Congressmen Cicilline, Larson want to expand social security for retirees


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

social securityOn August 14, 1935 President Franklin Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act into law, perhaps one of the greatest and most important strands of the fraying American social safety net.

On Tuesday, Congressmen David Cicilline and  John Larson of Connecticut are celebrating social security’s 81st birthday in East Providence, in the community room of Rumford Towers, 95 Newman Ave.

“An estimated 165 million workers are covered by Social Security, with nine out of ten individuals age 65 and older receiving these benefits,” according to a news release from Cicilline’s office. “A recent study by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that Social Security keeps at least 22 million Americans out of poverty.”

But celebrating FDR’s achievement isn’t enough.

“Cicilline and Larson have introduced the Social Security 2100 Act (H.R. 1391) to expand benefits, cut taxes for millions of seniors, and ensure Social Security remains solvent through the end of the century,” said the news release. “Expanding benefits for current and future seniors will provide greater economic security and dignity at a time when millions of Americans are increasingly concerned about their retirement.”

The event is open to the public. It will be held at 3:30 in the Community Room at Rumford Towers, 95 Newman Avenue, in East Providence.

Keeping Social Security off the GOP chopping block


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

social_security_disabilityOne of the first political skirmishes to protect the nation’s Social Security program, 589 days before next year’s Presidential election, took place on March 24th in the U.S. Senate during the budget debate. Leading the charge, Rhode Island Senator Sheldon Whitehouse called up Senator Wyden (D-OR)’s budget amendment, requesting a Senate point of order against legislation to cut benefits, raise the retirement age, or privatize Social Security.

“Social Security benefits are a solemn promise that our seniors have earned over a lifetime of work,” said Whitehouse, a founding member of the Senate’s Defend Social Security Caucus. “Sadly, Republicans have made it their mission for decades to dismantle that promise, attempting to turn it over to Wall Street and cut benefits through misguided ideas like the so-called ‘chained-CPI.'”

Republican Senator Mike Enzi from Wyoming raised a point of order, calling Wyden’s amendment non germane to the budget resolution being debated. The Democrats rallying 51 senators to vote yea, but 60 votes were required to wave Enzi’s point of order.

Although his attempts to protect Social Security in the Senate budget have thus far failed, Richard Davidson, Whitehouse’s Rhode Island press secretary, tells this columnist that the senator plans to continue his efforts to keep Social Security off the GOP budget chopping block and from being privatized by supporting legislation like the Keeping Our Social Security Promises Act, legislation that would raise the income cap on the payroll tax to ensure the program’s solvency.

The Social Security trust funds are projected to be fully solvent though 2033; there’s no immediate funding crisis, said Davidson. But, in the longer run, Whitehouse believes the program must be bolstered by applying the payroll tax, which currently only applies to income up to $118,500, to higher levels of income, he says.

Protecting SSDI

whitehouse-395One month before the Senate budget debate, the GOP-controlled Senate Budget Committee put a spotlight at a hearing on the impending insolvency of the nation’s Social Security Disability Trust Fund (SSDI). The federal government has predicted that SSDI fund reserves will run low by the end of 2016, at which point millions of disabled beneficiaries could see up to a 20 percent cut in benefits.

At the Senate hearing, entitled “The coming crisis: Social Security Disability Trust Fund Insolvency,” Democrats called for an easy quick fix to the problem, specifically the shifting of a small percentage of the Social Security payroll tax from the retirement trust fund to the disability trust fund. No big deal, they say, because these transfers have occurred 11 times in the past with bipartisan support without political bickering. But, from this hearing it seemed clear that GOP senators see things differently and are threatening to block the infusion of funds to SSDI.

Approximately 10.2 million Americans received SSDI benefits in 2013, including roughly 42,000 Rhode Islanders. In order to qualify, beneficiaries are required to have worked in a job covered by Social Security, and must have been unable to work for a year or more due to a disability.

The Plum Line blog, penned by Greg Sargent for the Washington Post, took a closer look a look at this SSDI entitlement debate in February.

In his opinion blog, Sargent says that GOP lawmakers claim that “restricting a fund transfer is all about forcing a necessary discussion on how to improve Social Security’s long term finances, rather than merely ‘kicking the can down the road.'” On the other hand, the Washington Post blogger believes Democrats see the Republicans as “exaggerating the sense of crisis to realize one of two political goals. Either they want to force immediate, and unnecessary, cuts – or they want to hold the disability fund hostage, in order to have another run at cuts to the broader program [Social Security].”

Gathering the Troops

At a March 23rd panel discussion hosted by the Providence-based Headquarters of Community Action Partnership , Whitehouse and Congressman Jim Langevin with Rhode Island Senator Donna Nesselbush, a disability attorney, along with SSDI recipients, disability groups, and the Social Security Administration, came to discuss the solvency of SSDI and its impact on the Ocean State. The lawmakers called for shifting Social Security payroll taxes to financially shore up the ailing SSDI program. Both lawmakers also supported a long-term solution, fully funding the federal retirement and disability programs by lifting the cap on the amount of income that is subject to the payroll taxes that fund the program.

“Right now, a millionaire hedge-fund manager pays the same amount of taxes into the Social Security system as someone who makes $118,500,” said Whitehouse. He called for “wealthiest Americans to pay a fair share into the program, so that it’s not funded disproportionately on the backs of middle-class workers.”

Congressman Langevin stressed “SSDI is not only a critical safety-net for disabled workers, their children and spouses, it is also a promise we make to everyone who pays into the Social Security trust fund that they won’t be impoverished if they are left with a debilitating condition or disability.”

Although Whitehouse’s efforts to protect the nation’s Social Security and disability programs were derailed in the Senate budget debate because of a GOP procedural call, it’s only the first of many political skirmishes to come. The upcoming 2016 presidential elections will firmly put this entitlement issue on the nation’s radar screen, hopefully to address once and for all.

But, here’s my message to Whitehouse: Even if you lose a skirmish, or battle, you can always win the war. Keep pushing.

