The Cliff Notes version of the bi-partisan deficit reduction commission has leaked even though the full report isn’t due for another couple of weeks. That probably means that the commissioners have agreed on their recommendations. Despite the supposed mission of the commission — to reduce the deficit — that seems to be pretty far down on their list of priorities.
Rather, the emphasis is on reducing taxes (at least for some) and cutting spending. Take, for example, the proposal to raise the retirement age. But there was no accompanying recommendation to raise the cap so that more money would be paid into the system by current earners. If that is representative of the ideology driving the rest of the recommendations, it’s fair to say that the burden of deficit reduction will be disproportionately put on that vast majority of Americans who are working and middle class. Here’s why.
Working class or blue collar jobs are those that require a higher level of physical labor. And while it’s true that all of us are living longer than seventy years ago when Social Security began, working class people often cannot physically continue to work well into their 60s. So raising the age at which “full benefits” kick in is, in reality, a benefits cut for working class Americans.
The other kicker is changing the rules for cost of living adjustments. The biggest impact of inflation on older Americans is the rise in medical costs, which would not be considered under the new scheme. So, again, the effect is a benefits cut, potentially a very significant one, especially if the GOP manages to dismantle those parts of health care reform that would put downward pressure on costs of services.
Yet, they seem to leave the cap untouched. The cap provides a 6% tax cut on wages above $107,000 — another tax break for those at the top, leaving everyone else to pick up the slack. By not raising the cap, the commissioners have demonstrated that they are ideologically to the right.
That ideological bent will certainly be apparent in their other recommendations. There’ll be talk of the need to sacrifice, painting such sacrifice as our patriotic duty. But it seems that patriotic sacrifice will be reserved for the vast majority of Americans while allowing the top few percent to escape.
On the other hand, Rep. Jan Shakowski (D-MI) has released her own proposal that would take a big bite out of the deficits without further sacrificing the middle class. She calls for allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire for the top two brackets, raising the cap on Social Security taxes, implementing cap and trade (which would create thousands of new jobs in the growing alternative energy sector), and several other distinctly progressive solutions.
Rep. Shakowski’s proposal, along with those from the deficit reduction commission, should provide an opportunity for a healthy debate. Whether that debate will happen remains to be seen. Unfortunately, debate lately has been limited to who can get the best shots in rather than an open, honest, rational discussion of the pros and cons of a particular policy recommendation.
I really like some one bringing up this subject. One thing which will probably be ignored is the disability problem. The problem is not with us but rather with Governmental policies. Even with the ADA our unemployment is at 78%. Are Americans really afraid that a few of us are going to take their jobs away from them? Sometimes a benevolent government does more harm than good. All the education programs are for naught if the limits are set at $1800 per family. When there are over 50 million Americans living below the poverty level those who run our lives should start to realize that this is not sustainable.
So I guess my comment is; Please Uncle Sam LET US WORK!
OPnYDe