Oh, by the way: Biden, Hoyer, Clyburn all open to raising Social Security retirement age

posted at 9:42 pm on June 30, 2010 by Allahpundit

A fun follow-up to yesterday’s Democratic heart-ache about Boehner wanting to raise the retirement age to 70. Hoyer and Clyburn are on record about this recently but the Biden stuff comes from the 2007 presidential primary. Do you suppose he’s come around to The One’s position about the retirement age being sacrosanct? Or is he just crazy enough to stick to his guns and singlehandedly destroy their talking point against Boehner by insisting even now that the retirement age should be on the table?

Note to Jake Tapper or any other reporter who reads this site: Ask him.

Boehner’s office passes along a series of clips that show senior Dems supported lifting the retirement age too.

Those senior Dems include VP Joe Biden, who told the AP in ’07 he was open to discussions about raising the cap.

House Maj. Whip James Clyburn’s official website says raising the age can keep Social Security solvent. “With minor changes to the program such as raising the salary cap and raising the retirement age by one month every year, the program could become solvent for the next 75 years,” Clyburn’s website says.

Just last week, House Maj. Leader Steny Hoyer told an audience at an event for Third Way, the centrist think tank, “we could and should consider a higher retirement age.”

Actually, The One once told “Meet the Press” (again, back in 2007) that while raising the retirement age is “not the best option,” he’d listen to all arguments in the interest of restoring long-term solvency to the program. Why the left thinks he wouldn’t be willing to deal with a Republican Congress on that point is beyond me; as he’s shown repeatedly, first and foremost during ObamaCare, he’s happy to compromise on progressive sacred cows like the public option in order to get something passed. There’s already talk from unlikely quarters about investing a chunk of the Social Security trust fund in the stock market. Why would the retirement age be off limits if that isn’t?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

The Trap is set!!

canopfor on June 30, 2010 at 9:45 PM

Hell Yes
-Boehner

canopfor on June 30, 2010 at 9:46 PM

House Maj. Whip James Clyburn’s official website says raising the age can keep Social Security solvent. “With minor changes to the program such as raising the salary cap and raising the retirement age by one month every year, the program could become solvent for the next 75 years,” Clyburn’s website says.

Not exactly – the fundamental imbalance between retirees and workers won’t be solved with just those fixes.

By the way, nobody (and I mean NOBODY) is addressing the fact that the Disability Insurance portion will be going bankrupt in the next few years.

steveegg on June 30, 2010 at 9:46 PM

The hope you die before you are eligible fix. Obamacare should help in that regard.

Southernblogger on June 30, 2010 at 9:46 PM

Make it optional. I’d gladly forgoe any claim on SS if I no longer have to pay into it. 40+ years of funding food stamps and Boca Raton condominiums.

In a heartbeat I’d walk away from that Ponzi scheme and smile till I die.

BobMbx on June 30, 2010 at 9:47 PM

the program could become solvent for the next 75 years,” Clyburn’s website says.

And then what? Oh, thats right…you’ll have been dead for several decades, so what do you care.

BobMbx on June 30, 2010 at 9:48 PM

The hope you die before you are eligible fix. Obamacare should help in that regard.

Southernblogger on June 30, 2010 at 9:46 PM

Little-known fact #1 – When SocSecurity came about, the retirement age was set at the mean life expectancy.

Little-known fact #2 – The basis of SocSecurity, Imperial Germany’s government retirement plan, actually required a potential retiree to live several years longer than the average German.

And yes, PlaceboCare will help thin the population.

steveegg on June 30, 2010 at 9:50 PM

Biden unveils plan to protect retirement savings
updated 9/27/2007 11:45:50 AM ET
=================

To protect Social Security, Biden said he would bring both parties to the table to keep the plan paying out. That would include discussing options

(such as upping the retirement age)

and raising the cap on income subject to the Social Security tax past the $97,500 it was in 2007.
=================================================

Oh,its on!!!

canopfor on June 30, 2010 at 9:50 PM

And then what? Oh, thats right…you’ll have been dead for several decades, so what do you care.