Obama’s budget addresses issues of interest to seniors


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

obama isisPresident Obama released his 141 page ‘policy and wish list” when he unveiled his politically ambitious FY 2016 budget on Feb 2, not having to worry about running for president in the upcoming 2016 presidential election cycle.

Yes, even inside the Washington Beltway a picture is truly worth a thousand words. Gone is the budget’s plain blue cover replaced by a black and white photo of the Tappan Zee Bridge in New York, an image that projects one of the President’s spending priorities of rebuilding the nation’s infrastructure to create jobs and improve the transportation system.

The $4 trillion presidential budget, a political campaign document outlaying his policies and priorities, would cancel automatic sequestration cuts to domestic and military programs over a 10 year period. According to the New York Times, Obama’s budget proposal would add $6 trillion to the national debt, and the single-year deficit would rise to $687 billion by 2025.

Obama’s FY 2016 budget puts more funding into education, rebuilding the nation’s infrastructure, increased defense spending, along with providing tax relief for America’s middle class while increasing the taxes for corporate America and the wealthy. Political insiders say that Obama’s budget, one that gives to the middle class and assesses higher taxes from corporate America and the wealthy, sets the issues to be surely debated in the upcoming presidential election. .

A Look at Aging Priorities

In a Feb. 3 blog post, Nora Super, executive director of the upcoming White House Conference on Aging, details how the recently released budget proposal will “ensure that older Americans enjoy not only longer but healthier lives.”

As to retirement security, Super notes that the Obama Administration strongly opposes any legislative measures that would privatize the nation’s Social Security program, or slash benefits for future generations or reduce basic benefits to current beneficiaries. Super says that half the nation’s workforce, that’s about 78 million, does not have a retirement savings plan at work. “Fewer than 10 percent of those without plans at work contribute to a plan of their own. The President’s FY 2016 Budget expands retirement opportunities for all Americans to help families save and give them better choices to reach a secure retirement,” she says.

According to Super, Obama’s Budget proposal supports healthy aging by strengthening the Medicare program by “aligning payments with the costs of providing care, along with encouraging health care providers to deliver better care and better outcomes for their patients, and improving access to care for beneficiaries.”

To put the brakes to rising prescription drug costs, Super notes that the President’s Budget proposes to close the Medicare Part D donut hole for brand drugs by 2017, rather than 2020, by increasing discounts from the pharmaceutical industry. The Budget proposal also gives the Secretary of Health and Human Services new authority to negotiate with drug manufacturers on prices for high cost drugs and biologics covered under the Part D program.

Linking nutrition to healthy aging, Super says that Obama’s Budget provides “over $874 million for Nutrition Services programs, a $60 million increase over the 2015 enacted level, allowing States to provide 208 million meals to over 2 million older Americans nation-wide, helping to halt the decline in service levels for the first time since 2010.” Also, Obama’s budget ratchets up funding for supportive housing for very low-income elderly households, including frail elderly, to give these individuals access to human services, she adds. .

Protecting older persons from elder abuse, neglect and financial exploitation, Super blogs that the President’s budget proposal includes $25 million in discretionary resources for Elder Justice Act programs authorized under the Affordable Care Act. “Funding will “improve detection and reporting of elder abuse; grants to States to pilot a new reporting system; and funding to support a coordinated Federal research portfolio to better understand and prevent the abuse and exploitation of vulnerable adults,” she says.

Here’s Super’s take on the Obama budgetary blueprint: “Taken together, these and other initiatives in the Budget will help to change the aging landscape in America to reflect new realities and new opportunities for older Americans, and they will support the dignity, independence, and quality of life of older Americans at a time when we’re seeing a huge surge in the number of older adults.”

In a released statement, AARP Executive Vice President Nancy LeaMond gives thumbs to the president’s efforts to “lower the cost of prescription drugs, promote better care, reward improved outcomes and make health care programs more efficient and less wasteful.” She also expresses her nonprofit group’s support for the President’s budgetary priorities to “create opportunities for the middle class” and his goal “to make saving for retirement easier.”

But, LeaMond expresses concerns that higher premiums, deductibles and copays might shift costs to older Americans. “As the federal deficit continues shrinking, we must find responsible solutions for strengthening critical programs and improving the retirement and overall economic security of current and future generations. We must also look for savings throughout the entire health care system, as the rising cost of health care threatens people of all ages,” she says.

In his statement, President/CEO Max Richtman, of the Washington, DC-based National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, agrees with LeaMond’s concerns of higher premiums, deductible’s and co pays, too. “While some tout increasing means testing in Medicare as a way to insure ‘rich’ seniors pay their share, the truth is, the middle-class will take this hit as well,” he predicts.

Political pundits say that Obama’s 2016 budget was dead-on arrival at Capitol Hill the day it was released at the beginning of February. In the shadow of the upcoming 50th Anniversary of Medicare, Medicaid, and the Older Americans Act, as well as the 80th Anniversary of Social Security, GOP leadership in both chambers of Congress must work with the Democratic President to hammer out a bipartisan compromise. Putting budgetary proposals that strengthens the nation’s programs and services for older Americans on the chopping block for purely political reasons is not acceptable, especially to a nation that opposes political gridlock.

Herb Weiss, LRI ’12, is a Pawtucket-based writer covering aging, health care and medical issues. He can be reached at hweissri@aol.com.

VIDEOS: Why would anyone vote for Ernie Almonte for General Treasurer?


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

almonte conleyErnie Almonte can’t make up his mind.

Now he’s an “independent” running for general treasurer. But he began the 2014 campaign season as a Democrat running for governor. He was the first to announce, way back in November 2012 right after the last election. He soon realized that there was no way he would win the nomination for governor against Gina Raimondo and Angel Taveras (and later Clay Pell). So he switched to running for the Democratic nomination for general treasurer. But then he pulled the plug on that, too, when he realized he couldn’t beat Seth Magaziner and Frank Caprio.

That’s when he decided instead to go the independent route, though with the informal endorsement from the RI Republican Party.

But Almonte’s biggest problem and the cause of his vacillations is that he can’t keep his own story straight.

