Obama explicitly campaigned on opposing Social Security cuts -- and he just endorsed them

[Report1212]

This is something every single person in America -- we all benefit from Social Security -- should oppose.

There are now multiple press reports that President Obama will agree to a fiscal deal that enacts a so-called “Chained CPI” to calculate Social Security and veterans’ benefits. Under this plan, “a person age 75 in the future will get a yearly benefit that’s $653 lower after ten years of chained CPI than that person would get under the current formula. An 85-year-old will have $1,139 less to live on.” This represents a huge cut to benefits.

But during the presidential campaign, the Obama team swore up and down that it would not agree to slashing Social Security benefits. Here’s an October 6th statement:

President Obama will under no circumstances agree to put your retirement at risk by privatizing Social Security, and he will reject any plan that slashes Social Security benefits.
And his campaign web site said “no current beneficiaries should see their benefits reduced” and that the “administration will not accept an approach that slashes benefits for future generations”:

Read more: http://boldprogressives.org/obama-said-during-the-campaign-that-hed-reject-any-plan-that-slashes-social-security-benefits/

[still_one]

1. The question is will the Democratic Senate prevent any cuts?

[Panasonic]

7. Reid said yes. He will not allow any SS cuts.

Not even chained CPI.

What we need is a real cost of living increase to adjust for the REAL cost of living, not some made up shit.

1.7% incraese for 2013 SS? Bah. That's not even more than $15 increase for me.

[rurallib]

8. They have pretty much exhibited spines of jelly for two decades

and let's face it, who bankrolls their campaigns?

Eight ball says "prospects do not look good."

[kelliekat44]

32. Well, it really is up to the voters to put in office people who will not bargain

away their benefits. Obama is trying to do the most good for the most people right now. All these measures that are passed can be repealed or overridden in the future...DEPENDING ON WHO, WE, THE VOTERS PUT IN THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE!! To place all this shit on Obama is just plain stupid. One thing the GOP has over Dems is that they are patient, and have a long range plan as was shown in the 2010 elections. The Dems never get their act together for the long haul. I feel for those unemployed right now. SS recipients will continue to get their money, on time, and in the same amount. But some former workers will not be able to feed their families right now if we go over the cliff. We may not get everything we want right now, but I believe the President will get us everything we need unless the Dems in the House and Senate do not go along.

[leftstreet]

36. When will the Democrats run some candidates who won't?

Don't blame voters

[Shadowflash]

2. I'm shocked, I tell you.

Shocked!

[limpyhobbler]

3. Devil's in the details. He said he wouldn't "slash" social security, only "tweak" it.

Chained CPI must be his idea of a "tweak".

[fredamae]

4. Locally, folks quietly

put their selected items back on the shelves, wallets back in pockets and stop shopping....

[spanone]

5. show me a quote where he endorsed social security cuts....waiting.

[Itchinjim]

9. He can't because there isn't one.

The shit stirrers are out in force today.

[limpyhobbler]

14. I would like to see a quote where he rejected social security cuts.

[Report1212]

17. Do you read the newspapers?

Or even just HuffPo?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/18/obama-social-security-fiscal-cliff_n_2319850.html

[spanone]

18. yes i do. that article is based on a GOP aide. the President said no such thing.

[OldDem2012]

27. Thank you. Amazing how quickly people panic without checking sources. nt.

[Report1212]

29. How many sources do you want?

http://blogs.marketwatch.com/encore/2012/12/18/obama-cliff-bid-trims-social-security/

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324407504578185362961624862.html

http://blogs.marketwatch.com/encore/2012/12/17/how-gop-offer-would-trim-social-security/

[bigtree]

33. they ALL rely on the same unidentified, unnamed, unaffiliated 'source' or person'

It's clear from the way you defend these reports that you've been played in a major way. learn what credible sourcing really is. It's not just a bevy of rags parroting the same unidentified, unaffiliated source.

[spanone]

40. how about ONE quote from the President. all these articles are based on a GOP AIDE.

do you believe the gop that much? you really shouldn't.

p.s. a blog is not a credible news source. never was, never will be.

[Report1212]

47. Presidents don't quote details of their offers

Are you kidding me?

[bigtree]

50. no, not before the agreement is actually made

. . . just trolls and sock puppets do that

[Fumesucker]

6. Obama on mandates

[limpyhobbler]

12. o.m.g.

[rso]

10. Social security

I must say that if recent reports about the President's surrender of middle class interests is accurate, I will be extremely disappointed. If he cannot get what is fair, he should go over the cliff and have democrats immediately introduce separate legislation lowering taxes ONLY on those making under $ 250,000. If the republicans dare to oppose this legislation, the 98 % will certainly relegate their Party to the deep South.
Come on Mr. President, fight on !.

[Luminous Animal]

11. Actually, he said he wouldn't SLASH Social Security. He didn't say anything about cuts...

Plenty of people saw through that deception.

[G_j]

24. point on

yep

[Catherina]

25. +1 n/t

[Bainbridge Bear]

56. Also, didn't he mention "reforms" to these programs in the SOTU?

I'd also like to know why creeps such as Simpson, Bowles and Petersen of the "Cat Food Commission" are the most frequently quoted about these so-called reforms. The other more moderate members seem to get little airtime. Oh wait, I just answered my own question.

[SidDithers]

13. Obama endorsed it? Where?...

Has the White House released a proposal to the public?

