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
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Heads-Up !!! - 'Why Democrats Might Cave On Social Security Cuts' - HuffPo [View all]
Why Democrats Might Cave On Social Security CutsZach Carter - HuffPo
Posted: 10/20/2013 11:19 am EDT | Updated: 10/20/2013 11:24 am EDT
WASHINGTON -- Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) on Sunday opened the door to Social Security cuts as part of a budget deal with congressional Republicans. But Durbin pushed back against GOP calls for entitlement cuts as the negotiating price to curb or extinguish the economically damaging sequester cuts.
"If this is the bargain that the Republicans are now pushing for, that we have to cut Medicare to avoid cuts at the Department of Defense, they need to take a step back," Durbin said on "Fox News Sunday."
Congress is currently negotiating a new budget, with a December deadline. The talks were mandated by last week's deal to raise the debt ceiling and end the government shutdown.
"If this is the bargain that the Republicans are now pushing for, that we have to cut Medicare to avoid cuts at the Department of Defense, they need to take a step back," Durbin said on "Fox News Sunday."
Congress is currently negotiating a new budget, with a December deadline. The talks were mandated by last week's deal to raise the debt ceiling and end the government shutdown.
And...
Durbin said that Republicans had to put tax revenue on the table to get entitlement cuts. Fox host Chris Wallace noted that Durbin has previously supported entitlement cuts, and asked why Republicans should have to give up tax increases to get something that many Democrats support. President Barack Obama has repeatedly endorsed Social Security cuts as part of budget deals, and Durbin acknowledged that he did support Social Security reforms.
"Social Security is gonna run out of money in 20 years," Durbin said. "The Baby Boom generation is gonna blow away our future. We don't wanna see that happen."
Social Security will not run out of money in 20 years. The program currently enjoys a surplus of more than $2 trillion. Social Security will, however, be unable to pay all benefits at current levels if nothing is changed. If a 25 percent benefit cut were implemented in 20 years, the program would be solvent into the 2080s.
"Social Security is gonna run out of money in 20 years," Durbin said. "The Baby Boom generation is gonna blow away our future. We don't wanna see that happen."
Social Security will not run out of money in 20 years. The program currently enjoys a surplus of more than $2 trillion. Social Security will, however, be unable to pay all benefits at current levels if nothing is changed. If a 25 percent benefit cut were implemented in 20 years, the program would be solvent into the 2080s.
Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/20/democrats-social-security-cuts_n_4132087.html
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
292 replies, 21725 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (93)
ReplyReply to this post
292 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Heads-Up !!! - 'Why Democrats Might Cave On Social Security Cuts' - HuffPo [View all]
WillyT
Oct 2013
OP
No. Raise the cap on payments. It's called Fair Share. No cuts. Expand the funding base.
libdem4life
Oct 2013
#2
SO the richest 100 people might be eligible for 260k annual retirement benefits
FogerRox
Oct 2013
#172
$90 Billion...had no idea. That would probably be easier (?) than SS changes.
libdem4life
Oct 2013
#179
That makes sense. Because once you open up the SS conversation, kind of like a genie in a bottle.
libdem4life
Oct 2013
#206
Now I remember why I wasn't an accountant...appreciate the explanation. Put in minimum wage
libdem4life
Oct 2013
#219
The government has treated SS as a revenue stream to avoid raising taxes so raise the cap or,
emsimon33
Oct 2013
#250
When a prominent Democrat like Durbin LIES through his teeth to the detriment of poor people
99th_Monkey
Oct 2013
#4
Durbin is not welcome in Palm Springs he voted for DOMA so he should stay among
Bluenorthwest
Oct 2013
#79
I quit donating to Durbin when he first expressed his support for cuts to social security.
Enthusiast
Oct 2013
#84
And he IS lying. SS is NOT in trouble, and the Baby Boomers, contrary to his false claims are the
sabrina 1
Oct 2013
#173
Support Elizabeth Warren. I bet she knows how to make the right cuts. She is good at math.
