I am glad Republicans jeered Biden
Republican officeholders recoiled at President Biden's assertion that some of them advocated ending Social Security and Medicare.
 |
Biden said he would take them at their word.
The issue divides Republicans. Most politicians understand that the programs are very popular and that it would be politically dangerous to reduce their payment formulas. Unfortunately for Republicans, there were a few of their members who did the equivalent of what a few careless Democrats did when they called for "defunding the police." They put something unpopular and easily understood on the table of public debate.
 |
| Click: "My objective is to get rid of Social Security--pull it out by the roots." |
Utah Senator Mike Lee is on video saying the wanted to end Social Security and Medicare. Mitch McConnell's rival in the senate for GOP leadership, Florida's Rick Scott, listed as one of the GOP's central policy platforms putting Social Security and Medicare up for re-authorization every five years. Democrats are doing what Republicans did with "defund the police." Anything less than an angry denial leaves a lingering doubt.
It is straw man politics, but it is warranted. There is a concept in politics known as the Overton Window, named after political scientist Joseph Overton. He posited that political ideas change over time once they enter the public square.
Unthinkable
Radical
Acceptable
Sensible
Popular
Policy
Dr. Francis Townsend announced a plan in 1933 that was unthinkable. The Townsend Plan advocated that every American over the age of 60 be given $200 a month, with only one condition: They spend it that month.
Severe poverty among the elderly was the norm then. In the depression era of depressed demand, and in an economy that was overwhelmingly domestic, that money did not disappear. It would be immediately spent on goods and services produced by other Americans, then that money would be re-spent, and so on. Dr. Townsend put the idea out there and stood behind it, turning the idea from unthinkable into merely radical. Crowds attended Townsend Plan rallies. There were hearings on the idea at the Capitol. It got debated and condemned as too expensive and un-American. A compromised and diluted version of the plan grew to become acceptable to FDR and a Democratic congress: Social Security.
Republican officeholders who openly posit ending Social Security and Medicare turned that idea from unthinkable to radical. It was a huge step. Another huge step in reverse was the jeering at that part of Biden's speech. Republicans were saying NO! Ending Social Security and Medicare was unthinkable.
Good.
I am 73 and write from both personal experience and a 30-year career as a financial advisor. A great many retired Americans, even prosperous ones who used a financial advisor like me, have included Social Security and Medicare in their retirement planning. Social Security is a guaranteed monthly check. About 40% of elderly Americans get over half their income from Social Security. For prosperous Americans like my former clients, it is a baseline income. The income is a bond-equivalent that allows them to invest other money in less certain but potentially more productive ways.
Old people consume health care. I have paid into Medicare for my entire working life. Now I receive it. Without Medicare for my wife and myself, I would need to have on ready reserve $300,000, maybe $500,000, and maybe much more for each of us. Most people cannot put aside that kind of money into a hospitalization emergency fund. Getting ill can be financially catastrophic, but not for people with Medicare.
Social Security and Medicare are a safety net. They mean that, if everything else goes very, very wrong, I or my widow have something. Medicare means that I do not drag my family into poverty if I get cancer. Once something moves from unthinkable to radical, it becomes a question mark, and no longer a safety net. Might it happen? If it happens, will I meet the qualifications for an exemption or loophole or "grandfather clause?" So many unknowns.
Laws change. A year ago women in Texas could have abortions. Now they cannot. Tax rates change. Treatment of capital gains changes. In my youth draft laws changed. At different points in my life these changes had huge effects on me.
There is all the difference in the world between something that is "probably OK," and a guarantee. I welcomed those Republican jeers.
[Note: To get daily delivery of this blog to your email go to: https://petersage.substack.com Subscribe. The blog is free and always will be.]
10 comments:
Rick Scott is the U.S. Senator (R-FL) and massive Medicare fraudster who previously resided in Tennessee.
See Newsweek article from 2-9-23, read his Wikipedia page or Google search for more information. He definitely belongs in Florida with OJ and the former Traitor in Chief.
As I recall, Tim Scott is the Republican U.S. Senator from South Carolina.
While Rick Scott was CEO of Columbia/HCA, the company pleaded guilty to defrauding Medicare (taxpayers) of many millions of dollars. Since it involved white collar criminals stealing such huge amounts of money, the company paid a fine and nobody went to jail. Scott was pressured to leave the company. Being such an outstanding example of Republican values, he became governor of Florida and then Senator.
Naturally he wants to “sunset” Social Security and Medicare. Having profited so enormously from Medicare, he doesn’t need Social Security and since he’s no longer in a position to rip off Medicare, he doesn’t need it anymore.
"Senator" Scott, or as I think of him, Skeletor, has challenged The President to debate him, in Florida on his (written) proposal to Sunset all Federal spending programs, apparently trying to deny his back door approach to ending Social Security and Medicare. I hope The President takes him up on the challenge, as I think Skeletor would wind up being laughed into oblivion, just like Paul Ryan, the Zombie Eyed Granny Starver from the formerly great State of Wisconsin.
Yes, laws change. Sometimes needlessly, and other times much needed.
State, local, and federal governments enact legislation and spending that is essential. Other times, checks and balances are forgotten for that legislation.
What happens when the costs for that legislation promise too much? There are proposals to raise taxes and fees to cover those increased costs. What happens when tax increases aren't possible?
Rick Scott and the others made their wants known, and it's a disaster for the Republicans, regardless of the intentions, and the Democrats will capitalize on that misstep. At least in the short term.
What should governments do when spending exceeds obligations? What happens when tax revenues are below expectations or grow slower thand spending.
What happens when state pension programs guarantee rates of return that aren't met by investments? What happens when benefits are calculated based on the last few years of employment rather than actual contributions over their work history and actual investment returns.
Someday our states, local governments, and Congress will pay attention to the details and have a regular review of promises made. No problem if they're well funded. Not so good when costs rise faster than the funding sources can pay for them.
Senator Scott is my Senator. He and his allies could have addressed this differently.
Taxes cannot be increased indefinitely, and we certainly should not increase our debt unless we have the ability to reduce that debt.
Raise the income limits on Social Security.
That's right, folks. The richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world can no longer afford Social Security and Medicare because Rick Scott, Trump and cronies need their tax cuts more than the rest of us need a social safety net.
It'd be nice to think a few Republicans might wake up to reality before 2024, but we're talking about people more worried about "wokeness" than they are about climate change. Rational Republican has become an oxymoron.
“How did you go bankrupt?"
“Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly.”
― Ernest Hemingway, The Sun Also Rises
Yes indeed. A measure from the past that is easily done today.
Nice to see the willingness to suggest a reasonable action rather than the usual criticism of folks who might be Republican.
The solution, of course, is an equitable tax system that pays for the programs we want and also reduces the debt. Unfortunately, Republicans don't support equity, taxes or social programs. But we did it after WWII and we could do it again.
Peter, you briefly tossed in a point I've heard on a couple of national pods this week, calling the minority Republican position to end/slash Social Security and Medicare equivalent to the minority Democratic position to defund the police. Except that the Democrats you're talking about were activists chanting in the streets and maybe a few big-city officials, while the Republicans are Rick Scott, Ron Johnson, Mike Lee, some of the most powerful Senators and GOP decision-makers.
"Equivalent"?
Post a Comment