HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Why doesn't anyone come o...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:45 AM

Why doesn't anyone come out and ask the politicians to raise the CAP to solve the SS problem?

30 replies, 1651 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 30 replies Author Time Post
Reply Why doesn't anyone come out and ask the politicians to raise the CAP to solve the SS problem? (Original post)
still_one Dec 2012 OP
raccoon Dec 2012 #1
GeorgeGist Dec 2012 #2
tk2kewl Dec 2012 #3
closeupready Dec 2012 #29
Ganja Ninja Dec 2012 #4
RKP5637 Dec 2012 #5
Kelvin Mace Dec 2012 #6
CrispyQ Dec 2012 #7
noiretextatique Dec 2012 #8
abelenkpe Dec 2012 #12
freshwest Dec 2012 #15
CrispyQ Dec 2012 #21
freshwest Dec 2012 #22
still_one Dec 2012 #24
freshwest Dec 2012 #26
freshwest Dec 2012 #9
CrispyQ Dec 2012 #10
freshwest Dec 2012 #13
Autumn Dec 2012 #11
CrispyQ Dec 2012 #14
truedelphi Dec 2012 #27
Autumn Dec 2012 #28
corkhead Dec 2012 #16
Uncle Joe Dec 2012 #17
bvar22 Dec 2012 #18
CrispyQ Dec 2012 #19
bvar22 Dec 2012 #20
CrispyQ Dec 2012 #23
jtuck004 Dec 2012 #25
indepat Dec 2012 #30

Response to still_one (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:46 AM

1. Nobody has the cojones to do so. recd. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:50 AM

2. It's been asked.

And ignored by the muckety schmucks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:51 AM

3. because it would take more money from rich folks instead of giving them a back door tax cut

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tk2kewl (Reply #3)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 03:46 PM

29. Rich folks like the overpaid news-readers from Sunday

morning talk shows.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:51 AM

4. Because the fix is in and has been in for a long time.

People can ask but it won't be reported on or considered seriously or discussed except to ridicule it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:52 AM

5. Just way too easy ... and corp. MSM wouldn't want this, they thrive on controversy as $$$$$ rolls in

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:56 AM

6. Because rich people own our politicians

and they already paid for that tax to be capped

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:56 AM

7. Also a stock transaction tax. And tax investment like labor.

Austerity will never touch these sacred cows & here's why:





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CrispyQ (Reply #7)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:01 PM

8. bingo

we have a political class that is looking out from their class...fuck the rest of us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CrispyQ (Reply #7)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:17 PM

12. +1000 nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CrispyQ (Reply #7)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:43 PM

15. Actions taken on financial transaction taxes:

The Better Bargain: Transaction Tax, Not Austerity

On the eve of Occupy Wall Street’s first anniversary, Congressman Keith Ellison introduced a much-needed common sense bill: HR 6411, the Inclusive Prosperity Act. The bill taxes financial transactions to generate revenue for social needs. Amid our consensus-narrowed, deficit-obsessed political debate, it’s a call to arms, and a breath of fresh air.

As I’ve often argued, a financial transaction tax is deeply pragmatic, broadly popular and sorely needed. At a time when budget slashing is a bipartisan obsession, it offers vital revenue. As we struggle to escape the recession wrought by the 1 percent, it presents a simple solution to discourage speculation. As progressives fight too many defensive battles, the financial transaction tax presents an urgent opportunity to go on offense...

But the FTT would never have made it thus far without sustained and savvy organizing. Groups like National Nurses United, National People’s Action, and Health GAP have been tenacious in forcing the FTT onto the agenda. Their European counterparts have forged a critical mass of support within the EU. And they’re backed on both sides of the pond by a slew of economists and financial professionals who wield common sense against Chicken Little lobbyists...

Ellison’s bill would raise up to $350 billion through a small tax on stock, bond, derivative and currency trading.


http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/09/26-10

That is from the link, that I found here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021424128

Keith Ellison is one of the members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

...Of the 20 standing committees of the House in the 111th Congress, 10 were chaired by members of the CPC. Those chairmen were replaced when the Republicans took control of the House in the 112th Congress...

All members are members of the Democratic Party or caucus with the Democratic Party. There are currently 76 declared Progressives, including 73 voting Representatives, two non-voting Delegates, and one Senator.

