To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
The great guessing game in official Washington - and the surrounding
punditocracy - this week goes to the question of whether President Obama
will use his State of the Union Address to open a discussion about
making changes to Social Security that would undermine the retirement
guarantee the federal government has maintained for three quarters of a
century.
The great guessing game in official Washington - and the surrounding
punditocracy - this week goes to the question of whether President Obama
will use his State of the Union Address to open a discussion about
making changes to Social Security that would undermine the retirement
guarantee the federal government has maintained for three quarters of a
century.
"Nobody knows what the president is going to do on Social Security," says Roger Hickey, co-director of the Campaign for America's Future. "It's a huge question for people like me who are strong supporters of Social Security."
Hickey's right. No one outside the White House knows for certain what the president will say.
But Hickey and others who are involved with the more than 200 groups (including the AFL-CIO, AFSCME, SEIU, National Women's Law Center, USAction and MoveOn.org) that have formed the Strengthen Social Security Campaign know what they fear the president could say.
The co-chairs of Obama's deficit commission have already outlined a
plan for reining in the federal deficit by reducing Social Security
benefits and schemes for "supplementing" the program, which is a polite
language for "privatization." The Republican who will respond to Obama's
speech, House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wisconsin, has a
roadmap for going even further.
If Obama is in the mood for some political triangulation, this State
of the Union speech - which sets the tone for his 2012 reelection
campaign - would be the place to establish his deficit-buster
credentials with a jab at Social Security. The problem, of course, is
three-fold:
1.Attacking
stable programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, buys
into the absurd arguments of conservatives who are far more interested
in killing off federal programs than fiscal responsibility -
let alone societal good. To the extent that Social Security faces any
challenges, they can be addressed with modest tweaks to payroll taxes
and benefits. Radical restructuring and privatization are unnecessary.
2.Accepting
the argument that Social Security must be changed in any substantial
way buys into the broader argument that entitlements that serve working
Americans are the cause of fiscal instability, as opposed to endless wars, bank bailouts and ever-expanding tax breaks for billionaires.
3.If a Democratic president
starts arguing for serious changes in Social Security, Medicare and
Medicaid, that legitimizes Republican positions on entitlement issues
and pushes the debate to the right. That creates internal
tension within the Democratic Party, not just between the White House
and Democrats in Congress, but between Democrats in Washington and
Democratic governors, legislators and local officials who are struggling
to maintain an economic safety net.
These are the sorts of concerns that prompted Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders to
write Obama about "worrisome reports" that the president might use the
State of the Union address to propose cuts in Social Security. "I hope
that information is wrong and that you will stand by your campaign
promises to strengthen Social Security," read the letter from Sanders.
"I urge you once again to make it clear to the American people that
under your watch we will not cut Social Security benefits, raise the
retirement age or privatize this critical program."
The message is being echoed by labor unions, senior groups and
religious organizations as the State of the Union Address approaches.
"Let's get one thing straight right at the beginning: Social Security
is not responsible for the deficit - the program actually has been
running surpluses for decades, to the tune of $2.6 trillion total,"
reads a message from Sojourners, the Christian social justice group that champions programs to address poverty.
"Social Security is based on a promise: If you pay into the system
with your payroll taxes, then you earn the right to guaranteed benefits.
It is a system that reflects our values as a nation - values also found
in scripture. There is no trust more sacred to biblical faith than the
injunction to care not only for our families but also for those in need.
Social Security is not just for the elderly - it also helps low-income
children, widows and widowers, those with disabilities, and children
without parents," the Sojourners message continues. "In fact, without
the 75-year-old program, nearly half of elderly Americans would be in
poverty; with it, only 10 percent are."
On the political side, Progressive Democrats of America has
launched a "Keep Your Promise" campaign urging President Obama to use
the State of the Union Address to restate past commitments to preserve
Social Security.
