August, 10 2011, 03:51pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Don Owens, (202) 587-1653 dowens@socialsecurity-works.org
Joshua Rosenblum, (202) 587-1635 jrosenblum@socialsecurity-works.org
Veterans' Groups Urge President Obama and Congress Not to Cut Social Security Benefits
Groups Oppose Changes to COLA Formula that Would Result in Significant Benefit Cuts
WASHINGTON
Eight leading veterans' groups sent letters to President Obama, and to members of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate today, urging them to continue their commitments to veterans and their families during negotiations over the federal deficit by opposing any effort to reduce benefits by adopting the chained consumer price index (CPI) formula for determining Cost of Living Adjustments (COLAs) for recipients.
The letters from the American GI Forum, AMVETS, Blinded Veterans Association, National Military Family Association, Paralyzed Veterans of America, VetsFirst, a program of United Spinal Association, Vietnam Veterans of America, and VoteVets.org identified significant cuts that would occur to 9 million veterans receiving Social Security retirement benefits, 3.2 million receiving VA Disability Compensation Benefits, and 310,000 receiving VA Pension Benefits if the chained CPI was used to calculate the annual COLA. Those cuts are detailed in this fact sheet.
The letters from veterans groups said: "Many veterans who rely on these programs live on fixed incomes and very tight budgets. For them, every dollar of hard-earned benefits counts in meeting basic expenses, attaining quality of life, and building a better future for themselves and those who depend on them. For many of them, reducing the annual COLA would mean real sacrifice. We ask that you not do that for those who have already sacrificed so much for this great country."
The letter to President Obama is below. Similar letters were sent to all members of Congress.
Dear Mr. President:
We thank you for the strong commitment you have shown to veterans and their families since you came into office. We are very grateful.
We hope you will continue your strong support during these challenging negotiations over the federal deficit. That is why we are writing to bring to your attention our concerns about the harmful effects changes to the formula used to calculate the annual cost of living adjustments (COLAs) will have on Social Security benefits and veterans' benefits.
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that adopting the chained consumer price index (CPI) to calculate annual COLAs could save the government $208 billion over ten years by reducing Social Security, disability, and other benefits, and by increasing revenues. More than half of this amount - $112 billion - would come from Social Security cuts, which veterans rely on very heavily for both retirement and disability benefits. Another 11 percent of the savings - $24 billion - would come from VA benefits, civilian pensions, and military retirement pay.
We estimate that use of the chained CPI would have a significant effect on benefits that millions of veterans depend on in the following ways:
- Social Security Retirement Benefits: Social Security is one of our nation's most important programs serving veterans and their dependents and survivors. It currently pays benefits to over 9 million veterans - about 4 in 10. The average retirement benefit of a veteran receiving Social Security was about $15,500 in 2010. Adopting the chained CPI would significantly reduce those benefits, by changing the manner in which COLAs are determined. A veteran with average earnings retiring at age 65 would get nearly a $600 benefit cut at age 75, and a $1,000 cut at age 85. By age 95, when Social Security benefits are probably needed the most, that veteran would face a cut of $1,400 - a reduction of 9.2 percent.
Not only would a Social Security COLA cut hurt veterans and their families; it is also misguided policy. Social Security is self-financed by the contributions of workers and employers. In effect, it belongs to its contributors. It is separate from the rest of the budget. To use it to reduce the federal deficit, which it did not cause, or effectively to fund other parts of the government or to help maintain tax breaks unrelated to Social Security, is to break the promise of Social Security.
- VA Disability Compensation Benefits: Veterans are generally eligible for VA disability compensation benefits if they become disabled due to injuries or illnesses sustained during, or as a result of, military service. There were 3.2 million veterans receiving these benefits in 2010. A veteran receiving VA disability compensation due to a service-connected disability rated at 100 percent is currently entitled to receive $32,076 a year. Under the chained CPI, which is a cut in the formula traditionally used to determine the COLA for VA benefits, a disabled veteran who started receiving benefits at age 30 would have their benefits reduced by $1,376 at age 45, $1,821 at age 55 and $2,260 at age 65.