House members:

Arizona

* Ed Pastor (AZ-4, Phoenix)
* Raúl Grijalva (AZ-7, Tucson) - Co-Chair

California

* Lynn Woolsey (CA-6, Santa Rosa) Retired in 2012
* George Miller (CA-7, Richmond)
* Barbara Lee (CA-9, Oakland)
* Pete Stark (CA-13, Fremont) Defeated in 2012
* Janice Hahn (CA-36, San Pedro)
* Michael Honda (CA-15, San Jose)
* Sam Farr (CA-17, Monterey)
* Xavier Becerra (CA-31, Los Angeles)
* Judy Chu (CA-32, El Monte)
* Karen Bass (CA-33, Baldwin Hills)
* Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34, Los Angeles)
* Maxine Waters (CA-35, Inglewood)
* Laura Richardson (CA-37, Long Beach) Defeated in 2012
* Linda Sánchez (CA-39, Lakewood)
* Bob Filner (CA-51, San Diego)

Colorado

* Jared Polis (CO-02, Boulder)

Connecticut

* Rosa DeLauro (CT-3, New Haven)

Florida

* Corrine Brown (FL-3, Jacksonville)
* Frederica Wilson (FL-17, Miami)

Georgia

* Hank Johnson (GA-4, Lithonia)
* John Lewis (GA-5, Atlanta)

Hawaii

* Mazie Hirono (HI-2, Honolulu) Elected to the Senate

Illinois

* Bobby Rush (IL-1, Chicago)
* Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL-2, Chicago Heights), resigned his house seat on November 21, 2012
* Luis Gutierrez (IL-4, Chicago)
* Danny Davis (IL-7, Chicago)
* Jan Schakowsky (IL-9, Chicago)

Indiana

* André Carson (IN-7, Indianapolis)

Iowa

* Dave Loebsack (IA-2, Cedar Rapids)

Maine

* Chellie Pingree (ME-1, North Haven)

Maryland

* Donna Edwards (MD-4, Fort Washington)
* Elijah Cummings (MD-7, Baltimore)

Massachusetts

* John Olver (MA-1, Amherst) Retired in 2012
* Jim McGovern (MA-3, Worcester)
* Barney Frank (MA-4, Newton) Retired in 2012
* John Tierney (MA-6, Salem)
* Ed Markey (MA-7, Malden)
* Mike Capuano (MA-8, Boston)

Michigan

* John Conyers (MI-14, Detroit)
* Hansen Clarke (MI-13, Detroit) Defeated in 2012 - primary

Minnesota

* Keith Ellison (MN-5, Minneapolis) - Co-Chair

Mississippi

* Bennie Thompson (MS-2, Bolton)

Missouri

* William Lacy Clay, Jr. (MO-1, St. Louis)
* Emanuel Cleaver (MO-5, Kansas City) - Chairman, Congressional Black Caucus

New Jersey

* Frank Pallone (NJ-06, Long Branch)
* Rush Holt (NJ-12, Hopewell Township)

New Mexico

* Ben R. Luján (NM-3, Santa Fe)

New York

* Jerry Nadler (NY-8, Manhattan)
* Yvette Clarke (NY-11, Brooklyn)
* Nydia Velázquez (NY-12, Brooklyn)
* Carolyn Maloney (NY-14, Manhattan)
* Charles Rangel (NY-15, Harlem)
* José Serrano (NY-16, Bronx)
* Maurice Hinchey (NY-22, Saugerties) Retired in 2012
* Louise Slaughter (NY-28, Rochester)

North Carolina

* Mel Watt (NC-12, Charlotte)
* Brad Miller (NC-13, Raleigh) Retired in 2012

Ohio

* Marcy Kaptur (OH-9, Toledo)
* Dennis Kucinich (OH-10, Cleveland) Defeated in 2012 - primary
* Marcia Fudge (OH-11, Warrensville Heights)

Oregon

* Earl Blumenauer (OR-3, Portland)
* Suzanne Bonamici (OR-1, Beaverton)
* Peter DeFazio (OR-4, Eugene)

Pennsylvania

* Bob Brady (PA-1, Philadelphia)
* Chaka Fattah (PA-2, Philadelphia)

Rhode Island

* David Cicilline (RI-1, Providence)

Tennessee

* Steve Cohen (TN-9, Memphis)

Texas

* Sheila Jackson Lee (TX-18, Houston)
* Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30, Dallas)

Vermont

* Peter Welch (VT-At Large)

Virginia

* Jim Moran (VA-8, Alexandria)

Washington

* Jim McDermott (WA-7, Seattle)

Wisconsin

* Tammy Baldwin (WI-2, Madison) Elected to the Senate
* Gwen Moore (WI-4, Milwaukee)

Non-voting

* Donna M. Christensen (Virgin Islands)
* Eleanor Holmes Norton (District of Columbia)

Senate members:

* Bernie Sanders (Vermont)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Progressive_Caucus

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #15)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:21 PM

21. Thank you for taking the time to put this together.

I see my rep is on the list. I will write & let him know I'm please & also drop his name when I write my senators about this.

