WASHINGTON — Democrats in Congress, including members of Massachusetts’ delegation, were unhappy Tuesday to learn that President Obama may be willing to trim future Social Security payments as part of a budget deal. But with little progress in meeting a Jan. 1 deadline, even liberals in the party did not rule out such a reduction in a New Deal centerpiece.
Some suggested that targeting Social Security might be the lesser of two evils, compared with the other major idea for entitlement program cuts that has been floated in Washington: raising the Medicare eligibility age from 65 to 67. House minority whip Steny Hoyer said Tuesday that raising the Medicare age is a “much more sensitive’’ issue.
Comments
We're all just squeaking by!
Agreed. This is a shameful development. Why cut Social Security?
This comment has been removed.
The only people who are surprised about this move are the ones who fell for the myth of Barrack Obama rather than the reality. He is not another FDR who will save the dying middle class. He has always been center-right Clinton style corporate democrat. He is the man who packed his administration with the same Wall Street insiders who pushed this country into a depression. His "Justice" Department will not bring criminal cases against banksters even if they launder money for terrorist nations and help flood our streets with heroin.
Why would anyone be surprised when he chooses to hurt senior citizens rather than raise than remove limits on social security taxes or end corporate welfare such as the ban on Medicare negotiating drug prices.
Of course the democrats in congress will go along. It’s not like they depend on social security and Medicare. They made themselves wealth through government self service. The incredibly generous taxpayer funded retirement benefits will always be there for them.
Help flood our streets with heroin? Got any backing for that?
Unbelievable! The talk is about a "fiscal cliff" and all the respondents so far are griping that the President is considering "compromise". What, you think a tax increase on those making above 250K or 400K will take care of this fiscal calamity? What cuts are you complainers offering. Stop whining and recognize we don't have the money we need for the budget.
Boehner is willing to compromise (has to compromise), and cost cutting is something the Democrats and the President has to do as well. Tighten the belts and get ready to help the seniors in your life.
If we want to trim the deficit it is obvious that the money has to come from both sides. Taxes need to go up, expenditures need to go down. That being said no one will be completely happy, but that's what compromise is. It's a fairly simple concept.
Wouldn't it be great to have a few politicians - on both sides of the aisle - who actually care more about the country than getting re-elected?
We who worked paid into Social Security. The Legislators of both parties have borrowed from this fund over the years to cover their government expenses and never replaced a penny. Now President Obama wants to steal more wth his" Shop to you drop" to cover his outragious spending practices.When will the Senate ever wake up and come to their senses and realize what is really occuring . This country is being sold out by its leaders. Wake up America before it is too late!!
Globe finds the time to write this long report. But it completely fails to report the major news of the day, as per today's headline in the WSJ. "State Department Faulted in Libya Attack". Video details security weaknesses http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324296604578175694059481304.html?mod=ITP_pageone_0 EVERYBODY knew that the Benghazi attack had nothing to do with a video. Even the Boston Globe knew. And Hillary Clinton refuses to testify, using one excuse after another.
http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2012/12/19/state-dept-security-chief-others-resign-after-benghazi-report/OqlUWvMVpOiG5a0SL6vApL/story.html RIGHT THERE in front of your eyes.
And, in relation to this article, "Obama's Fiscal Offer", WHAT fiscal offer? Obama is conceding NOTHING, as long as he refuses to cut the vast amount of spending that is occurring due to ObamaCare. ObamaCare is stealing money from Medicare and Secial Security to pay for it. Look at this law yourself. The Affordable care Act 2209 pages PDF http://www.healthcare.gov/law/resources/authorities/patient-protection.pdf
yes, thanks- i just read all 2,409 pp. and did not conclude what you did, so maybe you could just point out the pertinent passage?