Huffpost: 2011 Biden led negotiations where SS cuts were on the table.

[Tiggeroshii]

Biden’s participation exemplifies his desire to cut deals with Republicans and his political moderation, traits he’s highlighted on the presidential campaign trail.

Since President Donald Trump took office, “fiscal responsibility” has faded as a top concern, with Republicans larding the national debt with corporate tax cuts, and Democratic presidential candidates, including Biden, only pushing to make Social Security and Medicare more generous. (Progressives maintain that because Social Security and part of Medicare are self-funded, they cannot contribute to the debt.)

Biden was “a member of an administration whose theory of the case was that to get to where we essentially needed to go, we had to put everything on the table,” recalled Jared Bernstein, who served as Biden’s top economic adviser and has not endorsed in the presidential primary

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5e2dcbffc5b67d8874b423fe?ncid=engmodushpmg00000004

[George II]

1. No Social Security benefits cuts were "on the table". The HP headline is misleading, if not false.

[Tiggeroshii]

3. Not according to the sources

[George II]

4. The BUDGET of the Social Security Administration was cut, not benefits. The instituted....

....a hiring freeze, closed marginal offices, and initiated other cost cutting programs throughout SSA. Benefits weren't cut.

[Tiggeroshii]

8. Chained CPI are well disguised cuts.

The Biden group considered applying chained CPI to both Social Security benefits and tax brackets, one source said. Since tax brackets are adjusted for inflation each year, if they go up more slowly, then more wages — which grow faster — wind up subject to the higher-percentage brackets. Obama’s deficit commission and his Grand Bargain also considered the inflation measurement change; he went on to include it in his fiscal 2014 budget.

[George II]

13. Yes, they "considered it", but didn't recommend it. The so-called "Biden group" was....

...a working group of legislators that looked at (considered) various ways to reduce the deficit. Some they recommended, some they didn't. The fact that a mixed group of people had different ideas didn't mean each and every one were recommended or implemented.

The article is misleading by implying things that weren't true.

[Tiggeroshii]

18. The article does not say it was done.

Nor did they imply it. They simply said that they were open to it. Which in my book is very bad. Being open to something means "it is on the table."

[AlexSFCA]

52. Dude, Biden PROTECTED SS benefits!

[OliverQ]

6. No it isn't.

[pfeiffer]

9. Yes it is.

[KPN]

17. What? You don't remember the proposed payroll tax holiday discussions I guess. How would those NOT

affect Social Security? Yeah, no direct cuts, but clearly the payroll tax holiday was on the table. And if that was discussed, considered and rolled up into proposals during "budget control" talks, I'm sure other means to reduce SS costs (benefit payouts) over time (e.g., chained CPI) were at least discussed and considered, which means "on the table".

Just because the cuts didn't happen doesn't mean they weren't on the table or that Biden (who takes credit for getting the Budget Control Act passed though the Senate), the Obama Admin, and some Democratic legislators were not open to them.

[George II]

19. There are articles about how budget cuts affected the Social Security Administration, but....

....NOT SS benefits.

[KPN]

20. That's true, but you said that cuts were not even on the table. They were ... and willingly. The

only thing that stopped them was loud outcry from seniors/AARP which undermined congressional support on both sides of the aisle as well as WH support. Biden was directly involved in crafting and negotiating proposals throughout the Senate process.

[CarlitosMMT]

53. All payments were made to the Trust Fund

The Trust Funds were not affected by the payroll tax holiday. The US Treasury, per direction of Congress, simply made the payments that would have been made by taxpayers.

People had those fears, but they were unfounded and based on an inapplicable understanding of federal spending/monetary operations.

We can cut all of the payroll taxes to zero and increase Social Security/Medicare benefits should Congress choose to do so. The financing and statutory rules are all political decisions.
What really protects Social Security/Medicare is the creation of real assets so that there are things for seniors to purchase.

[snowybirdie]

27. Huffpost

Is so obvious in it's dislike of Biden.

[booley]

2. This has always been a problem and not just with Biden

Remember, int he grand Bargain, Biden was there on Obama's behalf. Apparently Bill Clinton was also open to the idea before his own impeachment distracted him.

I seriously don't understand why. It only hurts them electorally, they get nothing, and it gives an advantage to the Republicans.