BobMbx on June 30, 2010 at 9:48 PM

75 years is as far as the actuaries dare project. Even though Clyburn doesn’t care about the time period after he’s dead, it’s not a nefarious trick.

steveegg on June 30, 2010 at 9:52 PM

And then what? Oh, thats right…you’ll have been dead for several decades, so what do you care.

BobMbx on June 30, 2010 at 9:48 PM

F-ing A right. SS is terrible public policy, and this nation of idiots are happy in their ignorance.

Aquateen Hungerforce on June 30, 2010 at 9:53 PM

steveegg on June 30, 2010 at 9:52 PM

The point is that you cannot make a Ponzi scheme solvent in the long run. You just can’t.

Aquateen Hungerforce on June 30, 2010 at 9:54 PM

F-ing A right. SS is terrible public policy, and this nation of idiots are happy in their ignorance.

Aquateen Hungerforce on June 30, 2010 at 9:53 PM

It’s been too long…

Comment of the Day™

steveegg on June 30, 2010 at 9:54 PM

The point is that you cannot make a Ponzi scheme solvent in the long run. You just can’t.

Aquateen Hungerforce on June 30, 2010 at 9:54 PM

Exactly!

steveegg on June 30, 2010 at 9:55 PM

Why not set government subsidized retirement at the age of immediate past members of the U.S. Senate from, say, West Virginia?

Scribbler on June 30, 2010 at 9:55 PM

If a Republican comes up with an idea the libs call it bad at best, evil at worse.

If a Democrat steals an Republican idea and calls its own, then its a great idea that we need to study.

WTF????

Lance Murdock on June 30, 2010 at 9:56 PM

Social Security could be fixed for the next 150 years if they simply raised the retirement age to 90.

Pelosi delende est on June 30, 2010 at 9:59 PM

This is insane..They are trading the elderly voting block for the Acorn thugs that will have carte blanche to block voters and all the while stealing our money in front of us!

KZnextzone on June 30, 2010 at 10:02 PM

F-ing A right. SS Every law put in the Federal Register since 1913 is terrible public policy, and this nation of idiots are happy in their ignorance.

Aquateen Hungerforce on June 30, 2010 at 9:53 PM

That’s more like it.

gryphon202 on June 30, 2010 at 10:03 PM

“There’s already talk from unlikely quarters about investing a chunk of the Social Security trust fund in the stock market.”

The Social Security trust fund is a bunch of I.O.U.s that are worthless pieces of paper that were spent years ago…

… in fact, this year, more was paid out than current Social Security taxes were paid in by current workers.

You might as well raise the working age to 100.

The only way to fix this…

… is to make Congress and every bureaucrat with a union pension live under Social Security.

Seven Percent Solution on June 30, 2010 at 10:09 PM

Even raising it a year would save billions of dollars. This is single handedly one of the best solutions to saving social security and the impending budget crisis.

Vincenzo on June 30, 2010 at 10:12 PM

Anyone remember this…?

Seven Percent Solution on June 30, 2010 at 10:12 PM

Let me opt now ,this is a PONZI scheme and I will never see a dime I have paid in .
It’s not even worth typing that if the used EVERY DIME we paid in we would all retire MILLIONAIRES ……
I think they should let MADOFF go free his crime is pale in comparison with the THIEVES who have taken our tax dollars

ELMO Q on June 30, 2010 at 10:17 PM

Anyone remember this…?

Seven Percent Solution on June 30, 2010 at 10:12 PM

..God yes! To quote the latest comment on that clip:

“..let me get this straight, Bush asked congress to fix the fannie and freddie issues and Frank gave republicans a big FU and 2 years later the housing market collapsed. Republicans tried to fix SS and the Dems pissed on it, not it will be bankrupt next decade. Somehow all this is Bush’s fault? F**K THAT! Take some responsibility for once you asshat liberals.”

By the way, “W” was, is, and always will be a better speaker that that oily, fawning a**-clown, Obama. He speaks straight and true and you could most always believe that what he said he was going to do.

Thanks, 7%, I sure miss “the decider“.

The War Planner on June 30, 2010 at 10:27 PM

Why shouldn’t the retirement age be increased. That master of Ponzi schemes, FDR, damned well knew what life expectancy was when Social Security was started (avg 59 years). The system would eventually go broke when people lived longer. But we didn’t have to worry about that. In the mid-60′s the Democrats saw all that ‘trust money’ just lying around ‘doing nothing’. So they’ve “borrowed” from it for every entitlement program they could.

