ACROSS THE progressive landscape you can read about what Mitt Romney said that wasn’t true if you look at the facts. What you won’t see is a discussion about what Democrats are going to do about President Obama and Social Security.
“On Social Security, I suspect we have a similar position.” – Barack Obama, Denver debate
It had to be stunning for progressives to hear Obama utter the words above, unless you’ve been reading what I’ve been writing on the subject. Ed Schultz exploded and days later Huffington Post’s Sam Stein found supporters of the President “baffled.”
“Oh my God,” said Eric Kingson, co-chair of the Strengthen Social Security campaign. “That is really very sad. Mitt Romney has written about it in one of his books … It also speaks to a lack of appreciation for the importance of this institution to our country … It really is remarkable that a Democratic president at this point in time would not draw a very dramatic line. They probably have to say, ‘I made a mistake, I misspoke.'”
Instead of taking Kingson’s advice, team Obama sent out an email that amplified the President’s debate position. It came from OFA, signed by Stephanie Cutter:
In Wednesday night’s debate, Mitt Romney deliberately tried to confuse voters about where he stands on many issues. I want to clear up where President Obama and Mitt Romney agree — and where they disagree — on one particularly important issue: Social Security.
President Obama and Romney agree that we need to make gradual changes to make sure Social Security stays solvent over the long term. The disagreement is over how to do it — and that’s where President Obama and Romney have fundamentally different ideas.
President Obama will under no circumstances agree to put your retirement at risk by privatizing Social Security, and he will reject any plan that slashes Social Security benefits. Because Romney opposes any effort to raise a single penny in new revenue, his Social Security plan is forced to rely solely on big benefit cuts to maintain solvency — analysis of a similar plan showed current workers would see cuts of up to 40 percent that would badly hurt their financial security.
Romney and Ryan also supported the Bush privatization plan that would have had exposed Social Security benefits to the financial crisis that devastated many pension funds and retirement accounts.
Take a look at this post that details the clear choice voters have on Social Security in this election, and be sure to share it with everyone you know who’d be affected:
Thanks for all you do,
Stephanie
The problem isn’t with Social Security, which is not in trouble, especially if the economy keeps coming back.
The problem is with priorities of austerity and Pentagon funding that goes well beyond what we need, while President Obama and Democrats make compromises with themselves before negotiating has started, all in the ode to bipartisanship, which Republicans have no interest in.
Sen. Bernie Sanders will be leading the fight against cutting the cost of living increase, among other “stengthening” measures, as President Obama and Democrats get ready to open the path to changing all entitlements, a Republican political dream.
I’ve been writing about Obama’s clear plan to slice and dice entitlements for years. But the last thing I thought he’d ever confirm is exactly what he said above. What Democrats should be saying is that the tax cap for Social Security should be raised above the $169,000, especially for the top 2%.
Whether Obama or Romney is elected, both men will do the exact same thing when it comes to Social Security.
To have that confirmed unequivocally by President Obama in last week’s debate had to be a gut punch for progressives who were listening.
This is especially true because Obama’s never had the goal to privatize the popular entitlement program, but Republicans going back a long way always have.
Obama’s lack of ideological compass caught up with him last night, but so did the lack of challenge by the progressives to make Barack Obama a better president than he’s been on their issues by challenging his policies on substance. Progressives should have a long time ago told Obama where he has been going on economics and entitlements wasn’t progressive enough. They chose not to rock Obama’s boat.
Last weeks’s debate is what happens when your party’s leader has no one to rebut a rightward shift that now has the Democratic Party standard bearer parroting Republicanism on entitlements.
Taylor Marsh, a veteran political analyst and former Huffington Post contributor, is the author of The Hillary Effect, available at Barnes and Noble and on Amazon. Her new-media blog www.taylormarsh.com covers national politics, women and power.
Photo: Official White House photo by Pete Souza.