Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Bernie Sanders writes, "Unfortunately, Republicans in Congress and too many Democrats, have been discussing harmful cuts to Social Security as part of an overall scheme to balance the budget on the backs of the elderly, the sick, the children, and working families. That is wrong, it is unconscionable, and it must not happen!"

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders addresses the issue of deficit reduction, 06/28/11. (photo: LA Times)
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders addresses the issue of deficit reduction, 06/28/11. (photo: LA Times)



Strengthen Social Security

By Bernie Sanders, Reader Supported News

25 August 11

 

ometimes we all tend to take things for granted and we forget that Social Security is the most successful government program in our nation's history. Let's be clear. For more than 75 years, Social Security has, in good times and bad, paid out every nickel owed to every eligible American. Social Security has succeeded in keeping millions of senior citizens, widows and orphans and the disabled out of extreme poverty. Before Social Security was developed, about half of our seniors lived in poverty. Today, fewer than 10 percent live in poverty and all of that is done with minimum administrative costs. In America right now more than 53 million Americans, including over 120,000 Vermonters, receive Social Security benefits. In our state Social Security benefits total over $1.5 billion per year, an amount equivalent to 6 percent of the state's annual GDP.

Today, Social Security is facing an unprecedented attack from those who either want to privatize it completely or who want to make substantial cuts. In the coming months, a so-called super-committee in Congress made up of 6 Republicans and 6 Democrats will be making decisions to cut the national debt by some $1.5 trillion over the next decade. Social Security is on the table and could be cut by that committee.

The argument being used to cut Social Security is that because we have a significant deficit problem and a $14 trillion national debt, we just can't afford to maintain Social Security benefits. This argument is false. Social Security, because it is funded by the payroll tax, not the US Treasury, has not contributed on nickel to our deficit. In fact, according to a very recent study by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Social Security has a $2.5 trillion dollar surplus and can pay out every penny owed to every eligible American for the next 27 years until 2038. At that point it has enough money to pay over 80% of promised benefits.

Unfortunately, Republicans in Congress and too many Democrats, have been discussing harmful cuts to Social Security as part of an overall scheme to balance the budget on the backs of the elderly, the sick, the children, and working families. That is wrong, it is unconscionable, and it must not happen!

John Boehner, the Speaker of the House, and the President's Fiscal commission have both recommended raising the retirement age to 69 or 70. That, for obvious reasons, would be a disaster. Recently, the attack most discussed would be to reduce the cost of living adjustments (COLA) for Social Security recipients by coming up with a new formulation for COLAs called a "chained CPI."

What would these proposed cuts to COLAs mean in the real world? For average 65 year olds living on about $16,000 a year, it would mean receiving $560 less each and every year when they turn 75 and $1,000 less a year when they reach 85. Imagine that. Taking $1,000 a year away from a frail and sick 85 year old woman who is living on $16,000 a year. In my view that is not what this country is supposed to be about.

At a time when seniors, veterans, and persons with disabilities haven't received a COLA in the last two years, and at a time when the price of prescription drugs and medical care has skyrocketed, Republicans and too many Democrats believe that the formula for calculating COLAs is too generous. That is absurd!

Instead of cutting Social Security COLAs or raising the retirement age, there is a much fairer way to make Social Security solvent for the next 75 years.

Right now, an American who makes $106,800 a year pays the same amount of money into the Social Security system as a millionaire or a billionaire. That is because today, all income above $106,800 is exempt from the Social Security payroll tax. As a result, 94% of Americans pay Social Security tax on all of their income, but the wealthiest 6% do not. That is wrong and that has got to change.

That's why I will be introducing the Keeping Social Security Promises Act as soon as the Senate gets back into session.

This legislation will strengthen Social Security for the next 75 years by asking the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share into Social Security.

Specifically, my legislation would apply all income over $250,000 a year to the Social Security payroll tax.