Well the bill is due now and all those IOU’s have to be paid somehow.

GarandFan on June 30, 2010 at 10:30 PM

Why would the retirement age be off limits if that isn’t?

It shouldn’t be. Another thing that shouldn’t be off limits, address the the retirement packages of all government workers. Seems a little unfair to force people to work to seventy to get back what was confiscated from them while at the same time still supporting the life of leisure for ex government workers that retire at 55.

lowandslow on June 30, 2010 at 10:33 PM

70 is a done deal. when you get your SSI retirement income statement each year 70 has been projected for about 4 years now. This was decided along time ago it just hasn’t been Rahmed yet!

I wonder about the early provision maybe 66 or 67?

dhunter on June 30, 2010 at 10:40 PM

There’s already talk from unlikely quarters about investing a chunk of the Social Security trust fund in the stock market.

Since Social Security funds are part of the regular revenue and we now own a huge chunk of AIG and GM (any of Chrysler?)how does anyone figure we aren’t already in the stock market? Just remember the squealing they did when W suggested it. It’s okay if they do it and keep control but don’t let a citizen get uppity.

Cindy Munford on June 30, 2010 at 11:00 PM

Hey maybe we privatize SS? Wouldn’t you like a real lock box for your money?

tarpon on June 30, 2010 at 11:16 PM

Raising the age is great. It needs to happen. Raising the salary cap on contributions is just another way to “redistribute” wealth. The system was set up as a mandatory trust fund, meaning each person is supposed to pay for his future benefits. Raising the cap is a way to get some people to pay for other people’s retirements!

MJBrutus on July 1, 2010 at 5:54 AM

Why even put an age on it? Just say “the day after you die you’re eligible”. Makes as much sense as the rest of the crap libs put out.

Squiggy on July 1, 2010 at 6:46 AM

There’s already talk from unlikely quarters about investing a chunk of the Social Security trust fund in the stock market.

 
According to my calculations, an 8% return on a scrap of paper with “IOU” written on it would yield…

rogerb on July 1, 2010 at 6:59 AM

In the mid-1980′s the insolvency of SSA was announced to be around 2050… approx. 75 years away.

By 1990 or so it was 2030, still only 40 years away.

By 2005 it was solidly at 2020, only 15 years away.

By 2008 it was 2018, only 10 years away.

By 2010 it has happened, zero years away.

I realized in the mid-1980′s that this system is broke, my money will never be seen again, and that I was being lied to by politicians and the elite establishment grubbing around for cash. The system cannot be ‘fixed’ when politicians are in charge of it for they will change it to meet immediate political ends and screw the means to get there.

All of that for a low paying annuity.

I will help to care for the poor and elderly, just stop taking my money and end the empty promises of a government unable to live up to the bare minimum it MUST do. End the robbery in the name of political pay-offs and expedience because we can’t afford it any more.

ajacksonian on July 1, 2010 at 7:27 AM

The One once told “Meet the Press” (again, back in 2007) that while raising the retirement age is “not the best option,”

To “the One” the best option is probably Communism. So this really isn’t a knock against raising the retirment age, from O’s perspective.

jwolf on July 1, 2010 at 9:14 AM

SSN would still be solvent today if Congress hadn’t been stealing from it for decades.

RebeccaH on July 1, 2010 at 10:41 AM

I wish some one could do the research to see how many of those bloated A**h*les in congress are collecting SSI, and put on that what their income is and total net worth. We can actually see apples n apples as to who is sucking on the system even when they dont need to!

If I can retire and not collect it I wont.
if I need it I will.

ColdWarrior57 on July 1, 2010 at 7:22 PM

There’s already talk from unlikely quarters about investing a chunk of the Social Security trust fund in the stock market.

Danger, Will Robinson! As Stuart Varney explained this morning on Fox n Friends, this is so they can grab more power and invest in union heavy firms, while punishing corporations like, say WalMart who aren’t unionized. We the peeps would not have the opportunity to take our money and invest it for ourselves.

Buy Danish on July 2, 2010 at 7:07 AM