SOCIAL SECURITY. I am 55 years old, and as long as I have been able to understand what has been going on in the political world I have been hearing the warnings that Social Security is doomed to fail, it was supposed to run out of money in the 80's, 90's and now by 2031. The solution, according to those who do not have the best interest of the tens of millions of Americans who depend on Social Security in mind, is to cut benefits and impose their chained cpi proposal to calculate yearly benefit increases, thus actually imposing further cuts to recipients. These people are furiously working behind the scenes to cut the program and so protect their wealth and power. Senators Bernie Saunders I VT and Elizabeth Warren D MA will have none of that and are fighting to protect Social Security and even expand the program to provide for those of us who need need it now and in the future. The obvious way to do this is to lift the cap on Social Security taxes so all income is subject to the tax. That is what has the rich and powerful, the 1%, in such a panic, and why corporate democrats and republicans are waging a propaganda campaign to deceive the American public about the dangers of Social Security going bankrupt and the need for all Americans (except the 1%) to tighten their fiscal belts and get used to doing with less. This is nothing less than class warfare and third way will only bring us closer to being a Third World plutocracy. Bold Progressives, mostly Democrats with some Republicans, are fighting back, but unless the American people stay actively involved in this battle we will loose. You need to let your Representative and Senators know you expect them to vote against any budget bill that includes cuts to Social Security and the chained-cpi proposal by contacting them by phone or e mail. Find your elected officials here CONTACT YOUR REPRESENTATIVE and CONTACT YOUR SENATORS . This from Daily Kos.....
Third Way leadership, Jon Cowan, Paul Volcker, John Vogelstein, aka "rich assholes pissed that we have Social Security"
If you talk to leading progressives these days, you'll be sure to hear this message: The Democratic Party should embrace the economic populism of New York Mayor-elect Bill de Blasio and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren. Such economic populism, they argue, should be the guiding star for Democrats heading into 2016. Nothing would be more disastrous for Democrats [...]Translation: Wall Street is scared shitless of De Blasio and Warren. But we knew that already. Head below the fold to see just how scared they are, and what they really want. Hint: it's something to do with Social Security and Medicare and their taxes, and none of it is good.
The political problems of liberal populism are bad enough. Worse are the actual policies proposed by left-wing populists. The movement relies on a potent "we can have it all" fantasy that goes something like this: If we force the wealthy to pay higher taxes (there are 300,000 tax filers who earn more than $1 million), close a few corporate tax loopholes, and break up some big banks then—presto!—we can pay for, and even expand, existing entitlements. Meanwhile, we can invest more deeply in K-12 education, infrastructure, health research, clean energy and more.It's nice of these Third Way jokers to clarify, way at the top, that this is all really about protecting the banks and the assholes who run them.
Social Security is exhibit A of this populist political and economic fantasy.Surprise! They want to cut it. Nothing infuriates bankers more than a retirement program that they can't profit from. Although to their credit, they do point out that the program is fine until 2031, so ... PANIC NOW! To their discredit, they don't recommend simply raising the cap on payroll taxes.
Even more reckless is the populists' staunch refusal to address the coming Medicare crisis.Cut that, too!
On the same day that Bill de Blasio won in New York City, a referendum to raise taxes on high-income Coloradans to fund public education and universal pre-K failed in a landslide. This is the type of state that Democrats captured in 2008 to realign the national electoral map, and they did so through offering a vision of pragmatic progressive government, not fantasy-based blue-state populism. Before Democrats follow Sen. Warren and Mayor-elect de Blasio over the populist cliff, they should consider Colorado as the true 2013 Election Day harbinger of American liberalism.Cute. That Colorado referendum didn't just raise taxes on high-income Coloradans, it raised them on all Coloradans. Would that referendum have played any differently if it raised taxes on the wealthy but cut them for everyone else? Who knows. But that would've made it "populist" and relevant to this discussion. All we found out was that Colorado residents didn't want to pay more in taxes. 2012 was a triumph of populism. Sure, there was Warren in Indigo Blue Massachusetts (in a race that no other serious Democrat wanted to make because Scott Brown was seen as unbeatable). But there was also Tammy Baldwin in Wisconsin. Chris Murphy kicked Third Way hero Joe Lieberman to the curb in Connecticut. Martin Heinrich in New Mexico, Jon Tester in Montana, and even Heidi Heitkamp in North freakin' Dakota won with the populist playbook. That's a Purple state, a Blue state, and two Red states, for those keeping score. Bob Kerrey, on the other hand, got crushed in Nebraska by running on cutting Social Security and austerity.