[George II]

14. I don't get it - now you're talking about Clinton in the context of Obama/Biden?

[Go Vols]

49. Been a problem for a while

But as Tuesday evening’s clash affirmed, Biden, an avatar of the business-friendly “New Democrats” in the 1980s and ’90s, has a long history of flirting with, endorsing ― and at times actively pushing for ― benefit cuts.

Biden was proud of his vote for the constitutional amendment balancing the budget, which the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities said would have jeopardized Social Security and Medicare, for years afterward.

In a March 1998 press release, Biden boasted that his vote for the constitutional amendment is part of what had earned him the distinction of being rated by National Journal one of the five most conservative Democrats in the Senate.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/sanders-hits-back-at-biden-over-social-security-claims_n_5e27c5a8c5b67d8874a906b2

[Mr.Bill]

5. Thanks for the link to the full article.

I read the entire thing and it makes it crystal clear that Biden is not for any cuts in Social Security or Medicare.

[George II]

7. Funny how that works out after getting past a sensational headline.

[pfeiffer]

10. I know, right?!

[KPN]

21. Well, duh, not a single Democratic candidate is for those NOW! Or so they say. I'm sure

Biden wasn't for them when he ran for VP either.

Keep in mind the concessions that were on the table (payroll tax cut, chained CPI) were in response to the GOP holding out on raising the debt ceiling (hostage taking in other words). They weren't compromise, they were concessions. It was only because of senior citizen/AARP outcry that support eroded for these measures on both sides of the aisle.

In my view then and now, they should never have been on the table in the first place.

[Tiggeroshii]

23. Actually it made very clear they were on the table.

And he was open to them.

The Biden group considered applying chained CPI to both Social Security benefits and tax brackets, one source said. Since tax brackets are adjusted for inflation each year, if they go up more slowly, then more wages — which grow faster — wind up subject to the higher-percentage brackets. Obama’s deficit commission and his Grand Bargain also considered the inflation measurement change; he went on to include it in his fiscal 2014 budget.

[Mr.Bill]

28. "considered applying" and "one source said"

Is nowhere near "he was open to them"

You see, the way negotiations work is you put things on the table sometimes that you have no intention of giving, to get them to put things on the table. It's a very complex process. Let me give you an example. When I'm buying a new car, as part of negotiating a lower price I will tell the salesman I am interested in purchasing an extended warranty, which I know they make a huge profit on. So I put it on the table. They put a lower price on the table, I take it then in the finance office before signing the papers I tell them I don't want the extended warranty, but I already got the lower price.

[Tiggeroshii]

31. That is exactly what that means.

If you are putting it on the table, you are open to having them. Yes based on how the negotiations go, but nonetheless it is being considered openly.

[Mr.Bill]

34. Sometime it's making the other side think you sre considering it.

That's called outsmarting the opposition and not giving what you are "considering".

See my example about the extended warranty on the new car.

Oh, and stop digging.

[Tiggeroshii]

43. Well he ceratinly made our side think he was considering it.

And there isn't much evidence to suggest he wasn't.

[Mr.Bill]

46. How about the fact that it never happened?

[Tiggeroshii]

47. What? You cant consider something and not do it?

The key is looking at the reasons why it didn't happen. Not because he was against them, but because both sides were inundated with public pressure to keep it from happening. It was the GOP that flinched first.

[Mr.Bill]

11. Okay, I just read the article again.

It says nothing about "Bernie stopped them".

[George II]

12. No it doesn't, but it does have this nugget:

“And as Senator Sanders himself said in 2015: ‘Joe Biden is a man who has devoted his entire life to public service and to the well being of working families and the middle class.’”

[The Valley Below]

15. More dirty-tricks campaigning.

[emmaverybo]

30. Right and I am sick of it. Dirty because based on either lies, omissions, or distortions.

[iwannaknow]

16. chained cpi

was put on the table by the obama admin. i remember. scary.

[MineralMan]

22. Scurrilously misleading.

You know, we remember that. It didn't happen. It was never implemented, and never really seriously considered.

Probably it would be good if you read the entire article before posting a brief excerpt. We can all read, you know.

Please campaign for your favorite candidate fairly and honestly. Thanks.

[Tiggeroshii]

24. They were willing to go along with it.

It was on the table. We should not even be considering those cuts, and Biden did, contrary to what his campaign has argued.