Sid

[NYC Liberal]

45. Don't hold your breath waiting for an actual quote.

They don't have one because it doesn't exist (much as they'd love us all to believe otherwise).

[JPZenger]

15. An inflation measure that takes into account normal substitutions

As I understand it, they are simply moving to an inflation measure that takes into account the normal substitutions that occur in the marketplace. If the price of beef goes up, more people buy chicken.

[leftstreet]

16. LOL So 'slash' is the new talking point?

'But, but...he said he wouldn't SLASH it..'

Easier to spell than 'shellacking,' I guess

[Safetykitten]

19. Oh dear...this is why we can't have...Oh you get the idea.

[bigtree]

20. link?

[Enrique]

21. he left wiggle room n/t

[Safetykitten]

22. For who?

[jeff47]

23. Last week, there were multiple media reports that Obama was about to sign another terrible deal

Those reports were false.

The media in our country are awful at their jobs. You shouldn't believe their "behind-the-scenes" reporting, because it's wrong the vast majority of the time.

[snooper2]

26. So a couple far left blogs make up the same meme/story, and now it's "Being Reported"

I guess our fringe is learning from the right's fringe LOL...

[Bobbie Jo]

28. You Better Believe It! nt

[Skidmore]

30. Is this part of "Plan B" which I just read was rejected by the WH?

[abelenkpe]

31. My third way uncle recently explained these cuts would only effect my children

So our kids get to pay more to receive less. This is the democrat's version of "sell out future generations." and it is a betrayal that benefits millionaires at the expense of the working class.

[democrattotheend]

54. That's what really pisses me off

Legislation is always structured in such a way that shields current seniors and screws over younger people. Like the ACA, which I support in principle, but it hurts younger people (except those under 26) by requiring insurers to charge no more than 3 times in premiums for older people what they charge for us, which means our premiums go up.

On the other hand, as a young person I am happy to see them take steps to reduce the debt, because the bigger debt we run up, the more of our tax money will go to paying interest on the debt and the less will be available for social spending. And even though this chained CPI will mean that we get less in benefits when we retire, it increases the chance that we will at least get something. The more they reduce the deficit now, the less they can "starve the beast" to force more cuts in the future.

Still, if they refuse to raise the cap I'd rather they means test SS starting now, because I see no reason why wealthier seniors, especially those retiring now who got the benefit of the Bush tax cuts for 10 years, should not be asked to pay a little more.

[banned from Kos]

34. Not a "cut" anyway - just smaller benefit hikes.

The rest of us have been living on flat-to-lower income.

[tkmorris]

35. Cost of Living adjustments are not "hikes" to anything

By definition they do no more than keep the recipient in the same place. In the real world of course they rarely do even that much.

Furthermore, using your own less than satisfactory financial status to justify a steadily decreasing SS income to Seniors is at best bad logic, and at worst just plain petty. They earned every damned penny of that money and then some.

[democrattotheend]

55. That's a good point

I know SS recipients went several years without a COLA, but a lot of working-aged people went several years without a raise, if they were lucky enough to keep their job and not face a pay cut.

[jsr]

37. One has to understand the role of pawns in mutidimensional intergalactic chess

to fully appreciate these moves.

[MjolnirTime]

38. so it's not an actual cut, but instead a change in the rate of growth.

You could at least be honest in your criticism.

[jsr]

41. Old tiresome apologist crap.

[cthulu2016]

49. Did you give any Republicans the benefit of that distinction 1980-2012?

The "not a cut, change in rate of growth" thing has been a central Republican argument as long as I have been voting.

It was bullshit then, and still is.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

42. There is an easy way for Obama to kill these "rumors".

Call a press conference and announce that he will veto any bill that contains cuts to SS, medicare, or any social programs. And, announce that all negotiations will be televised.

[nc4bo]

44. +1 and I agree. It can't get much easier than that.

Why the mind and word games? Why even play any such game at all?

Freaking GOP ideology LOST the election. Poll after poll has large majorities of Americans saying NO to cuts, slashes, burns, shell games or sabotaging our safety nets in any way and YES to taxing the wealthy to pay their fair share.

Just

[NYC Liberal]

43. Let's see a quote.

We're waiting.

[Report1212]

51. If the President was being wrongly portrayed

In every news outlet in the country, I think he'd say it.

[NYC Liberal]

53. They are all coming from the SAME single source from the WSJ.

[woo me with science]

46. "One of these things is not like the others,"

One of these things just doesn't belong.
Can you tell which thing is not like the others
By the time I finish this song?

A. Americans across party lines want to protect SS benefits.

B. SS benefits are meant to be separate from the deficit and should be protected.

C. Obama campaigned on "B" and won by a landslide.

D. We have a representative system of government.

_________________________________________________

[Report1212]

48. I think it's D. nt

[indepat]

52. That $1,139 is tantamount to a tax increase which would be large as a percentage of the

total income of millions of elders. If only the Congress would cavalierly impose this percentage tax increase on the most affluent and large corporations, there would be so much wailing and gnashing of teeth from the right, the crescendo would sound like squealing pigs.

[AndyA]

57. The American people need to hold President Obama to his word.

We gave him a second term, he keeps his promises that got our vote. That's the deal.

Social Security isn't contributing to the deficit, cutting benefits will only make the hardship most Americans are enduring worse.

Cut welfare to the oil companies (subsidies), and fix the tax loopholes that allow big corporations to pay essentially ZERO taxes.