JDPriestly
Oct 2013
#158
Cut 50% from the biggest entitlement program of all - the Defense Dept budget
AlbertCat
Oct 2013
#151
I think this is political chess. The Repubs want SS cuts, but none of them campaign on it with
okaawhatever
Oct 2013
#80
Based on his actions, I would say that it's Durbin's mission to derail Democratic victories.
gtar100
Oct 2013
#81
Any change in Social Security benefits that results in a decrease is a DEFAULT
JDPriestly
Oct 2013
#164
I'd bet you cash money that's what's coming. Obama has been maneuvering for SS cuts
Marr
Oct 2013
#244
But democrats being democrats, we all have to worry about their lack of a spine.
truedelphi
Oct 2013
#280
Raise the cap and cut the military. Stop blaming the boomers ya fuckin sociopaths!
L0oniX
Oct 2013
#7
Perfect timing. This will revitalize the GOP. It's nothing but a gift to Republicans.
jsr
Oct 2013
#10
Do you think so? If the Repubs push SS cuts what will happen to their large senior base? I think
okaawhatever
Oct 2013
#96
How are we putting it in the lap of the republicans when a senior Democratic senator
tularetom
Oct 2013
#135
It's not lost on me that the person who spoke on Fox has one of the safest Senate seats. Not
okaawhatever
Oct 2013
#187
Are you seriously suggesting letting cuts to seniors to go through just so 'we can get their votes'?
sabrina 1
Oct 2013
#247
First they'll have to get out of denial. When he offered it up before some kept telling me it didn't
cui bono
Oct 2013
#33
Well, if the President wants it, it is something good, something we should all embrace.
Enthusiast
Oct 2013
#111
As I recall the debates, Obama suggested raising the cap, and Hillary disagreed.
JDPriestly
Oct 2013
#254
To say that is being too generous. Dems have to want this too or they wouldn't be offering it up
cui bono
Oct 2013
#32
In 2008 Obama ran on raising the cap, this won my vote and he never mentioned it
Bluenorthwest
Oct 2013
#87
No, but he got unlimited income on 3% hike for medicare. That's a huge increase. nt
okaawhatever
Oct 2013
#104
Raising the cap to 90% of taxable income covers 1/3rd of the projected shortfall, from the CBO:
FogerRox
Oct 2013
#136
Once again, assuming things go as planned. We might have an unemployment rate double today's by
Hoyt
Oct 2013
#221
So projections are quite optimistic - GDP growth greater than we've seen in awhile, and
Hoyt
Oct 2013
#233
You are right. Nothing wrong with Social Security that more jobs and a higher minimum
JDPriestly
Oct 2013
#176
OK, but if we can close some loopholes so they actually PAY 40% I'll be happy. nt
Tigress DEM
Oct 2013
#222
Yep. And would you believe I got attacked for saying that now that Obama opened up SS
cui bono
Oct 2013
#31
Cave-in is not the right wording. The word is default. It would be a default.
JDPriestly
Oct 2013
#189
But it can refuse to pay a debt, such as the debt it owes to the Social Security Trust Fund.
JDPriestly
Oct 2013
#210
Right. My sister and I delivered ads door to door. I was maybe 7-9 at the time.
JDPriestly
Oct 2013
#191
When the trust fund has been spent all the $ you contributed is gone to pay others.
dkf
Oct 2013
#77
Yeah we the tax payer pay interest for the general fund's borrowing from our social security fund.
dkf
Oct 2013
#129
not only did we put money in every day of our working lives, we put *extra* money in because
magical thyme
Oct 2013
#108
They're counting on our fatigue to push through SS and Medicaid cuts instead of raising 1% taxes
leveymg
Oct 2013
#21
And of course after next year's midterm disaster, it will be the liberals fault
Doctor_J
Oct 2013
#35
We're supposed to believe (again) that the Ponies frightened away undecided voters?
leveymg
Oct 2013
#178
OK, Dick, the People demand that Congress return every cent of the money it stole from our Social
Zorra
Oct 2013
#23
Most Democrats are cast members, along with all of the Republicans in this distracting, but sad tale
Dustlawyer
Oct 2013
#26
If you tax stock transactions, you tax transactions made by pension plans. So what?
