Tweet
Jay Carney: Chained CPI still on the table
Both the upcoming sequestration cuts and the end of the current continuing resolution will give President Obama another chance to push for a grand bargain. Thus the administration is laying out what it will and will not consider as part of a “balanced approached.”
Apparently the pushback against raising the Medicare eligibility age was strong enough that Obama has taken if off the table, but the President would still support switching Social Security to the chained-CPI.
During a press conference today, Press Secretary Jay Carney was asked directly if Obama was still open to raising the Medicare eligibility age from 65 to 67 as part of a grand bargain and Carney answered with an unequivocal “No.” Obama had previously supported the increase in age as part of a possible deal with Speaker John Boehner back in 2011, but that deal failed.
In response to a question about Social Security’s cost of living formula, Carney said Obama still considers that change to be on the table. The President will continue to support including it in future deals as long as it is part of a balanced approach, i.e. contains some new revenue.
Switching to a chained-CPI would effectively be a yearly cut for everyone on Social Security. While modest at first, the size of the cut would grow every year and eventually result in a significant benefit cut for older seniors.
34 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Damn that table.
For Obama, Medicare Age Increase Off the Table, But Chained-CPI Still On
And just why is Chained-CPI still on the table for a Democratic president????????????? Was tax increases in any form ever a part of W. Bush’s agenda? NEVER. But, since Obama is a great BIPARTISAN, he is ready to sell out his middle class base to earn his false sense of bipartisan credential through chained-CPI. Great going Democratic party. All Democratic presidents are desperate to earn their bipartisan credentials. I am just wondering what will 2016 bring to us, with Lady Clinton being the president then. Just wondering how she will screw the middle class in order to earn her bipartisan credential.
Can we put the Pentagon on the Chained CPI? Please, pretty please?
And Congress?
And every other pet department of the government?
After they learn how to live on it then we can talk about SS.
And why, since Social Security doesn’t contribute to the deficit or the debt is this even ON the table at all.
Still asking……..
I know, ”’crickets””
Obama’a Condundrum:
How can we maintain the status quo – shovelling billion$ to crony capitalists like Jamie Dimon and Eric Prince and get the elderly, the infirm and the Middle Class to take it in the neck?
But Republican presidents, not in the least interested. Funny that.
If you’ll accept a friendly amendment:
…while simulating empathy for those I’m kicking down to?
Could it be to keep the “independent” from being a viable third party?
We don’t need an independent party if the Dems are “bipartisan”.
Soon it won’t be too hard to get a devout Democrat into a third party. These greedy contemptible low information self centered boobus americanus will continue til the 99% finally take away their power. (says a former devout Democrat)
I haven’t been following along. Could someone explain what chained CPI is and how it would decrease benefits more and more each year?
And to whom do we have to make clear our objections? Congress person? Senator non-people?
WRT Medicare, perhaps 0bama and friends have decided that the $700 billion in cuts to Medicare that they made in order to create the Frankenstein monster known as Robamneycare was sufficient damage for now, and it were best not to antagonize American seniors on the same point again, while the anger is still fresh?
The Bureau of Labor Statistics has a definition (not very friendly) of the “Chained Consumer Price Index.”
In a nutshell, Chained CPI is designed to account for consumer substitution. For example, pork and beef are two separate CPI item categories. If the price of pork increases while the price of beef does not, consumers might shift away from pork to beef and lessen the impact of rising pork prices. Chained CPI would rise, but not by as much as traditional CPI.
In the case of Social Security beneficiaries, you can substitute “Kibbles” and “Meow Mix” for “beef” and “pork”.
killing us with…ARITHMETIC…really boring arithmetic
Here’s some additional info re chained CPI
LINK (PDF from strengthensocialsecurity.org)
LINK (David Dayen post with explanations)
Atrios is right, we should be agitating for an increase in Social Security benefits.
Brings to mind the Jim Hightower quote: “Some people say we need a third party. I wish we had a second one.”
Yes, what Chained CPI does is hide inflation
Hah! Catfood, it’s not just for cats any more!
The chained part sucks.
Thanks everyone for the links and explanations. I’ve got the gist of it now, but as it affects me, I’ll check out the links.