I don't think the people in power realize just how pissed off the working class is right now. I think the bad economy fuels a lot of the rage out there & they are suggesting putting even more burden on us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CrispyQ (Reply #21)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:32 PM

22. You're welcome. This is something we can do to give them leverage. They keep records...

But only from those who contact them, more especially, though who know what is being done and tell them what bill they support, and which one they oppose.

Those who refuse to get involved will not have their opinion heard. Those who refuse to vote as some say they won't, have left the field to the Tea Party. We can't count on them.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #15)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:45 PM

24. Thanks

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #24)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 03:12 PM

26. You're welcome. Don't forget:


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:10 PM

9. They have. May want to read the threads about bills by Begich and Sanders on this:

Dem Senator Introduces Bill To Lift Social Security’s Tax Cap, Extend Its Solvency For Decades

By Jeff Spross on Nov 16, 2012 at 5:15 pm

Democratic Senator Mark Begich of Alaska... Social Security, the government entitlement that provides support to seniors in retirement, the disabled, and other Americans, has long been in the cross-hairs of budget reformers. The program’s trust fund currently won’t be spent out until 2033, and after that it would still pay 75 percent of scheduled benefits.

Most of the proposed solutions to the shortfall involve cutting back benefits and raising the minimum retirement age. Both are deeply problematic; at its current level of benefits Social Security kept over 20 million people out of poverty in 2011, many Americans in demanding manual labor jobs already take early retirement and thus reduced benefits as it is, and lower-income Americans have not particularly benefited from the average rise in lifespans .

This week, however, Sen. Mark Begich (D-AK) put forward a reform package that goes in the opposite direction, while still financially securing the program’s trust fund for roughly the next seven decades. The Washington Post’s Dylan Matthews laid out the details:

The Begich bill would lift the current payroll tax cap, which exempts wages in excess of a certain amount ($110,100 this year) from the tax. In turn, it would give high earners, who would pay more, additional benefits upon retirement, just as benefits increase as wages do for workers below the cap.

It also increases benefits across-the-board. While Bowles-Simpson and Domenici-Rivlin adopt a stingier “chained CPI” measure for inflation, Begich adopts “CPI-E,” or a measure that specifically captures inflation in goods that seniors buy.

Due to deteriorated health and other considerations, goods seniors buy tend to be more expensive than those younger people purchase. Begich’s CPI-E change would mean, effectively, a 4.5 percent benefit increase for the program’s beneficiaries, including not just seniors but their designated survivors and disabled Americans as well.

The Congressional Research Service ran the numbers back in 2010 and concluded that eliminating the payroll tax cap — while also paying out the new benefits to wealthier Americans in accordance with their new taxes — would eliminate 95 percent of the trust fund’s shortfall over the next 75 years.

Begich may not hit that goal exactly, depending on how the legislation is written. In particular, his change to CPI-E also lifts the overall benefit level, on top of the changes in CRS’ scenario. But his reform would probably come very close.


http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/11/16/1208701/democratic-senator-introduces-bill-to-lift-social-securitys-tax-cap-extend-its-solvency-for-decades/

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021835303

Will the 29 Sanders-letter senators co-sponsor the Begich Social Security bill?


The most recent Social Security bill, proposed by Alaska Sen. Mark Begich, includes such enhancements as full cancellation of the payroll cap — making the Social Security tax a simple flat tax and not a regressive one — and improves the cost-of-living adjustment by indexing it to the items most bought by the elderly. All round, a very good bill.

This bill also goes on offense, putting a stake in the ground that says Social Security benefits should be enhanced, not just kept the same. I hope you can see the negotiating benefit of that.

The 29 senators who signed the Sen. Sanders letter are playing excellent defense — drawing a line that says No Cuts to the safety net and No New Tax Breaks for the rich. (With the Bush–Obama Tax Cuts set to expire in December, renewing them is without doubt a new tax break.)

Can we get the 29 senators to go on offense as well, and co-sponsor the Begich bill? You could ask them.

