The President held a town hall meeting in Annandale, Virginia, and these are usually events that serve as a conduit for a message that the President wants to get out. Therefore, it’s worth paying attention to his entire answer about Social Security:
Q Hi, Mr. President. My name is Vinita Griffin (ph). I’m a late student here at Northern Virginia Community College. I’m in my second career now. My question is, in about 15 years I’ll be eligible for Social Security. And I’m part of the baby boomer generation, and I don’t know if there will be Social Security when I get ready to — and I probably won’t retire for another 25 years, I’m thinking.
THE PRESIDENT: No, you look pretty young. (Laughter.) You look like you’re — you look like you’ve got a lot of career left in you.
Q I’m about your age. But, yes, so I figure another 25 years I’ll be working. But I don’t know if it will be there when I need it, and I’m concerned about that.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, let me talk about Social Security. The big drivers of our deficit are health care costs. I mean, the thing that we’ve really got to get control of is Medicare and Medicaid. That’s what’s skyrocketing really fast. Because not only is the population getting older, but health care costs are just going up a lot faster than people’s wages and salaries — or tax revenues to the federal government.
Social Security is a problem but one that we can solve much more easily. So the first answer to your question is, Social Security will definitely be there when you retire. (Applause.) I’m absolutely confident about that. I am absolutely confident about that.
Now, here’s the thing. If we don’t do anything on Social Security, if we just don’t — if we don’t touch it at all, then what would happen is, by the time you retire, or maybe just a couple years after you retire, you might find that instead of getting every dollar that you were counting on, you’re only getting 75 cents out of that dollar. Because what’s happening is the population is getting older; there are more retirees per worker and more money starts going out than is coming in.
So we do have to stabilize Social Security’s finances, but we can do that with some relatively modest changes — unlike health care, where we’ve got to get in and work with providers and really get some much more substantial reforms. With Social Security, it’s just a matter of tweaking how it currently works.
Now, politically, it’s hard to do. Politically, it’s hard to do. For example — I’ll just give you one example of a change that would make a difference in Social Security. Right now you only pay a Social Security tax up to a certain point of your income. So a little bit over $100,000, your Social Security — you don’t pay Social Security tax.
Now, how many people are making less than $100,000 a year? Don’t be bashful. (Laughter.) The point is, for the vast majority of Americans, every dime you earn, you’re paying some in Social Security. But for Warren Buffett, he stops paying at a little bit over $100,000 and then the next $50 billion he’s not paying a dime in Social Security taxes.
So if we just made a little bit of an adjustment in terms of the cap on Social Security, that would do a significant amount to stabilize the system. And that’s just an example of the kinds of changes that we can make. (Applause.)
So we are going to have to make some changes in Social Security, but it’s not the major driver of our deficit. And what I’ve proposed is let’s work on Social Security, but let’s not confuse that with this major budget debate that we’re having about how we deal with both spending and revenues because that is the problem that is going to require some really hard work and some bipartisan cooperation. Okay?
So we have the President making bipartisan noises about Social Security reforms, but on the specifics, he only mentions lifting the payroll tax cap, and he rejects completely that it should become part of the budget debate since it’s not a driver of deficits.
This is an accurate, substantive take on the nature of Social Security and its relationship to this larger debate. It’s certainly more accurate than what Dick Durbin’s out there saying. So you have to reconcile this all, because Durbin is seen as at least close to the President if not a stalking horse for him in the Gang of Six negotiations.
I don’t want to get into the pop psychology of who’s making what statement for whom, or the difference between public statements and private statements. Honestly, you can make yourself nuts with all of that. I’ll only say this: the President is making a generally accurate assessment of Social Security, and offering a progressive reform that happens to be extremely popular with the public. If he breaks with that course, every single person who collects Social Security benefits now or in the future will remember. In other words, everyone.
Same goes for Durbin and his constituents.




68 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Gee. President DINO announces for reelection and suddenly remembers he’s a Democrat. Whotta shock.
Somehow, however, nothing substantial will happen before the election. After the election? We’ve seen that movie before.
Now he wants to lift the cap. Like he wanted a public option. Like he wanted to let Bush’s tax breaks for the rich to expire. Like he said he’d walk the picket line with union workers. This list could go on for quite a while, but you get the idea.
I wouldn’t believe Obama if he told me today was Tuesday.
Obama may be a calculating politician, whose motives shift with the political winds. But that doesn’t mean we should reject his advances when the political winds are blowing our way. He needs to get his base excited about reelecting him. That means we have leverage. That means we may be able to actually hold his feet to the fire.
