HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Senator Schumer wrote me ...

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:15 PM

Senator Schumer wrote me back via email about SS and Medicare

He said he is strongly against privatization and reducing benefits to seniors in terms of Social Security.

He also said as a member of the Finance committee he will also "keep an eye out for any proposals designed to weaken Social Security, pension and Medicare, that reach the committee." He said "He will ardently oppose them every step of the way"

Also mentioned his work with Dan Maffei on the Pension Protection Act of 2010 and how private pension plans must be protected too not just government ones.

Thought it was nice I got response. Hope we are on the same page about what constitutes "weakening Medicare" but this made me feel like at least he is listening to his constituents. It's probably a standard letter to all New York residents who write about this issue but at least is is on point.

At least he responds which is better than most!

Sorry for all edits but I have a sinus infection so I keep making boo boos grammatically.

14 replies, 1170 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 14 replies Author Time Post
Reply Senator Schumer wrote me back via email about SS and Medicare (Original post)
Liberalynn Nov 2012 OP
boomer55 Nov 2012 #1
Liberalynn Nov 2012 #5
forestpath Nov 2012 #2
Liberalynn Nov 2012 #6
forestpath Nov 2012 #9
Liberalynn Nov 2012 #14
CakeGrrl Nov 2012 #12
forestpath Nov 2012 #13
wordpix Nov 2012 #3
Liberalynn Nov 2012 #7
WorseBeforeBetter Nov 2012 #4
Liberalynn Nov 2012 #8
trof Nov 2012 #10
Liberalynn Nov 2012 #11

Response to Liberalynn (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:28 PM

1. I'm gonna guess it was a staffer. :) n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boomer55 (Reply #1)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:37 PM

5. I'm gonna guess you are right too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberalynn (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:29 PM

2. They always say they want to "protect" them. They just never give a straight answer on

 

what they mean by "protect." Like you said - we just have to hope they're on the same page when they say that.

I've just written to all my congressmen, too. You're lucky you got a response that even replied directly to your letter - several times when I've written to my congressman about this I've gotten replies concerning completely different subjects! Which did not increase my confidence!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forestpath (Reply #2)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:54 PM

6. Exactly

I do feel better about Social Security at least for now.

Like you I'd prefer a more specific guarantee on Medicare. I'd rest easier. I do feel cautiously confident that the Senator would not vote for something like the Ryan plan which would privatize it, or any huge changes. i am just not totally sure whether he believes cuts to beneficiaries will weaken or strengthen Medicare?

I also understand and share your frustration about some Congressional responses. Like you I have also gotten responses back from some that had nothing to do with what i wrote them about.

Most notably from Tom Reed, who was redistricted out of my area, this past election, yay. He still got re-elected though boo for another district, and I got stuck with another Puke,.boo-hiss, who I have heard is going to be just as bad if not worse. My letter to Reed was about how I was against the proposed SS and Medicare cuts in the debt cieling talks etc.

He sent me some form letter that said thanks for writing and then went on and on about how he and his Puke friends, were going to reduce taxes for every God fearing American, yadda, yadda, yadda. It never even mentioned the words SS or Medicare. Ass. I quit writing and calling his office. I saw no point of trying to communicate a blank hard wall.

So I give Schumer's office a lot of credit for at least responding and on point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberalynn (Reply #6)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 05:06 PM

9. Ugh, poor you. My rep is a Democrat and when I have been on town hall

 

conference calls with him, Social Security always comes up and he says he opposes changes. But politicians use so many weasel words that even when it seems like they're giving a straight answer, often they are not. Mostly, he votes the way I want him to but not always. (I live in VA's 11th district.)

I loathe both of my senators even though both are so-called Democrats. A few years ago, Mark Warner voted against a measly $250 stipend for SS recipients in a year they got nothing - I called his office and asked if he was a Democrat. When the person who answered the phone said yes, I responded that I was asking because no Democrat would have done that!


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forestpath (Reply #9)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:43 PM

14. That is so true about the weasel words

I majored in History and minored in Political Science and our professors taught us how to read between the lines of what was actually said or written by many politicians, not just in the U.S. but around the world. I still cringe when I hear a politician or lawyer for that matter using them, and really wish I was face to face them so I could ask them directly just how stupid do they think I am that I would fail to recognize they were using political double speak.