The Chief Actuary of the Social Security Administration has projected that doing this will ensure that Social Security can pay out all benefits for at least the next 75 years.

In fairness, I can't take credit for this legislation. It is exactly what Barack Obama proposed to do when he campaigned for President back in 2008.

During the presidential campaign, candidate Barack Obama said: "What we need to do is to raise the cap on the payroll tax so that wealthy individuals are paying a little bit more into the system. Right now, somebody like Warren Buffet pays a fraction of 1 percent of his income in payroll tax, whereas the majority ... pays payroll tax on 100 percent of their income. I've said that was not fair." The President's specific campaign proposal was to apply Social Security payroll taxes to all income above $250,000. In other words, the proposal I will be introducing is exactly what the President campaigned on.

Social Security is a promise to Vermonters and all Americans that when they get old, if they become disabled, or if they lose their parents, they will not live in abject poverty. Social Security is a promise that we cannot break. We have got to keep our word. And, that's exactly what this legislation would do.

 

Comments  

 
+52 # MainStreetMentor 2011-08-25 19:49
The only thing I know about Senator Sanders is: His logic, his approach to issues, his abilities to quickly identify the root and causes of problems need to be cloned and reproduced en masse, and a dose of the resultant product be a requirement of ingestion for every member of Congress.
 
 
+8 # AndreM5 2011-08-26 07:14
These terrific attributes of Sanders are precisely why he is so marginalized or completely ignored by the mainstream right wing media, not to mention the Senate leadership. Nothing worse than a Senator who tells the truth, offers real solutions and stands by his word. I don't know how he can stand to work every day with the millionaire losers in the Senate.
 
 
0 # PGreen 2011-08-26 20:53
I believe that this is due to the fact that Sanders has rejected the Capitalist ethos, both laissez-faire and monopoly. He is a self-declared Democratic Socialist; this frees him to abandon fundamental preconceptions and preconditions, such as the notion that the public interest must serve private good, that the state must intervene to protect the interests of private capital. Only a few politicians, like Kucinich, are able to achieve similar freedom and reject this POV. Many Democrats, possibly like Obama, struggle to create a semblance of morality within this ethos, but given their acceptance of State Capitalism, they fail. Others, like Cheney, abandon ethics altogether, and simply advocate for the oligarchy which is served by this system.
Sanders is indeed a bold and logical thinker, but, to me, he seems (even more) to be courageous. On behalf of the public majority, he has rejected the code which most successful people must follow in order to prosper. I'm sure it has cost him.
 
 
-26 # MidwestTom 2011-08-25 19:51
The first thing to do to strengthen SS is to stop all payments to anyone who did not contribute, and stop doing things like funding housing developments with the funds.
 
 
+8 # joyce 2011-08-26 04:46
what have you been smoking????
 
 
+1 # pbbrodie 2011-08-26 08:31
Why don't you just go away. You are obviously a troll. Your ridiculous comments are really getting old.
 
 
0 # AndreM5 2011-08-28 15:57
Well, shoot, you have to admire his pluck. At least he gets paid ($25 per post?) for staining the internet and decent jobs are hard to find. There is no shortage of people willing to say anything their paymasters dictate.
 
 
+26 # billy bob 2011-08-25 19:57
Let’s say you’re the median age: 37.
Let’s say you want to retire at 70. That’s 33 years from now.
The rate of inflation over the last 33 years makes things 3.38 times as expensive as they were 33 years ago (1978).
Let’s say the rate of inflation stays the same.
Let’s say the average senior’s yearly income including Social Security is about $30,000.
Let’s say you plan to never get sick and be hit by a bus on your 90th birthday.

You will need to save enough to pay for 20 years of $101,400 per year. That’s $2,028,000. You have 858 paychecks left to save for it, if you get paid every other week.

You will need to start setting aside $2,363.64 PER PAYCHECK starting RIGHT NOW, to meet that goal. Do you even make that much? Of course, if you’re older than 37, you better hurry and put aside MORE.

