

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
President Obama on Wednesday did a remarkable 180-degree turn on Social Security, and since we have been dogging him for his earlier failed attempt at a "grand bargain" that would have cut Social Security benefits for future seniors, let's give credit where credit is due.
Here's what the president said at the Concord Community Elementary School in Elkhart, Ind.:
President Obama on Wednesday did a remarkable 180-degree turn on Social Security, and since we have been dogging him for his earlier failed attempt at a "grand bargain" that would have cut Social Security benefits for future seniors, let's give credit where credit is due.
Here's what the president said at the Concord Community Elementary School in Elkhart, Ind.:
But look, let's face it - a lot of Americans don't have retirement savings. Even if they've got an account set up, they just don't have enough money at the end of the month to save as much as they'd like because they're just barely paying the bills. Fewer and fewer people have pensions they can really count on, which is why Social Security is more important than ever. We can't afford to weaken Social Security. We should be strengthening Social Security. And not only do we need to strengthen its long-term health, it's time we finally made Social Security more generous, and increased its benefits so that today's retirees and future generations get the dignified retirement that they've earned. And we could start paying for it by asking the wealthiest Americans to contribute a little bit more. They can afford it. I can afford it.
That is the message that members of the progressive Social Security coalition have been pressing for years, but this is the first time that we can claim President Obama as an ally on this issue.
Nancy Altman, president of Social Security Works, was as late as last year making critical comments about President Obama's stance on Social Security, telling Talking Points Memo that Obama "hasn't been great on this issue." Then, Altman was still smarting from Obama's willingness to cut a deal with Republicans in 2011 that would have resulted in a reduced cost-of-living adjustment for Social Security benefits, and thus would have eroded seniors' buying power over time.
But on Wednesday, Altman released a statement that praised Obama for adding "to his already impressive legacy. By endorsing expanding, not cutting, Social Security, he has thwarted a thirty-year, billionaire-funded campaign to undermine confidence in the future of Social Security. He has announced loudly and clearly that the question whether to expand or cut Social Security is one of values, plain and simple."
Maya Rockeymoore, president of the Center for Global Policy Solutions (and a member of the Campaign for America's Future board) explained in a statement what President Obama's about-face meant in dollars-and-cents terms.
"We applaud President Obama's proposal to strengthen Social Security given that our nation is facing a retirement crisis with 38 million working-age households (45 percent of the U.S. workforce) without retirement savings of any kind and a paltry median account balance of $40,000 for those with retirement accounts in 2010," Rockeymoore wrote.
That's particularly true for people of color, the statement continued, because they are disproportionately employed "in low-wage jobs that don't pay enough for them to save and don't offer retirement benefits."
Paul Waldman, writing in The Washington Post, said, "Now that Obama has taken this position, it makes it much more likely that most or all Democrats will adopt it as well, which could truly change a debate that up until now has been dominated by an alliance of Republicans and supposedly centrist advocates whose mission is to scale back the most successful social programs America ever created."
This is a victory for the millions of people who have joined the call to expand Social Security, not cut it. This should also eliminate any ambiguity over who really supports protecting Social Security, and who is only mouthing the phrase to cover an agenda that would do violence to a program that has been the only thing separating millions of people in their sunset years from abject poverty.
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 |
President Obama on Wednesday did a remarkable 180-degree turn on Social Security, and since we have been dogging him for his earlier failed attempt at a "grand bargain" that would have cut Social Security benefits for future seniors, let's give credit where credit is due.
Here's what the president said at the Concord Community Elementary School in Elkhart, Ind.:
But look, let's face it - a lot of Americans don't have retirement savings. Even if they've got an account set up, they just don't have enough money at the end of the month to save as much as they'd like because they're just barely paying the bills. Fewer and fewer people have pensions they can really count on, which is why Social Security is more important than ever. We can't afford to weaken Social Security. We should be strengthening Social Security. And not only do we need to strengthen its long-term health, it's time we finally made Social Security more generous, and increased its benefits so that today's retirees and future generations get the dignified retirement that they've earned. And we could start paying for it by asking the wealthiest Americans to contribute a little bit more. They can afford it. I can afford it.
That is the message that members of the progressive Social Security coalition have been pressing for years, but this is the first time that we can claim President Obama as an ally on this issue.
Nancy Altman, president of Social Security Works, was as late as last year making critical comments about President Obama's stance on Social Security, telling Talking Points Memo that Obama "hasn't been great on this issue." Then, Altman was still smarting from Obama's willingness to cut a deal with Republicans in 2011 that would have resulted in a reduced cost-of-living adjustment for Social Security benefits, and thus would have eroded seniors' buying power over time.