"Nearly all Americans depend on Social Security at some point in
their lives. Many are retirees. But millions are disabled workers,
widows and widowers, and children who have lost a loved one. We need to
keep the promise alive for all of us," notes PDA. "Fortunately,
President Obama has supported our position in the past--no benefit cuts,
no raising the retirement age, no cuts in the COLA and no
privatization. In a 2007 newspaper editorial, Obama said, 'I do not want
to cut benefits or raise the retirement age. I believe there are a
number of ways we can make Social Security solvent that do not involve
placing these added burdens on our seniors.'"
Along with the Strengthen Social Security Campaign, PDA is circulating a review of Obama's past statements that places them in the context of the current debate.
"In blaming Social Security for the deficit, politicians and pundits
like to claim that Social Security is on the brink of bankruptcy. In
fact, Social Security currently has a $2.6 trillion surplus. But with an
aging population, it will inevitably start to feel the strain.
President Obama addressed that, too, in an October 2008 campaign video:
'The best way forward is to first look to adjust the cap on the payroll
tax. ... Ninety-seven percent of Americans will see absolutely no change
in their taxes under my proposal. ... What it does allow us to do is to
extend the life of Social Security without cutting benefits or raising
the retirement age.' And candidate Barack Obama responded to candidate
John McCain's suggestion that the way to keep the pressure off of Social
Security would be to cut cost-of-living adjustments or raise the
retirement age, 'I will not do either.'"
PDA and other groups want to hear those words once more on Tuesday.
"President Obama's State of the Union address will be on January 25,"
the groups says, while urging progressives to: "Let him know that he
must state in no uncertain terms that he supports Social Security and
will veto any threats to its integrity. Tell him you support Social
Security and want to see it strengthened, not weakened."
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. Join with us today! |
The great guessing game in official Washington - and the surrounding
punditocracy - this week goes to the question of whether President Obama
will use his State of the Union Address to open a discussion about
making changes to Social Security that would undermine the retirement
guarantee the federal government has maintained for three quarters of a
century.
"Nobody knows what the president is going to do on Social Security," says Roger Hickey, co-director of the Campaign for America's Future. "It's a huge question for people like me who are strong supporters of Social Security."
Hickey's right. No one outside the White House knows for certain what the president will say.
But Hickey and others who are involved with the more than 200 groups (including the AFL-CIO, AFSCME, SEIU, National Women's Law Center, USAction and MoveOn.org) that have formed the Strengthen Social Security Campaign know what they fear the president could say.
The co-chairs of Obama's deficit commission have already outlined a
plan for reining in the federal deficit by reducing Social Security
benefits and schemes for "supplementing" the program, which is a polite
language for "privatization." The Republican who will respond to Obama's
speech, House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wisconsin, has a
roadmap for going even further.
If Obama is in the mood for some political triangulation, this State
of the Union speech - which sets the tone for his 2012 reelection
campaign - would be the place to establish his deficit-buster
credentials with a jab at Social Security. The problem, of course, is
three-fold:
1.Attacking
stable programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, buys
into the absurd arguments of conservatives who are far more interested
in killing off federal programs than fiscal responsibility -
let alone societal good. To the extent that Social Security faces any
challenges, they can be addressed with modest tweaks to payroll taxes
and benefits. Radical restructuring and privatization are unnecessary.
2.Accepting
the argument that Social Security must be changed in any substantial
way buys into the broader argument that entitlements that serve working
Americans are the cause of fiscal instability, as opposed to endless wars, bank bailouts and ever-expanding tax breaks for billionaires.
3.If a Democratic president
starts arguing for serious changes in Social Security, Medicare and
Medicaid, that legitimizes Republican positions on entitlement issues
and pushes the debate to the right. That creates internal
tension within the Democratic Party, not just between the White House
and Democrats in Congress, but between Democrats in Washington and
Democratic governors, legislators and local officials who are struggling
to maintain an economic safety net.
These are the sorts of concerns that prompted Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders to
write Obama about "worrisome reports" that the president might use the
State of the Union address to propose cuts in Social Security. "I hope
that information is wrong and that you will stand by your campaign
promises to strengthen Social Security," read the letter from Sanders.
"I urge you once again to make it clear to the American people that
under your watch we will not cut Social Security benefits, raise the
retirement age or privatize this critical program."
