Social Security Recipients Take a Hit
Senate Republicans are sticking to their pledge and refusing to vote on any legislation until they pass the agreement extending the Bush-era tax cuts for the super-rich. Yesterday, two Democrat-sponsored bills felt the wrath of this pledge after failing to collect the 60 votes necessary to reach the floor.
From Politico,
Largely party-line votes squelched both bills, one that would have allowed public safety workers to unionize and another that would have dispensed a one-time $250 cost of living payment to Social Security recipients. Both measures drew more than 50 votes but didn’t come close to 60.
But Social Security can also be connected to the Senate Republicans’s soft-spot for the super-rich. $250 might not seem like a lot of money to some people, but for seniors who are primarily living off of their social security benefits, it can be a huge help. $250 can pay rent. It can put food on the table. It can pay the heating bill through the winter.
Beyond this one time payment, Social Security payments each month matter more to the middle- and working-classes than to the super-rich. From the New York Times, here is Paul Krugman’s take on it,
Social Security, by contrast, is something that matters enormously to the bottom half of the income distribution, but no so much to people in the 250K-plus club. A 30 percent cut in benefits would represent disaster for tens of millions of Americans, but a barely noticeable inconvenience for [the super-rich] and everyone they know. A rise in the retirement age would be a vast hardship for people who do manual labor, but if anything a gift to [the super-rich] who don’t want to step aside in any case. And so on down the line.
This isn’t just the opinion of the liberal left, but clear economics. This chart shows the percentage to which the different classes depend on social security benefits. The lines are clear. For people in the first income bracket, social security payments make up 83.2% of their income. That’s rent, that’s groceries, that’s heat. For the top percent, these measly checks only make up 17.9% of their income.
This latest vote shows exactly whose side Senate Republicans are on. Not that we were wondering.
Source: Our Fiscal Security
Tags: social security
I’ve found that the one-time $250 Social Security check under discussion here is commonly misunderstood. It isn’t too unusual for people to misinterpret this as meaning that benefits are scheduled to increase by $250 per month!
Here is how this works: Normally, benefits for Social Security disability and retirement slightly increase each year, per the cost of living adjustment (C.O.L.A.). This c.o.l.a. has been withheld a couple of times in recent years (at least, for disabled recipients). It was denied in 2010, and there will still be no c.o.l.a. increase in 2011. Based on recent legislation, it will continue to be denied until ( so far) 2013.
The $250 check under discussion would actually replace the c.o.l.a. increase. Instead of receiving benefits that are roughly $20.10 per month higher, recipients will
receive it all in one lump sum, a single check for $250.00. They can either splurge, blowing it all on something like their heating bill, or stretch it to last through 2011, perhaps using it to buy a couple of chickens and a bag of potatoes each month.
You must sign in or register to post a comment. Registration is free.
Actually, the GOP cannot do anything about the tax cuts, or Social Security. Remember the Democrats are still in control, so quit blaming the GOP now.
You must sign in or register to post a comment. Registration is free.
The labor union’s long time allegiance to the Democrat party has hardly been rewarded over the past 25 years. The result of a frustrated Democrat base who was tired of being on the losing side ever since the 1968 loss to Nixon and the loss of the Southern Democrat Caucus in response to the plethora of civil rights legislation enacted in the 1960s. Faced with becoming an obscure political entity, the Democrat leadership turned to the Neo-Liberals who were defined by there association with the DLC (Democrat Leadership Council). An organization that had early ties to an elite cliché of million and billionaires such as George Soros. The DLC standard bearers that took control of the Democrat base were headed by the Clintons who were known for supporting any organization that furthered their own personal fortune. After twelve years of GOP dominance over the White House, the country cheerfully ushered Clinton into office despite Ross Perot’s warnings of pending GOP inspired trade agreements that would cause permanent massive job losses for this country. Clinton, Like Obama, didn’t take long to show his true colors by ramming through NAFTA and orchestrating a half-hearted effort to reform healthcare that was easily pushed aside by the GOP. When asked how these efforts would effect the Democrat’s relationship with the Labor Unions, Clinton replied; “They have to support us, they don’t have anywhere else to go !”. Today the plight of working people is uncertain with an estimated 7% union membership in this country and an attack on various progressive social programs (i.e., Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.) that have increased the quality of life for the working people of this country for decades. I would say that it’s way past time to get creative and find a new path !
You must sign in or register to post a comment. Registration is free.