But on Wednesday, Altman released a statement that praised Obama for adding "to his already impressive legacy. By endorsing expanding, not cutting, Social Security, he has thwarted a thirty-year, billionaire-funded campaign to undermine confidence in the future of Social Security. He has announced loudly and clearly that the question whether to expand or cut Social Security is one of values, plain and simple."
Maya Rockeymoore, president of the Center for Global Policy Solutions (and a member of the Campaign for America's Future board) explained in a statement what President Obama's about-face meant in dollars-and-cents terms.
"We applaud President Obama's proposal to strengthen Social Security given that our nation is facing a retirement crisis with 38 million working-age households (45 percent of the U.S. workforce) without retirement savings of any kind and a paltry median account balance of $40,000 for those with retirement accounts in 2010," Rockeymoore wrote.
That's particularly true for people of color, the statement continued, because they are disproportionately employed "in low-wage jobs that don't pay enough for them to save and don't offer retirement benefits."
Paul Waldman, writing in The Washington Post, said, "Now that Obama has taken this position, it makes it much more likely that most or all Democrats will adopt it as well, which could truly change a debate that up until now has been dominated by an alliance of Republicans and supposedly centrist advocates whose mission is to scale back the most successful social programs America ever created."
This is a victory for the millions of people who have joined the call to expand Social Security, not cut it. This should also eliminate any ambiguity over who really supports protecting Social Security, and who is only mouthing the phrase to cover an agenda that would do violence to a program that has been the only thing separating millions of people in their sunset years from abject poverty.
President Obama on Wednesday did a remarkable 180-degree turn on Social Security, and since we have been dogging him for his earlier failed attempt at a "grand bargain" that would have cut Social Security benefits for future seniors, let's give credit where credit is due.
Here's what the president said at the Concord Community Elementary School in Elkhart, Ind.:
But look, let's face it - a lot of Americans don't have retirement savings. Even if they've got an account set up, they just don't have enough money at the end of the month to save as much as they'd like because they're just barely paying the bills. Fewer and fewer people have pensions they can really count on, which is why Social Security is more important than ever. We can't afford to weaken Social Security. We should be strengthening Social Security. And not only do we need to strengthen its long-term health, it's time we finally made Social Security more generous, and increased its benefits so that today's retirees and future generations get the dignified retirement that they've earned. And we could start paying for it by asking the wealthiest Americans to contribute a little bit more. They can afford it. I can afford it.
That is the message that members of the progressive Social Security coalition have been pressing for years, but this is the first time that we can claim President Obama as an ally on this issue.
Nancy Altman, president of Social Security Works, was as late as last year making critical comments about President Obama's stance on Social Security, telling Talking Points Memo that Obama "hasn't been great on this issue." Then, Altman was still smarting from Obama's willingness to cut a deal with Republicans in 2011 that would have resulted in a reduced cost-of-living adjustment for Social Security benefits, and thus would have eroded seniors' buying power over time.
But on Wednesday, Altman released a statement that praised Obama for adding "to his already impressive legacy. By endorsing expanding, not cutting, Social Security, he has thwarted a thirty-year, billionaire-funded campaign to undermine confidence in the future of Social Security. He has announced loudly and clearly that the question whether to expand or cut Social Security is one of values, plain and simple."
Maya Rockeymoore, president of the Center for Global Policy Solutions (and a member of the Campaign for America's Future board) explained in a statement what President Obama's about-face meant in dollars-and-cents terms.
"We applaud President Obama's proposal to strengthen Social Security given that our nation is facing a retirement crisis with 38 million working-age households (45 percent of the U.S. workforce) without retirement savings of any kind and a paltry median account balance of $40,000 for those with retirement accounts in 2010," Rockeymoore wrote.
That's particularly true for people of color, the statement continued, because they are disproportionately employed "in low-wage jobs that don't pay enough for them to save and don't offer retirement benefits."
Paul Waldman, writing in The Washington Post, said, "Now that Obama has taken this position, it makes it much more likely that most or all Democrats will adopt it as well, which could truly change a debate that up until now has been dominated by an alliance of Republicans and supposedly centrist advocates whose mission is to scale back the most successful social programs America ever created."
This is a victory for the millions of people who have joined the call to expand Social Security, not cut it. This should also eliminate any ambiguity over who really supports protecting Social Security, and who is only mouthing the phrase to cover an agenda that would do violence to a program that has been the only thing separating millions of people in their sunset years from abject poverty.