He claimed to be a Democrat, but he has repeatedly mouthed Republican positions such as mimicking Mitt Romney’s attack on the “47% of the public” whom Romney – and Almonte – consider to be deadbeats. He attacked Social Security and Medicare and even giving any consideration at all to raising taxes on the rich. It’s all on videotape that is linked here and here.

Almonte’s TV ads tout his credentials as an auditor, which I found to be pretty bold, given that Almonte – as Rhode Island’s Auditor General – failed to sound the alarm about our impending public pension crisis. The first warning from the Auditor General’s office about our pension problems came in the first audit report issued after Almonte resigned. We count on auditors to find problems like the one our pension funds faced, but Almonte blew it but now wants to claim credit for his experience as auditor.

At a recorded forum about a month ago, Almonte appeared on stage with his opponent Democrat Seth Magaziner. Seth very kindly gave Almonte an opportunity to recant, or at least revise, the remarks Almonte had made against the American middle-class, Medicare, Social Security and public pensions.

At first, it seemed as if Almonte was going to recant, saying that the remarks were actually written for him by the US Comptroller General who asked Ernie to take his place at a workshop and deliver the remarks. In an earlier meeting with the political action committee of one of the state’s labor unions, Almonte said that he was paid to make the remarks, as if that made it better.

In today’s video, you can see Almonte explain where the statement came from and see him say to Magaziner that he felt he couldn’t turn down the Comptroller General. Seth’s very droll answer was “I would have said NO.”

Rather than cut his losses, Almonte decided to ditch his good old boy persona to try to take Seth Magaziner to the wood shed. Almonte began lecturing him as if Seth was a school boy – “Listen to what I’m saying so you don’t get it wrong.” And Seth played right along, feeding him straight lines.

Almonte blew it again. He took the position that he doesn’t trust the government to invest people’s money, despite 80 years of successful administration. Seth said that Almonte’s attacks on Social Security were unwarranted, an “over-reaction,” and that “minor tweaks” (such as raising the current cap on the level of income is subject to Social Security – set too low and placing the burden on low-wage workers).

Almonte said that yes, “minor tweaks” could work – such as raising the retirement age. But fundamentally, he does not trust the government, even though he is running for a place in it. He calls this a “courageous conversations.”

Even though Almonte tried to gloss over his earlier remarks, he just couldn’t help himself but take a full header into the swamp. As much as he tried to pass the blame for the anti-Social Security remarks onto the Comptroller General, he ended up embracing privatizing Social Security. Period.

“I don’t trust the government to make the decisions.” Instead, he offered his “vision” of using a “financial literacy program” to teach the elderly how to cope with a new private system where they have to invest the money themselves “so people don’t have to rely on the government.” If that’s not a full-throated call for privatized Social Security, I don’t know what is.

Here’s the new video (you can also click here to see it):

Was Almonte asleep during 2008 – 2009 when those private retirement accounts – 401(k)s and IRAs – crashed and, in many cases, ended up being used to cover mortgage payments?

Actually, Almonte was asleep, because if you look at the reports he issued for the state’s pension funds for those two years (his last before he resigned to run for state office), you’ll see nary a hint of alarm. Click here and here to see what I’m talking about.

But worse than that, it was Almonte’s job in the years leading up to the market crash and Rhode Island’s subsequent pension crisis to point out that the state was failing to make the promised deposits into state workers’ pension funds even though those state workers consistently paid their fair share.

Where was RI Auditor General Almonte while all this happening? Well, then he was part of the government apparatus that he now doesn’t trust. With his record, and his recorded radical views on pensions, Social Security and the middle-class, he wants us to trust him to be General Treasurer?

GAO report: Elderly hit hard by student loan debt


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

gao retiree student loanJanet Lee Dupree took out a $ 3,000 student loan to help finance her undergraduate degree when she was in her late twenties. While acknowledging that she did not pay off the student loan when she should have, even paying thousands of dollars on this debt, today the 72-year-old, still owes a whopping $15,000 because of compound interest and penalties.

The Ocala, Florida resident, in poor health, will never pay off this student loan especially because all she can afford to pay is the $50 the federal government takes out of her Social Security check each month. Citing Dupree’s financial problems in her golden years in his opening remarks, Chairman Bill Nelson (D-FL), of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, used his legislative bully pulpit to dispel the myth that student loan debt only happens to young students.

“Well, as it turns out, that’s increasingly not the case,” he said.

Student Loan Debt Impacts Seniors, Too

Last week’s Senate Aging panel hearing also put the spot light on 57-year-old Rosemary Anderson, a witness who traveled from Watsonville, California, to inside Washington’s Beltway, detailing her student loan debt. Anderson remarked how she had accumulated a $126,000 loan debt (initially $64,000) to pay for her bachelor’s and master’s degree. A divorce, health problems combined with an underwater home mortgage kept her from paying anything on her student loan for eight years.

Anderson told Senate Aging panel members that with new terms to paying off her student loan debt, she expects to pay $526 a month for 24 years to settle the defaulted loan, setting her debt at age 81. The aging baby boomer will ultimately pay $87,487 more than her original student loan amount.

Like Anderson, a small but growing percentage of older Americans who are delinquent in paying off their student debts worry about their Social Security benefits garnished, drastically cutting their expected retirement income.

According to a 22 page Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, “Inability to Repay Student Loans May Affect Financial Security of a Small Percentage of Retirees,” released at the Sept. 10 Senate panel hearing, the amount that older Americans owe in outstanding federal student loans has increased six-fold, from $2.8 billion in 2005 to more than $18 billion last year. Student loan debt for all ages totals $ 1 trillion.

The GAO report noted that student loan debt reduces net worth and income, eroding the older person’s retirement security.

Nelson observed, “Large amounts of any kind of debt can put a person’s finances at risk, but I think that Ms. Dupree’s story shows that student debt has real consequences for those in or near retirement. And, the need to juggle debt on a fixed income may increase the likelihood of student loan default.”