Because the chained CPI assumes that consumers substitute a lower quality product for one of higher quality, it GUARANTEES a lower standard of living year after year. It’s not just catfood: when apartment rents get too high and seniors move into single-room occupancy hotels, THAT becomes the new normal for standard of living. After the SRO, of course, comes the cardboard box.
It’s also not very realistic for people who are most dependent on Social Security. What do you substitute for regular medical checkups, natural gas to heat your home, or bus fare to the senior center? If you’re already down to tuna fish and Hamburger Helper, what do you substitute for those when the price goes up?
In that case, why is only the Democratic party single-handedly shouldering that burden of birpartisanship while the GOP shuns it. The answer is perhaps because the Dem politicians are even bigger sell outs than the GOP politicians. Alternatively, the reason for that might be that the Democratic base is much more naive than the GOP base.
Or the Rs don’t give a shit. Period,.
Here’s a photo/chart that makes it pretty plain. It’s facebook, though; I couldn’t get to it off fb…
We need to join Atrios’s plan to double Social Security benefits instead.
It’s what we should do.
Exactly. To me, the thought that these folks can even think that’s possible for people surviving on SocSec alone means they are basing it all on false (and unexamined) assumptions.
They must be assuming old folks are having steak or pork chops every night, so they can ratchet down to burgers or tuna salad.
How is it they don’t know/didn’t bother to find out that most olds are already down to meat a couple of times a week, if they’re lucky.
This is a plan that will, and I mean will result in starvation for old people. Exactly what SocSec was instituted to prevent.
We saw a trailer of New version of the old movie The Replacement Killers last week. I have not figured out the movie for this week. I sure some of you have a good idea.
If Obysmal is still ‘putting CPI on the table’, I suggest yes, bring it on. The caveat being that his future earnings are divided by 100,000 and chained likewise.
The man is a souless wanker.
Cat Food Commission here we come.
Thanks Obama, you’ve earned your place in history. Trillions to bail out the people that destroyed the world economy, and cat food for the rest of us.
Obama and Pelosi and their tables!
Can Rep Grayson please come back here and once more explain why this is a really terrible idea…..and then explain why he’ll still end up voting for it?
We should also be advocating for a raise in wages. The bottom line is that what they pull out of Social Security is a percentage of your wage. It should come as no surprise that just like the wages of working Americans have lost value and not really kept up, so has the benefits that are based on a percentage of those wages.
We ought to be arguing for 3 75 cent increases over 3 years and a 50 cent increase over 1 year to make the minimum $10 an hour. If housing is supposed to account for 25% of wages then there is no reason that anyone should make less than $400 a week.
They already know the answer to this because every year there are seniors that freeze to death or that cut their blood pressure pills in half to make them last longer. They don’t care.
As a matter of fact, before this brilliant idea was launched they did a study that suggested that as it stood the elderly were already struggling because they have increased health care costs and regular inflationary models fail to take this into account. The study suggested that there should be a special equation used for Social Security that took into account the needs specific to seniors. It’s nice to know that we have the money to waste on studies that the government does and then promptly ignores though isn’t it?
At Dkos there is a diary on this topic entitled “What The Hell Is WRONG With Him??” For Dkos, it and the follow-up discussion are uncharacteristically harsh toward Obama.
Chained CPI substitutes an expensive good for a cheaper good. Which is bad.
For example: eating fillet steak, is replaced by chuck steak, and then by pork, and then chicken then pink slime, then catmeat, then cats and dogs, then rats, then insects (if you can catch enough after which you either give up eating protein, or starve to death.
The problem I have with the substitution assumed in the chained CPI. is the assumption there is always something to substitute. At the end of the substitution process are the homeless, living on garbage.
My list above illustrates my view of the absurdity, and complete dishonesty, of the process.
We already know has people in the US substitute. We can see it in any city.
That is: Living a reasonable live is substituted in a set of nasty steps with living in a back alley, cold and hungry, subsisting on garbage and handouts, and then dieing.
you only get to live a “reasonable life” if you show yourself willing to “act reasonably” and compete with Chinese, near-slave labourers….don’t you understand that? Reduce your expectations (and life expectancy). That’s the new game in town.