- VA Pension Benefits: Veterans with low incomes who are either permanently and totally disabled, or age 65 and older, may be eligible for pension benefits if they served during a period of war. More than 310,000 veterans received VA pension benefits in 2010. The current benefit for a veteran is just $11,830 a year. Under the chained CPI, VA pension benefits for veterans aged 65 and older living in poverty would be reduced by $341 at age 75, $672 at age 85 and $993 at age 95.
Social Security and veterans' benefits need to be based on an accurate measure of inflation. The current COLA formula understates the true cost-of-living increases faced by seniors and people with disabilities because it does not take into account their higher share of spending devoted to health care, and that health care prices rise much more rapidly than overall prices. Although veterans who have service-connected disabilities and those receiving pension benefits are eligible for VA health care, they may still be impacted by rising out-of-pocket health care costs. Adopting the chained CPI would make the situation worse.
Instead, Social Security and VA benefits should be based on a formula that takes account of these higher health care costs called the CPI-E (Experimental CPI for the Elderly) developed by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The CPI-E rises at a slightly faster rate than the formula currently used to calculate the COLA, and at a still faster rate than the proposed chained CPI, providing a modestly more generous COLA for seniors and people with disabilities.
We agree that political leaders need to restore fiscal discipline, but we believe it should be done with great care and without reneging on this country's promises to veterans, including the promises of Social Security and VA disability compensation and pension benefits - all of which are modest in size. Many veterans who rely on these programs live on fixed incomes and very tight budgets. For them, every dollar of hard-earned benefits counts in meeting basic expenses, attaining quality of life, and building a better future for themselves and those who depend on them. For many of them, reducing the annual COLA would mean real sacrifice. We ask that you not do that for those who have already sacrificed so much for this great country.
Thank you for your serious consideration of our views. We look forward to working with your Administration on this important matter.
Sincerely,
American GI Forum
AMVETS
Blinded Veterans Association
National Military Family Association
Paralyzed Veterans of America
VetsFirst, a program of United Spinal Association
Vietnam Veterans of America
VoteVets.org
The Strengthen Social Security Campaign is comprised of more than 300 national and state organizations representing more than 50 million Americans from many of the nation's leading aging, labor, disability, women's, children, consumer, civil rights and equality organizations.
LATEST NEWS
Chilean Judge Convicts US-Trained Pinochet Agents for 1976 Murder of Ronni Moffitt
The 25-year-old American, her newlywed husband, and former Chilean diplomat Orlando Letelier were driving to work at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington, DC when their car was bombed.
Jun 23, 2026
The Institute for Policy Studies on Monday welcomed a judge's homicide convictions and prison sentences for three agents of former US-backed Chilean dictator Gen. Augusto Pinochet who murdered Ronni Karpen Moffitt, one of the progressive think tank's employees, during a 1976 car bombing targeting her colleague, the exiled leftist diplomat Orlando Letelier.
Last Thursday, Chilean Judge Paola Plaza González sentenced three former agents of the Directorate of National Intelligence (DINA)—Pedro Octavio Espinoza Bravo, José Octavio Zara Holger, and Raúl Eduardo Iturriaga Neumann—to 15 years' imprisonment each for the qualified homicide of Moffitt, who was 25 at the time she was killed with her Institute for Policy Studies colleague Letelier.
There is no legal status of murder in Chile, where homicides are divided into two categories, simple and qualified (aggravated).
On the morning of September 21, 1976, Moffit, Letelier, and Michael Moffitt—Ronni's husband of four months, who also worked at IPS—were on their way to work when the Chevy Malibu in which they were traveling was blown up in Sheridan Circle on Washington, DC's Embassy Row.
Michael, who was sitting in the back seat, survived the blast and watched as Ronni staggered from the mangled car, mortally wounded in the neck, drowning in her own blood. Letelier, whose legs were blown off and torso mangled, died before an ambulance arrived.
Never before and never since has a foreign diplomat been assassinated on American soil.

“For a half century, IPS has turned this heinous act of international terrorism into a force for justice and for lifting up new human rights champions in the United States and Latin America,” IPS executive director Tope Folarin said in response to the sentences. “We are thrilled to see this huge step towards accountability for the murder of Ronni Karpen Moffitt, a young American woman whose work to improve lives in her community and her world was cut tragically short.”
