Yes, Cut the Budget, Says a Progressive
Is there a strong liberal argument to be made for attacking the federal debt?
The question is a critical one for Democrats, because the party is drawing ever closer to an internecine, once-in-a-generation war over whether or not to seriously scale back the federal budget.
President Obama’s bipartisan panel on the national debt won’t issue any recommendations for reshaping the budget until after the November elections, but that hasn’t stopped liberals from mobilizing to discredit the panel’s work. This month, more than 70 organizations, including the A.F.L.-C.I.O. and MoveOn.org, formed a group, Strengthen Social Security, to pre-emptively oppose the panel’s findings, starting with any reduction in Social Security benefits it might propose. And they are calling on Democrats in Congress to pledge the same.
Under that kind of pressure, you would think it might be hard for the White House and its allies to persuade liberal lawmakers to go along with budget-cutting proposals. But some progressives might be swayed by a different case, like the one I recently heard Earl Blumenauer make.
Read the full article here. Discuss below.
|
Posted on Aug. 25, 2010
|
|
connect with blueoregon
6:17 p.m.
Aug 25, '10
I agree with Earl!
4:05 p.m.
Aug 26, '10
Remove the $102k cap on how much of someone's wages are subjected to FICA and the program is not only solvent in perpetuity, but actually builds up a massive surplus.
Anyone who has looked at the actual data and suggests that Social Security has to be significantly altered in any way, such as increasing the retirement age, means testing reduction in benefits, etc. is simply being dishonest.