Obama has undoubtedly played “punch the hippie” to win points with “centrists.” He sold out his base on health care for fear of angering big insurance and big pharma. But now he needs us again which means we can actually get stuff.
What sucks is that the stuff we get when it comes to Social Security will likely be (now try not to get too excited) the status quo!! Right now that’s the way-out-there liberal position: don’t change it.
I can barely contain myself.
The Enabler is definitely running for re-election, I guess the puppet-masters decided to keep him on for another 4 years of progressive talk and fascist actions.
“Oh, how I wish we could have a public option.”
“Won’t Dawn Johnsen be a swell addition to the Justice Department?”
“I signed a paper closing Gitmo in one year!”
“I fully support equal marriage rights for same-sex couples.”
“Torture is wrong, and those who did it must be held accountable.”
I could go on.
It’s ony talk. He wants to get re-elected and cutting Social Security would be a sure way to lose. They’ve got the polling covered, we know that much. It doesn’t mean anymore than that, especially coming from Obama.
Here’s the most important part of that transcript, though:
(Applause.)
His words mean NOTHING.
His actions have been disastrous and will remain so.
Not only does it not mean anything, coming from Obama, it most likely means the opposite given his track record. Lining up his rhetoric and actions is impossible. He does the mirror image of what he promises, while he is making the promise.
Bullshit. He is “mentioning” it, not “proposing” it, or saying he will “fight” for it. This is the PO all over again.
You beat me to it.
I need to collect a bunch of those and throw them into side-by-side videos. It’s striking when one actually sees and hears the same face saying the opposite things.
Blergh.
Plus, he’s saying it’s “hard to do” politically. Double bullshit.
Of course it’s hard to do, politically.
It applies to every single one of the people who will vote on it. Every single one of them will be voting to raise their own payroll taxes, let alone the vastly greater payroll taxes of the spouses and supporters.
It is very hard to do.
Sorry, David, I think the title of this post is misleading. He is not reaffirming anything. It’s a fucking “example” — by his own admission.
President Obama has already done so much damage to major “progressive” issues during his first two years in office, that I find his credibility at zero. I have stopped listening to his speeches and only focus on his actions…which are great if you are a corporate neo-liberal or part of his wealthy campaign contributors. His constant neo-liberal message of tax cuts and deficit reduction are just sad coming from a “Democratic party” President. I would like to see a town hall where a few people pin him down on questions so that the public can “see” what he really is all about.
It’s not hard to actually propose it and fight for it.
You gotta read what’s there, not what you think you read.
DDay said “making a generally accurate assessment” and “offering a progressive reform” – nowhere does DDay say “propose” or “fight.”
Give me a break. I can read.
–Obama Reaffirms Desire to Lift Social Security Payroll Cap
–offering a progressive reform that happens to be extremely popular with the public.
He did neither: he did not “reaffirm his desire” or “offer” (as in propose) a reform.
…but he also does torture, gross human rights violations and should be in jail. So how about we just say “f**k him”? Okay?
Error.
All I’ve learned from Obama’s recent reaffirmation of progressive ideas is that he has no shame. He spends two solid years selling us out and then badmouthing us when we offer legitimate criticism, even calling us names and suggesting we be drug tested, and then poof! One day he announces he’s going to run for reelection and suddenly he’s Mr. Left of the left again. Sorry Mr. Obama but as Bush tried to say, “Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me”. Not buying it this time.
He’s already proven to have zero principles, and even less character, so we know that won’t happen.
Barry. Nah, nah, nah, nah…I can’t hear you…nah, nah, nah….what a crock..
He actually sounds about as plausible as Al Assad in Syria at the moment.
If I have to listen to Durbin tell me once more how he “knows” and “likes” Paul Ryan, I may just throw up.
Off topic: Looks like the Pentagon is getting worried and is going to more thoroughly disappear Manning.
Absolutely.
If you read the post again, all it says it that a raised cap would solve the problem of lowered benefits at some future date
He says nothing about wanting this to happen.
More kabuki.
The skeptic’s entree was served:
and you have a concern about the garnish. Fair enough. You’ll forgive me that I call this sort of commentary “parse-ly.”
Nobody substantively disagrees with you as regards Obama and duplicity in general; past or potential.
Please do it and share it with us.
The first problem with this statement is that a small adjustment of the cap is ALL we would have to do to stabilize the system. Nothing else. The second problem is that this is offered as an “example of the kinds of changes we can make.”
IMHO, this wording is intentional. It implies that even if we did this we would have to do other things and that it’s just one way to do it — among others. Both misleading.
