With "structural reforms" being quietly tucked within/negotiated away the current mega-budget deal in the works -- as one of Speaker Boehner-Ryan's Last-First Hurrahs -- it might be a good time to recall what the leading Democratic Candidates said about "defending" and even "expanding" Americans 'earned benefits' (aka our common 'Retirement Insurance') -- aka Social Security ('the cornerstone' of the New Deal)
-- if by some miracle, either Candidate happens to get elected. Despite the opposition's best worse efforts to the contrary ... to rolling back "those entitlement programs" ... in some unspoken, un-grand bargain way.
Indeed. Senator Sanders from the Democratic debates (October 13, 2015):
My view is that when you have millions of seniors in this country trying to get by — and I don’t know how they do on $11,000, $12,000, $13,000 a year — you don’t cut Social Security, you expand it. And the way you expand it is by lifting the cap on taxable incomes so that you do away with the absurdity of a millionaire paying the same amount into the system as somebody making $118,000. You do that, Social Security is solvent until 2061 and you can expand benefits[7].
When asked directly in that same debate, what she thought about "expanding" Social Security benefits (like Sanders and Warren have called for), Hillary Clinton declined to answer the question directly -- and rather choose another word that begins with an "e" -- expecting few people to notice. And indeed few people did.
BASH: Do you want to expand it?
CLINTON: I want to enhance the benefits for the poorest recipients of Social Security. We have a lot of women on Social Security, particularly widowed and single women who didn’t make a lot of money during their careers, and they are impoverished, and they need more help from the Social Security system.
And I will focus — I will focus on helping those people who need it the most. And of course I’m going to defend Social Security. I’m going to look for ways to try to make sure it’s solvent[5] into the future.
What do words like “fully support” and “defend” mean? Do they mean “expand”? I’m guessing no, since Clinton could have answered “Yes” to the moderator who asked her the direct question. And while we’re at it, why isn’t the best defense a good offense? Surely the best way to “defend” Social Security would be to expand it?
--
Hillary Clinton on Social Security Expansion:
Words are Wind. A Cold Wind.
by Lambert Strether, nakedcapitalism.com -- October 21, 2015
That author Lambert Strether at nakedcapitalism.com, draws out the expansive 'wiggle room' expressed in those rather sympathetic-sounding words. Especially with regards to "will enhance both programs [Medicare and Social Security] for our most vulnerable seniors" ...
Which to some economic ears, sounds like a more palatable, focus-group tested way of saying "Means Testing" -- but in a way that few regular folks are likely to hear.
What is so hard about using the words "I will expand Social Security" ...
Could it be the requisite follow-up words: "by lifting the cap on taxable incomes [for FICA] ... beyond the arbitrary $118K limit"? {PS. that is "a way" to guarantee "program solvency" -- no looking required.}
Inquiring, New-Deal democratic Voters -- should really want to know ...
if "enhance" is a really a secret code word for "expand" ... or just another more-palatable word for "Austerity" -- and 'sharing the inevitable rollback-pain'?