Although the newly released GAO report acknowledged that seniors account for a small fraction of student loan debt holders, it noted that the numbers of seniors facing student loan debt between 2004 and 2010 had quadrupled to 706,000 households. Roughly 80 percent of the student loan debt held by retirement-aged Americans was for their own education, while only 20 percent of loans were taken out went to help finance a child or dependent’s education, the report said.

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), who sits on the Senate Special Committee on Aging, says student loan debt is a burden for thousands of Rhode Islanders, including a growing number of retirement-age borrowers who either took out student loans as young adults, or when they changed careers, or helped pay off a child’s education.

“Student debt presents unique challenges to these older borrowers, who risk garnishment of Social Security benefits, accrual of interest, and additional penalties if they are forced to default,” said Whitehouse, stressing that pursuing an education should not result in a lifetime of debt.

He sees the Bank on Students Emergency Loan Refinancing Act, which would allow approximately 88,000 Rhode Islanders to refinance existing student loans at the low rates that were available in 2013-2014, as a legislative fix to help those who have defaulted on paying off their student loans. “By putting money back in the pockets of Rhode Islanders we can help individual borrowers make important long-term financial decisions that will ultimately benefit the economy as a whole,” he says.
Garnishing Social Security

The GAO reports finds that student loan debt has real consequences for those in or near retirement. The need to juggle debt on a fixed income may increase the likelihood of student loan default. In 2013, the U.S. Department of the Treasury garnished the Social Security retirement and survivor benefits of 33,000 people to recoup federal student loan debt. When the government garnishes a Social Security check, multiple agencies can levy fees in addition to the amount collected for the debt, making it even more challenging for seniors to pay off their loan.

Susan M. Collins (R-ME) warned [because of a 1998 law] seniors with defaulted student loans may even see their Social Security checks slashed to see their Social Security check to $750 a month, a floor set by Congress in 1998. “This floor was not indexed for inflation, and is now far below the poverty line, adds Collins, who says she plans to introduce legislation shortly to adjust this floor for inflation and index it going forward, to make sure garnishment does not force seniors into poverty.

According to an analysis of government data detailed on the CNNMoney website, “More than 150,000 older Americans had their Social Security checks docked last year for delinquent student loans.”

Unlike other types of consumer debt, student loans can’t be discharged in bankruptcy. Besides docking Social Security, the federal government can use a variety of ways to collect delinquent student loans, specifically docking wages or taking tax refund dollars. These strategies also cutting the income of the older person.

Some Final Thoughts…

“It’s very important that we focus on the big picture and the implications in play,” said AARP Rhode Island State Director Kathleen Connell, noting that “Education debt is becoming a significant factor for younger workers in preparing for retirement, delaying the ability of people to retire and threatening a middle-class standard of living, both before and after they retire.

Connell says, “Its serious concern for some older Americans as approximately 6.9 million carry student loan debt – some dating back to their youth. But others took on new debt when they returned to school later in life and many others have co-signed for loans with their children or grandchildren to help them deal with today’s skyrocketing college costs.”

“It’s not just a matter of Federal student loan debt being garnished from Social Security payments if it has not been repaid, “ Connell added. “Outstanding federal debt also will disqualify an older borrower from eligibility for a federally- insured reverse mortgage.

“Families need to know the costs and understand the long-term burden of having to repay large amounts of student loan debt,” Connell concluded. “They also need information regarding the value of education, hiring rates for program graduates and the likely earnings they may expect.”

Finally, Sandy Baum, senior fellow with the Urban Institute, warns people to think before they borrow. “They should borrow federal loans, not private loans, she says, recommending that if their payments are more than they can afford, they should enroll in income-based repayment.

Addressing student loan debt issues identified by the GAO report, Baum suggests that Congress might ease the restrictions on discharging student loans in bankruptcy, and end garnishment of Social Security payment for student debt. Lawmakers could also strengthen income-based repayment, making sure that they don’t give huge benefits to people with graduate student debt and relatively high incomes.

The wage gap for older women, in Rhode Island and nationally


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

equal-payFollowing on the heels of a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report released last week, the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging held a hearing to put a Congressional spotlight on the alarming increase of older Americans becoming impoverished.  The GAO policy analysts concluded that a growing number of the nation’s elderly, especially women and minorities, could fall into poverty due to lower incomes associated with declining marriage rates and the higher living expenses that individuals bear.

As many as 48 percent of older Americans live in or on the edge of poverty.

“While many gains have been made over the years to reduce poverty, too many seniors still can’t afford basic necessities such as food, shelter and medicines,” said Aging Committee Chairman Bill Nelson (D-FL).

Policy experts told Senate lawmakers on Wednesday that millions of seniors have been spared from abject poverty thanks to federal programs such as Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, SSI, and food stamps.  The testimony contrasted with the picture painted by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) earlier this week, who produced a report that labeled the federal government’s five-decade long war on poverty a failure.

Appearing before the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging, Patricia Neuman, a senior vice president at the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, stressed the importance of federal anti-poverty programs.

“Between 1966 and 2011, the share of seniors living in poverty fell from more than 28 percent to about 9 percent, with the steepest drop occurring in the decade immediately following the start of the Medicare program,” said Neuman.  “The introduction of Medicare, coupled with Social Security, played a key role in lifting seniors out of poverty.”

Neuman’s remarks were echoed by Joan Entmacher of the National Women’s Law Center, who credited food stamps, unemployment insurance and Meals on Wheels, along with Social Security, for dramatically reducing poverty among seniors.

The report was highly critical of many programs designed to help the poor and elderly saying they contribute to the “poverty trap.”  Ryan and other House lawmakers have long proposed capping federal spending and turning Medicaid, food stamps and a host of other programs for the poor into state block grants.

Older Women and Pension Benefits

GAO’s Barbara Bovbjerg also brought her views to the Senate Select Committee on Aging hearing. Managing Director of Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues,  she testified that the trends in marriage, work, and pension benefits have impacted the retirement incomes of older Americans.

Over the last five decades the composition of the American household has changed dramatically, stated Bovbjerg, noting that the proportion of unmarried individuals has increased steadily as couples have chosen to marry at ever-later ages and as divorce rates have risen.

