WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans backed off a demand to trim spending on Social Security by changing the cost-of-living adjustment, a proposal Democrats say was a nonstarter in talks to avert the so-called fiscal cliff.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., included the provision to move to a “chained CPI” — an alternative measure of inflation — in his offer Saturday evening. It was, aides cautioned, not the only sticking point that held up talks Sunday, with just over a day left for lawmakers to act to prevent automatic spending cuts and tax hikes.
But soon after the idea became public, Republican senators began distancing themselves from it.
“I’m not a fan,” said retiring Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, as she left a closed-door meeting of the party caucus. “I don’t think it should be part of it, and I think there are others who shared that view.”
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said he supported the idea in theory, but that it should have never been offered as part of current talks, which are focused narrowly on tax rates.
Asked why his party leader made the proposal, McCain responded bluntly: “Damned if I know.”
“It’s a very bad, losing proposition,” McCain said. “What [Democrats] are saying now is, ‘Republicans want to preserve tax breaks for rich people and give up seniors’ Social Security.’ That’s the argument they’re using. Now whether it’s valid or not, it’s a winning argument. It should be off the table. And I think most Republicans believe it should be off the table.”
In the last offer he made to House Speaker John A. Boehner, President Obama had included the chained CPI as part of a larger deal that would have also included asking Republicans to agree to raise the debt ceiling for two years. But lawmakers now have all but written off the likelihood of that kind of large-scale “grand bargain.” Instead, they are working simply to prevent a year-end tax increase for nearly all Americans.
“I’ve supported chained CPI as part of a grand bargain, but this is no grand bargain,” said Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D.
Distributed by MCT Information Services
Pop quiz: Who said the following about how utterly inappropriate it is to include Social Security in any debate on the deficit?
.
Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit. Social Security is totally funded by the payroll tax levied on employer and employee. If you reduce the outgo of Social Security, that money would not go into the general fund to reduce the deficit. It would go into the Social Security Trust Fund. So Social Security has nothing to do with balancing a budget or erasing or growing the deficit.</i
Ronald Reagan, 1984!
Yep. But bunches of nouveau fake Republicans are either too ignorant of how government funding works or so inherently dishonest they are willing to take money from senior citizens to give tax breaks to the top 2%.
.
A sad comment on how low my party has sunk in recent years. Many of them are so ignorant they call me a RINO when I espouse traditional Republican values.
the teas (and GROVER) would have bullied their hero reagan out of office as not being “conservative” enough !!!
As well the Republicans should back off. Jeeze, they want to hurt seniors and give breaks to the wealthy. What is wrong with them anyway.
You have been fed, and digested a whole bowl of lies and misinformation. Try getting news from other sources than MSNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, NYT, BDN.
Your problem is a steady diet of FOX News(unfair & unbalanced)!
Then describe the Republican position using specifics. What exactly do the Republicans want to cut? Be specific. Whose tax cuts are they trying to protect? Be specific.
I know you guys like to say you want to cut entitlements and protect tax cuts for businesses, but that’s not specific, those claims are meaningless. We need to know exactly what you want to cut and protect. As it stands, Republicans had their eyes on SS and the tax cuts for the wealthy. That fact can’t be denied.
Where do you get your news?
One term limit for them all. One term , no time taken to worry about re election. A government of the people instead of career politicians ! Put them all on social security instead of the cushy retirement plan they have now. Consider paying them minimum wage with a bonus for saving the taxpayer money. Include Obamacare in their health plan instead of the best medical care in the world. It’s time for all of us to stand up to them and demand our country back. It’s obvious that an election hasn’t changed anything. Same game , same players ! Let’s rally against Washington politics and stop this taxpayer funded merry go round !
SS and medicare ( entitlements all) should be totally OFF the table. They didn’t cause the problem and aren’t a solution TO the problem.
Ronald Reagan solved the problem by significantly raising SS taxes AND CREATING a designated Medicare tax OVER 30 years ago. As a result retiring babyboomers have contributed MORE to SS then ANY previous generation..Regan also already RAISED the retirement age The baby boomers have paid a high enough price already and will NOT tolerate any tinkering with it. EVER –NOW or in the NEAR future !!! The GOP is bat crap crazy if they think anyone will tolerate changes to SS.They will have one heck of a FIGHT on their hands.
What DID cause “the problem” IS reduced revenues thru BUSH’s tax cuts.ODD the R’s aren’t willing to deal with what actually CAUSED the problem isn’t it? RAISE the CAPITAL GAINS TAXES !!!
Asked why his party leader made the proposal, McCain responded bluntly: “Damned if I know.”
“It’s a very bad, losing proposition,” McCain said. “What [Democrats] are saying now is, ‘Republicans want to preserve tax breaks for rich people and give up seniors’ Social Security.’ That’s the argument they’re using. Now whether it’s valid or not, it’s a winning argument. It should be off the table. And I think most Republicans believe it should be off the table.”
So why are the GOP even bringing this into the conversation at this point!!
Oh no!!!!! Granny is going off the fiscal cliff! How about we stop the free lunch program for every kid in schools and give the money to granny? Let the parents feed their own kids and then put that money aside for granny’s raise. Naww…our thieves would find some other social goody to come up with just to spend more money.
“‘Republicans want to preserve tax breaks for rich people and give up seniors’ Social Security.’ That’s the argument they’re using. Now whether it’s valid or not, it’s a winning argument.”
It’s not an argument though, it’s describing the actual position Republicans were holding. You can’t scream about cutting entitlements, entitlements, entitlements and then try and pretend you weren’t asking to cut entitlements.
McConnell opposes Social Security simply because he doesn’t need it,anymore than Medicare. The government takes care of those trivial matters.
McConnell’s net worth is estimated at $17 million. He also draws an annual salary of $193,000.
John Boehner, the sun lamp man, is another millionaire who is constantly spouting off about killing Social Security and Medicare. Boehner’s net worth is estimated at between $2 million to $6 million. As Speaker of the House he is paid $223,500 per year.
Another opponent of the so-called “Entitlements” is Eric Cantor, whose net worth is between $2,175,000 and $7, 533,000
The annual pay for rank and file members of the House and Senate is a mere $174,000.
More than half of the members of Congress – Republicans and Democrats alike – are millionaires.
With all of their huge salaries, office, travel, health, and retirement benefits, isn’t it kind of strange that these wealthy inhabitants of the Washington Bubble can only feel justified in making cuts to Social Security and Medicare?
What a laugh – on us – that is.