Moffitt's niece, Rebecca Karpen, said that "the recent sentencing of three of the men responsible for my aunt’s murder comes 50 years after their crime was committed—17 years after the death of my grandfather, Murray Karpen, who dedicated his life to fighting for justice for his daughter, and four years after the death of her brother, my father Harry, who carried her picture in his wallet for decades after his big sister was murdered."
"It is often said that justice delayed is justice denied," Karpen added. "So many of my family members who loved Ronni never lived to see this measure of justice applied, and that is a tragedy."
"So many of my family members who loved Ronni never lived to see this measure of justice applied, and that is a tragedy."
Plaza noted that the attack was planned under the direction of then-DINA Director Gen. Manuel Contreras Sepulveda and his deputy, Pedro Octavio Espinoza Bravo, as part of "a series of attacks outside the national territory against the lives of Chilean citizens" during Operation Condor.
The secret, US-backed effort, which ran from 1975-83, saw right-wing military dictatorships in Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Bolivia, Paraguay, Brazil, Peru, and Ecuador collaborate on an international campaign of terror in which an estimated 60,000 leftists were killed, while tens of thousands of others were arrested and tortured.
Letelier was targeted because he was once a Chilean foreign minister under former socialist President Salvador Allende, who had become a prominent critic of the Pinochet dictatorship while living in exile after the US-backed 1973 coup that overthrew his democratically elected reformist government and brought Pinochet to power.
Other prominent leftists forced into exile during Pinochet's reign of terror—including former Army commander Gen. Carlos Prats and his wife Sofia Cuthbert—were assassinated during Operation Condor. In fact, Contreras and the three men convicted last week were also found guilty in 2010 of killing the couple in a 1974 car bombing in Buenos Aires.
Officials in the administration of US President Gerald Ford, including Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, knew Pinochet's government and other Condor partners were planning to murder their political opponents abroad. The State Department drafted warnings regarding the impending assassinations but withdrew them shortly before the Letelier-Moffitt killings.
In her sentencing order last week, Plaza affirmed the role of DINA Capt. Armando Fernández Larios in obtaining passports for members of the hit squad, as well as for US citizen Michael Townley, a US-born DINA operative who built the remote-control bomb and placed it under Letelier's driver's seat. According to court records, declassified documents, and media reporting, Townley consulted with notorious anti-Castro Cuban militants Orlando Bosch and Luis Posada Carriles—who were behind terrorist attacks including the bombing of Cubana Flight 455—while selecting operatives for the Letelier assassination.
However, last week's convictions and sentences were solely for Espinoza, Zara, and Iturriaga—and exclusively for Moffitt's murder.
In 1993, Contreras and Bravo were convicted in Chile for ordering and implementing Letelier's assassination. Contreras was sentenced to seven years in prison, where he died in 2015 while serving hundreds of years of cumulative sentences for Pinochet-era crimes. Bravo was sentenced to six years behind bars.
Townley, Fernández, and five right-wing Cuban exile militants were separately convicted in the United States in connection with Letelier's assassination. Townley served just over five years before being placed in witness protection due to his cooperation with investigators. Fernández was released after seven months, due to a plea bargain. Two of the Cubans served eight years; the convictions of their three co-defendants were overturned on appeal.
All three men convicted and sentenced last week for Moffitt's murder attended the US Army School of the Americas (SOA), then located in Panama. So did Contreras and Fernández.
SOA is sometimes called the School of Assassins and the School of Coups due to its notorious graduates and their crimes, including the drug trafficking Panamanian president Manuel Noriega, Bolivian despot Hugo Banzer, Haitian death squad commander Raoul Cedras, and Argentine “Dirty War” dictator Leopoldo Galtieri
At least hundreds of war criminals from throughout the hemisphere have been trained at the SOA, whose graduates planned, ordered, committed, or covered up some of the most notorious atrocities of the era, including the Guatemalan genocide; El Mozote massacre; assassination of Archbishop Óscar Romero; Jesuit massacre; and kidnapping, rape, and murder of four US churchwomen.
Juan Pablo Letelier, the son of Orlando Letelier and a former Chilean senator, called last week's sentences "an act of justice."
"Truth has prevailed," Letelier asserted. "Many years have gone by in this effort for truth and justice. Yet, with perseverance and with conviction, we’ve reached the point where, in a Chilean court, this act of terrorism in which an American citizen was assassinated by Chile’s secret police in 1976 has finally had a case, an investigation, and a sentencing of the three main people responsible."
