would suffer the consequences of their vote. Too bad it doesn't work that way.

Since we don't know how people voted there is no way to allocate benefits based upon how you voted. Under our system we have go along with what the majority or plurality of people voting on election day voted for. You don't get to opt out of a policy because you didn't vote for it.

It was stolen through gerrymandering, voter ID laws, hacked voting machines, etc.

Don't let anyone tell you otherwise either. We have got to get this shit stopped. Pretty much the way our election laws are written now it put the vote of our congress critters, dem and pukes alike, on the auction block. If someone would come up with a system like we have right now and try to sell it to the people they'd be tared and feathered then rode out of town strapped straddled legged to a pole tied between two galloping horses. we can bet our ass on that too. Our system is the most corrupt in the world of the ones who claim to have any semblance of a democracy

Election laws changed and the Press taken out of the hands of corporations. Our press was intended to be the fourth leg of the 3 legged stool called democracy they set up damn near 240 years ago. The press being the most important part of that whole system they envisioned. Without a honest and open press you have nothing. We don't have an honest press now and haven't in a while. This all goes back the the watefgate hearings and nixons forced resignation. The pukes took that one personal. The ones involved were caught red handed and everyone knew it so the pukes vowed to never let that happen again. Pukie buying up the print and over the air News Organizations began in earnest. They pretty much control way more than their share of the newspapers and news organizations on air. We're fucked until we get that fixed. pretty simple actually

SOMETHING about vote integrity since 2000. But we've gotten SQUAT from them. Bupkis. A big, fat O. I'm more and more convinced that our DEMS are owned by the same 1% that owns the vote "counting" machines...

they throw us a tidbit every now and then but the rest of the time its shit they shovel our way

I wonder if my dad felt the way I do today when he was 66 yo like I am now and his dad before him, our sons when they get to this place in life, how will they feel.
personally I think things were different then than now and they we're faced with some of the shit we are today, but I just don't know.

has become a joke compared to what it once was.

Especially after the criminal 2,000 and 2,004 elections I was shocked that the Democratic Party did not address this issue.

These sorts of things helped me decide that the Democratic Party isn't exactly what they pretend to be. Hear me?

I am thoroughly fed up. I have been letting the office holders and candidates know it.

aren't sharpest tools in the tool shed if they even bother to vote. I often think the majority in this country are truly F'ed, but many seemingly remain clueless. They whine, but do nothing, and often politicians elected are liars. The media, outright owned by big money, and investigative reporting ... the last I saw was Jack Anderson.

A democracy can not exist without properly informed citizens.
The oligarchs realized this years ago when the mobilized to take over the MSM and make it into the propaganda machine that it is today. They are no different than the ruthless dictators who know that their greatest threat is a free press and informed citizens.

I was saying as often and as loud as I could that we have to do something about our press. if we don't nothing else will matter. If we don't nothing we want to do to make things right is possible. if we don't we are literally FUCKED. More so than we already are.

It was calculated, and they aren't finished until we are.

100 percent impossible to gerrymander the Senate. Rest of your post is incredibly true!

the electorate is not representative of the people's will. i am bitter about this state of affairs. makes me want to tune out the way i did in the reagan years, but somehow it's not so easy to do anymore.

gerrymandering only affects the House, not the Senate since Senate elections are at large state-wide elections.

And I think the main reason why Republicans took the Senate is because too many in the Democratic base stayed home and did not vote. After all Democrats usually win presidential elections nowadays and the difference between midterm and presidential elections is voter turnout.

Only the house.

And that's not even all true. Our political process and involvement is shameful in this country. No wonder our government is spiraling into the toilet.

to control both houses of Congress.

And some say there's no difference between Democrats and Republicans. I rest my case.

Those who don't vote get what the rest decide. It can get even uglier.

I rarely notice silence. I notice the absence of it.

But here:

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/229199-dems-warn-of-social-security-cuts

Apparently some are disputing this. Perhaps you didn't hear about it.

that is just a few! We need everyone to say, "Yeah, that!"

That'll be the difference ... or something like that.

They will just keep claiming that there is no difference. Even in the face of evidence to the contrary. I'm sick of it.

guess, I was living in the past.

numbers to help them do stuff that they could not do without that magic number of Dems to help them along.

Have you been paying attention to that, by any chance, going back several years, EVEN WHEN DEMS were in the majority.

Now the Dem Leadership can ignore the voters, AGAIN and go on listening to the inside DC pundits, that's up to them. But people posting on political forums have no control over what millions of voters are going to do. Sick or not 'of it'.

But the leadership of this party has, all they have to do is STOP BLAMING THE VOTERS. They are not to blame.

And the more it happens, the further they are driving people away. Sometimes I wonder, is that the goal of those doing it? To drive people away from this party?

Just last week we had 13 Dems help Republicans get the votes they needed to stop Elizabeth Warren's Amendment. THAT is the fault of the party leadership, NOT the voters.

So no, not 'one notices', MILLIONS are noticing.

and the President raising holy hell about this? I want to see cartoon steam coming out of their ears. Not enough outrage. Not nearly enough.

