Why Progressive Groups Have a Problem With Clinton On Social Security

[LongTomH]

From Huffington Post.

Hillary Clinton refuses to rule out any and all benefit cuts to Social Security, angering leading progressive groups that have not endorsed a candidate in the Democratic primary.

...............//snip

Sec. Clinton has made noises about protecting and even expanding some benefits for low income retirees, which dissatisfies a number of people in the progressive wing of the party.

What worries advocates, however, is that a Democratic president would use Social Security as a chip in a "grand bargain" with Republicans after the election. Clinton pledges on her website to "expand" Social Security benefits for "those who need it most and who are treated unfairly by the current system -- including women who are widows and those who took significant time out of the paid workforce to take care of their children, aging parents, or ailing family members."

Nancy Altman, a co-founder of Social Security Works who has 35 years of experience in the field, said that Clinton campaign's statement and the policy descriptions on her website, do not definitively promise not to cut the program

"What Secretary Clinton has said about Social Security is completely consistent with the Bowles-Simpson plan," Altman said, referring to a Fiscal Commission proposal in 2010 that would have made major cuts to middle-class benefits, even as it marginally lifted those of poor beneficiaries. "From the very beginning, there have been those who have wanted to boost benefits at the low end and cut middle-class benefits -- pushing it in the direction of becoming a kind of welfare program. It is very important that the candidates not only expand benefits but promise not to cut them. Otherwise there could be cuts that undermine what the program is: insurance, where you get a fair benefit for the money paid."

The Bowles-Simpson Commission, sometimes referred to as 'The Catfood Commission,' has proposed raising retirement ages and the infamous Chained CPI. As an AARP article explains:

"Bottom line: Cost-of-living adjustments would be lower with the chained CPI than with the plain old CPI. So depending on which formula is used, the amount of your Social Security payments could change over time."

I got the link for the previous article from the Social Security Works Facebook page, which has multiple entries concerning Sec. Clinton and her stance on Social Security.

Here's another one from CommonDreams: Progressives to Clinton: Pledge Never to Cut Social Security - Now:

Hillary Clinton is under pressure from progressives to pledge never to cut Social Security—and to do it before the New Hampshire primary on February 9.

The Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) launched a new national push this week demanding the former secretary of state confirm her allegiance to the program that provides benefits to roughly 60 million Americans, which she has yet to do. The campaign includes a petition calling on Clinton to make the promise, and will introduce new tactics in the coming days.

"We challenge Hillary Clinton to promise before the New Hampshire Primary that she will never cut Social Security," PCCC co-founder Adam Green said on Tuesday—just a day after the Iowa caucuses unexpectedly ended in a "virtual tie" between Clinton and her chief rival Bernie Sanders.

[liberal_at_heart]

1. No more cuts to social services! I will not vote for any Democrat who votes to cut social services.

[CharlotteVale]

3. Neither will. Nor any who talk out of both sides of their mouths on them.

[tokenlib]

2. If Hillary pledged "no cuts"..I'd think she was lying....

To see Hillary's true posture on Social Security, I'd look at Third Way's positions on it. She is going to blow smoke on this issue as much as she can.

[CharlotteVale]

4. It sounds like she wants to turn SS into a welfare program for elderly women --

in order to make the cuts she wants more palatable. Sorry, but even if I trusted her to protect elderly women (and I do not), as a retired woman myself, that simply doesn't fly with me. She can't be trusted to protect any SS recipients.

[NCjack]

5. We are unlikely to know Hillary's SS plan until after she is elected, if she is. What

we have here is the ol' pig-in-a-poke conundrum. I recall my shock when I read that Pres. Obama had put SS on the table to entice the Rethugs to bargain on the budget. Is this here-we-go-again?