Fiscal Commission Co-Chairs Recommend Draconian cuts to Social Security and Medicare

[jtown1123]

Well, here you have it folks, the moment we've all been waiting for.

Today we hear the first indication from the co-chairs of the fiscal commission what their recommendations are for Social Security and Medicare:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/10/debt-commission-report-social-security-medicare-_n_781606.html

Time to fight back. Send this E-Card to the Fiscal Commission: http://www.ncpssm.org/sendcard/

"Hands off Social Security!"

If we were waiting for people to get pissed and start rioting, this fiscal commmission could be it.

Thanks for listening.

[Catherina]

1. I hope people won't take this lying down. n/t

[IDHow]

3. Scream out your window: "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not gonna take it anymore!"

People need to mobilize like war, because that's what this is. A war on the people. The people, the eternal enemy of the elites big wig fat cats.

[Catherina]

14. I've been screaming for years, so much that I'mn becoming mute

Obama showed his true colors with his pre-election FISA vote, that's when I dropped the man I'd given so much money to like a hot potato.

I'm mad as hell, not going to take it.

[Individualist]

16. +1

[TBF]

20. I wrote about this earlier today -

explaining the words in his "State of the Union" address in 2009 - http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=517132&mesg_id=517180

The DLC response: oh it's the republicans ... which is complete BS. Dems are just as complicit in this as they were in attacking Iraq.

[Faryn Balyncd]

2. k and r #3

[AldebTX]

4. Its Just The Beginning

Repugs have a whole social net to unweave.

[TBF]

21. If you think repugs are doing this on their own I got a bridge

to sell ya in the middle of Texas. Dems are complicit in this one - Obama has been talking about having "conversations" about social security at least since the state of the union address in 2009 (maybe earlier - but that's when I first caught it).

[Hannah Bell]

5. 70% cut in benefits? wtf? WITH A REDUCTION IN CORPORATE TAX RATES????

UPDATE - 1:25PM ET: The draft put out by the commission chairs has been released, coming in at 50 pages. The overarching goal, Simpson and Bowles write, is to achieve "nearly $4 trillion in deficit reduction through 2020" while reducing "the deficit to 2.2% of GDP by 2015."

How they get there is going to be a matter of contention as other commission members have already stressed their displeasure with the suggestions. But here are a few of the more noteworthy suggestions.

•Roll discretionary spending back to FY2010 levels for FY2012, requires 1% cut in discretionary budget authority every year from FY2013 though 2015;

•Fully offset the cost of the "Doc Fix" by asking doctors and other health providers, lawyers, and individuals to take responsibility for slowing health care cost growth;


•Reduce farm subsidies by 3 billion per year by reducing direct payments and other subsidies;


•Achieve 100 billion in Illustrative Defense Cuts;


•Index retirement age for Social security to increases in longevity. "This option is projected to increase the age by one month every two years after it reaches 67 under current law, meaning the normal retirement age would reach 68 in about 2050 and 69 in about 2075." There will be a "hardship exemption" for those unable to work beyond 62;


•Give retirees the choice of collecting half their benefits early and the other half at a later age to minimize impact of actuarial reduction and support phased retirement options;


•Reduce corporate tax rate to 26% and permanently extend the research credit;


•Gradually increase gas tax to fund transportation spending.

•Reduce Congressional & White House budgets by 15 percent;

•Freeze federal salaries, bonuses, and other compensation at non-defense agencies for three hears;


•Cap the number of federal political appointments at 2,000;


•Eliminate the Office of Safe & Drug Free Schools;


•Eliminate all earmarks.;


•Reduce unnecessary printing costs;


•Reduce funding to the Smithsonian and the National Park Service and allow the programs to offset the reduction through fees;


•Cut funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.


The most direct assault on Social Security, however, may not be the increase of the retirement age, but rather an attempt to tilt the program toward a welfare model and away from the current, universal insurance model that has made it popular and enduring despite 75 years of attacks. The co-chairs propose to "increase progressivity of benefit formula by creating a new bendpoint at the 50th percentile." Such a move would require means testing. In other words, the government would determine benefits based on a beneficiary's assets and other sources of income. Currently, beneficiaries are paid benefits based on their contribution over their working life. Replacing the social insurance model with a welfare model would erode support, encourage fraud and ultimately undermine the program.