“This is important because Social Security is not only available to workers but also to spouses and survivors.  The decline in marriage and the concomitant rise in single parenthood have been more pronounced among low-income, less educated individuals and some minorities,” she says.

As marriage and workforce patterns changed, so has the nation’s retirement system, adds Bovbjerg.  Since 1990, employers have increasingly turned away from traditional defined benefit pensions to defined contribution plans, such as 401(k)s, she says, this ultimately shifting risk to individual employees and making it more likely they will receive lump sum benefits rather than annuities.

These trends have affected retirement incomes, especially for women and minorities, says Bovbjerg, that is fewer women today receive Social Security spousal and survivor benefits than in the past; most qualify for benefits on their own work history. While this shift may be positive, especially for those women with higher incomes, unmarried elderly women with low levels of lifetime earnings are expected to get less from Social Security than any other demographic group.

According to Bovbjerg, these trends have also affected household savings Married households are more likely to have retirement savings, but the majority of single-headed households have none. Obviously, single parents in particular tend to have fewer resources available to save for retirement during their working years.  With Defined Contribution pension plans becoming the norm for most, and with significant numbers not having these benefits, older Americans may well have to rely increasingly on Social Security as their primary or perhaps only source of retirement income.

Inside the Ocean State

Although the GAO report findings acknowledge a gender-based wage gap that pushes older woman into poverty, Maureen Maigret, policy consultant for the Senior Agenda Coalition of Rhode Island and Coordinator of the Rhode Island Older Woman’s Policy Group, observes that this inequity has been around since the 1970s when she chaired a legislative commission studying pay equity. “Progress in closing the gender wage gap has stagnated since 2000 with the wage ratio hovering around 76.5 percent,” she said.

GAO’s recent findings on gender based differences in poverty rates are consistent with what Maigret found researching the issue for the Women’s Fund of Rhode Island in 2010.  She found that some of the differences in the Ocean State can be attributed to the fact that older women are far less likely to be married than older men.  Almost three times as many older women are widowed when compared to men.

Maigret says that her research revealed that older women in Rhode Island are also less likely to live in family households and almost twice as likely as older men to live alone. Of those older women living alone or with non family members an estimated one out of five was living in poverty. For Rhode Island older women in non-family households living alone, estimated median income in 2009 was 85% that of male non-family householders living alone ($18,375 vs. $21,540).

Finally, Maigret’s report findings indicate that aound 11.3 percent of older Rhode Island women were living below the federal poverty level as compared to 7.3 percent of older men in the state. Older women’s average Social Security benefit was almost 30 percent less than that of older men and their earnings were only 58 percent that of older men’s earnings.

There is no getting around peoples’ fears about outliving their savings becoming a reality if they live long enough,” said AARP Rhode Island State Director Kathleen Connell. “One thing that the latest statistics reveals [including the GAO report] is the critical role Social Security plays when it comes to the ability of many seniors to meet monthly expenses. Social Security keeps about 38 percent of  Rhode Islanders age 65 and older out of poverty, according to a new study from the AARP Public Policy Institute.”

“Nationally, figures jump off the page,” Connell added. “Without Social Security benefits, 44.4 percent of elderly Americans would have incomes below the official poverty line; all else being equal; with Social Security benefits, only 9.1 percent do, she says, noting that these benefits lift 15.3 million elderly Americans — including 9.0 million women — above the poverty line.”

“Just over 50 percent of Rhode Islanders age 65 and older rely on Social Security for at least half of their family income—and nearly 24 percent rely on Social Security for 90 percent of their family income” states Connell.

“Seniors trying to meet the increasing cost of utilities, prescription drugs and groceries would be desperate without monthly Social Security benefits they worked hard for and planned on. As buying power decreases, protecting Social Security becomes more important than ever. Older people know this; younger people should be aware of it and become more active in saving for retirement. Members of Congress need to remain aware of this as well,” adds Connell.

Kate Brewster, Executive Director of Rhode Island’s The Economic Progress Institute, agrees with Maigret that older women in Rhode Island are already at greater risk of poverty and economic security than older men.

“This [GAO] report highlights several trends that make it increasingly important to improve women’s earnings today so that they are economically secure in retirement.  Among the ‘policy to-do list’ is shrinking the wage gap, eliminating occupational segregation, and raising the minimum wage. State and federal proposals to increase the minimum wage to $10.10 would benefit more women than men, demonstrating the importance of this debate to women’s economic security today and tomorrow.”

House Speaker Gordon Fox is proud that the General Assembly in the last two legislation sessions voted to raise minimum wage to its current level of $8 per hour.  That puts Rhode Island at the same level as neighboring Massachusetts, and we far surpass the federal minimum wage of $7.25, he said.  He says he will carefully consider legislation that has been introduced to once again boost the minimum wage.

“Bridging this gap is not only the right thing to do to ensure that women are on the same financial footing as men, but it also makes economic sense”, says Rep. David N. Cicilline.

At the federal level, the Democratic Congressman has supported the ‘When Women Succeed, America Succeeds’ economic agenda that would address issues like the minimum wage, paycheck fairness, and access to quality and affordable child care. “Tackling these issues is a step toward helping women save and earn a secure retirement, but we also have to ensure individuals have a safety net so they can live with dignity in their retirement years,” says Cicilline.

With Republican Congressman Ryan in a GOP-controlled House, captured by the Tea Party, leading the charge to dismantle the federal government’s 50 year war on poverty, the casualties of this ideological skirmish if he succeeds will be America’s seniors.  Cutting the safety net that these programs created will make economic insecurity in your older years a very common occurrence.
Herb Weiss, LRI ’12, is a Pawtucket writer who covers aging, health care and medical issues.  He can be contacted at hweissri@aol.com.

PolitiFact RI once again shows right-wing bias


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

I was going to write about this this weekend, but the Huffington Post beat me to it.

PolitiFact is well-known nationally for its conservative bias. In Rhode Island, where PolitiFact has partnered with the right of center Providence Journal, this bias was recently on full display. Recently, they went after David Cicilline for saying on Newsmakers that the Social Security payroll tax is currently assessed on about 83 percent of income, down from a peak of “approximately 90 percent of the income generated in this country…which was sort of where it has been historically.”

