By Alex P. Kellogg
A coalition of progressive advocacy groups for seniors are revving up their efforts to educate elderly Americans about the deep cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefits they say are certain to be implemented if Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney wins November’s election.
Romney has endorsed Wisconsin House Republican Paul Ryan’s budget, which these groups say will lead to millions of Americans not being able to make ends meet.
Two of the most active groups, Social Security Works, an umbrella organization, and the Alliance of Retired Americans, which has 4 million paid members, the vast majority union retirees, are holding more than 100 events in August alone. Hundreds more will follow, ranging from pressers to celebrations of Social Security’s August 14 birthday to luncheons and conferences focused on senior issues.
Social Security Works includes more than 300 national and state organizations representing 50-million-plus Americans. The aim is to recapture the 65-and-over vote, which Republicans won by a whopping 21% margin in 2010.
The SEIU, the AFL-CIO, AFSCME, Paralyzed Veterans of America, Latinos for a Secure Retirement, the NAACP and the National Organization for Women are among the other active members of the coalition.
Efforts by left-leaning senior advocacy groups to inform seniors of the risks they argue exist to their benefits began in earnest in July. The Alliance for Retired Americans sent dozens of members of Congress cakes and cards on July 30, the 47th anniversary of Medicare and Medicaid becoming law. They targeted Republicans in tight state legislative and national races in particular.
Protests were held in recent weeks at the offices of lawmakers such as Michael Fitzpatrick, a Republican for Pennsylvania’s eighth district who strongly favors Ryan’s budget.
Social Security Works will also release state-by-state data detailing the number of senior beneficiaries who rely on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid on August 14, the 77th birthday of Social Security.
Republican presidential candidates won the senior vote by smaller, but still definitive margins in 2004 and 2008. The senior vote was the only age group Republican presidential candidate John McCain won.
Romney’s endorsement of Ryan’s budget has repeatedly been attacked by President Obama, even though Ryan, the chair of the House Budget Committee, is the most prominent voice on fiscal issues in the Republican Party.
The Congressional Budget Office, a federal agency that provides economic data to Congress, estimates that in today’s dollars new Medicare beneficiaries would see benefits reduced by several hundred dollars by 2023, more than $1,200 in 2030 and more than $5,900 by 2050 if Ryan’s budget passes.
Ryan has also proposed upping the Medicare-eligibility age to 67 from 65 in 2023. Earlier this summer, House Republican leader John Boehner went a step further, saying he’s in favor of raising the Social Security retirement age to 70 for people who have at least 20 years until retirement.
“The Ryan budget… will almost certainly shift costs to the most vulnerable among us—seniors and people with disabilities,” wrote Nancy Altman, co-founder of Social Security Works, in an email to Lean Forward this week.
Altman was former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan’s assistant when he chaired a bipartisan commission that helped solidify the financial foundation of Social Security in 1983.
Altman added that states "would feel enormous pressure” to cut back on Medicaid protections to free up funding.
The Alliance for Retired Americans estimates that the GOP budget could raise health care costs by $4,300 for nearly one million individuals if it is implemented. The alliance also estimates that if Ryan’s budget passed 70% of Social Security beneficiaries would lose a huge chunk of their benefits—nearly 30% for the average retiree in 2080.
Ryan’s budget would also repeal Obama’s health care law, which would mean seniors too young to be eligible for government benefits could once again have a harder time buying insurance on the private market if they have pre-existing health conditions.
Ryan is rumored to be receiving serious consideration as a running mate by Romney’s campaign.
His fiscal plan passed the Republican-controlled House in April and has since been adopted as a key part of the party’s 2012 campaign platform.
President Obama has derided Ryan’s budget repeatedly, calling it “antithetical to our history as a land of opportunity.”
Ryan has repeatedly defended the cuts he’s proposing to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid as necessary to lower the federal budget deficit and ensure their solvency.
Framing Romney’s support of Ryan’s budget as not just a doomsday scenario for seniors, but a bad news for all Americans, is part of a larger effort by progressives.
“We want to show that this is not something self-interested on the part of seniors, but this is something for their children and their grandchildren,” says Edward Coyle, executive director of the Alliance for Retired Americans, which has 1,500 local chapters organizing 62 events in 27 states this month.
While not every event will tell seniors how to vote, “first and foremost we want to re-elect the president,” he said.
Leave a Comment:
And, why wasn't this started, back, when Ryan's plan was endorsed by Romney. Well, I guess that great ideas have to start somewhere. Best of success to their efforts.
This is a GREAT idea. If Romney gets in, it will be those from 55-65 yrs. of age who will be hurt the most as Romney intends to implement the Ryan budget. He thinks it is marvelous. The Catholic Church thinks it's immoral. So do I.
This budget, plus Romney's tax plan, will damage everyone but the wealthy. But it will be the baby boomers who could get hit the hardest. They could take away the safety nets and many haven't planned at all for not having social sec. and Medicare when they retire, plus the economy has been rough, and people haven't been able to save money. Many seniors could be plunged into poverty.
The poor will clearly be plunged into worse poverty.
Alex, it sounds like these groups are not acknowledging that these programs are on a path to insolvency, but simply promoting don't vote for the guy that is proposing cuts. Do you know of, or do these groups endorse any lawmakers that propose reform that ensure solvency while still ensuring that those most in need are taken into consideration? I know that I for one, being 35, cannot possibly argue with raising the age of retirement to 70. I dont know enough about the Ryan plan to say I'm for or against it but when are we going to find someone to drop the all or nothing mentality and step up?
Silk
As a 15 times certified grandparent, iv'e concluded that Social Security has morphed into a financial cancer on middle class working Americans, their families and the communities they call home; Following is the basis for this conclusion.
Over a 45 year working lifetime, a 1960 retiree generated an average annual Social Security tax contribution of 1.56% - for a 1970 retiree it was 3.20% - for a 1980 retiree it was 5.38% - for a 1990 retiree it was 7.57% - for a 2000 retiree it was 9.75%, for a 2010 retiree it was 11.28%, and those just beginning work in 2010, their starting point was 12.4% - Does anyone see a trend here??
Additionally retiree benefits are determined by the relationship between average annual wages over a period of time and the annual Social Security wage cap, which determines the amount of annual wages subject to the Social Security tax. All wages below the cap are taxed, and all wages above the annual cap are exempt from a Social Security tax. In 1970 average annual wages exceeded the annual SS wage cap by 20%, resulting in maximum SS benefits at retirement time; in 1990 average annual wages were only 56% of the annual SS wage cap, resulting in diminished SS benefits; by 2910 average annual wages were only 37% of the SS wage cap, resulting in millions of SS retirees struggling to survive at retirement
time. Does anyone see a trend here??
On top of all this, consider what Dr. Tom Coburn, the senator from OK said recently on the floor of the United States senate; "Both republicans and democrats have stolen money from Social Security; we have stolen 2.6 trillion dollars from it, we didn't just take it we took it and spent it on something other than intended; the MONEY'S GONE". Makes you see red doesn't it??
Now consider the fact that they replaced each stolen retirement dollar with a special obligation bond, an SOB or IOU that is a general revenue fund liability that puts some of those same taxpayers on the hook to pay again that which they've already paid once through higher Social Security taxes, only this time they'll pay through higher income and/or corporate taxes because the special obligation bonds or SOBs they replaced the stolen retirement dollars with are a general revenue fund liability. Still think your favorite politician or organization is looking out for you??
This begs the question; how have so many generations of politicians been able to fool so many generations of working Americans? The simple answer is deceit & deception; There a better way;