You think I'm kidding?

What you want is something I can't do anything about.

As if the media would report what any Dem said.

Anything the White House says is on whitehouse.gov. So if anyone is saying anything it is out there to be linked to.

But still not reported.

He talked about how cruel it is to cut money from those who can least afford it. He talked about Reugs want to reduce what the rich pay and take the money from the disabled and elderly instead. However, since he's put SS on the table several times, I do not trust him not to sign this bill.

As someone posted earlier,"Continue to bash liberals and see results just like in November."

It seems some are proud of the results, now we will see action or inaction in congress which does not results in good results.

BTW, this remark was made in response to the poster bashing others.

Yeah you know who pushes that lie? Republicans. Why? Because then they can be as horrible to America as they want and the public won't do anything about it because they feel the Democrats will do the same. It is all part of their plan to suppress the vote in this country.

read DU.

republicans...

What a fucked up situation. But I am sure those vets and seniors, etc. will understand the Big Bank Picture and vote for the next corporate Dem, anyway. Right? Right? The important thing is - Jamie Dimon got what he wanted.

That's the vote you needed to whip. How do you get the Senator from Aetna, who just shot down his own public option proposal, to vote for yours?

Keep in mind he knows he will be leaving the Senate soon, and cares more about his TV gigs than actually doing anything for his constituents.

I think you're a tad confused.

personally made phone calls and whipped for the Crapnibus really really really abhorrent. And quite illuminating.

and unrelated to the OP.

this wasn't part of that bill, it was a House only rule that the President couldn't veto nor did he whip votes for it. You are just plain, flat out, gold carat wrong.

that the public is so quiet on this. It's just the beginning of the cuts, raising the age and privatizing. They're going after pensions as well. 2 years can wipe out a lot of people trying to make ends meet. Cut food stamps:check: cut SS:check: Cut pensions:check: This is what America wanted??

no one said anything.

and it seems to be a repeat

Sad to say with everything going on in my life if this was passed in another bill I missed it.

Republicans passed a rule to block transfers between Social Security's trust funds. As a result, they'll have to raise taxes, cut benefits, or reverse the rule in late 2016.

Since it's a rule about how they are allowed to write funding bills, it does not have to be signed by the president.

content until they destroy this country and everyone in it but the wealthy.

And Congress gets to decide how Congress decides to spend money.

Obama will have to sign any bill that raises taxes or cuts benefits.

The question was if Obama could change the rule. He can't.

He does have to sign any spending bills that result from the rule in order for them to come into effect. But he can't change the rule.

That's how bills become law or not.

to be signed or vetoed by the President.

You are wrong, but keep digging.

you start arguing:

The rules change could be vetoed by the President.

No? ... Well ...

The rules change will cause a change in benefits and benefit changes can be vetoed by the President!

No? ... Well ...

The bills that change the benefits that result from the rules change can be vetoed by the President!

No? ...

"what benefit was cut and by how much?"

There's two trust funds. The one that funds "regular" Social Security, and the one that funds Social Security Disability payments.

In the past, they've transferred money between the two funds as needed. This rule requires any future spending bills (which must start in the House) to not transfer money between the two funds.

Basically, they are required to write the bill in a particular way. That bill then goes through the normal "I'm just a bill, sitting here on Capitol Hill" process.

The result of that is the Disability fund will run out of money in 2017. In the spending bill in 2016, either taxes have to go up, disability payments have to be cut, or this rule has to be changed/ignored.

was a chained CPI and would never pass the Senate.

And all spending bills must start in the House - they get to write the bill.

Now, the Senate can amend the House bill and put the transfer back in, but the Senate has no say on the rule.

over the past number of years.

Far more important is the question of whether to mock or not to mock people for their beliefs, THAT will help the poor, disabled and the elderly.

This OP should have hundreds of comments and recs, IF our priorities were what they ought to be.

1) Lots of the media are busy instilling more fear of brown people.

2) Younger people have always assumed Social Security will be pillaged by the time we can get it. Every other part of the safety net has been shredded, largely due to the work of "sensible" Democrats. Why expect them to leave that one alone? Yes, this is SSDI, not "regular" Social Security, but it's the first two words people are paying attention to.

3) To actually do it, Republicans would have to cut Social Security right before the 2016 elections. That's when Republicans would would actually have to raise taxes, cut benefits, or allow a transfer. That has "really fucking stupid politics" written all over it, and there's enough Republicans left that realize it is really stupid. So people don't believe the Republicans will actually do it.

And if they did, the massive losses in the 2016 election would allow Democrats to reverse the change in January 2017.

battle is over. This program is worth fighting for because it is obvious that the pensions for work are not going to be around like everyone paying into them thought and the so called savings that you are putting away are not safe either. Banksters are gambling them away. And there is not other program that takes care of the disabled, elderly, survivors like SS does.

Either work for it now or there will be nothing. And believe me you do not want to go back to 1929.

of congress or the President. I don't think there is any way to stop them. I wonder how much this cut is going to be?

