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 Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Dyedinthewoolliberal

(16,236 posts)
51. I've emailed my elected Congress people
Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:28 AM
Dec 2012

and this reply from one of my Senators (Maria Cantwell) indicated cuts to SS will not pass.

Thank you for writing to me about the Social Security retirement benefits and the Chained Consumer Price Index. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.



The Social Security Administration provides retirement, disability, family benefits, and survivor benefits to millions of Americans and their dependents. In an effort to compensate for the effects of inflation, Social Security beneficiaries receive a cost-of-living-adjustment (COLA) in January of most years. Currently, the COLA is calculated using the Consumer Price Index for Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W), which is updated monthly by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.



Since 2002 the Bureau of Labor Statistics has been publishing the Chained Consumer Price Index (Chained CPI) as a proposed alternative for the CPI-W. The Chained CPI uses a formula that accounts for what is known as the "substitution bias" – when higher prices cause people to change buying habits. Chained CPI would result in lower cost of living increases for Social Security recipients. I strongly oppose the proposed use of the Chained CPI. I understand that many Social Security recipients have expenses that differ from those of typical wage earners and clerical workers, and that the proposed Chained CPI would not reflect the actual cost-of-living changes these citizens face. For example, seniors spend more on health care expenses than the rest of the population and health care expenses have historically increased at a higher rate of inflation.



The importance of the Social Security program to retirees and disabled Americans cannot be overstated. Since its beginning in 1935, Social Security has prevented millions of seniors from falling into poverty, and it has served as a cornerstone of retirement security for American workers. We have a responsibility to ensure that Social Security delivers on its promises to current and future retirees. Changes to the Social Security program—how it is financed, how benefits are calculated, or decisions about retirement age—should be designed to preserve and strengthen the financial integrity of the program, and should not be a part of deficit reduction decisions.



As a member of the U.S. Senate Finance Committee I will continue to work with President Obama and with my colleagues to draft legislation that strikes the right balance in how we collect and spend federal tax dollars so we can leave more than debt to the next generation. I understand that this issue is especially important to you; be assured that I will keep your views in mind as we craft legislation.