This is true. Even PolitiFact admits that both numbers are correct. In order to justify a “mostly false” rating, they claim that Cicilline’s muttered qualifier, “sort of where it has been historically,” amounted to saying that 90 percent was the historical average, not the peak. That sort of unreasonable quibbling could arguably justify a “mostly true.” But there really is no defending a “mostly false” rating.

In fact, PolitiFact was guilty of some misleading of their own. The percentage of earnings taxed started at 92 when the program was implemented in 1937, dipped down to a low of 71 in 1965, and rose to a peak of 90 in 1982 and 1983. It has since declined to 83 percent. In their quest for a “mostly false,” PolitiFact neglected to mention the fact that the figure started at 92 percent, giving the impression that 90 percent was the all-time peak, instead of the closest the income percentage ever came to returning to its starting point.

The cap on social security taxes is one of the most regressive features of America’s tax system. To help address this, Obama added a 0.9 percentage point high-income surcharge on the Medicare tax and cut the Social Security tax by two points. Here’s what that looks like in chart form:

payrollTaxRate

Sadly, this pro-growth, highly progressive Social Security tax cut recently expired, falling victim to austerity politics.

Progress Report: Doherty the ‘Blank Slate’; Pension Vote Fallout; Junk Food Subsidies; Happy B-day, Social Security


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
A cove on Dutch Island. (Photo by Bob Plain)

First Brendan Doherty supported Paul Ryan’s draconian budget proposal; then he didn’t. First he wanted to foist anti-organized labor laws on Rhode Island; but he changed his mind on that one too. The Bush tax cuts? He changed his mind on that one during a single interview, so who knows what he’ll think by the end of the campaign. Really, there is only one thing we know for certain about his positions, and Ted Nesi nails it down in a piece about how Paul Ryan will change the CD1 race: “Doherty is about as close to a policy blank slate as you can get.”

This headline from the dept. of no duh: Pension vote key to unions’ support

But the Projo’s Randy Edgar throws in a very interesting graph down near the end of his story: “Meanwhile, state General Treasurer Gina M. Raimondo, the chief architect of last year’s pension overhaul, also plans to weigh in with “financial support” and “information for campaign material” for Assembly members who voted for the pension bill, a spokeswoman said last week.”

RIPR’s Kristen Gourlay reports on an interesting new compensation structure between Blue Cross and some RI hospitals: “The new arrangement moves away from paying the hospitals based on the volume of care it provides – like the number of procedures – toward paying them for better outcomes for patients.”

Speaking of health, did you know junk food subsidies costs Rhode Island taxpayers millions each year? Small government activists, we’re waiting to hear from you on this one … Or does government not need to be shrunk so much when its largess is going to corporate America?

Fellow kayakers, here’s a new map of some of the best waterways in the Ocean State to paddle. And here’s the existing one folks who like to get out on Narragansett Bay use. Me, if I can swing it, I’m going to pay Dyer Island a visit this weekend. And it seems like Tim Faulkner, over at EcoRI, recently paid a visit to Prudence Island.

Today in 1935, President Roosevelt signs the Social Security Act, one of the many ways America governed itself out of the Great Depression.

True that, Projo!

Fighting for Rhode Island


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

The last few years have been tough for our great Ocean State. Across Rhode Island, I’ve organized community dinners, main street tours, and coffee hours where I’ve heard firsthand from so many people struggling to find work, seniors worried about their Social Security and Medicare, families being crushed by unfair credit card rates, and students scared they are going to have to leave college because they can’t afford tuition. People are hurting and they are frustrated, but they aren’t giving up, and neither am I. I’ve listened and I’ve brought these stories with me to Washington, and it is my promise to you as your U.S. Senator that I will keep fighting to create jobs, protect essential benefits like Social Security and Medicare, and provide our kids with a brighter future.

OUR VOICE IN WASHINGTON                                        

Rhode Islanders sent Sheldon to the Senate to fight for us and against the big special interests – and that’s just what he has done. We know that we can count on Sheldon to support our priorities – creating jobs, protecting families, and ending special deals for billionaires and big corporations. Sheldon has led the fight against moves to severely cut Social Security, Medicare benefits, and Pell Grants because he knows how much we in Rhode Island count on these programs.  And he has opposed giving more tax breaks to billionaires and multinational corporations while middle class families continue to suffer.

SHELDON’S PLAN

Putting Rhode Islanders Back to WorkSheldon has fought hard for legislation to create jobs, support small businesses, and revitalize our manufacturing sector.

  • Sheldon introduced legislation that would meet President Obama’s call in his State of the Union speech to eliminate the tax loopholes that reward companies who ship US jobs overseas.
  • Sheldon helped pass a Senate bill to crack down on China’s currency manipulation that costs American jobs by making it more expensive for us to sell goods to China, and cheaper for China to sell things here.
  • Sheldon is supporting legislation that could fund significant transportation improvements, such as repairing the I-95 viaduct in Providence, and provide new construction jobs in Rhode Island.
  • Sheldon has proposed a measure to provide tax credits to small businesses who hire unemployed workers to make it easier for a business to add new jobs.

Protecting Medicare and Social Security for Rhode Island Seniors. Sheldon will always be committed to preserving Social Security and Medicare benefits, and will continue fighting to reduce the cost of prescription drugs for seniors.

  • When Republicans in the House passed dangerous legislation to end Medicare as we know it, Sheldon helped lead the fight against that bill in the Senate.
  • Sheldon helped ensure that the health care reform bill closed the “doughnut hole” for prescription drugs covered under Medicare. More than 10,000 Rhode Island seniors benefited from this discount in 2011, saving $5.5 million dollars.
  • When budget negotiators threatened to pass new cuts to Social Security to reduce the deficit, Sheldon stepped up to protect that vital program and helped form the Senate’s Defend Social Security Caucus.