Any benefit cut would have to be signed by the President. The OP is misleading.

this is a rule change that the President doesn't get to approve or veto.

Bills that flow from that rule change may propose benefit changes or not. Obama then has to sign or veto them. Civics 101.

AND "What Comes Next - 095" ... the republicans won't draft any spending/benefit changes ... because with the rule change, the SSD fund bleeds out without them doing anything further.

Benefits will have to be cut or taxes raised. Both those would be bills which Obama would have to sign or veto. Or the rule could be rescinded. You are so wrong, keep digging.

It will never happen but anyway .....

BTW ... Do you even bother to follow your own argument ... which has morphed into the exact opposite of what you now claim.

so take on the next guy.

Remember? " President Obama can veto the rule change"?

For which I apologize; or, you were correct for the wrong reason. Either way, you did not say that President Obama could veto the rule change.

Especially ones that are somewhat complicated. Assumptions are made on both ends which can be incorrect. Let's see how this plays out and then we can re-battle!

But it is the duty and responsibility of our elected and running for office Democrats to take this to the people through the outlets only available to them. TV, radio, interviews with newspapers, magazines and public speaking. If they lose next time, it is nobody's fault but their own… and WE are the ones that pay the price.
Word up, Dems.

Shout this from the rooftops. Fight for what's right. No cuts to SSDI. Expand it don't reduce it!

Shameful, indeed.

Elections have consequences.

Maybe when the GOP cuts off their lifeline and puts the sick, old and disabled out on the street it will finally cut through the fog of Fox "news" and hate radio BS propaganda!

Maybe these idiot faithful republican voters will finally see that republicans are a threat to their own life!

asking posters to name their two biggest concerns. Mine were Social Security and the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

People need to be paying attention.

They urged the President to use the bully pulpit to take this before the people.

http://time.com/money/3660116/social-security-disability-obama-congress-defending/

So far I haven't heard anything.

of "no big deal" because as we all know-they Only carry the really big Important news, like what Chris Christie said about Rand Paul"-of course "dems" Won't talk about it-they're all-"Out of Sight? Out of Mind" quietly planning to vote for it....
I'm pretty sure many recipients understand it is happening and I'm Hoping people are lighting up the phones in DC.

gives the democratic leadership the cover to go along with what both parties want while they get to wring their hands and wail about their powerlessness to do anything about it. Same old re-run.

Disabled
Veterans
Women
LGBT
Non-White
Atheist
Students
Everyone who isn't a CEO or Hedge Fund Manager


Seriously, because I'm having trouble figuring this one out!

it hurts.

Unfortunately

McConnell has already admonished the House that he does not have 60 Republicans in the Senate.

And more is coming.

the last time i added the comment that i will continue to post it until corporate media reports on it. i wish you'd included a link, but maybe there isn't one out there.

From an average of about $1,130 per month SSDI to around $900 per month. More info here: http://time.com/money/3660116/social-security-disability-obama-congress-defending/

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/12/26/1265436/-Disability-benefits-WILL-be-cut-20-in-2016-are-you-okay-with-that

It's who they are.
Suddenly they believe in natural selection.
The cognitive dissonance, it burns.

for not voting or voting Republican.

They invested in the corporations that bankrolled the politicians that lie, cheat & steal us out of our democracy. Some even have the nerve to claim they are on our side. Don't be fooled. For many, money trumps democracy.

The nausea just keeps increasing.

is supporting benefit cuts.

I have more respect for the Republican position at this point than the Democratic position, because Americans will support tax increases to fund these retirement programs. But the problem is that if these tax increases don't happen soon enough, the magnitude of the tax increases required later would throw the economy into a lasting recession and thus be counterproductive.

This is a Congressional Research Service report from last year on the topic:
https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33514.pdf

CBO's last estimate that I know of is that OASDI combined trusts would become insolvent in 2030. The Trustees estimated 2033.

But regardless, simply transferring money from the SS trust fund to the DI trust fund is embracing the cuts in benefits rather than supporting the program. While, in the short term, DI recipients would continue to get full benefits, benefits from both programs would be cut steeply before 2035.

Everyone who is blaming the Rs on this is avoiding the issue. If we wait much longer, raising taxes to cover the deficit won't be possible later.

There is a consensus among the electorate that these programs need to be funded, so now is the time to confront the problem while the cost of doing so is workable. Even now, we cannot raise payroll taxes enough to cover the deficit without causing a recession, so we need to slowly raise payroll taxes somewhat, and then find another revenue stream to cover the balance of the funding deficit.

Note that the problem is worse than it appears, because the trust funds don't have any money in them - the deficit between income and outgo is made up from the general fund, and it won't be sustainable for more than another ten years, it looks like.

Then, when I think about it, I know they are doing this.

This is Big Screw You to the poor and dialed, and the elderly should be getting ready to take it, as well. If we don't put more democrats in office, SS as we know it might not exist by the time I retire in about ten years.

Or I should say, plenty of IOUs for war