"We hope that US government authorities will now consider that what has been done in Chile should also be done in the US regarding the investigation and the sanctioning of those responsible for this terrorist act," he added. "There are persons who are responsible for Ronni Karpen Moffitt’s death 50 years ago who are still in liberty on US soil, and there are pending Chilean requests for their extradition with which the US government has not complied."
Chile is seeking the extradition of Fernández, who was arrested by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in Florida last year but has not been handed over to Chilean authorities to stand trial.
“Justice is slow," Letelier recently wrote. "There are many families in Chile who were victims... and they want justice... Armando Fernández Larios should never have been free in the United States.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Alan Greenspan, Longtime Fed Chair and Ayn Rand Disciple, Meets Ultimate ‘Invisible Hand’
"For decades, he preached that the self-interest of the predator was the invisible hand of the common good," Yanis Varoufakis said after the man who led the US central bank under four presidents died aged 100.
Jun 22, 2026
Alan Greenspan, whose policies during nearly 20 years as US Federal Reserve chair fueled soaring economic inequality and helped create the conditions for multiple economic crashes, died Monday at age 100 after a long battle with Parkinson's disease.
While many corporate media outlets published hagiographic obituaries lionizing the "Maestro" who presided over nearly two decades of low inflation, rising stock prices, and American economic confidence, critics focused on Greenspan's role in promoting dangerous deregulation and "easy money" policies that inflated financial bubbles, with sometimes disastrous results.
Robert Reich—who served as US labor secretary under President Bill Clinton during all of Greenspan's tenure—called him "in many ways the most powerful person in America" during that era.
"If any single person was responsible for the financial crisis of 2008, it was Greenspan."
"He maintained an iron grip over the Fed, and almost single-handedly decided on interest rates," Reich wrote. "He essentially fired George H. W. Bush by raising interest rates so high (ostensibly to ward off the inflation then threatening the economy) that the economy took a dive, and voters blamed Bush. This was enough to convince my boss, Bill Clinton, to do exactly what Greenspan wanted—which was to reduce the federal budget deficit and thereby destroy much of the agenda Clinton ran on (and I helped create)."
"I don’t want to speak ill of anyone who has passed. Greenspan was an extremely charming, intelligent, and thoughtful man," Reich added. "But the truth must be told: If any single person was responsible for the financial crisis of 2008, it was Greenspan. That crisis—the worst collapse since 1929, which led to the worst recession in decades, in which millions of Americans lost their jobs, savings, and even their homes—resulted from the deregulation of Wall Street that Greenspan advocated."
Former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis wrote on X: "His epitaph? A singular, glorious confession, 'I found a flaw in my model of the world.' A flaw, he said, as though it were a leaky pipe, not a total collapse of the intellectual architecture that anointed him Oracle. For decades, he preached that the self-interest of the predator was the invisible hand of the common good.
"Then, in 2008, the beast devoured the table, and to his credit, he blinked, admitting that his entire worldview—the one that central bankers canonized and the world swallowed—was a fairy tale for rentiers," Varoufakis added. "He did not, of course, admit to culpability. That would require a moral compass, a device notably absent from his Ayn Randian toolbelt. No, he merely noted the flaw, as a meteorologist might note a gust of wind, and returned to his well-earned silence."
Born 10 miles from Wall Street in Manhattan's Washington Heights during one of the most infamous economic bubbles of all time, Greenspan was a protégé of libertarian writer and philosopher Ayn Rand and was influenced by the Atlas Shrugged author's moral defense of capitalism, her fierce advocacy of deregulation, and her insidious insistence that self-interest was socially beneficial.
Their relationship cooled as Greenspan embraced more mainstream economic policies despised by Rand and gradually became a leading steward of the very sort of state-shepherded system she deeply distrusted.
After heading President Gerald Ford's Council of Economic Advisers, Greenspan was appointed chair of the Fed by President Ronald Reagan in 1987. He would remain in the post well into George W. Bush's second term.
