55 House Democrats Sign Letter to Obusha Opposing Social Security Cuts

Monday, September 20, 2010

TalkingPointsMemo reports 55 U.S. House Democrats signed a letter warning President Obusha they will oppose his so-called “cat food commission” plans to cut, privatize and raise the retirement age of Social Security.

The letter was the effort of Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. It was originally co-signed by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), Dan Maffei (D-NY), Mary Jo Kilroy (D-OH), Chellie Pingree (D-ME), and CPC co-chair Lynn Woolsey (D-CA). The advocacy groups P Street Project and MoveOn,org helped organize the effort to add signatures.

They group plans to continue to gather signatures through Tuesday before delivering the letter the White House.

Congressman Grijalva said:

“This is not an issue we should even need to debate as Democrats. The people of this country have had an agreement with the Federal government for many years now — you give to your country during your career, and your country gives back during your retirement.”

But President Obusha sees things quite differently. Among the changes the president’s so-called “cat food commission” will recommend making to Social Security is reducing the amount of benefits and raising the retirement age to 70.

This entry was posted in Cat Food Commission, Democrats, News, Politics, President Barack Obama, Social Security and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to 55 House Democrats Sign Letter to Obusha Opposing Social Security Cuts

  1. Aunt Peg says:

    If they cut my SS benefits, I will not be able to pay for food and utilities. I live on the margins.

    Instead of cutting SS, maybe the federal government could consider stopping the practice of raiding the SS Trust Fund to pay for raises in Congress’ salaries and the wars?

  2. Randy Arroyo says:

    Maybe someone smarter than yours truly can explain to me why we should trust President Obama to reform Social Security when he can’t even fix the economy and create jobs? Let’s see now. Obama’s choice for the Federal Reserve is Tim Geithner and for the Cat Food Commission of Republican Alan Simpson. This is what passes for sounds executive judgment? I think not.

  3. Vivzzz says:

    Barack Obama doesn’t have a brain in his head. There are 65 million Americans receiving Social Security. Is he really so lame as to think he can risk alienating such a huge block of voters by tampering with Social Security?

  4. fran says:

    Retire at age 70? The bastards who would vote for that are millionaires and or working cushy power jobs.
    I want to see Mitch McConnell & Orrin Hatch or any other old coot Senator schlepping the aisles of Wal Mart, stocking shelves @ 2 am for minimum wage @ age 70.

    Stop funding the damned wars!

  5. Jolly Roger says:

    The entire Federal Government is going to go into default sooner rather than later anyway…

  6. Adirondacky says:

    I know what the “Cat Food Commission” is hoping to achieve. If they’re successful at raising retirement age to 70, actuarial table show Social Security recipients will only be alive — on average, less than 15 years to receive benefits. President Obama has about as much in common with core Democratic values as does Newt Gingrich.

  7. Bel Ami says:

    This isn’t the first time Obama finds himself out of touch with the progressive wing of his own party and my guess is, it won’t be the last. Somehow, we thought for someone we thought would be a progressive but instead, we got a Wall Street middle manager, who believes in the free markets.

  8. MichaelTAtheist says:

    The problem here is that when we voted for OBUSHA, we thought we were electing a new leader……….. But in reality, unfortunately, all we got was the educated House Negro who has no idea how to be a leader. Hey, House Negro, can you bring me my evening Newspaper & my pipe???

  9. Mauigirl says:

    It’s unbelievable that any Democrat, especially Obama, would consider cutting SS. I’m glad these Democrats are standing up for their principles. Raising retirement age to 70 is ridiculous considering how hard it is to get a job if you’re laid off at 55 or so. What company will hire someone that age? So what are these people supposed to do for the next 15 years?

  10. R.J. says:

    I’m already operating under the impression I can’t retire until I turn 70 or drop dead anyway, but why does it have to be that way for everybody?

    President Obama is such a disappointment. I thought he had a back bone.

  11. Joe in Colorado says:

    I understood the Social Security trust fund had $2 trillion in it as fiscal year 2009. This amount is sufficient to pay benefits to at least 2040. Over the next 30 years, additional funds will go into the trust as more people pay FICA and the fund’s ability to pay put benefits isn’t an issue. So, I am curious why President Obama would try to touch the so-called ‘third rail’ of politics at a time when the Democratic party is rapidly falling out of favor with the voters and the population is getting older. Unless, he needs the money in the trust fund to help pay for national healthcare costs and he’s not telling us the truth.

  12. Big Hank says:

    Joe in Colorado – Among the myriad reasons why high unemployment is so destructive for the country is fewer people working means less FICA tax being paid into the SS Trust Fund.

    We can have 27 million Americans unemployed and expect the fund to remain solvent. But raising the retirement age isn’t the answer.

    Jobs are the solution.

  13. Rinaldo says:

    @Joe in Colorado:

    The social security “trust fund” is (and has always been) a sham. Since the funds are held in US treasury securities, it’s the same as if an individual borrowed money from him/herself. For example, let’s say you paid me $100. I have $100 in assets. Then I spend the $100 and write myself a piece of paper that says I owe myself $100. Do I still have the $100 ?? Is that IOU I wrote myself a trust fund?

    Having said that, I’ve always felt that Soc Sec is a viable program … because it is based upon current working people paying their FICA, which is 13 percent of all wages in the economy. So there is plenty of money coming in every day to pay out benefits. And there will always be people working and paying in, and the amount being paid in will always be growing over time.

    Over time, we need to adjust the benefit amounts to keep the program in line with the revenue coming in. Maybe baby-boomers (like myself) should expect to receive about 30% less than our parents are receiving now, because there are more of us and we will each be sharing a smaller portion of the tax revenue. We need to plan for our retirement under that assumption.

  14. Seabec says:

    Our entire financial system is based on an IOU and a promise of future behavior.

    When the dollar was based on gold, it was much more difficult for the USA to engage in deficit spending but almost the moment was unhooked from the gold standard, debt became the constant companion of the American people.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s