And let's not forget, Newt Gingrich employed Occupy "1 percent" rhetoric to win South Carolina's GOP primary in 2012, extending his party's nomination contest. Had he stuck with it, he might've even gone further. But his party's establishment shut that whole thing down. And of course, there was the marquee presidential race, where Mitt Romney went down despite every historical advantage (i.e. shitty economy) because of his close association with Wall Street.
Third Way still thinks it's 1994, that the electorate is dominated by "Reagan Democrats", and that people don't f'n hate Wall Street, its banks, and everyone associated with it. But it's an understandable blind spot. Look at their board. It is almost entirely dominated by Wall Street interests. Laughably so, in fact.
So consider Third Way a trade group, one lobbying to keep their taxes lower and the pitchforks at bay. That might make them greedy selfish assholes, but it sure doesn't make them Democrats.
Originally posted to Daily Kos on Tue Dec 03, 2013 at 09:00 AM PST.
Also republished by Pushing back at the Grand Bargain, Social Security Defenders, New York City, and Massachusetts Kosmopolitans.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/12/03/1259801/-Corporate-Dems-cutting-Social-Security-is-path-to-electoral-victory?detail=email
Elizabeth Warren takes sides in Democratic feud
As Elizabeth Warren waded in and a congresswoman running for
Pennsylvania governor distanced herself, an escalating feud Wednesday
between left-leaning groups highlighted a major fault line among
Democrats over entitlements.
It started with an op-ed in Monday’s Wall Street Journal. Two leaders of the center-left think tank, Third Way, wrote that “economic populism is a dead end for Democrats.” Jon Cowan and Jim Kessler argued that plans to increase Social Security benefits, put off Medicare reform and raise taxes on the rich espoused by liberals like Warren are irresponsible, substantively and politically.
Continue Reading
A liberal candidate running in a crowded Democratic primary, John Hanger, then joined these groups Wednesday morning in calling on Rep. Allyson Schwartz, the early Democratic frontrunner in the race to take on Pennsylvania Republican Gov. Tom Corbett next year, to resign as an honorary co-chair of Third Way.
By lunch time, Warren jumped into the fray. Her Senate office blasted out a letter from the freshman firebrand senator to the CEOs of the country’s six largest financial institutions, prodding them to disclose money they provide to think tanks like Third Way.
“Just as there is transparency around your direct efforts to influence policymaking through lobbying,” Warren wrote, “the same transparency should exist for any indirect efforts you make to influence policymaking through financial contributions to think tanks.”
A few hours later, Schwartz condemned the piece for the Journal but declined to end her affiliation with the group.
(Also on POLITICO: Elizabeth Warren: ‘I’m not running for president’)
“She read the op-ed and thought it was outrageous and strongly disagreed, and she told Third Way that,” said spokesman Mark Bergman. “She has constantly fought to preserve and protect Medicare and Social Security.”
Each of the groups involved said the back-and-forth is an opening salvo in a debate among Democrats that will only become louder through 2014 and 2016. As much as is written about the divide between tea party and establishment Republicans, the Democratic Party has its own ideological breach that the episode has brought to the fore.
Third Way co-founder Matt Bennett explained that JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon, one of the recipients of Warren’s letter, would see an increase in his Social Security benefits under a plan supported by Warren. Bennett said it is “magical thinking” to believe government can invest more in education and infrastructure while putting off long-term fixes to Medicare and simultaneously infusing more money into the Social Security system. Bennett added that his group is willing to take a short-term political hit to ensure the long-term political solvency of programs that seniors depend on.
“Our view as Democrats is that the entitlement crisis threatens the twin achievements of progressive politics in the 20th century, which is the safety net – the programs themselves – and the idea of government investment,” said Bennett. “Since we believe strongly both are vital, we’ve got to fix the problem.”
The victories of Warren and New York City Mayor-elect Bill de Blasio have given liberals fresh confidence that their wing of the party is ascendent. Schwartz’s attempt to distance herself from Third Way emboldened the Progressive Change Campaign Committee to call on the centrist group’s other co-chairs to take public positions on the Journal op-ed.
“Third Way couldn’t have picked a less strategic fight than attacking two of the most popular things in the Democratic Party: Elizabeth Warren and Social Security,” said PCCC co-founder Adam Green. “It’s a huge blunder, and their credibility will take a big hit on Capitol Hill.”
The battle also previews something that could dog Hillary Clinton if she runs for president and draws a challenger from her left. Clintonism has long been synonymous with moderate, third-way-style politics. Leading moderates like Bennett are alums of Bill Clinton’s White House.
Warren’s willingness to take sides only boosts her standing as a darling of progressive activists. Green was ecstatic that she sent her letter after PCCC started circulating a petition to activists trying to get Third Way to fully disclose all their donors.
