Skip to main content

View Diary: Boehner rejects Obama offer to extend some Bush tax cuts for wealthy while cutting Social Security (317 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  This is pathetic. (10+ / 0-)

    Boehner rejects an offer that no one in the WH has confirmed on record?

    Where the hell are the Democrats?

    "And as long as they believe President Obama is desperate for a deal, they'll hold out until they get every concession they can possibly get."

    Exactly!

    This offer amounts to unnecessarily giving Republicans a cookie for being hostage takers.

    Social Security should not be part of the negotiations, and the President needs to stand his ground and protect benefits for seniors. He has repeatedly said he would and that Social Security is not a deficit driver.

    White House: Social Security should be off limits in "fiscal cliff" talks
    http://www.cbsnews.com/...

    Why the sudden urgency to drag Social Security into these negotiations?

    Here's what the President campaigned on:

    Obama-Biden

    The President knows that guaranteed Social Security benefits are not handouts, but a bedrock of the commitment to retirement security America makes to our seniors. He believes that no current beneficiaries should see their basic benefits reduced, and he will not accept any approach that slashes benefits for future generations. President Obama stands firmly opposed to privatizing Social Security—the future security of hard-working Americans should not be dependent on the fluctuations of the stock market. That is why the President has called on Congress to develop a bipartisan plan that follows these principles:
     

    •Any reform should strengthen Social Security for future generations and restore long-term solvency.

    •The administration will oppose any measures that privatize or weaken the Social Security system.

    •While all measures to strengthen solvency should be on the table, the administration will not accept an approach that slashes benefits for future generations.

    •No current beneficiaries should see their basic benefits reduced.

    •Reforms should strengthen retirement security for the most vulnerable, including low-income seniors.

    •Reform should maintain robust disability and survivors’ benefits.

    Game Changer: Biden Guarantees No Changes in Social Security
    http://ourfuture.org/...

    There shouldn't be a need to bluff anymore. We won, and Americans do not support cutting benefits.

    What the millionaires want versus what the voters want
    http://www.dailykos.com/...

    It's time to let Republicans jump off the cliff on their own.

    •  More: (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      aufklaerer, Williston Barrett
      The Morning Plum: Should progressives accept emerging fiscal cliff deal?

      Posted by Greg Sargent

      <...>

      On the spending cut side: $800 billion, including defense cuts. No rise in the Medicare eligibility age, but there would be “chained CPI” on Social Security, i.e., a change in the measurement of inflation that amounts to a benefit cut. While the hard line on Medicare is good, in essence, the emerging framework keeps taxes low on income between $250,000 and $400,000, while raising taxes on the middle class (the payroll tax cut would expire) and cutting Social Security.

      However, according to an official familiar with the talks, the White House continues to insist on various ways of softening the blow of “chained CPI” that are supported by progressive economists, though the details are still unclear. The liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities is willing to support “chained CPI” if it is offset with a small increase in Social Security benefits for longtime beneficiaries and an exemption of of Supplemental Security Income, which is geared towards the poor and disabled. And so, a lot will depend on what the final agreement on Social Security looks like.

      The left looks to be mobilizing to pressure Harry Reid not to accept any Social Security cuts, because he previously said Social Security should not be part of any deal. A senior Senate Dem aide tells me that Reid is not prepared to accept the emerging deal yet; he wants to talk to his caucus about it first.

      The big picture: With this deal Obama will have broken the GOP’s fundamentalist opposition to raising tax rates on the rich (albeit only on income over $400,000) something that would have been deemed very unlikely a year ago. He will have held the line against the GOP demand for two years of Medicare — a victory. Debt ceiling hostage taking will have been deferred for two years, meaning it won’t get tied up in the next elections. He will have obtained stimulus spending — on infrastructure, and in the form of an extension of unemployment benefits — and as Paul Krugman notes, that wouldn’t happen if we go over the cliff. (I’m told the talks have not focused on the exact sum of stimulus spending the White House wants.) The price: The expiration of the payroll tax cut and the cut in Social Security benefits. That’s bad, but the damage could be limited, if the White House insists on it.

      <...>

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

      •  And do not believe the hard line on Medicare (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        corvo, Dem Beans, COBALT1928, Willa Rogers

        for one second.  They have always really been after Medicare so they will be back to balance the cuts in Social Security benefits with cuts in Medicare.  The continued increase in Medicare Premiums wipe out the Social Security COLA as it is.  That's now.  That's before they cut the COLA.  That's before they cut more out of Medicare.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site