Friday, March 22, 2013

Tell Your Senators to Defend Social Security and Medicare by Supporting These Amendments

 Richard Eskow, Smirking Chimp:
This week two Senate budget amendments could affect the future of everybody reading these words – presuming we live long enough to reach our retirement years.

That’s not an overstatement: The Sanders-Harkin-Hirono Amendment would prevent the government from cutting Social Security benefits, an idea which both sides in the “Grand Bargain” negotiations seem to like far too much for comfort. The Stabenow Amendment would ban the privatization of the Medicare system through the Ryan/Republican “voucher” scheme.

These amendments would protect everyone’s financial and physical health during our senior years, while also protecting disabled veterans and other disabled Americans. For all of our sakes, tell your Senators to support them.

We won’t belabor the arguments against the “chained CPI,” since we and others have made that argument so many times. Here’s one of our write-ups about it. Here’s Dean Baker’s latest take n the subject, courtesy of the Roosevelt Institute. And here’s a write-up from Lawrence Mishel, head of the Economic Policy Institute. (The Strengthen Social Security campaign has even more info.)

The chained-CPI sales pitch often comes with an offer to increase benefits to “protect” the poorest of the elderly, as if it were moral to finance antipoverty programs by taking benefits away from struggling seniors. But, as Mishel points out, this contradicts the argument that the chained CPI is a “more accurate” way to measure inflation. If that were true we wouldn’t need to protect anyone.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren summed it up pretty well, as she is wont to do: “‘Chained CPI’ is just a fancy way to say ‘cut benefits for seniors, the permanently disabled, and orphans. Our Social Security system is critical to protecting middle-class families, and we cannot allow it to be dismantled inch by inch.”

Contrast Sen. Warren’s moral and rhetorical clarity with the White House’s decision to label the chained-CPI cut the “superlative CPI” measure – as if all those old people are drowning in unneeded cash.
As for the voucher idea, here’s an argument against it from Baker, who notes that it would force seniors to spend most of their income on medical care.

The GOP’s Ryan voucher plan eliminates Medicare as we know it. Here’s our “Alice in Voucherland” piece responding to the the hallucinogenic arguments that say it doesn’t. There’s a lot of double-talk in the looking-glass world of Medicare and Social Security, but here’s the bottom line: One bill makes you larger and one bill makes you small.... read the rest.

3 Comments:

Blogger Father Tyme said...

Remember when our elected officials were supposed to vote for what the majority of their constituents wanted?

Somewhere in the Windmills of my Mind, I seem to recall that. It's just I'm having a hard time separating it from all the other fiction I've seen.

Few corporons with big bucks > Americans*

* > ...greater than, more important than, has more money than, gives better perks than, knows the actual intelligence of...

1:23 PM  
Blogger Anna Van Z said...

It's a dim, faint memory....one that's become difficult to dredge up from the distant depths of recall.
Perhaps I remember a time when elected officials were simply better at pretending to represent the public; as opposed to now, when they are in our faces with their blatant demonstrations that they do only as they and their corporate handlers please.

11:58 AM  
Blogger Father Tyme said...

The sad part, the really sad part is some of them actually want to help the people until the POS in the Whitewash House strong-arms them into voting the way HE wants done.

Corporate money + Presidential Machtgelüst = fucked people. Simple math.

2:50 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home