Obama's 6 Social Security Principles

February 16, 2011 RSS Feed Print

For a program everyone agrees is not in crisis, there sure are a lot of proposals swirling around to "reform" Social Security. There are even a lot of non-proposals, some of which you can find in President Obama's just-released 2012 recommended federal budget.

The "big three" entitlement programs—Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security—have long been the elephants in the room for our enormous deficit problems. They consume 60 percent of federal spending and will be at 70 percent before you know it. Any effort to curb spending on these programs is absent from the President's budget. And while Republicans complain about how wimpy the White House's proposed budget cuts are, they aren't eager to tackle entitlements, either. They're hardly alone.

[See 10 Ways to Improve Your Finances in 2011.]

The public may lament the trillions of dollars that's been added to the national debt in recent years. And it may have sent a lot of Tea Party legislators to Congress to "fix things." But opinion surveys show that people don't want to do away with, or even weaken, the big safety-net programs.

Senior medical spending is at the heart of the issue for Medicare and a major factor in Medicaid. It's even an important consideration in Social Security benefits, given that rising health costs are a dominant concern among seniors who depend on Social Security. And in case you hadn't noticed, the future of all healthcare costs is up in the air due to the embattled health reform act, whose overturn is being aggressively sought by Congressional Republicans and in several court challenges supported by many state governments. Even if you wanted to cut senior medical costs, where would you even start these days?

Of course, it is nearly inconceivable that any elected official would publicly call for reduced support of senior healthcare. Just the hint of proposing cost-saving discussions with seniors about end-of-life care decisions brought forth claims of death panels and forced the White House into an embarrassing retreat (by the way, end-of-life consultations are linked with both lower costs and extended life spans). Logic is trampled under the feet of a charging entitlement elephant every time.

Yet our leaders all know that entitlements must be cut. But how to get there and escape with one's political life? There's the rub. So, instead of proposals, we have positioning statements. And this is really what the Obama 2012 budget is at this point. In public-relations speak, our leaders are engaged in a huge framing job. They seek to gain the high ground for how to discuss the deficit and how to position themselves to voters.

[See Public Supports Continued Strong Senior Benefits.]

As far as Social Security is concerned, the President's National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform included very specific reform ideas in its final report. President Obama endorsed the group's work. But you won't find any of these ideas in his 2012 budget message. What you will find are six principles the President says will guide him in any Social Security reforms:

•Any reform should strengthen Social Security for future generations and restore long-term solvency.

•The Administration will oppose any measures that privatize or weaken the Social Security system.

•While all measures to strengthen solvency should be on the table, the Administration will not accept an approach that slashes benefits for future generations.

•No current beneficiaries should see their basic benefits reduced.

•Reform should strengthen retirement security for the most vulnerable, including low-income seniors.

•Reform should maintain robust disability and survivors' benefits.

[See 4 Retirement Pillars Have Serious Cracks.]

I have read these "principles" several times. They leave precious little room for any reform proposal that does not use higher payroll taxes as the primary tool for narrowing Social Security's long-term payment gap. The most likely approach is to raise or lift entirely the maximum annual wage income that is subject to the Social Security payroll tax. Right now, that ceiling is $106,800. I certainly wouldn't mind using higher payroll taxes as one of the tools for rebalancing Social Security for the next 75 years. Raising the retirement age for younger workers is also a possible adjustment. But trying to make Social Security self-supporting again without asking any hard questions about benefit levels is reflective of the thinking that got us into this fix in the first place.

And Social Security, it needs to be stressed, is the easy fix here. Under current rules, Social Security projects it will be able to pay all promised benefits in full until the year 2037. At that time, it would be able to pay them only at 78 cents to the dollar. Closing this gap should not involve anything like the really hard and nasty cuts in store for Medicare and Medicaid. I can't wait to see the principles for those reforms. In the meantime, if you'd like to refresh yourself on some of the thoughtful deficit-reduction proposals that do include entitlements, check out a recent Urban Institute summary.

Twitter: @PhilMoeller

Tags:
Obama administration,
Barack Obama,
retirement,
social security

Reader Comments Read all comments (68)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

I became disabled June 6, 2011 and received my first payment December 2011, unbeknowest to me my husband passed away three years ago and Social Security decided to add his benefits to mine, I am receiving a total of $436 from his account and $701 from my disability-my son is disabled he has a mental disability he is only receiving $465 when in actuality he was receiving $698> I am truly confused with the Social Security Administration because I was told that I would receive $997 from my husband because he earned more but was later told a month later that the $997 amount was increased and I would receive $436? That is totally a decrease by any calculation? Can someone tell me what happened?

Donna of DE 7:15PM May 13, 2012

Cut the waste in our government. (like keeping up those persons in this country illegally. Also why are we trying to fund every do nothing country in the world when the people in this country (leagally) are having such a hard time to just have the basic necessities of life. (Like food, housing, medical care) It is time for

our government officials to remember what is most important (it isn't their pocketbook or wallet). This country needs to stop throwing money away and start using a real budget. So far I have only see a small number of politicians who are up for the task. Democrats and Republicans, if you shake them up and pour them out, they all look the same they are only concerned with what will enrich their wealth.

G Frey of NC 10:04AM May 13, 2012

I am certainly not an economics expert, but as a retired social worker I had to figure out how to live within my Social Security benefits. I purchased a modest mobile home along with another retiree in a seniors mobile home park. We share mutual living expenses totaling $1600.00 a month. We do not wear rolex watches, however, our timex's are just as accurate. I am very concerned about the rising costs of medical care and medication. I pay $300.00 a month for medical and prescription insurance. One medication copay went from $7.00 in 2011 to $105.00 in 2012. I find this obscene and will probably die penniless one day unable to afford lifesaving meds. My solution recommendation would be that every person in the workforce and those on welfare pay a flat 10% income tax. Vote the fat cats out of office by limiting thier terms of office and give them the same retirement and medical benefits as every other receive. The medical and pharmacutical indrustries should not be allowed to raise consumer costs 900% from one year to the next. Social workers are not polititions, but we have to rely on common sense in order to serve the public properly. If we are not voted into public office, we should be required to be placed on the advisorary team of every elected official from the President on down to every city council in the country.

J.E. Barber,MSW

Judith E Barber of WA 10:38PM April 26, 2012

The Best Life

The Best Life

Contributing editor Philip Moeller writes about the people, ideas and programs that provide "best life" retirement solutions and opportunities.

advertisement

EASY RETIREMENT CALCULATOR

Our retirement readiness calculator will provide a rough idea of how long your retirement savings and income will last.


Latest Video

advertisement