Getting a Straight Deal for Middle Class FamiliesSheldon has heard from so many Rhode Islanders who are frustrated with the special deals enjoyed by big corporations and billionaires.  He shares that frustration and is working to restore the “straight deal” that middle class Americans expect and deserve – ending tax giveaways to Big Oil, combating unfair credit card interest rates, making sure millionaires and billionaires pay their fair share in taxes, and putting a stop to unlimited and anonymous spending by big corporations in our elections.

Supporting Education Providing our children with a good education is the most important thing we can do to give them the opportunity to get the best jobs in the future.

  • Sheldon is fighting to protect Pell Grants to make it easier for students to afford college. In 2009-2010, 19,937 Rhode Islanders received $69,567,944 in Pell Grants for an average of $3,489 per student.
  • Sheldon has been working to extend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to improve our nation’s middle schools by establishing a grant program to help fund reforms in struggling school systems.

Protecting our Environment and Coastal Economy.  In Rhode Island, the strength of our economy is strongly tied to the health of our environment.  Sheldon recognizes this, and is leading several bipartisan efforts to better protect our oceans and coasts – and the jobs they support.  He’s working with Senator Snowe (R-ME) to establish a National Endowment for the Oceans, collaborating with Senator Vitter (R-LA) to re-authorize the National Estuary Program, and is co-chairing the Senate Oceans Caucus with Senator Murkowski (R-AK).  Sheldon will continue fighting to advance these priorities in 2012.

Stay in Touch: whitehouse.senate.gov, facebook.com/SenatorWhitehouse, twitter.com/SenWhitehouse

Fighting for Our Future


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

This is bound to be an exciting year for our state, and I know I speak for many when I say that the return of RI Future to the Ocean State’s blogosphere is a welcome one.

From Netroots Nation coming to Providence – something Mayor Taveras and I worked particularly hard to ensure – to our continued efforts to get Rhode Island’s economy moving again and put people back to work, there will be no shortage of Rhode Island events for us to discuss here on RI Future.

But as we look forward to the year ahead, we have to take a hard look at where we are now.  When one month of unemployment, one missed mortgage payment, or a single medical bill can push a Rhode Island family over the brink, we know it’s more important than ever to re-commit ourselves to protecting the programs that formed the foundation of our nation’s middle class:  Social Security, Medicare, and Pell Grants.

These three programs are the pillars of American prosperity and economic security. Unfortunately, last year alone, Congressional Republicans attempted to undercut each of these programs.  The House Republican Budget would have slashed Pell Grants for more than 1.3 million students and ended Medicare as we know it.  And legislation has been introduced in the House to allow private accounts to replace Social Security.

This is wrong, outrageous, and as long as I’m in the Senate, you can count on me to fight against attacks like these on the pillars that sustain the middle class.

That’s why I stood with Senator Sanders from Vermont to advocate for legislation to keep Social Security solvent for the next 75 years.

That’s why I called on President Obama to make sure he keeps Medicare benefits off the chopping block in deficit negotiations.

That’s why I’ve cosponsored legislation to allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices to lower costs, without reducing the benefits.

And that’s why I’ve been reaching out to the students who depend on Pell Grants and bringing their stories to Washington.

I’m glad to say that we beat back the House attempts to slash Pell grants and Medicare benefits in the Senate, but we need to stay active to defend our progressive principles.   Please take a moment to sign the petition to defend Social Security and Medicare benefits or share your Pell Grant story with me.

The more voices we have the stronger we will be.

*****

Sheldon Whitehouse is the junior U.S. Senator from Rhode Island.  To keep up with Sheldon online, please visit him on Facebook and Twitter.

No More Caving: A Message To Super Committee Democrats

As the super committee nears its deadline (Nov. 23), it seems increasingly likely that the Democrats will cave on the issue of raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans. This is not the first time we have seen them punt on this issue, and I’m getting pretty tired of it. I hope that you will join me in emailing this message to Senator Patty Murray, the Democratic co-chair of the super committee.

You can email her here. For the topic pull down thing, select the first option “Joint Committee on Deficit Reduction.” For subject I put “No More Caving.”

Here is the message I’m sending:

Senator Murray,

As you may already be aware, many young progressives are once again becoming disillusioned with our political system. In 2008, many of us were idealistic about the potential of the shift in leadership. However, time and time again we have watched as Democrats in Congress capitulated to the obstinate Republicans. Each time, Democrats blamed the Republicans’ complete refusal to compromise. While this problem is real, it must not be used as an excuse. Instead, Democrats must be equally resolute in defending and advocating for their own principles. Just as the Republicans have their “no tax pledge,” Democrats ought to have their own pledge. This pledge should demonstrate that they are committed to a balanced approach to deficit reduction, including both spending cuts and tax increases on the wealthiest Americans.

Not only is this good policy, but it is also good politics. Every poll demonstrates that the American people support this kind of approach. The polls showed the same results during last summer’s debt ceiling debate, but unfortunately the Democrats squandered the opportunity. Polls are not the only indicator of popular support for tax increases on the wealthiest Americans. The Occupy Wall Street movement, dedicated in large part to protesting income inequality, is committed to making the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share. How is it that the Republicans are able to go to the wall for principles that are relatively unpopular while Democrats consistently cave on their principles, despite having the wind of popular support at their backs? When you read headlines about young progressives becoming disillusioned, remember that your refusal to stand firmly behind progressive principles and tendency to capitulate are major contributing factors.

Our country is in an economic crisis. The Republicans have suggested that we can solve the crisis by simply cutting regulations and spending. When President Obama and the Democrats in Congress suggest a more balanced approach including increased taxes on the wealthiest Americans, Republicans criticize them for waging class warfare and attacking the “job creators.” The Democrats have allowed the Republicans to shape the public discourse in such a way that makes tax increases on the wealthiest Americans seem un-American. This is not the case. Crises call for shared sacrifice. The notion that all Americans have the duty to help their country out of crises is inherently American. Some Americans can afford to sacrifice more than others and they should be called on to do so.