{ LOL }
Yeah, since Obama is bringing it up, I’ll let Janet Tavakoli, author of “Dear Mr. Buffett,” talk about the real Warren Buffett beginning at time point 12:35.
Got all that? The core issue is the unaddressed massive theft, fraud and collusion in the US financial sector and the international system. Dealing with that would stabilize “the system.” Now you’ll hear Applause from me.
I yield.
Thanks for letting me know about Manning’s situation. I have been steering clear of the NYTimes. Talk about feeling isolated and alone, and he’s just a young man, too.
Talk is cheap, Mr. Prez. As you have proven repeatedly for the past two+ years. Right? Right.
But since you’re in such a giddy and generous mood right at the moment, can you please go ahead and fire Timmy “The Tool” Geithner, and replace him with someone real like James Galbraith?
I think we know how the play, starring O with Dickie Durbin in a supporting role, ends. They’ll fight for lifting the cap, fight nobly, but lose. They will emerge from combat with something, though, and it will be the best, the very best, they could have done against overwhelming opposition from president Ryan and Standard & Poor’s.
Maybe a year’s supply of cat food for everybody?
If you told me he has already cut a deal to lower the cap, that I would believe.
Jeez, he blames the New Deal as big drivers of the deficit.
That just makes me simmer.
Not a mention of our three open wars, one covert war, CIA, special forces, and mercenaries working to overthrow governments that won’t cooperate with our corporate interests, and 800 military bases trashing the world.
No mention of the hundreds of billions in tax cuts for the rich he extended four months ago, or the reduction is estate tax he was eager to dump on our heads.
No mention of billions in subsidies to corporations making massive profits like big ag., oil, GE, etc.
And most egregious, never a peep about the trillions being funneled to banks all over the world. Those criminals are the biggest drivers of our deficit.
Obama hasn’t a shred of decency. He should have been booed off
the podium. He has zero shame in saying the same shit he said
to get elected the first time. I am confident that if
elected again, he will work behind the scenes to thwart
everything that doesn’t benefit Wall St.
Obama should stop Sen Durbin and the Gang of 6 with their means test – and indeed reverse the thinking by ending the wage cap for both tax and benefit calculations
stopping the nonsense about this being just an “entitlement” – just another “welfare benefit” – and start selling the payout as coming from a dedicated premium collected as a payroll deduction (a concept he will need to sell for single payer health most likely)
It is not a question of “giving benefits to the rich” – and Obama had better start saying this.
END THE CAP ON WAGES FOR SS PAYROLL “TAX” AND BENEFIT CALCULATIONS.
Indeed extent the calculation to include investment income – as was done for Medicare in the health reform.
The guy is a sleazy Chicago politician. Always was, always will be.
Barak Obama is done folks. The cable talk show hosts are starting to admit it when they see the recent polling numbers. Even after he stood up to Ryan and his bullshit budget and his defense of Medicare did his numbers take a dive and the talk show people were startled with that. A Republican will be elected in 2012. What the hell is wrong with the DNC. They should convince him to go back to Chicago and try and run someone else….maybe we could get someone to run who has some guts.
Obama was so busy protecting the profits for insurance companies, pharma, and hospitals with his insider deal making in HCR, he conveniently forgot to fix Medicare and Medicaid costs. There’s no difference between Obama and the Republicans. He’s just more duplicitous.
Raising the cap now is a way of increasing taxes on a small group of upper middle class people, while not affecting the rich. It means that the rich will never have to pay back the bonds in the Trust Fund, and will be able to use the excess of current revenue over payouts as a slush fund to pay for tax cuts or corporate loopholes.
The only way to deal with this is to do nothing at all, wait until we get there, and then convert SS back to a current basis with a small trust fund to smooth out recessions.
I was talking to and old timer the other day.He said nothing really changes that much. He said we got the same soup but a different spoon. He said neither party is worth a mouthful of spit. I have to agree with his analysis some what. On the road to Damascus(election)Superman Light seem to have a conversion or an epiphany. He sounded like , Lincoln, FDR, Martin ,Malcolm X,John,and a host of other characters the last time around. Now he is an affront to the working man ,the jobless,the poor,and the down trotted. Everybody on Wall Street made out like Bandits. As for Main Street that another book ,chapter and verse. So,I can see why small town America is “holding on to their guns and religion”. The “To Big To Fail Banks” have stolen their homes, exported their jobs and everything else that were not nailed down. So you can see that, I am little bit skeptical of his conversion on social security. When he first ran, he was just a “babe in the wood”. Now he is a full grown wolf in sheep clothing here to just tweet grandma Social security. That what Blue Dog Democrats do. They run for office one way. They govern another way. Give him a chew toy, but not another bite at the apple. I am choosing not to believe the convent lie this time. I think I will pass. Plus I want my money back from the last “Liar Fest”
Obamas two biggest problems?
