Our next meeting will be
The next meeting of Don’t Cut Our Medicare will be on
Saturday 1/8/11 from 1pm-4pm
Beacon Hill Library
2821 Beacon Ave S
Seattle, WA 98144
There is a long term threat to both Social Security and Medicare,
which will require an ongoing fight. The Catfood Commission's report
from its chairs is going to for the basis for a legislative attack on
both programs.
http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/budget/134531-warner-chambliss-will-introduce-debt-commission-bill-next-yearSens. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) and Mark Warner (D-Va.) on Monday said
they will introduce a bill early next year based on the report from
President Obama’s deficit commission.
Warner and Chambliss have been meeting with a group of 18 senators on
finding a way to balance the budget, and said they have concluded the
debt commission's proposal is the best basis for bipartisan talks.
Despite the failed vote, Warner and Chambliss want to use the debt
commission's work as a starting point for deficit talks in Congress.
The senators said they expect their legislation to evolve as they seek
supporters from both parties, but they said the final plan will
reflect the commission’s goals of balancing the budget by 2035 by
bringing spending down to 21 percent of gross domestic product.
A "Pledge of Resistance" to Defend Social Security (and Defund the
Empire)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/a-pledge-of-resistance-to_b_804692.htmlFor the third time in the last 20 years, establishment voices, with
high-profile slots in traditional media, are trying to convince the
public to accept cuts to Social Security by endlessly claiming such
cuts are necessary without giving coherent evidence to justify the
claim. Twice, under President Clinton and the second President Bush,
these voices were defeated. But they didn't give up. And now they are
in striking distance of their goal: the fact that Republicans have
taken over the House, combined with the fact that the president
appointed a deficit reduction commission which nearly recommended a
cut in Social Security benefits, and might well have done so if Rep.
Schakowsky hadn't worked to undermine the co-chairs' plan, means that
one can't be complacent; some reports have suggested that the
president may indicate support for cuts to Social Security in his
State of the Union speech. Of the two principal Washington political
actors who will shape the outcome -- the Republican leadership and the
president's team -- one is a determined adversary of the public
interest, the other a very uncertain ally. The most successful anti-
poverty program in U.S. history is again in grave danger.
<snip>
Consider, for example, proposals to raise the normal retirement age.
How much would that save? How else could we save the same amount of
money?
On September 29, the Washington Post editorial board - Fox on 15th
Street - expressed outrage that President Obama, as portrayed in Bob
Woodward's book, "repeatedly cites the cost of the war and the need to
shift resources to domestic priorities," despite the fact, the Post
assured us, that "spending on Afghanistan is well below 1 percent of
U.S. gross domestic product." Thus, for the Washington Post, when
considering the war, spending of less than 1% of US GDP is not a big
deal.
At the time, I asked economist Dean Baker of the Center for Economic
and Policy Research how much then-current proposals to raise the
Social Security retirement age would save. He said they would save
about 0.7% of GDP. For example, a proposal to raise the retirement age
to 70 by 2040 would save $155 billion by 2020.
CEPR's Deficit Reduction Calculator.] Thus, less than 1% of GDP is not
a big deal when it is spending for the war that the Washington Post
supports, but it is a very needed savings when it comes to proposals
for cutting Social Security benefits by raising the normal retirement
age, a proposal that the Washington Post - Fox on 15th Street -
supports.