We want leaders who will act as passionate advocates for progressive ideals. As the super committee approaches its deadline, we urge you to stand up for what you believe in. Young progressives cannot stomach another Democratic capitulation.

For the very first time since 2009, Social Security benefits to increase

Social Security benefits will go up by 3.6 percent in 2012 to adjust for the living costs. Social Security benefits have not increased since 2009. The increase is welcome news for retirees in this difficult economic climate. Many retirees, however, will see much of that boost devoured by increased Medicare premiums. Source of article: Social Security benefits to increase for the first time since 2009 Continue reading “For the very first time since 2009, Social Security benefits to increase”

Uh Oh, President Obama to Address Nation Tonight at 9pm

This could potentially be very, very bad…

Tonight at 9 p.m. EDT President Obama will address the nation on the stalemate in Washington over avoiding default and the best approach to cutting deficits.

You can watch the speech live at www.WhiteHouse.gov/live starting at 9pm tonight.  The expectation among progressives is that President Obama will reiterate his frustration at Republican intransigence for his desire to dismantle the social safety net that millioins of Americans rely on.  To summarize:

Democrats asked Republicans to pass a clean bill, just as GOP leaders had supported many times in the past. Republicans said, “No.”Democrats invited Republicans to Biden-led bipartisan talks. Republicans quit. Democrats offered a $2.4 trillion debt-reduction package, 83% of which would come from spending cuts. Republicans said, “No.”Democrats sought a Grand Bargain, with more than $4 trillion in savings. Republicans said, “No.”Several Democrats offered some preliminary support for the “Gang of Six” blueprint. Republicans said, “No.”Many more Democrats signaled support for the McConnell/Reid “Plan B.” Republicans said, “No.”

Unfortunately, we can only rely on Republican intransigence to protect Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid for so long.  As I said before, it took a Democrat to “end welfare as we know it.”  And it’ll take this Democrat to gut the social safety net.  Will Obama offer yet another path that fully capitulates to Republican demands?  Will he abandon any and all revenue enhancements in the battle over the debt ceiling?  It has been a slow progression away from what would be desireable, what would be reasonable, to what is ridiculous.

From the Center for American Progress:

The infographic above shows that the president’s latest offer to House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) is heavily titled toward spending cuts. In fact, the president’s offer contained about $1 trillion less revenue than the recent proposal from the so-called Gang of Six, a group that includes three Republican senators and three Democratic senators. It also represents significant movement from the president’s original debt reduction framework, which itself was already more conservative than the recommendations from the chairs of the debt commission (Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson) last December.

I suppose we’ll see what happens at 9pm.  In the meantime, sign this petition asking our Congressional Delegation to stand strong against cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

How to Further Destroy the Economy in Two Easy Steps – A Tutorial Brought to You by Obama and the Democrats


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Step One: Form a “Fiscal Commission” tasked with developing a plan (with the end result of implementing the plan) to reduce the budget deficit during the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.  This will be done by slashing spending on social services, MediCare, Social Security, education, etc. (all the things that working folks depend on), but not the military budget, bailouts for banks, corporate subsidies to businesses sending jobs overseas, etc.  Check!

Step Two: Ignore the growth of income inequality in the U.S. over the past 30+ years, which is actually at the root of the economic problems the country faces.  Don’t even mention it, and especially don’t do anything about it.  Check!

I have watched in shocked horror over the past couple weeks, as conservative deficit hawks enabled by the Democratic Party, have marched toward a fiscal austerity program that will take the depressed and down economy and pummel it to a bloody pulp.  This is all being done in order to alleviate some mythical inflationary pressure that wealthy bankers are terrified of (remember, inflation is the biggest enemy of accumulated wealth).

Of course none of this really matters to the tens of millions of people who are looking for work, have had their hours cuts, have been forced into part-time work, or are in fear of losing their jobs (55% of all adults in the labor force have been affected by this recession in some way).

The real problem is that people aren’t spending money because of the recession, and that is directly related to the growth in income inequality, albeit in complicated ways.  Since the 1970s, U.S. wages have largely remained stagnant.  At the same time, the vast majority of all the wealth created in the country over the last 30 years has been flowing upward.

Because the super wealthy don’t actually work to generate their income, wages as a share of national income has been declining for just as long.  What that means is less and less money is being earned by workers, and that’s bad for the economy because workers spending money is what fuels economic growth.  Consumers earning more money means that they can buy more goods and services, increasing the effective demand in an economy.  Seems pretty simple, right?  Well, yes, it is.

But Brian, if wages have been stagnant for 30 years, then why has the economy been growing that whole time?  I’m glad you asked.  The economy didn’t tank sooner because people have been supplementing their stagnant or declining wage income with credit and debt.  As a society, America took out more and more, and larger and larger, loans either through credit cards, home equity loans, mortgages, payday loans, and all the other delightful financial products offered by financial institutions intent on making money off of your debt.  Notably, as fake housing wealth grew, people used their homes as ATMs – we’re currently seeing how good of an idea that was (and once the housing bubble burst, the $1 trillion of increased demand that was based on it vanished).

As a result of all this borrowing, middle class Americans tripled their debt over the last 30 years.  As we all know, when debt rises, service on the debt rises.  That is yet another mechanism that sucks dollars from a local economy and puts it in the bank account of CEOs, exacerbating the income inequality problem (always remember that when millions of people have been losing their jobs since 2007, Wall Street managed to find $145 billion to pay in bonuses in 2009 alone).

Yes, there’s more to the story, there always is.  But here we are, discussing the budget deficit and the national debt when the real problem is that average workers are getting screwed, they haven’t been making enough money to keep pace with the increases in the cost of living, virtually all the wealth accumulates into the hands of the few, and Democrats and Republicans continue to let it happen.

We need to put more money in the hands of people who will spend it in the economy – that’s the only way jobs will come back.  Why the federal government isn’t spending every waking moment developing a strategy for making this happen is beyond me.  Instead we get bank bailouts and financial reform legislation that makes Wall Street happy.

We expect Republicans to screw workers – that’s what they do.  But Democrats have, time and again, been complicit in the weakening of the middle class.  And it’s no different now.