He hasn’t done a damn thing about US jobs, and every American knows the Wall St. criminals who ruined so many lives are now richer than ever.
No shit! I wouldn’t believe a thing this asshole says. He’s a lying sack of shit.
Ditto!!
Besides being a war criminal he’s a lying scheming sack of offal. Bring on Donald Trump at least with him I know up front what I get.
Less.
Absolutely.
He deliberately didn’t mess much with Medicare because he’s got to string folks along to get their votes. Once he’s back, the New Deal will systematically be crushed by the lot of’em.
What Wall St. wants, Wall St. gets.
x2
I think Obama will make a few speeches like this, so when he gives the Republicans everything they (and he) want, it will be seen as a big compromise.
Obama is way more dangerous than any batshit wingnut who shows all their batshit cards right off. Obama is your clinical narcissistic personality. He’s totally unfit for any public office. The fact that he’s the most powerful man on earth scares the snot out of me.
Obama is the Boy Who Cried Wolf. We’ve seen this movie before, again and again and again. cf public option, marching with unions, tax cuts for the rich etc. etc. If we ever believe Obama’s suddenly strong progressivism this time round, we are stupid.
As I predicted, once he runs for HIMSELF, Obama will become VERY progressive once again in his speeches. (So he depends on his drug-adled leftist extremist purist base afterall, for votes. @$*$%.) Notice he lost that progressivism when Congressional Democrats were running for office last November. Instead, he attacked the progressives when Democrats were in the midst of campaign, thus discouraging the base from turning out. He wanted the Democrats to lose. But now that he himself is at stake, he becomes suddenly a strong progressive in his talk. Self-interested politician of the highest order.
Please don’t forget despite himself, despite the recent strong progressive talk, Obama–along with the Republicans, since they belong to the same party–are still working to dismantle Medicare and Medicaid. In his actions, Obama is still pulling out the handful of key social safety programs–social security etc.–and giving them to Republicans to cut, contrary to his recent progressive talk. Obama is still double talking. Once you see Obama as a shady character, it all falls into place. Shady is as shady does. All this betrayal, sellout, villainy behavior is that of a shady character.
Watch for Trump. He is an anti-establishment populist who attacks both Democrats and Republicans. He appears to mean what he says, unlike the programmed Obama. Trump hits all the buttons that are popular with left and right, but that politicians ignore–getting out of paying for endless wars, bringing manufacturing jobs back home, taxing goods from China. Trump could get the support of both left and right, and he is possibly more progressive than Obama, as Trump may be a “Nixon Republican.” Obama is a neoliberal, like Karl Rove, like Mainstream Media, PBS, George Will etc., who will all support Obama over Trump anyday. Obama is of the Democratic party which is the same Corporate-Owned party as the Republican party.
Trump would be a tantalizing candidate. He is said to have supported public option, single payer health care, one time tax on the rich to bring down the federal deficit etc. Karl Rove and the Club for Growth attacked Trump. That in itself says something.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/apr/19/trump-gop-dont-raise-debt-ceiling/?page=2&sms_ss=email&at_xt=4dadd0749e85b582%2C0
Sorry, I gave page 2 in the link above. here is the correct link to page one:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/apr/19/trump-gop-dont-raise-debt-ceiling/?page=1&sms_ss=email&at_xt=4dadd0749e85b582%2C0
Here is a quote re Trump as a tantalizing candidate.
The influential anti-spending group the Club for Growth, meanwhile, sent an email blast that pointed to past statements and writings by Mr. Trump in which he advocated for such unconservative positions as universal health care, a single-payer health care system and a one-time tax increase on wealthy Americans and trusts to help close the national debt and shore up Social Security. The group also criticized Mr. Trump’s protectionist rhetoric aimed at China.
“Donald Trump for president? You’ve got to be joking,” Club for Growth President Chris Chocola said in the email.
Once again Barry is talking out of two-sides of his mouth to throw off the public for a few minutes.
At the same time as he made these remarks, his buddy from Chicago Senator Dick Durbin was tasked to “strike a deal” with the GOP on the budget — which includes cuts in Social Security. And who created a commission composed entirely of Social Security opponents to “study the debt issue and make recommendations”? Obama. Some protector.
Don’t believe a word this man says. This is no different than him stopping the Bush Tax cuts to the wealthy. Obama had two whole years to push for that, and (unlike Bill Clinton who reversed Reaganomics in 1993) he never even tried once, and actually did the opposite when there was absolutely no need to, and the popular unemployment benefit could have been separately revoted on until that piece got through by itself.