If you're a conservative or "libertarian" who believes Social Security is unnecessary and unconsitutional , why are you wasting time arguing with liberals about news articles? GET BACK TO WORK!

NOW!
 
 
+1 # AndreM5 2011-08-27 14:28
This is precisely the point about the power of a REAL PENSION as opposed to a 401(k). Pensions actually cost the workers much less but they don't make the Banksters quite as filthy rich; rich just not filthy rich. The math works fine as long as we have reasonably full employment, such as somewhere north of 95%.
 
 
0 # billy bob 2011-08-27 19:13
I agree. If only private companies were required to stand by their pension plans. Even an agressive 401(k) account won't get you that 2 million dollars in time to retire. The problem is that everyone just falls in line with whatever they're told to do.

The amount of bankruptcies declared by the future elderly (if that's still legal) after they gut Social Security will end up costing future tax payers a lot more than just funding Social Security.
 
 
+1 # AndreM5 2011-08-28 16:00
Private companies are not the only ones killing their own pension plans. It is now the "conservatives" mantra of choice for public pensions. Those teachers, fire fighters, police, military, et al. are all so loathesome and overpaid.
 
 
+27 # Yakpsyche 2011-08-25 20:01
Go Bernie!
 
 
+7 # Regina 2011-08-25 21:50
Bernie Sanders is unique in Congress -- he's a mensch.
 
 
+14 # Paul Marioni 2011-08-25 22:45
I need to point out that W Bush borrowed money from Social Security funds to pay for his wars (off the books) and now doesn't want to repay that I.O.U.
 
 
+3 # billy bob 2011-08-26 13:15
It didn't start with bush jr. It started back in the 80's when ray-gun was in office.
 
 
+9 # angelfish 2011-08-25 23:16
What they NEED to do Bernie, is stop TAXING Social Security after age 65. Taxing it at ALL seems unfair for folks who are already on a limited income! WHY should the Government get a piece of your Social Security, or ANY Pension, for that matter. You're taxed when you earn it, then you're taxed when you draw on it. It seems like double dipping if you ask me...? I agree with you that it's a system that basically, pays for itself. The THUGs want to use it as a freebie fund to do with as they want. It should remain inviolate and they should keep their filthy hands off it! If it ain't broke, DON'T fix it! God Bless you Bernie, you are a National Treasure!
 
 
+4 # DLT888 2011-08-26 08:37
Well-said, Angelfish!!! It's sick to double tax that money and tax seniors when they need it so much. Go back and put those taxes back where they belong -- on the ROBBER CLASS -- Those rich SOB's who run our government.
 
 
+9 # Ralph Averill 2011-08-26 00:35
Any future problems with Social Security can be solved by simply removing the ceiling on SS taxes. Let 100% of the seven and eight figure incomes of bankers, hedge fund managers, etc. be taxed, not just the first $80,000.
 
 
+3 # GeorgeNJ 2011-08-26 05:21
Bernie Sanders is the only US Senator making sense today every time he says something. And the president doesn't. He has completely capitulated to the super rich and powerful corporations. Forget the fascists calling themselves Republicans. Their total rational intelligence is ZERO! We have got to do something fast to get the right man (i.e., Bernie Sanders) in as president in 2012. Let's start moving in that direction RIGHT NOW! Please save us, Bernie!
 
 
+5 # wleming 2011-08-26 05:25
Sen. Sanders makes it clear... the Congress is composed of those who serve corporate capitalist interests period. Bravo Bernie, and if we had but fifty more of you, we might make our way back from the gigantic hole that Congress has dug for every American. Throw the bums out....
 
 
+5 # Ken Hall 2011-08-26 05:59
Though I'm not a VT resident, I've been a fan and supporter of Bernie Sanders for the past 20+ years. There are others who stand up for the "common man", such as Marci Kaptur, but they are the few, and none, I think, are Republicans. Yes, please support Bernie Sanders legislation. Write letters, make a noise, involve yourself, be patriotic, stand up and be counted!
 