[unblock]

7. why do they hate safe & drug free schools?

oh, right, they want public schools to turn into disaster areas so anyone with money will have to send it (along with their kids) to a private school.

[jtown1123]

9. Means testing is the nail in the coffin for Social Security, thanks for responding

[Individualist]

17. and the Commission's actions will be the nail in the coffin of the Democratic Party.

DLC has succeeded.

[Catherina]

15. Not a single penny to come from the war budget. How interesting. n/t

[Hannah Bell]

18. "Achieve 100 billion in Illustrative Defense Cuts" -- but yeah, it's a pittance.

[Catherina]

24. I missed that.

Thanks for the correction but still chump change as you said. WTH are Illustrative Defense Cuts?

[Hannah Bell]

6. kik for visibility

[Me.]

8. Call Nancy Pelosi's Office & Ask Her To Fight This

[phone]

[jtown1123]

10. Fortunately, Pelosi is a big ally of Social Security.

[Me.]

28. That's Right

And she's fearless

[leftstreet]

11. K&R

[ipaint]

12. Thank you, Obama, you did this.

Change you can believe in. :puke:

[TBF]

23. Yes he did and it is noted. nt

[pinto]

13. I read through the Co Chairs' draft documents and don't see a 70% cut recommendation.

I think this was speculation made anonymously and passed on by the blogger -

"In the process of pursuing their reforms for Social Security and Medicare, the commission chairs are expected to suggest that the end result will be a 70 percent cut in benefits and 30 percent increase in revenues, according to the source familiar with the upcoming announcement."

Updates to the HuffPo blog, post release, have no mention of 70%.

fwiw, folks can go to the draft proposal from the CoChairs, i.e. the source. And remember, it's a draft and has to be approved by 14 of the 18 member commission. -

http://www.fiscalcommission.gov/sites/fiscalcommission.gov/files/documents/CoChair_Draft.pdf

http://www.fiscalcommission.gov/sites/fiscalcommission.gov/files/documents/Illustrative_List_11.10.2010.pdf

[jtown1123]

19. That's definitely hyperbole. I am waiting on some legitimate analysis before I throw those numbers

around.

[pinto]

22. Yeah, same here. Some of the draft proposals look good, some don't look good and

some go right over my head.

[Radical Activist]

27. This maneuver indicates that their ideas won't be approved by the full commission.

This looks like a tactic to get attention for their ideas because they know agreement on them can't be reached.

[Better Believe It]

32. They are softening us up for deficit cuts "that won't be as bad".

[KansasVoter]

25. Jesus, way yo flip out automatically. I would love to see your solutions! Wait a damn week!!

[Better Believe It]

26. That's on top of the 500 billion in Medicare cuts proposed under the health insurance act.

[alarimer]

29. Fuck those rich assholes.

None of them have had to work a day in their lives. Sitting around getting rich at the public trough.

[blindpig]

30. Fuck those people

I'll see ya'll in the street.

[suffragette]

31. Krugman makes apt assessment

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/10/unserious-people-2/
November 10, 2010, 1:43 pm
Unserious People

OK, let’s say goodbye to the deficit commission. If you’re sincerely worried about the US fiscal future — and there’s good reason to be — you don’t propose a plan that involves large cuts in income taxes. Even if those cuts are offset by supposed elimination of tax breaks elsewhere, balancing the budget is hard enough without giving out a lot of goodies — goodies that fairly obviously, even without having the details, would go largely to the very affluent.

I mean, what’s this about? There is no — zero — evidence that income taxes at current rates are an important drag on growth.

Oh, and they’re talking about raising the retirement age, because people live longer — except that the people who really depend on Social Security, those in the bottom half of the distribution, aren’t living much longer. So you’re going to tell janitors to work until they’re 70 because lawyers are living longer than ever.

Still, I guess this is what it takes to get compromise, if by compromise you mean something the center-right and the hard right can agree on.


Because it bears repeating: So you’re going to tell janitors to work until they’re 70 because lawyers are living longer than ever.

[Individualist]

33. Co-Chairs: A neocon and a DLC tool