Greenspan generally favored low interest rates, especially after crises like the 1987 stock market crash, the 1998 Long-Term Capital Management crisis, and the 2001 recession. His fame grew after he suggested that the economy might be experiencing a tech-driven “productivity miracle," language that many investors took as validation that traditional valuation limits were obsolete.
Critics would later call it a "productivity mirage."
Staunch devotion to low interest rates by Greenspan's Fed boosted stock prices and real estate values under "easy money" policies. Many investors came to believe that the Fed would intervene aggressively whenever markets fell sharply—the so-called "Greenspan Put."
However, since ownership of financial assets (and the firms that sell and promote them) is concentrated among the wealthy, it was the rich who benefited most from Greenspan's polices. When bubbles burst, as they did after the dot-com boom that ended in early 2000 and during the 2008 global financial crisis, the rich bounced back thanks to their diversified portfolios and bailouts, while middle- and lower-income households were wiped out through asset devaluation, foreclosures, and job losses.
"It is no exaggeration to say the global financial crisis of 2008 had an enormous and lasting impact on American life and the way ordinary people view elites," New York Times global economic correspondent Peter S. Goodman said on social media. "It is also no exaggeration to say that Alan Greenspan has as much responsibility for the crisis as an individual can."
"For those not old enough to remember, it is difficult to state his aura during his time of greatest influence," Goodman continued. "When he told Americans that they should buy houses and use variable-rate mortgages to do it, they listened. Much is made of his econ jargon-laden vernacular that went over the heads of nearly all listeners."
"That was central to the mystique," he added. "When he went to the Hill and spoke to Congress, most people had no idea what he was talking about but assumed that smarter kids did. And so his quasi-religious faith in the efficiency of markets as the ultimate insurance against risk went unchallenged and became dogma, and the risks kept building."
Keep ReadingShow Less
‘Time to Sue This Liar’: Trillionaire Elon Musk Threatens Ro Khanna for Warning of 4.5 Million Child Deaths From DOGE Cuts
"The Dems should have a leader who Elon Musk is threatening to sue and wants imprisoned," said one political observer. "That's the right guy."
Jun 22, 2026
The recently crowned world's first trillionaire Elon Musk threatened Rep. Ro Khanna with legal action on Monday after the California Democrat pointed out the life-ending potential of foreign aid cuts made by the Department of Government Efficiency.
During an appearance on the "I've Had It" podcast on Saturday, Khanna (D-Calif.) said that there must be consequences for Musk, who in February 2025 used DOGE to curtail programs and cut funding for the United States Agency for International Development (USAID).
"There needs to be accountability for Elon Musk," Khanna emphasized. "You know, they’re celebrating that he created 4,400 millionaires, but they don’t talk about the 4.5 million children around the world who he possibly sentenced to death by dismantling USAID.”
A peer-reviewed study published by The Lancet in July 2025 estimated that proposed cuts to USAID could lead to as many as 14 million preventable deaths by 2030 worldwide, including the deaths of 4.5 million children under the ages of five years old.
Musk, who earlier this month became the world's first trillionaire, wrote in response to Khanna's interview that it was "time to sue this liar."
It's not clear how Khanna's statement could be defamatory given that it was based on research published by a prestigious medical journal.
Musk, in a separate reaction to Khanna's remarks about USAID, later added that the US lawmaker "should be in prison."
On Monday afternoon, Khanna posted a video in which he challenged Musk to debate him on the impact the DOGE cuts have had on people throughout the Global South who had previously benefited from USAID.
"The world's richest person has spent all day... going after me," Khanna said. "Why? Because I cited an academic study that his DOGE cuts may lead to the deaths of millions of children overseas. You know, Elon, I thought you were a free speech guy. Why not debate me on these issues instead of threatening lawfare?"
"You're not going to be able to intimidate me," Khanna added.
.@elonmusk let's debate. You game?
I am for free speech, not lawfare. pic.twitter.com/gThLggxiOW
— Ro Khanna (@RoKhanna) June 22, 2026
Mehdi Hasan, editor-in-chief of Zeteo News, said that Khanna’s willingness to directly take on Musk exhibited qualities that Democrats could use more of in leadership positions.
"He is picking/making the right enemies on the right, and really pissing them off," Hasan wrote of Khanna. "The Dems should have a leader who Elon Musk is threatening to sue and wants imprisoned. That's the right guy."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