The Biden group considered applying chained CPI to both Social Security benefits and tax brackets, one source said. Since tax brackets are adjusted for inflation each year, if they go up more slowly, then more wages — which grow faster — wind up subject to the higher-percentage brackets. Obama’s deficit commission and his Grand Bargain also considered the inflation measurement change; he went on to include it in his fiscal 2014 budget.

[MineralMan]

25. Apparently not, since it did not happen.

Chained CPI was never implemented. For pete's sake! Please stop hunting for things to blame on Joe Biden. Trust me: It hurts your candidate more than Biden's. Just stop doing that and campaign positively for your favorite candidate. This crap isn't going to work, because there's nothing to it. Lots of things get considered all the time. That they are "not off the table" does not mean they will be done.

I would be willing to bet a good deal of money that you could not give me a brief explanation of what "chained CPI" even is. You're just looking for stories you think might be bad for Biden. You don't understand them, but you post them here anyway.

Read your thread and you'll see that you were way off base with this. Biden supports expanding Social Security, not cutting it. Listen to him.

[Tiggeroshii]

26. Biden insisted he never considered it as the clips that have been aired suggested

And alleged that all recordings suggesting so were doctored. He obviously openly and transparently made clear they were okay, until public pressure -not Biden or his team, made them reconsider.

[Mr.Bill]

32. By the way, thanks for the edit to your thread title to remove

where you said "Bernie stopped them".

[Tiggeroshii]

33. Welcome! It shouldn't have been there and I apologize for putting it in the first place.

Had to reread the article to make sure the facebook post I got it from was indeed wrong. Another reason why facebook should die.

[emmaverybo]

35. Your candidate needs to be able to beat Biden on the merits: qualifications, experience,knowledge,

accomplishment. Then he does not need to go low. Let him also win the wide respect and credibility Biden has earned here and abroad.

[Tiggeroshii]

40. Considering SS cuts in the first place, IMHO is "going low"

[still_one]

29. +++

[stopdiggin]

36. SAME TOPIC - SAME POSTER - SAME RESULT

it must be a looping effect.

we're wasting a lot of time shooting this down -- again -- and again.
is that perhaps the intention here?

[Tiggeroshii]

38. Except it was never "shot down"

Last edited Mon Jan 27, 2020, 05:16 PM - Edit history (1)

And the allegation again Biden being willing to put cuts to social security have been true. There's not much to get around that.

[stopdiggin]

45. an allegation that you repeat over, and over, and ...

and the posts on this string (and others) would suggest to most that your opinion is strongly in the minority, if not out right refuted, regarding these "allegations" .. and yet you keep bringing them forward. The same topic, same allegations.

And thus .. the looping effect.
At some point some would be prompted to ask, "to what end?"

[Hoyt]

37. We are fools if we don't at least look at some alternatives regarding SS. We can reject them, but to

just say "No way" sounds too much like GOPers to me, and gets us nowhere.

Fact is, if we had adopted the so-called Catfood Commission recommendations, people on the lower end of the SS benefits scale would have gotten a significant boost in payments. Instead, they got nothing and are still in the same boat now.

If the Chained-CPI had been implemented, as a trade-off for boosted payments for those on the low-end, there were several years that payments would have gone up more than under the CPI used currently for SS. Why, because the Chained-CPI is an Index. An Index fluctuates.

Fact, is -- despite the denials and proclamations that all that is needed is to boost the cap -- in 14 or so years, we are going to be facing an automatic cut in SS benefits of over 20%.

At that point, what do you think is going to happen if GOPers control just one House of Congress or Presidency. Worse, what if they control Congress and Presidency.

[Tiggeroshii]

39. That is an honest response and I appreciate that. But I think many voters strongly disagree with it.

[Hoyt]

41. Many voters also disagree with mandatory Medicare-for-All. Doesn't seem to faze Sanders or Warren.

[Tiggeroshii]

42. Well unlike Biden, he isn't denying that he supports this thing that may be unpopular.

[JustAnotherGen]

44. I don't care

It's 2019 - and if he can win - then I don't care.

[Tiggeroshii]

48. ?

It's 2020, no?

[tirebiter]

50. So what is being put forward is Biden, Obama, and Clinton pulled one over on the Republicans.

Big Time.

[RandySF]

51. Article doesn't quite match the OP title.