Good for you on what you asked of your Senator's office staff member and also what you told them.

Actually today I did get a reply from Tom Reed. I didn't write him directly but sent a pre-written letter composed by AARP through their site. I was shocked it actually addressed what the letter was about. It was a lot different than last time.

He basically said that SS was a sacred trust that should not be breached but strengthened and that they need to talk about it to strengthen it. So he disagreed that it should be off the table completely.

Then he went onto Medicare. He said that he know Seniors value the assistance Medicare provides but that Congress needs to work on lowering Medical costs, and that will help everyone including seniors in the long run. He also said that letting people choose (I'm guessing weasal way of saying vouchers for Medicare recipients) which insurance company to buy from was the best way for them to get the best price, because insurance companies have to compete, and competition lowers cost.

Yeah right. Nice try Congressman Reed.. Most people do choose their own insurance companies already, including Medicare recipients for Supplemental Insurance. The problem is that that the Insurance Companies are for the most part ruthless Scammers and are for the most part for profit, even though many claim to be not for profit, who don't give a damn about their client's health. Compettion my fanny, more like collusion. That's why the system is broken to begin with and you can't fix it by offering more of the same.

He also said we need to address frivilious malpractice suits and that will lower all heath care costs for everybody including Seniors. I don't entirely agree or disagree with that point. I don't think laws that make it harder or nearly impossible to sue are the answer which is I believe what the Republicans favor. I admire a lot of health care professionals, have them in my family, but let's face it there are cases where medical personnel fail to excercise reasonable standards of care. People harmed in those cases have the right to sue.

However, even lawyers I know, will admit there are people who will want to sue if they get a hangnail in the hospital and that there are some of their professional colleagues who will agree to represent those types of clients in malpractice suits. The Bar needs to do a better job policing and educating their own members and educating their clients about what constitutes a legitimate suit and what doesn't.

I also think legitimate plantiffs are entitled to just compensation for loss of income in the case of temporary/permanent disability, or wrongful death, the payment of any additional health care costs incurred as the direct result of the negligence, and something for pain and suffering. I do not agree, however, with any awards that go way off into like winning Lotto territory, for lack of a better comparison

Because the cost of payments of those types of awards ultimately get dumped onto the health care consumer with rising co-pays etc. That's why I say Reed isn't entirely wrong about reform being needed in this area. I think he and I likely disagree on how that reform needs to be accomplished however.

I guess I have mixed feelings about lawsuits because I have a paralegal certificate and know some really honest lawyers that I met through the college where I got it, who really do want to help people harmed by actual negligence.

On the other hand I have met some dishonest lawyers and at least one sue happy person as well. He married one of my best friends from high school. I used to go to their house for dinner every once in awhile. That's all he talked about was how he won this law suit, and who he was going to sue next, because there were a lot of people who wronged him in his life, and his lawyer agreed he might have serveral more winnable cases. I stopped accepting invitations because I was afraid he would come up with some excuse to sue me, and he made me mad. It is people like him who do contribute to the rise in health care costs for all of us, as well as other costs outside of health care too.

Sorry for the lengthy reply, but I did want to share with you that Reed actually did reply on topic this time and my thoughts about what he said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forestpath (Reply #2)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 08:23 PM

12. They won't telegraph their negotiating strategy - nor should they.

Yes, people would desperately like to know what's going to happen, but the WH/Congressional Dems are going to play it VERY close when dealing with the GOP crazy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CakeGrrl (Reply #12)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 09:28 PM

13. Tell that to David Plouffe. Just the other day he came right out and said the left would be mad.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberalynn (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:31 PM

3. as long as Schumer doesn't have to get tough with Wall St. or banks, he's fine

they give him shitloads of campaign funds, i.e. legalized bribes, to do their bidding

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wordpix (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 04:00 PM

7. I know.

Someone needs to get tough with the Wall Street gang and reform campaign finance too.

I wish he were fighting those parts of the system too, but alas like you I believe he is too much a part of that system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberalynn (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:32 PM

4. Current seniors or future seniors?

Any distinction made?

(Hope you feel better soon!)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WorseBeforeBetter (Reply #4)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 04:01 PM

8. Thank you for the get well wishes

No distinction was made between current/future seniors.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberalynn (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 05:15 PM

10. Are you a constituent?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Reply #10)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 08:19 PM

11. Yes I am

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread