TPMDC

Liberal Groups Organize In Opposition To Entitlement Reform Panel

Spread the word. Share this article on Facebook!

Share

Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND)

Share

Twitter Facebook Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

Earlier this month, Republican and Democratic deficit hawks in the Senate, led by Kent Conrad issued a veiled threat to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi: let us set up an entitlement-reform commission to address budget deficits, or we'll kill annual legislation raising the country's debt ceiling.

That may sound like a bunch of jargon, but loosely translated it means they want to get their hands on Social Security and they're willing to let America default on its debt, potentially unleashing economic catastrophe, if they don't get their way.

That has touched off a game of chicken as Congress counts down to the new year. Though she's somewhat handcuffed by Blue Dogs, who could join Republicans in forcing legislation calling for such a commission through the House, Pelosi is adamantly opposed to the idea. One side or the other will have to budge. For her part, Pelosi will have progressive organizations on her side.

The group Campaign for America's Future is gathering like-minded institutions to pressure Democratic leaders, including Harry Reid and President Obama to abandon the idea altogether.

"We write to alert you about the effort by Senators Conrad, Gregg and others to create an extraordinary Budget Commission, which would force Senators and Members of Congress to abdicate their budget responsibilities, replacing judgment with an automatic and undemocratic process," reads a letter from CAF's directors to other liberal groups. "This Commission would pose a serious threat to the future of Social Security and Medicare - and would undermine health reform and the fragile economic recovery."

Eleven Democratic Senators have announced their plan to force the Congressional leadership to create an undemocratic and dangerous Budget Commission -- by attaching it to the upcoming bill to raise the debt limit or some other crucial legislation. Indeed, we have just learned that the Blue Dog Coalition in the House has endorsed this effort to avoid political accountability. The proposed commission would come up with a budget reduction plan - which could include dramatic cuts to Social Security, Medicare and productive investments - and then override the normal legislative process to rush it through the Congress with expedited procedures and a single up or down vote on the entire package with no opportunity to amend and only very limited debate.

The allied groups include some of the heaviest hitters in Democratic politics, such as AFL-CIO and SEIU. They will issue a statement to Democratic leaders urging them to keep any attempts at entitlement reform in the regular legislative process, where it would be attended to by accountable elected officials.

You can read both the letter, the statement, and the list of current signatories below.

Dear XXXXXX:

We write to alert you about the effort by Senators Conrad, Gregg and others to create an extraordinary Budget Commission, which would force Senators and Members of Congress to abdicate their budget responsibilities, replacing judgment with an automatic and undemocratic process. This Commission would pose a serious threat to the future of Social Security and Medicare - and would undermine health reform and the fragile economic recovery.

Please look at the Statement below and click here if your organization can sign on.

Eleven Democratic Senators have announced their plan to force the Congressional leadership to create an undemocratic and dangerous Budget Commission -- by attaching it to the upcoming bill to raise the debt limit or some other crucial legislation. Indeed, we have just learned that the Blue Dog Coalition in the House has endorsed this effort to avoid political accountability.

The proposed commission would come up with a budget reduction plan - which could include dramatic cuts to Social Security, Medicare and productive investments - and then override the normal legislative process to rush it through the Congress with expedited procedures and a single up or down vote on the entire package with no opportunity to amend and only very limited debate.

We need to sound the alarm about the potential damage this commission could cause. And that's why we ask you to look at the statement we plan to send to Congressional leaders and to the White House, hopefully with your organization endorsing it.

Please read the statement, and then click at the link to go to a secure form to let us know that your organization can join these groups and sign the statement.

If you agree that the Conrad-Gregg budget commission is a big problem -- we hope you will:

1) let us know if your organization can SIGN THE STATEMENT, to be sent to the Congress and White House, click here.

2) tell us who on your staff we should be our contact person on this, and

3) start having your own conversations with Senate and House leaders -- and with key White House staff.

Note: We have tried to keep this statement simple enough so that lots of groups could sign it, emphasizing the threat to SS and Medicare, but also warning of the danger of economic austerity when we should be creating more jobs + the danger of undermining health reform (and the Medicare reforms contained in the health bills.)

Please click here to let us know by Monday, November 30, 2009, that your organization will sign the statement.