“In our minds, Elizabeth Warren is the north star to which the entire Democratic Party can look as they seek direction,” said Green. “The wind’s at our back, and Third Way’s kind of yelping from the sidelines.”
Third Way’s Bennett offered a more conciliatory tone. He noted the group’s support for the Dodd-Frank financial law, the Affordable Care Act and budget deals that have raised taxes on the wealthy.
“Our party is large and robust enough to have these kinds of policy disagreements,” he said, “and it’s important that no one try to drum anyone else out of the tent – the way Republicans do.”
It started with an op-ed in Monday’s Wall Street Journal. Two leaders of the center-left think tank, Third Way, wrote that “economic populism is a dead end for Democrats.” Jon Cowan and Jim Kessler argued that plans to increase Social Security benefits, put off Medicare reform and raise taxes on the rich espoused by liberals like Warren are irresponsible, substantively and politically.
Continue Reading
A chorus of groups aligned with the liberal wing of the
party – from the Progressive Change Campaign Committee to Howard Dean’s
Democracy for America and Russ Feingold’s Progressives United –
responded by attacking Third Way as a Wall Street-funded front group.
(QUIZ: Do you know Elizabeth Warren?)A liberal candidate running in a crowded Democratic primary, John Hanger, then joined these groups Wednesday morning in calling on Rep. Allyson Schwartz, the early Democratic frontrunner in the race to take on Pennsylvania Republican Gov. Tom Corbett next year, to resign as an honorary co-chair of Third Way.
By lunch time, Warren jumped into the fray. Her Senate office blasted out a letter from the freshman firebrand senator to the CEOs of the country’s six largest financial institutions, prodding them to disclose money they provide to think tanks like Third Way.
“Just as there is transparency around your direct efforts to influence policymaking through lobbying,” Warren wrote, “the same transparency should exist for any indirect efforts you make to influence policymaking through financial contributions to think tanks.”
A few hours later, Schwartz condemned the piece for the Journal but declined to end her affiliation with the group.
(Also on POLITICO: Elizabeth Warren: ‘I’m not running for president’)
“She read the op-ed and thought it was outrageous and strongly disagreed, and she told Third Way that,” said spokesman Mark Bergman. “She has constantly fought to preserve and protect Medicare and Social Security.”
Each of the groups involved said the back-and-forth is an opening salvo in a debate among Democrats that will only become louder through 2014 and 2016. As much as is written about the divide between tea party and establishment Republicans, the Democratic Party has its own ideological breach that the episode has brought to the fore.
Third Way co-founder Matt Bennett explained that JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon, one of the recipients of Warren’s letter, would see an increase in his Social Security benefits under a plan supported by Warren. Bennett said it is “magical thinking” to believe government can invest more in education and infrastructure while putting off long-term fixes to Medicare and simultaneously infusing more money into the Social Security system. Bennett added that his group is willing to take a short-term political hit to ensure the long-term political solvency of programs that seniors depend on.
“Our view as Democrats is that the entitlement crisis threatens the twin achievements of progressive politics in the 20th century, which is the safety net – the programs themselves – and the idea of government investment,” said Bennett. “Since we believe strongly both are vital, we’ve got to fix the problem.”
The victories of Warren and New York City Mayor-elect Bill de Blasio have given liberals fresh confidence that their wing of the party is ascendent. Schwartz’s attempt to distance herself from Third Way emboldened the Progressive Change Campaign Committee to call on the centrist group’s other co-chairs to take public positions on the Journal op-ed.
“Third Way couldn’t have picked a less strategic fight than attacking two of the most popular things in the Democratic Party: Elizabeth Warren and Social Security,” said PCCC co-founder Adam Green. “It’s a huge blunder, and their credibility will take a big hit on Capitol Hill.”
The battle also previews something that could dog Hillary Clinton if she runs for president and draws a challenger from her left. Clintonism has long been synonymous with moderate, third-way-style politics. Leading moderates like Bennett are alums of Bill Clinton’s White House.
Warren’s willingness to take sides only boosts her standing as a darling of progressive activists. Green was ecstatic that she sent her letter after PCCC started circulating a petition to activists trying to get Third Way to fully disclose all their donors.
“In our minds, Elizabeth Warren is the north star to which the entire Democratic Party can look as they seek direction,” said Green. “The wind’s at our back, and Third Way’s kind of yelping from the sidelines.”
Third Way’s Bennett offered a more conciliatory tone. He noted the group’s support for the Dodd-Frank financial law, the Affordable Care Act and budget deals that have raised taxes on the wealthy.
“Our party is large and robust enough to have these kinds of policy disagreements,” he said, “and it’s important that no one try to drum anyone else out of the tent – the way Republicans do.”
No comments:
Post a Comment