According to a new poll by AARP, older Americans don't like Obama's proposal of reducing future Social Security benefits by making the annual cost-of-living adjustments less generous.
Like many polls before it, the latest from the senior advocacy group finds overwhelming bipartisan opposition to cutting benefits.
Eighty-seven percent of registered voters 50 and older said it's "very important" that policymakers not cut benefits for current or near retirees. Sixty-nine percent of voters said they opposed or strongly opposed the chained CPI, according to AARP. Sixty-five percent said they'd have a less favorable opinion of their member of Congress if he or she supported the policy.
Social Security is not driving the deficit, therefore it should not be part of reforms aimed at cutting the deficit. The chained CPI, deceptively portrayed as a reasonable cost of living adjustment, is a cut to Social Security benefits that would hurt seniors.
Petition by Robert Reich, former U.S. Secretary of Labor
Social Security is not driving the deficit, therefore it should not be part of reforms aimed at cutting the deficit. The chained CPI, deceptively portrayed as a reasonable cost of living adjustment, is a cut to Social Security benefits that would hurt seniors.
There are several sensible reforms to Social Security that should be considered to help make it sustainable, including lifting the ceiling on income subject to Social Security from $113,700 to $200,000 or more, as well as instituting a 1% raise in the payroll tax rate, a rate that hasn't changed in over 20 years.
Both of these reforms would go a long way toward protecting the long-term health of Social Security, but neither should not be conflated with efforts to reduce the federal budget deficit.
Please stand by your Democratic principles and fight to protect Social Security
benefits.
Sign a
petition to President Barack Obama, which says:
"Mr. President, the chained CPI is a cut to Social Security benefits that would hurt seniors--it's an idea not befitting a Democratic president. If you want to reform Social Security, make the wealthy pay their fair share by lifting the cap on income subject to Social Security taxes."
Petition:
http://signon.org/sign/mr-president-please-do-1
Our Social Security system has never contributed a penny to the deficit. The debt we have comes from a decade of tax cuts for the wealthy, unlimited spending on foreign wars and a recession caused by unregulated Wall Street speculation. It’s wrong to ask senior citizens, veterans and the disabled to pay for the greed of the top 1%.
The President's proposal for “Chained CPI” will cut benefits for every single Social Security beneficiary—now and in the future. The average earner would lose $4,631 in Social Security benefits by age 75, $13,910 by age 85; and $28,004 by age 95.
Today, most seniors rely on Social Security for 2/3s of their income or more. Cutting Social Security will keep many of us from paying for necessities as we age. These cuts are an even bigger threat to the disabled and veterans, who would face the COLA cut for 30, 40 years or more. For example, a severely disabled, unmarried veteran who claims Veterans Disability Compensation benefits today at age 30 would experience a cumulative cut of $60,121 by age 65 and $144,189 by age 85!
The average Social Security benefit is only $13,833. Over 12 million beneficiaries live on 125% of the poverty level ($13,485 for individuals over age 65) or less. We earn retirement and disability benefits by contributing a portion of every paycheck to the Social Security. And veterans earn their benefits by putting their lives on the line for their country.
THE 99 PERCENT WILL PAY FIRST, AND IN FULL
ReplyDeleteThe American economy-- Wall Street "record trading" to the contrary-- has been left injured, bleeding and in critical condition since 2008.
This was no freak accident, but the direct result of a GOP-sanctioned gambling scandal on Wall Street. The biggest players escaped before the police arrived-- only to return to demand their money back. ("The boys were only having a little fun, see, and it cratered our economy. Awfully sorry, ossifer.")
Meanwhile, corporate America has made it clear it could not care less about the rest of the country (millions of peasants suffering the aftermath-- why don't they just get a job?!) or the collateral damage Wall Street left behind.
With cool indifference, our multinational corporations have assembled their best lobbies to run political cover for them during their mad scramble to leave town. They hope none will notice major US-based corporations continue to get a federal tax subsidy, while they build factories and export jobs offshore.
According to estimates, Johnson and Johnson already has stashed most of its corporate assets abroad, along with GE, Microsoft, IBM and many others. The objective is to reduce the taxes they must pay as nominal American corporations.