SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Sanders: Proposed Social Security Cuts 'Morally Grotesque'
Cuts to hit oldest, poorest beneficiaries
Oct 16, 2012
US Senator Bernie Sanders said Tuesday that a "draconian" proposal to chain the cost-of-living increase to the Consumer Price Index is "not only morally grotesque, it is extremely bad economics."
The Social Security Administration on Tuesday announced a 1.7 percent cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) next year, one of the lowest since the automatic annual adjustments were adopted in 1975.
But benefits for senior citizens and disabled veterans would be reduced under a proposal by former GOP Sen. Alan Simpson of Wyoming and investment banker and former White House chief of staff Erskine Bowles.
The Simpson-Bowles Plan would chain the COLA to the Department of Labor's CPI. That would reduce Social Security checks by 3 percent over 10 years and 9 percent over 30 years--even as the cost of living for the elderly may actually increase, said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center of Economic and Policy Research.
The average senior who retires at age 65 would see their Social Security benefits cut by about $560 a year when they reach 75 and by about $1,000 a year once they turn 85. At the beginning of 2012, the average Social Security benefit for a retired worker was $14,760 per year, according to Sanders.
"The idea of balancing the budget on the backs of some of the most vulnerable people in our country--the elderly, orphans, widows and disabled veterans--is not only morally grotesque, it is extremely bad economics," Sanders said.
Baker called for creating an elderly index, arguing that there is no reason not to "unless those pushing for switching the basis for the COLA to a chained index are simply using it as a backdoor to cut benefits. This is not only dishonest; it is an especially bad way to cut benefits. Those who would be hit hardest would be the oldest beneficiaries, who also tend to be the poorest."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
US Senator Bernie Sanders said Tuesday that a "draconian" proposal to chain the cost-of-living increase to the Consumer Price Index is "not only morally grotesque, it is extremely bad economics."
The Social Security Administration on Tuesday announced a 1.7 percent cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) next year, one of the lowest since the automatic annual adjustments were adopted in 1975.
But benefits for senior citizens and disabled veterans would be reduced under a proposal by former GOP Sen. Alan Simpson of Wyoming and investment banker and former White House chief of staff Erskine Bowles.
The Simpson-Bowles Plan would chain the COLA to the Department of Labor's CPI. That would reduce Social Security checks by 3 percent over 10 years and 9 percent over 30 years--even as the cost of living for the elderly may actually increase, said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center of Economic and Policy Research.
The average senior who retires at age 65 would see their Social Security benefits cut by about $560 a year when they reach 75 and by about $1,000 a year once they turn 85. At the beginning of 2012, the average Social Security benefit for a retired worker was $14,760 per year, according to Sanders.
"The idea of balancing the budget on the backs of some of the most vulnerable people in our country--the elderly, orphans, widows and disabled veterans--is not only morally grotesque, it is extremely bad economics," Sanders said.
Baker called for creating an elderly index, arguing that there is no reason not to "unless those pushing for switching the basis for the COLA to a chained index are simply using it as a backdoor to cut benefits. This is not only dishonest; it is an especially bad way to cut benefits. Those who would be hit hardest would be the oldest beneficiaries, who also tend to be the poorest."
US Senator Bernie Sanders said Tuesday that a "draconian" proposal to chain the cost-of-living increase to the Consumer Price Index is "not only morally grotesque, it is extremely bad economics."
The Social Security Administration on Tuesday announced a 1.7 percent cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) next year, one of the lowest since the automatic annual adjustments were adopted in 1975.
But benefits for senior citizens and disabled veterans would be reduced under a proposal by former GOP Sen. Alan Simpson of Wyoming and investment banker and former White House chief of staff Erskine Bowles.
The Simpson-Bowles Plan would chain the COLA to the Department of Labor's CPI. That would reduce Social Security checks by 3 percent over 10 years and 9 percent over 30 years--even as the cost of living for the elderly may actually increase, said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center of Economic and Policy Research.
The average senior who retires at age 65 would see their Social Security benefits cut by about $560 a year when they reach 75 and by about $1,000 a year once they turn 85. At the beginning of 2012, the average Social Security benefit for a retired worker was $14,760 per year, according to Sanders.
"The idea of balancing the budget on the backs of some of the most vulnerable people in our country--the elderly, orphans, widows and disabled veterans--is not only morally grotesque, it is extremely bad economics," Sanders said.
Baker called for creating an elderly index, arguing that there is no reason not to "unless those pushing for switching the basis for the COLA to a chained index are simply using it as a backdoor to cut benefits. This is not only dishonest; it is an especially bad way to cut benefits. Those who would be hit hardest would be the oldest beneficiaries, who also tend to be the poorest."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.