The message is being echoed by labor unions, senior groups and
religious organizations as the State of the Union Address approaches.
"Let's get one thing straight right at the beginning: Social Security
is not responsible for the deficit - the program actually has been
running surpluses for decades, to the tune of $2.6 trillion total,"
reads a message from Sojourners, the Christian social justice group that champions programs to address poverty.
"Social Security is based on a promise: If you pay into the system
with your payroll taxes, then you earn the right to guaranteed benefits.
It is a system that reflects our values as a nation - values also found
in scripture. There is no trust more sacred to biblical faith than the
injunction to care not only for our families but also for those in need.
Social Security is not just for the elderly - it also helps low-income
children, widows and widowers, those with disabilities, and children
without parents," the Sojourners message continues. "In fact, without
the 75-year-old program, nearly half of elderly Americans would be in
poverty; with it, only 10 percent are."
On the political side, Progressive Democrats of America has
launched a "Keep Your Promise" campaign urging President Obama to use
the State of the Union Address to restate past commitments to preserve
Social Security.
"Nearly all Americans depend on Social Security at some point in
their lives. Many are retirees. But millions are disabled workers,
widows and widowers, and children who have lost a loved one. We need to
keep the promise alive for all of us," notes PDA. "Fortunately,
President Obama has supported our position in the past--no benefit cuts,
no raising the retirement age, no cuts in the COLA and no
privatization. In a 2007 newspaper editorial, Obama said, 'I do not want
to cut benefits or raise the retirement age. I believe there are a
number of ways we can make Social Security solvent that do not involve
placing these added burdens on our seniors.'"
Along with the Strengthen Social Security Campaign, PDA is circulating a review of Obama's past statements that places them in the context of the current debate.
"In blaming Social Security for the deficit, politicians and pundits
like to claim that Social Security is on the brink of bankruptcy. In
fact, Social Security currently has a $2.6 trillion surplus. But with an
aging population, it will inevitably start to feel the strain.
President Obama addressed that, too, in an October 2008 campaign video:
'The best way forward is to first look to adjust the cap on the payroll
tax. ... Ninety-seven percent of Americans will see absolutely no change
in their taxes under my proposal. ... What it does allow us to do is to
extend the life of Social Security without cutting benefits or raising
the retirement age.' And candidate Barack Obama responded to candidate
John McCain's suggestion that the way to keep the pressure off of Social
Security would be to cut cost-of-living adjustments or raise the
retirement age, 'I will not do either.'"
PDA and other groups want to hear those words once more on Tuesday.
"President Obama's State of the Union address will be on January 25,"
the groups says, while urging progressives to: "Let him know that he
must state in no uncertain terms that he supports Social Security and
will veto any threats to its integrity. Tell him you support Social
Security and want to see it strengthened, not weakened."
The great guessing game in official Washington - and the surrounding
punditocracy - this week goes to the question of whether President Obama
will use his State of the Union Address to open a discussion about
making changes to Social Security that would undermine the retirement
guarantee the federal government has maintained for three quarters of a
century.
"Nobody knows what the president is going to do on Social Security," says Roger Hickey, co-director of the Campaign for America's Future. "It's a huge question for people like me who are strong supporters of Social Security."
Hickey's right. No one outside the White House knows for certain what the president will say.
But Hickey and others who are involved with the more than 200 groups (including the AFL-CIO, AFSCME, SEIU, National Women's Law Center, USAction and MoveOn.org) that have formed the Strengthen Social Security Campaign know what they fear the president could say.
The co-chairs of Obama's deficit commission have already outlined a
plan for reining in the federal deficit by reducing Social Security
benefits and schemes for "supplementing" the program, which is a polite
language for "privatization." The Republican who will respond to Obama's
speech, House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wisconsin, has a
roadmap for going even further.