Best regards,

Roger Hickey
Co-Director
Campaign for America's Future

Nancy Altman
Co-Director
Project to Defend and Improve Social Security

Eric Kingson
Co-Director
Project to Defend and Improve Social Security



Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid,
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi,
all members of the Senate and House,
and President Barack Obama (and key Administration officials)

We write in strong opposition to proposals to create an entitlements or deficit-reduction commission that would override the normal legislative process and replace it with expedited procedures prohibiting amendments and limiting debate.

Those supporting this circumvention of the normal process have stated openly the desire to avoid political accountability. Americans -- seniors, women, working families, people with disabilities, young adults, children, people of color, veterans, communities of faith and others -- expect their elected representatives to be responsible and accountable for shaping such significant, far-reaching legislation.

Any deficit reduction measures should be carried out in a responsible manner, providing a fairer tax system and strengthening -- rather than slashing -- Social Security, Medicare and other programs that are vital to the middle class." And as unemployment continues to grow, we need a real debate about how to balance the need for economic recovery and productive public investment with the goal of long-term budget responsibility. The American people are likely to view any kind of expedited procedure, where most members are sidelined to a single take-it-or-leave-it vote, as a hidden process aimed at eviscerating vital programs and productive investment.

As you know, the current effort to reform the health care sector seeks to achieve reductions in Medicare spending - without cutting benefits. But the proposed budget commission - which will be viewed as a way to actually cut Medicare benefits, while insulating lawmakers from political fallout - could confuse people and undermine the reform effort. And an American public that only recently rejected privatization of Social Security will undoubtedly be suspicious of a process that shuts them out of all decisions regarding the future of a retirement system that's served them well in the current financial crisis.

We urge you to act decisively to prevent the creation of such an extraordinary and undemocratic budget commission.

Sincerely,

AFL-CIO - American Federation of Labor - Congress of Industrial Organizations

AFSCME - American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees

Alliance for Retired Americans

American Association of University Women

Campaign for America's Future

Demos

Mothers Initiative

National Association of Mother Centers

National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare

National Council of Women's Organizations

National Organization for Women

National Senior Citizens Law Center

National Women's Law Center

OWL - The Voice of Midlife and Older Women

Pension Rights Center

SEIU - Service Employees International Union

Wider Opportunity for Women

Women's Institute for a Secure Retirement

The Women's Research and Education Institute

Join the Conversation!

21 comments

Recommend Recommend (2)

November 25, 2009 11:50 AM   

Any deficit reduction measures should be carried out in a responsible manner, providing a fairer tax system and strengthening -- rather than slashing -- Social Security, Medicare and other programs that are vital to the middle class." And as unemployment continues to grow, we need a real debate about how to balance the need for economic recovery and productive public investment with the goal of long-term budget responsibility.


amen

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 25, 2009 12:02 PM   

Hot damn. This is going to be good.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 25, 2009 12:05 PM   

Re-institute the Clinton era tax rates. Raise the payroll tax cap in include earnings above $106,000. Problem fixed.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 25, 2009 12:09 PM    in reply to eric the red

clinton? that marxist? no, what we need to do is reinstitute tax rates that existed under eisenhower, a true american!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 25, 2009 12:11 PM    in reply to benjoya

Heh, good idea, actually! I like Ike, and his tax rates.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 25, 2009 12:16 PM    in reply to eric the red

Just for some reference, here is a table: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=213

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 25, 2009 4:38 PM    in reply to eric the red

I'm always amused by listening to liberals debate who should pay their bills. How many here have seen the parable of the dinner story? Currently only 53% of households pay income tax, and most of the revenue comes the top 10%.

Consider that the largest part of income tax revenues is paid by a smaller and smaller group, magnifying any efforts they make to pay less. Sounds like you unwittingly want to empower that group with the ability to wreck your precious schemes. Keep up the good work.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 25, 2009 11:56 PM    in reply to shooter242

It is a well known fact that no American got rich under Eisenhower 90% top rates, Kennedy 70% rates (actually put in place by LBJ), Reagan 50% rates, or Clinton 39% rates. Gosh it was so sad to see Rockefellers and Kennedys rattling cups in the streets back then.

And God knows the White Man has NEVER caught a break since the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment.

(The preceding has been an extract from the Economic History of the US by Professors Beck, Limbaugh, and Art-something. No warranty implied or guaranteed.)