 
+6 # DLT888 2011-08-26 08:34
One thing Republicans (including those who falsely call themselves Democrats) need to learn is to GROW UP and take responsibility. Their greed and bad decisions created this fiscal mess and they don't want to pay for it so they want the elderly and sick to pay for it. I say to Republicans on both sides of the aisle -- Pick yourselves up by your bootstraps and take responsibility and take y our grubby hands off of what does not belong to you -- SOCIAL SECURITY! You tell 'em, Bernie!!
 
 
+1 # giraffee2012 2011-08-26 09:13
Quoting
One thing Republicans (including those who falsely call themselves Democrats) need to learn is to GROW UP and take responsibility. Their greed and bad decisions created this fiscal mess and they don't want to pay for it so they want the elderly and sick to pay for it. I say to Republicans on both sides of the aisle -- Pick yourselves up by your bootstraps and take responsibility and take y our grubby hands off of what does not belong to you -- SOCIAL SECURITY! You tell 'em, Bernie!!


Said perfectly
 
 
+4 # Wolfchen 2011-08-26 09:11
The President and every member of Congress should be put on notice: Those who vote for any dismantling of Social Security and Medicare will be voted out of office! That's the only language and action they understand. Yes, and let's not just talk about what we'll do but actually do it. It’s time we back up our voice with action.
 
 
+1 # wrodwell 2011-08-26 10:05
Why is it that Bernie Sanders is seemingly the only voice who consistently argues for strengthening Social Security? Where are the others? Even Reagan strengthened Social Security. Why wait until an election to vote out the corporate shills, why not do it now by converging on the Capitol, rushing Congress, the Supreme Court and the Executive Branch - and instead of "protesting" about the state of the country to our "representatives ", too many of whom who are irredeemably corrupt, just "Do The Right Thing" and throw the bums out.
 
 
-2 # acer14 2011-08-26 10:17
Rather than raise the limit on income that is subject to SS taxes, the benefits should be means tested as are other entitlement programs. There are literally millions of Americans who are recieving SS benefits that would do just fine without them. This proposal would be much easier to get passed on the Hill as it would not be seen as a "tax increase" but rather a "benefits decrease" for the affluent.
 
 
+1 # billy bob 2011-08-26 13:17
You're right to a point. However 85% of all Social Security recipients rely on it to maintain a living standard of living.

Why not raise the cap?
 
 
-1 # acer14 2011-08-26 15:12
This proposal would be much easier to get passed on the Hill because it cannot be construed as a "tax increase", therefore making it more palatable to the GOP (and the affluent) and more likely to get passed. Every bit helps. I say this one first, then work on raising the cap if need be.
 
 
0 # billy bob 2011-08-26 17:46
You're probably right. I don't think the other side of the debate is arguing in good faith though, so anything they disagree with will be twisted as needed for their purposes and fought tooth and nail to the death, no matter how mundane the subject is.

I guess what I think is that the most effective thing would be to act like a left-wing ronnie ray-gun and just confront the thinking of the right directly. You'd take a hit, sure, but you'd get the ball rolling on a serious debate that isn't happening. You'd change the framing of the debate by actually voicing the ideas of the left. Right-wing politicians are much better at the kamikazi approach, as they are willing to sacrifice their personal political careers to further their world view. The left is stuck with "representatives " like reid who never lead with any ideas, but will gladly bend depending on whatever way they feel pushed.

We could follow your strategy, but it would be fought hard - so hard, that another fight would be unlikely. Or we could lead with a bold defense of Social Security and an outright confrontation with the right's principles. The fight would be a little more bloody, but, since it's the only shot we have, we could win the day, by actually fighting the battle we intend to fight, rather than trying to put off the inevitable.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.