Bluenorthwest
Oct 2013
#94
Taxing stocks was not mentioned in that post either, but you made that assumption
Dragonfli
Oct 2013
#263
HOW can these men be such abject LIARS?? Do they think we cannot access the real truth in numbers??
WinkyDink
Oct 2013
#36
Your point makes me want to cry. I'll be 64 soon, and that, God willing, leads to sixty-five. I've
WinkyDink
Oct 2013
#268
Get our Living Wage Jobs back into this country would extend Social Security for at least forever.
RC
Oct 2013
#42
Centrists say anything that works that day. Obama has proposed raising the cap
Bluenorthwest
Oct 2013
#102
Going after BY NAME the "BBG" is a shameless attempt to get the "YOUTH VOTE." Rule for the 14-yr-old
WinkyDink
Oct 2013
#48
Correct. creating 20 million jobs @ 36k each adds about 89 billion in additional FICA
FogerRox
Oct 2013
#145
I've BEEN to Mexico and it's true!! Barter is part of the fun of shopping there.
Tigress DEM
Oct 2013
#174
Yeah, like divorce court - ask for 10x what you need to get what you do need.
Tigress DEM
Oct 2013
#184
@ Dick Durbin, Esteemed Senator, Have you lost your mind or just your spine?
Tigress DEM
Oct 2013
#73
We need a counter bill to lower SS to at least age 50yrs. This will generate a lot of
CK_John
Oct 2013
#61
Of course if he signs it, then it must be good. So there won't be any reason to complain.
progressoid
Oct 2013
#195
so dems are back to bending over for repubs? well that "spine" didnt last long lol nt
msongs
Oct 2013
#64
Hair On Fire, basically bringing up negative speculative narrative that 9.5 out of 10 fails. The ...
uponit7771
Oct 2013
#156
Obama's budget is not speculation. Nor are his words in favor of cuts, or Durbin's which are the
Dragonfli
Oct 2013
#183
How is that supposed to apply to Durbin's view that we should cut SS, because Baby Boomers?
Dragonfli
Oct 2013
#188
Durbin is worthless as a Democrat, so far to the right that he wants to slash
Bluenorthwest
Oct 2013
#110
National security dictates millions of seniors be thrown into poverty by cutting social security
indepat
Oct 2013
#134
BS! Raise the ceiling on SS. Problem solved. Raise taxes on wealthy to balance biudget
on point
Oct 2013
#139
The baby boomers paid extra into the Social Security Trust Fund since the 1980s to cover their
JDPriestly
Oct 2013
#142
Bingo! More assumptions than I could imagine to get to that "conclusion" about what he said
George II
Oct 2013
#193
Durbin seems clear enough in this statement: ""Social Security is gonna run out of money in 20 years
leveymg
Oct 2013
#194
Ah, I see the admission is that Democrats are NOT going to have to "cave on SS cuts". Excellent!
George II
Oct 2013
#235
No one should be surprised about this. Dem leadership has been discussing this for years.
DCBob
Oct 2013
#209
The Social Security Trust Fund is invested in Treasury Bonds and the problem is
Samantha
Oct 2013
#227
The American people are Creditors of the Fed Govt, along with China, Japan and whoever else
sabrina 1
Oct 2013
#237
I agree that the failure of the Government to fulfill its obligations to the SS Trust Fund would be
Samantha
Oct 2013
#243
Uh, wait.. a "25% benefit cut in 20 years".. yeah, who cares if SS is cut then instead of now, huh?
Warren DeMontague
Oct 2013
#245
No REAL Democrat will ever offer or give in to a reduction in SS. I won't vote for anyone who does.
L0oniX
Oct 2013
#264
Sen Durbin is proof that all Democrats are not friends of the 99%. No cuts is the line we draw. nm
rhett o rick
Oct 2013
#265
I'm still waiting to find out why it would be hunky dory to do a 25% benefit cut in 20 years.
Warren DeMontague
Oct 2013
#270
Why is there nothing in this comment about the effect of serious job creation on the SS Trust Fund
FogerRox
Oct 2013
#284
I have discussed the impact of new jobs on social security in other threads in the past
AndyA
Oct 2013
#290