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 26, 2009 2:31 PM    in reply to shooter242

Again with the convoluted argument of what is paid by whom.

Every working American that draws a paycheck PAYS a tax in both a payroll tax AND FICA. While a great many derive a rebate for payroll taxes paid during the year, A MAJORITY OF THEM PAY TAXES as a percentage of their income. FICA on the other hand is monies paid that will never be seen again by wage earners, but not a penny paid by those earning investment income. A source of income gained by the top 10% of money earners.

The richest 10% of Americans spend vast sums to AVOID paying their fair share of taxes on money gained from a wide variety of sources that are beyond anything that the average worker will ever see. Add to this the fact that the richest 1% CONTROLS over 80% of the money in private hands that won't go back out into the economy to create jobs, but into complicated investment vehicles that cater only to the wealthiest investors.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 25, 2009 12:12 PM    in reply to benjoya

hilarious.

or even the treasonous bastard Reagan! Oh, whoops, I mean great American Reagan!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 25, 2009 12:26 PM    in reply to eric the red

All one would have to do is sit on one's hands. Of course, there's the little matter of the President's promise not to raise taxes on people making under a quarter-mil a year. Thing is, if Congress refuses to act, can President Obama still be held liable for that one? I would suggest first allowing the tax cuts to expire, which they will next year, then introducing a bill reinstating the Bush-era rates for the bottom three brackets. Watch the Republicans go nuts defending those poor, poor rich people who are being left out.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 25, 2009 4:40 PM    in reply to eric the red

Don't forget the part where you deny the people making over $106,000 any benefits.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 25, 2009 11:41 PM    in reply to shooter242

Don't Bogart that joint my friend.

You obviously have an excellent dealer.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 26, 2009 12:12 AM    in reply to Bruce Webb

I would explain the reality that makes your post not ENTIRELY incoherent. But since 'nuance' is a French word don't want to risk your brain exploding.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 25, 2009 12:26 PM   

If conservatives are willing to filibuster the debt ceiling increase, gambling that, once again, liberals will be the grown ups and give them their lollipop so they'll do the right thing, let them. Let them cause a calamity by refusing to raise the debt ceiling. Maybe this will finally wake up the Democrats to the need to end the filibuster.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 25, 2009 3:06 PM    in reply to ericf

I don't think they need to end the filibuster so much as end the empty threatening of the filibuster. If the Republicans want to filibuster the motion to bring the HCR bill to the Senate floor, let them. Make those sleazebags stand there, 24/7, talking about nothing (since they aren't discussing the bill...). Let America see what the "Party of NO" stands for.

Ditto for this - if they want to force a fiscal catastrophe, call their bluff. Alternatively, enhance the panel's mandate to include looking at military spending; that will likely cause quite a few to suddenly develop a conscience.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 25, 2009 4:22 PM   

Just back from Japan--everyone's looking good, healthy, no homeless in our part of Tokyo at least, universities flourishing. And guess why? No military to drain all budgets for everything else. If this ridiculous commission goes forward it behooves everyone to assail them on this military spending excess. I do believe that Obama amazingly managed to cut the military budget this year, though I only saw one story about it, no headlines...

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 25, 2009 7:42 PM   

Call them out. Call the Blue Dogs and the GOP on their threats and their bluff. Let them be the ones responsible for shutting down government during a time when people are hurting, losing jobs and health care. It will be on their heads that the consequences will come down.
We need to cut the military, not Social Security and Medicare. WTF is wrong with these Democrats? Haven't they learned anything from the last 8 years? The last 30 years? Or, are they too part of the problem and going along with the same Reaganomics and Bushonomics that got our country to the horrible situation it is in now?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 26, 2009 12:04 AM   

Thanks Brian.

I e-mailed the link to Nancy Altman and she was appreciative as well. It is important to get the word out.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 26, 2009 1:21 AM   

One Lieberman in the Senate to block the benefits of civilization for ordinary people.

A nonelected commission to take their benefits away and lock them all down more firmly into their wage slavery.

Ain't democracy grand.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 28, 2009 12:27 PM   

Where's the $800 billion annual war budget commission?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Leave a comment

Your response:

Follow us!

Most Popular

TPM Stories Now Surging on