Thank you again for contacting me to share your thoughts on this matter. You may also be interested in signing up for periodic updates for Washington State residents. If you are interested in subscribing to this update, please visit my website at http://cantwell.senate.gov. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of further assistance.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Apparently the President's lips pscot Dec 2012 #1
That cant be right DJ13 Dec 2012 #28
Progressive Dem Community is sending a Clear Message..."Our Deal--Not Yours"... KoKo Dec 2012 #2
As the bank robber said, it's where the money is. reformist2 Dec 2012 #3
Yes, and it's not his money pscot Dec 2012 #38
Bob, what did reformist win!? Uncle Joe Dec 2012 #66
The misdirection Jim Warren Dec 2012 #4
Because self-funded or not, cuts will still mean less borrowing Recursion Dec 2012 #5
This is a sadness that's beyond bearing. ananda Dec 2012 #6
Yes, and what s/he is saying is that when someone borrows money from sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #9
That has nothing to do with the question. The cuts should come from the Fed Budget sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #7
Huh? Recursion Dec 2012 #8
And I'm telling you that it is not. sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #10
Businesses hate paying their half of Social Security - "it's that simple". xtraxritical Dec 2012 #40
it's a tax deduction for them. so not that simple. HiPointDem Dec 2012 #60
Agreed. madfloridian Dec 2012 #13
exactly. HiPointDem Dec 2012 #59
Because SS is the largest holder of our national debt Rex Dec 2012 #11
No, I think T-bills held by investors should take a 10% cut before touching Social Security on point Dec 2012 #65
The immature little brats keep whining so we have to give them all the cookies No Compromise Dec 2012 #12
I know, that was the lamest excuse I have heard yet. 'The Republicans wanted sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #15
The Dems are great at saying "no" Fumesucker Dec 2012 #19
Please edit to remove "retarded". nt FLyellowdog Dec 2012 #39
That is a quote from Rahm Emanuel. That is what he called the ideas sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #46
I didn't see the edit. Thanks for the clarification. nt FLyellowdog Dec 2012 #55
Neo-liberal ideology. n/t duffyduff Dec 2012 #14
Well, it's there now. Chained CPI was the starting point when putting it on the table RomneyLies Dec 2012 #16
Republicans put it on the table. Dems have to respond in a positive way during negotiations librechik Dec 2012 #17
Yeap, just like they didn't in 09...and reThugs lied about their involvement and they lost big uponit7771 Dec 2012 #20
I wish they would act like vicious leapoards defending their young librechik Dec 2012 #21
"Have to"? Why? Couldn't they just politely say "No"? Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2012 #22
Washington is a weird place. They have their own culture there librechik Dec 2012 #23
No, they don't have their own culture. They are hired help. Bluenorthwest Dec 2012 #29
Great post. recd. nt raccoon Dec 2012 #18
Thanks for the excellent post. JEB Dec 2012 #24
The money changers see a pool of money they haven't been able to steal. Yet! retread Dec 2012 #25
And The Goddamned President *knows* this...said so during one of the debates, I believe. AzDar Dec 2012 #26
Let's make this into an SAT question! KansDem Dec 2012 #27
lol Little Star Dec 2012 #30
That is excellent! sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #44
Perfect! LOL nt Mojorabbit Dec 2012 #45
"Social Security is not currently a driver of the deficit. That's an economic fact." ProSense Dec 2012 #31
So he said that in late November and then he admitted that SS was on the table sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #47
Carlin tried to warn us. raouldukelives Dec 2012 #32
As another poster said, Cleita Dec 2012 #33
I will K&R every post that repeats this. (PS - SS is solvent for the next 22 years... ) grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #34
I'm glad I didn't send him any money or spend time on his campaign. CrispyQ Dec 2012 #35
Spot on. jsr Dec 2012 #36
I think the republicans since St. Reagan have been borrowing/raiding from the SS Trust Fund kimbutgar Dec 2012 #37
It is political cover nineteen50 Dec 2012 #41
Yes, and the question is why should Democrats use SS, offer something sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #76
K&R CPI is a term Bernie Sanders said most people don't understand. midnight Dec 2012 #42
That's why they are using it. It is a stealth attack on SS Benefits. sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #63
They will keep screwing with us until we get more progressives in Congress and the WH. nm rhett o rick Dec 2012 #43
The problem is that we rarely get any progressive candidates to vote for. We get the same Nay Dec 2012 #53
Because Rs want to punish all the people who voted for Obama? Coyotl Dec 2012 #48
Let's just say they were off the table reggaehead Dec 2012 #49
Rec. nt. Mc Mike Dec 2012 #50
I've emailed my elected Congress people Dyedinthewoolliberal Dec 2012 #51
This should be an OP. This is a clear statement from Maria Cantwell which is encouraging. Now we sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #58
The SSI fix is easy. Tax all income the same, regardless of source and RAISE THE CAP on point Dec 2012 #52
Exactly ... sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #56
ss = social security. ssi = supplemental security income, not funded from ss taxes. ssi is a HiPointDem Dec 2012 #61
Because President Obama needs convenient scapegoats who can't fight back. forestpath Dec 2012 #54
Here is a photo that illustrates the principle behind SS cuts. retread Dec 2012 #57
Because the banksters and wall streeters who really want to steal the SS monies Fire Walk With Me Dec 2012 #62
Yes, that is exactly what it would be, theft. They've already borrowed sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #74
Not only is the irrational for the reasons you point out... MrMickeysMom Dec 2012 #64
That is a good point: 'its illegal to use SS to balance the general fund.' sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #67
Majorly depressed after that link, sabrina... MrMickeysMom Dec 2012 #68
How sad. And seeing how people are more than willing to pretend they are sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #72
Funny how many friends the Republicans have all of a sudden the election's over. Octafish Dec 2012 #69
Yes, but shhhhh! Obama never put SS on the Deficit table, you imagined it. sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #70
Here's what should be on the table -- the ones who took it. Octafish Dec 2012 #71
Amazing, isn't it? Outright fraud and deception not only is not ON the table sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #73
Thank you for saying this, Sabrina magellan Dec 2012 #75
kick woo me with science Dec 2012 #77
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why is Social Security on...»Reply #51