Thank the 42 Senators who want to expand Social Security
Both my R Senators voted against it.
Share on FB: https://www.facebook.com/socialsecurityworks/photos/a.155910007766200.33747.137389882951546/940590629298130/
= new reply since forum marked as read
Did she abstain, or vote against?
to Cardin where was the little firebrand Mikulski, she will be missed, but I strongly think we will get another firebrand to fill those shoes----and a progressive woman at that----Donna Edwards ---she got my vote
Now as side note, which needs to be brought forth and here it is :
"March 26, 2015
News Release
Legislation introduced in the House by Rep. John Delaney (D-MD) would create a Social Security Commission designed to fast-track reforms and insulate Members of Congress from the public backlash over harmful benefit cuts that co-sponsor Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK) says the commission will consider, including: raising the retirement age, means testing and the Chained CPI.
NCPSSM President/CEO, Max Richtman, expressed the National Committee’s opposition to the legislation in a letter to Rep. John Delaney
:
“We are troubled that H.R. 1578 takes several steps to circumvent a deliberative public process, limiting the participation of Social Security stakeholders and advocates. For example, the Committees of jurisdiction over the Social Security program — the Senate Committee on Finance and the House Committee on Ways and Means — would have limited input in the development of the Commission’s recommendations. Under “fast track” procedural rules in your bill, the legislation embodying the Commission’s recommendations would be considered by Congress on an expedited, “take-it-or-leave-it” basis. No amendments to the Commission’s bill could be offered and it could be passed in both the House and Senate by a simple majority vote. Normally, Section 310(g) of the Budget Act and the Senate’s “Byrd rule” require 60 votes in the Senate to approve legislation which changes Social Security.
The National Committee believes limiting the ability of stakeholders to shape the debate would insulate lawmakers from the devastating effect benefit cut proposals would have on retirees, workers with disabilities and survivors.”
So if anyone truly thinks that this matter is settled----think U.S. Postal Offices in 2006 when Delay and Hassert did this voice vote to bankrupt this agency and it passed on that procedure , no public input no committee hearings ----nothing , but attack the postal union and its structure , by forcing them to fund there retirement of the employees pension fund to the tune of 5 billion a year for 75 years into the future, even before they hired new individuals to work there in the future---no corporation have had to do this so why the postal union employees---because two reps hold stock in the right to work less stock they belong too and too the right to work for less corporations and its mantra of bigotry as said in Vance Muse words in 1930 in Texas and has expanded it today in such states as Wisconsin and Indiana and other states of bigotry.
This is what Cole and Delaney want to do to our Social Security------and its time to pull a Indiana on them both----this is just another from of bigotry and discrimination to us all, I have been means tested for over 48 years and my generation has been paying for those when it began(1935-1954 and those of us born in the early fifties up until now----double whammy).
These two hypocrites will whine and say there no money in the trust and its being spent that's a lie, and as for it being short by 2035 all they have to do is release the cap on those human being making over 118,000 in salary to continue paying there fair share and repealing the tax from 6.2% to 4.5 % in the paycheck----that solves the trust funding----we don't need bankster or a private hedge fund charging us fees so they can have access to our earned money----nope I trust the agency running the fund now, they have always give out the checks----always----the banks are the ones with two books and they fail when they do
As usual.