If Obama is in the mood for some political triangulation, this State
of the Union speech - which sets the tone for his 2012 reelection
campaign - would be the place to establish his deficit-buster
credentials with a jab at Social Security. The problem, of course, is
three-fold:
1.Attacking
stable programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, buys
into the absurd arguments of conservatives who are far more interested
in killing off federal programs than fiscal responsibility -
let alone societal good. To the extent that Social Security faces any
challenges, they can be addressed with modest tweaks to payroll taxes
and benefits. Radical restructuring and privatization are unnecessary.
2.Accepting
the argument that Social Security must be changed in any substantial
way buys into the broader argument that entitlements that serve working
Americans are the cause of fiscal instability, as opposed to endless wars, bank bailouts and ever-expanding tax breaks for billionaires.
3.If a Democratic president
starts arguing for serious changes in Social Security, Medicare and
Medicaid, that legitimizes Republican positions on entitlement issues
and pushes the debate to the right. That creates internal
tension within the Democratic Party, not just between the White House
and Democrats in Congress, but between Democrats in Washington and
Democratic governors, legislators and local officials who are struggling
to maintain an economic safety net.
These are the sorts of concerns that prompted Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders to
write Obama about "worrisome reports" that the president might use the
State of the Union address to propose cuts in Social Security. "I hope
that information is wrong and that you will stand by your campaign
promises to strengthen Social Security," read the letter from Sanders.
"I urge you once again to make it clear to the American people that
under your watch we will not cut Social Security benefits, raise the
retirement age or privatize this critical program."
The message is being echoed by labor unions, senior groups and
religious organizations as the State of the Union Address approaches.
"Let's get one thing straight right at the beginning: Social Security
is not responsible for the deficit - the program actually has been
running surpluses for decades, to the tune of $2.6 trillion total,"
reads a message from Sojourners, the Christian social justice group that champions programs to address poverty.
"Social Security is based on a promise: If you pay into the system
with your payroll taxes, then you earn the right to guaranteed benefits.
It is a system that reflects our values as a nation - values also found
in scripture. There is no trust more sacred to biblical faith than the
injunction to care not only for our families but also for those in need.
Social Security is not just for the elderly - it also helps low-income
children, widows and widowers, those with disabilities, and children
without parents," the Sojourners message continues. "In fact, without
the 75-year-old program, nearly half of elderly Americans would be in
poverty; with it, only 10 percent are."
On the political side, Progressive Democrats of America has
launched a "Keep Your Promise" campaign urging President Obama to use
the State of the Union Address to restate past commitments to preserve
Social Security.
"Nearly all Americans depend on Social Security at some point in
their lives. Many are retirees. But millions are disabled workers,
widows and widowers, and children who have lost a loved one. We need to
keep the promise alive for all of us," notes PDA. "Fortunately,
President Obama has supported our position in the past--no benefit cuts,
no raising the retirement age, no cuts in the COLA and no
privatization. In a 2007 newspaper editorial, Obama said, 'I do not want
to cut benefits or raise the retirement age. I believe there are a
number of ways we can make Social Security solvent that do not involve
placing these added burdens on our seniors.'"
Along with the Strengthen Social Security Campaign, PDA is circulating a review of Obama's past statements that places them in the context of the current debate.
"In blaming Social Security for the deficit, politicians and pundits
like to claim that Social Security is on the brink of bankruptcy. In
fact, Social Security currently has a $2.6 trillion surplus. But with an
aging population, it will inevitably start to feel the strain.
President Obama addressed that, too, in an October 2008 campaign video:
'The best way forward is to first look to adjust the cap on the payroll
tax. ... Ninety-seven percent of Americans will see absolutely no change
in their taxes under my proposal. ... What it does allow us to do is to
extend the life of Social Security without cutting benefits or raising
the retirement age.' And candidate Barack Obama responded to candidate
John McCain's suggestion that the way to keep the pressure off of Social
Security would be to cut cost-of-living adjustments or raise the
retirement age, 'I will not do either.'"
PDA and other groups want to hear those words once more on Tuesday.
"President Obama's State of the Union address will be on January 25,"
the groups says, while urging progressives to: "Let him know that he
must state in no uncertain terms that he supports Social Security and
will veto any threats to its integrity. Tell him you support Social
Security and want to see it strengthened, not weakened."