General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsExpanding Social Security: The Democratic Party Comes Home
Posted: 03/27/2015 11:32 am EDT Updated: 1 hour ago
In the wee hours of the morning, when most people were sleeping, the Senate took a vote that has momentous implications for who will win in 2016 and beyond. In three resounding votes over the last two days, Democrats rediscovered and reclaimed their legacy.
Just before recessing until April 13, the Senate passed a budget resolution. Prior to final passage, it voted on three separate Social Security amendments. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont) offered an amendment protecting all Americans against cuts in their Social Security earned benefits. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) offered an amendment only protecting current beneficiaries from cuts. And around 2:30 a.m., Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Massachusetts) offered an amendment advocating the expansion of Social Security.
The results were revealing and important. Every Democratic Senator who was present but two voted to expand Social Security. Every Democratic senator but one voted against cutting Social Security's modest benefits.
In sharp contrast, no Republican voted to expand Social Security. Every Republican but a mere six voted to keep open the option of cutting the earned Social Security benefits of every American except for those fortunate enough to already be receiving those benefits. (Sorry, those of you who are a month away from retiring or have a disabling or deadly illness or accident in your future. The Republicans refused to vote to protect you.)
The distinction between the Democrats and Republicans couldn't be clearer. The Democratic Party, which created Social Security, now in its 80th year, is unmistakably the strong champion of the program. The Republican Party which, in 1935, voted nearly unanimously to kill the legislation in the House of Representatives, is unmistakably on record for favoring scaling back working Americans' modest earned Social Security benefits.
The Democrats are finally back in line with the American people. ...
.....Despite this winning policy and politics, too many Democrats over the last few decades have waffled in their support. Too many flirted with trading away these modest but vital benefits in an ill-conceived "Grand Bargain." Thanks to last night's vote, that is now behind us, if the Democrats have their way.
....For too long, though, Americans did not have a clearly articulated choice about what is at stake. Too many politicians, Democrats and Republicans alike, spoke in vague terms about "saving" or "strengthening" Social Security. With that language, voters don't know who truly is on their side. Now they know. Some policymakers stand for expanding, not cutting, Social Security. Others want to "save" Social Security by dismantling it brick by brick....
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nancy-altman/expanding-social-security_b_6955394.html
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)Just that crazy woman again.
If she's not careful, Wall Street will cut the handouts to ALL the Democrats & it will all be her fault.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)LWolf
(46,179 posts)Who are the "Democrats" that voted Nay?
If Sander's amendment referred to here is Wyden # 471, which is what I could find, the lone "Nay" vote belongs to Mark Warner.
The two voting "Nay" for Warren's amendment are Heidi Heitkamp and Tom Carper.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-03-27/silent-ted-cruz-triumphant-elizabeth-warren-and-the-other-2016-moments-of-vote-a-rama
WhiteTara
(29,676 posts)FiveGoodMen
(20,018 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)pnwmom
(108,925 posts)If this is a safely blue state, then go ahead and replace him. Otherwise, be careful what you wish for.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)hootinholler
(26,449 posts)Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)to try and beat over the head of those willing wait and see what this shit is really about.
It's pretty comical reading the negative prognostications...then a short while later, the reality that is disclosed.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)They have a long way to go to restore Dem voter confidence.
This is a GOOD start though!
closeupready
(29,503 posts)B Calm
(28,762 posts)liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)Democrats not only need to fight current an future cuts to programs, they should be fighting for restoration of previous funding that has been taken away. We get more Democrats like this in government and I just might be able to rejoin the party. Until then I will continue to identify as a Socialist Independent.
former9thward
(31,805 posts)I wish there would have been a summary.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)former9thward
(31,805 posts)stage left
(2,934 posts)Liberalynn
(7,549 posts)Senate Democrats out of the debate and wants to cut it. I don't know who's going to win in the end but I sure hope it's not the cutters.
Can someone either answer me here or PM me about what are the chances Delaney's proposal will actually get enacted? I'm on disability and nervous about all this.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)Liberalynn
(7,549 posts)I'm hoping this will be the case.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Liberalynn
(7,549 posts)It's upsetting when someone who is supposed to be on our side proposes something like this but at least there's hope it won't get through.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)hands off and expand.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)They just cannot get around the fact that we paid more than 2.7 trillion dollars in than we have taken out.
What other aspect of government has been so well funded? Absolutely nothing.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)The big problem is the media. There is one misinformation hit piece after another on TV and radio. They give the viewers the very worst, convoluted information. And we never heard a word to the contrary.