on his side and there isn’t another election looming.
Oh, and my second point: Republicans are still demanding big spending cuts, but aren’t willing to specify any cuts in particular. Obama is supposed to do all the work. This from a party that ran against him for cutting Medicare in both 2010 and 2012, and will surely do the same in 2014 if given a chance. There’s just no way Obama can support Medicare cuts now unless the Republicans explicitly commit themselves to specific cuts in advance.
The Boehner-McConnell position, then, is still a joke, just marginally less funny than the previous joke.
- more -
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/17/no-deal-continued/
<...>
First, you can only have a bargain, even potentially, if each side is willing to offer something better than the other side’s “threat point” — what it could get without a deal. For Obama, the threat point is letting all the Bush tax cuts expire, then proposing a middle-class tax cut that Republicans almost surely would not be able to block. The trouble with this proposal, from Obama’s point of view, is that it still doesn’t raise as much revenue as he wants, and that it also doesn’t provide stimulus via payroll taxes and extended unemployment benefits. But that’s what he can get at minimum.
So what are Republicans proposing? A “deal” that offers even less revenue, no stimulus, and comes at the price of big social insurance cuts. Why should Obama be interested?
OK, there might be something here if Rs were willing to take the debt ceiling off the table. But they aren’t; they’re only willing to extend things for a year. And here again, this is worse than Obama’s threat point: if there’s going to be a debt ceiling confrontation, he wants it early in his term, when he knows public opinion is on his side and there isn’t another election looming.
Oh, and my second point: Republicans are still demanding big spending cuts, but aren’t willing to specify any cuts in particular. Obama is supposed to do all the work. This from a party that ran against him for cutting Medicare in both 2010 and 2012, and will surely do the same in 2014 if given a chance. There’s just no way Obama can support Medicare cuts now unless the Republicans explicitly commit themselves to specific cuts in advance.
The Boehner-McConnell position, then, is still a joke, just marginally less funny than the previous joke.
- more -
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/17/no-deal-continued/
Thanks to Manny for helping to draft the petition.
43 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
