MoveOn, DFA Push Back on Dems' Potential Social Security Cuts
When President Barack Obama said everything was on the table in his bipartisan talks on the deficit and the debt ceiling, it seems he wasn't kidding. Everything -- including, according to TPM's Brian Beutler, cuts to Social Security benefits via a manipulation of the way in which the program's cost of living allowance, or COLA, is calculated.
Progressives, of course, are having none of it. MoveOn.org quickly polled its members on how such a scheme would play. The group found that if the president supports cuts to Social Security in a final deficit deal, he'll likely lose donations and the sweat equity of his base. From MoveOn's statement about its survey:
76 percent of all respondents were less likely (46 percent of them much less likely) to donate or volunteer for the President's reelection effort if he cut Social Security. When asked the same question if the president cuts Medicare, 78 percent of respondents were less likely (47 percent much less likely) to donate or volunteer for Obama. When questioned on whether the president cuts a deal that does not roll back tax breaks for the wealthy, over 82 percent said they would be less likely (54 percent much less likely) to donate or volunteer for Obama.
Full survey results are here.
Democracy for America, the group founded by Howard Dean and chaired by his brother, Jim, issued the following statement from Jim Dean:
Cutting Social Security to reduce the national debt is like attacking Iraq to get Osama Bin Laden -- the two things are not related. Social Security is running a large surplus in 2011 and by scrapping the cap on the payroll tax over $107,000 it will be more than solvent for generations to come. Only 6 percent of Americans have wages above that cap. Which do we want more? More tax cuts for the rich, or Social Security for everyone else. Let's keep our priorities straight, and stop giving away the farm to Republican bullies who got us into this mess in the first place.
Full statement is here.