When the day comes where Obama fires Alan Simpson from his commission, and appoints Robert Reich to “study the issue” maybe…then we can believe him. Until then Social Security is decidely on Obama’s chopping block, and his buddy Dick Durbin will make sure it gets done.
Now, politically, it’s hard to do. Politically, it’s hard to do.
No Mr President it is not hard to do…just make a commitment that you will not accept or support any cuts or upping the retirement age and you support lifting the cap. Next you ask the American people to back you by calling. emailing. writing. and visiting any member of Congress who even thinks of screwing us out of SS! We would be with you and we would win…understand? Have Dave P call me ok?
That’s why he has to “run” as a birther.
Phoenix Woman is upstairs!
Republicans Are Whiners: Bachmann-Berg Edition
Just to summerize: We have to force Congress and the President to SCRAP THE CAP on social security payments. Its called social security for a reason.
I agree. The best defense in the case of social security, Medicare and Medicaid is–to do NOTHING. Absolutely nothing, rather than single them out for reductions, appoint a commission to look into cutting them etc. If Obama was really on our side and wanted to protect us, he would do absolutely nothing in the case of those programs since the Repubs want to radically cut/eliminate them.
Just as if Obama really did not want to extend the Bush tax cuts, he would have done nothing, and it would have lapsed. Instead, he took up the mantle of the need to extend the unemployment benefits and coupled that to the extension.)
Someone needs to do a cartoon of Obama as the smiling Joker, the Batman villian, taking toys (ss, medicare, Medicaid, home mortgage deduction etc.) away from a crying boy (the working class), and putting them on the table for the fat waiting and gloating bullies (Repubs) to take away.
All I remember is, not only did I not get COLA increases for 2 years as food and fuel reach record highs, I didn’t even get the $250 teaser he threw out there just ahead of the election in a failed effort to buy off the retired, poor, old, and disabled wing of the base.
Any credibility anything you said had went out the window with your last paragraph.
Trump would be tantalizing like a steaming load of chien merde is tantalizing.
Trump is protectionist. He threatens corporate profits. The corporate workers, from Rove to Obama, are out to discredit and slime him before he gets too much traction.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ian-fletcher/why-donald-trump-is-right_b_851305.html
And, did you read that he proposes single payer, a one-time tax on the wealthy to bring down the federal deficit etc.?
well everyone already said it.
but let me repeat:
war criminals?
the banksters and wall street?
BP? Massey?
more tax cuts for the rich?
green energy? (but nuclear and offshore cleared without a second thought)
public option?
the rich are doing better NOW, in this recession they created, THAN EVER BEFORE!!! THAN EVER BEFORE!!! THAN EVER BEFORE!!!
even better than under Bush.
Geithner? Summers? (Geithner was the head of the NY fed during the crisis/scam, so he’s either the most incompetent and can’t do his job or he is the most corrupt and let his friends steal trillions form america while hundreds of millions lost money from their 401k)
new COS is the king of off-shoring jobs?
capital gains kept at 15% and inheritance tax, ie. money they inherit, not what they worked for themselves, EVEN LOWER THAN UNDER bush!
Gitmo?
foreclosure fraud? rampant? millions of cases decided based on false affidavits that were NOT even read? and the DOI (dept of injustice) is … *crickets*
etc …
this guy’s right of Bush and Reagan. which Bush policy has he not continued?
endless wars and more on the horizon?
patriot act?
warrant-less wiretaps?
torture? rendition? suspension of habeas corpus?
sorry I just can’t go on. and there’s a lot more. but writing this list is sending me into depression.
my God, what have we become?
Right now, I have zero interest in participating in our rigged elections.
Having said that, the more the establishment busts on a candidate the more willing I am to hear them out. Is Trump a worthy candidate? So far he’s a self promoting, wacky, eccentric who is using the birther crap to drum up attention. Frankly, I don’t think he really buys it himself. I expect him to move away from it if he decides to actually run.
But, put your sneakers on and RUN from any candidate the establishment endorses. It’s the canary in the coal mine. When Karl Rove goes into his spiel about the American people being smarter than electing a Trump or whoever, said candidate is definitely worth another look no matter what letter of the alphabet sits besides their name.
I think Obama will support benefits for Social Security. Not fully, but sort of like Card Check, healthcare public option, ending tax cuts for the rich, regulating Wall Street. Not fully, kind of sort of, nearly, but a little compromise ahead of time, and there has to be a meeting between the middle right and far right, and now I’m starting to think like the President.