Dennis Moore and Social Security

Today our friends at Fire Dennis Moore are beginning a series focusing on Dennis Moore's record on Social Security.

An even more important point voters need to hear about was the last time Social Security benefits really were cut dramatically, and what party did the cutting.

Early in the Clinton Administration, when the Dems. still controlled the House, the budget needed to be balanced. Clinton came up with a plan: tax more of the Social Security benefits of the "rich."

The way the plan played out the rich were defined as any couple on Social Security making more than $44,000. For those people 85% of their Social Security benefits became taxable, up from 50%. If you do the math you will realize that if you tax an extra 35% of benefits at the tax rates those people would have paid, the government is basically taking 9-10% of their benefit, the same as a 10% benefit cut. While Social Security payments stayed the same, in reality recipients lost almost 10% of their benefits, not surprisingly the budget deficit declined.

The point is that the Dems got away with a huge SS cut for the middle class and then turn around and claim the Republicans want to throw old people out on the street. It was a clever way to implement the cut, mail out the check, and then take it back in taxes. I would argue that it would be more difficult to play these types of games if people had personal accounts.

Dennis Moore knows this, he also know that people who get checks from the government feel a kind of loyalty to the government that people who get checks from their own accounts never will. Right now Social Security runs a surplus that is spent on a variety of wasteful programs that don't have any connection to providing income to seniors, Moore knows this and he wants it to continue.

As FDM's post today highlights, Moore's record is basically a record of misleading the public and demagoguery. Moore has never hesitated to scare seniors, promoting the idea that Republicans want to take away Social Security, the fear that any kind of personal account would lead to everyone being forced to invest in "risky" stocks, which would all instantly go to zero, throwing seniors out on the street. It is a disgraceful legacy that voters need to hear about.


Timothy Burger