Here’s that list of Sanders-letter senators, the good guys in this fight. Note that Mark Begich, the author of the Begich bill, is an organizer:

Organizers:

Bernie Sanders (I-VT) — (202) 224-5141
Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) — (202) 224-2921
Mark Begich (D-AK) — (202) 224-3004
Al Franken (D-MN) — (202) 224-5641

Other signers:

Harry Reid (D-NV) — (202) 224-3542
Chuck Schumer (D-NY) — (202) 224-6542
Jack Reed (D-RI) — (202) 224-4642
Sherrod Brown ((D-OH) — (202) 224-2315
Ron Wyden (D-OR) — (202) 224-5244
Patrick Leahy (D-VT) — (202) 224-4242
Ben Cardin (D-MD) — (202) 224-4524
Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) — (202) 224-4822
Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) — (202) 224-2823
Tom Harkin (D-IA) — (202) 224-3254
Jeff Merkley (D-OR) — (202) 224-3753
Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) — (202) 224-3224
Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) — (202) 224-4654
Patty Murray (D-WA) — (202) 224-2621
Barbara Boxer (D-CA) — (202) 224-3553
Maria Cantwell (D-WA) — (202) 224-3441
Daniel Akaka (D-HI) — (202) 224-6361
Tim Johnson (D-SD) — (202) 224-5842
John Rockefeller (D-WV) — (202) 224-6472
Daniel Inouye (D-HI) — (202) 224-3934
Tom Udall (D-NM) — (202) 224-6621
Robert Menendez (D-NJ) — (202) 224-4744
Carl Levin (D-MI) — (202) 224-6221
Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) — (202) 224-4451
Joe Manchin (D-WV) — (202) 224-3954

http://americablog.com/2012/11/will-the-29-senators-who-signed-the-sanders-letter-co-sponsor-the-begich-social-security-bill.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251253882


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:15 PM

10. I see my two dem senators aren't on that list.

Time to write a letter, a heated letter!

Good post. Thank you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CrispyQ (Reply #10)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:19 PM

13. Yes it is! My two Democratic senators are there, though. Keep up the pressure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:15 PM

11. I have. I'm sure Bernie has, and SS is not a problem

it has nothing to do with this phony crises. They want to steal from SS and people on disability and Veterans to pay for a debt caused by tax breaks for the wealthy and wars of choice. A debt that they do not owe. It's theft, plain and simple.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #11)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:30 PM

14. This!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #11)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 03:16 PM

27. Whenever anyone votes for a scorpion, they should not be

Surprised when scorpion-like activities come about. (Reference to the old "turtle and scorpion" crossing a river fable.)

Most "Centrist" Dems are scorpions. Most Blue Dog Dems are scorpions.

On edit - what is odd to me is how many people, who should understand this, refuse to believe it, until some momentous realization sinks in. Like the moment we realize that the public option was not put on the table.

Or until the moment we realize that BP is getting WH-go-ahead to be in charge of "Cleaning up " the mess DeepWater Horizon made of an entire Eco-system.

Or until the moment someone figures out that the Obama EPA not reporting on Fukushima releases of radiation will not affect people less simply because radiation monitoring stations have been ordered closed.

As far as Social Security being cut, Obama stated quite openly during the first debate that he agreed with Rmoney about the Simpson Bowles Commission. And of course he agreed - he appointed the Commission's members!

DUH!


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to truedelphi (Reply #27)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 03:23 PM

28. A lot of truth to those old fables

and I agree with your description of "centrists" and blue dogs. I was concerned when Obama said he agreed with romney but I figured okay, it's just talk and he says he will protect it. So basically Obama made me nervous but romney terrified me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:49 PM

16. the same reason they don't talk about Iceland. The Job Creators (TM) would have a sad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:52 PM

17. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, still one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:57 PM

18. Obama "CAMPAIGNED" on Raising -the-Cap in 2008.

Raising -the-Cap was one of the very few differences between Obama & Hillary.
It was THIS difference that won my support for Obama in 2008.


Raise the Payroll Tax Cap


Raise the Payroll Tax Cap







SMOOTH, wasn't he?
Scammed me, and I'm not easy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #18)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:10 PM

19. Didn't he also campaign against mandated health insurance?

At least during the primaries?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CrispyQ (Reply #19)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:19 PM

20. Yes. He did.

He ridiculed Hillary for supporting it in the debates,
and told America precisely WHY Mandated Health Insurance was BAD for America.

He also "campaigned" on Renegotiating NAFTA,
making EFCA "The Law of the Land",
and labeling GM foods,

.....but THIS thread is about Social Security,
and NOT a general Pile On on the President.



"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."

--- Paul Wellstone


photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #20)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:40 PM

23. It's just that it's beginning to feel a lot like . . .

2009.



And when dem voters are unenthusiastic in 2014, it will be our fault for being purists.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:46 PM

25. Because the people they listen to don't instruct them to. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:34 PM

30. 'cause there ain't one effin' Repub in either House of Congress who would support any higher tax on

any higher-income person.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread