Presidential Candidates to Break Reagan Social Security Deal at Sept 16 Debate at Reagan Library, Say Robert Weiner, Ex-house Aging Comm. Chief of Staff and Eric Alves, Policy Analyst

WASHINGTON, Sept. 2, 2015 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- "The Presidential Candidates including Florida's Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio are wrong on Social Security, and would break the Reagan-O'Neill-Pepper deal and 1983 law," say former Chief of Staff of the U.S. House Aging Committee and an ex-White House spokesman, Robert Weiner, and senior policy analyst Eric Alves in an op-ed published in the Tallahassee Democrat today.  The article is titled, "Presidential Candidates Wrong on Social Security."

Weiner and Alves state, "As Republicans prepare for the second debate, at the Ronald Reagan Library on September 16, their continued calls to 'reform' (meaning, cut) actually tarnishes the legacy of Reagan. Reagan reached across the aisle, joining Speaker Tip O'Neill and Florida Congressman Claude Pepper, developing and signing into law the Social Security Amendments of 1983, an historic agreement, which helped the Social Security Fund to be solvent for 75 years. That will take us to 2058."

The authors warn, "At stake is the well-being of the 45.9 million Americans, including over a half million Floridians, that depend on the program." They point out, "Over half of Americans over 50 have less than $25,000 in savings and investments," as reported by AARP last month.  Weiner and Alves contend, "Social Security is a necessary national priority."

The authors note that in a speech at the National Press Club, Senator Marco Rubio laid out his plan to cut Social Security by "eliminating the Social Security payroll tax for seniors" which he said, "will likely result in older Americans choosing to work longer, which in turn will lead to an increase in federal income tax revenue. And seniors who choose to keep working will improve their personal retirement security and decrease their dependency on federal assistance programs." However, according to the Social Security Administration, eliminating the payroll tax will prevent the program from being solvent. 

The authors argue, "Making seniors work longer—a plan with which Jeb Bush agrees—isn't what seniors want to do when they retire. They report that half of Americans hold physically demanding jobs. They quote a US News and World Report analysis stating that for many, "their bodies have worn out by the time they enter their 60s."

Weiner and Alves contend that "Rubio failed to mention that the Social Security Fund is solvent, not in deficit, according to Social Security's own website – currently $2.7 Trillion in surplus."  They add, "If the economy continues to improve, the time Social Security will remain solvent will expand. Even in the worst case scenario, by 2035 or later the fund would only then be 25 percent short per year. To continue the commitment to seniors, it would only cost one-third of what we paid annually for the Iraq War."

Republicans are not alone.  Even though well-meaning, "President Obama supported a revision to move to a 'chain CPI' cost of living, meaning a loss of $1,000 annually in ten years by changing the categories used as markers – but only if the GOP agreed to tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. Republicans refused the deal while selectively trying to say Obama is willing to cut Social Security."

The authors recall "the courage of Congressman Claude Pepper and his determination to save Social Security, a lesson the Nation needs to learn today.  Following Carter Commerce Secretary Juanita Kreps' statement in 1978 suggesting increasing the retirement age to 68 for full Social Security retirement benefits, Pepper demanded and got a meeting of Kreps with himself and House Social Security Chairman James Burke (D-MA). Pepper proclaimed that he and Burke would 'fight it to our death.' Kreps asked, 'Even (delaying the start) to the year 2000?' Both members exclaimed, 'Yes!' Kreps finally responded, 'Well, I haven't made the proposal anyway.'"  Weiner, as Chief of Staff of the Aging Committee chaired by Pepper, was at the meeting.

Weiner and Alves conclude, "When we hear 'reforms' and 'cuts' in Social Security, proponents actually mean using the money for tax breaks for the rich and commissions to Wall Street brokers for partial privatization. At the upcoming debate and beyond, listen carefully because those are giveaways that neither seniors nor the nation must endure."

Robert Weiner is former chief of staff of the U.S. House Aging Committee under Chairman Claude Pepper and a former spokesman for the Clinton White House.  Eric Alves is senior policy analyst at Robert Weiner Associates and Solutions for Change.

Link to article: http://www.tallahassee.com/story/opinion/2015/09/01/presidential-candidates-wrong-social-security/71534718/

Contact: Bob Weiner or Autumn Kelly 301-283-0821 cell 202-306-1200 [email protected]

SOURCE Robert Weiner Associates and Solutions for Change