Catfood Commission's Initial Recs: Cut Corporate Taxes, Raise SS Retirement Age, Means Testing

UPDATE - 1:25PM ET: The draft put out by the commission chairs has been released, coming in at 50 pages. The overarching goal, Simpson and Bowles write, is to achieve "nearly $4 trillion in deficit reduction through 2020" while reducing "the deficit to 2.2% of GDP by 2015."

How they get there is going to be a matter of contention as other commission members have already stressed their displeasure with the suggestions. But here are a few of the more noteworthy suggestions.

•Roll discretionary spending back to FY2010 levels for FY2012, requires 1% cut in discretionary budget authority every year from FY2013 though 2015;

•Fully offset the cost of the "Doc Fix" by asking doctors and other health providers, lawyers, and individuals to take responsibility for slowing health care cost growth;


•Reduce farm subsidies by3 billion per year by reducing direct payments and other subsidies;


•Achieve100 billion in Illustrative Defense Cuts;


•Index retirement age for Social security to increases in longevity. "This option is projected to increase the age by one month every two years after it reaches 67 under current law, meaning the normal retirement age would reach 68 in about 2050 and 69 in about 2075." There will be a "hardship exemption" for those unable to work beyond 62;


•Give retirees the choice of collecting half their benefits early and the other half at a later age to minimize impact of actuarial reduction and support phased retirement options;


•Reduce corporate tax rate to 26% and permanently extend the research credit;


•Gradually increase gas tax to fund transportation spending.



UPDATE - 1:45PM ET: A more detailed list of discretionary spending cuts proposed by Simpson and Bowles has been released. Below are a few of the more notable bites at the apple:

•Reduce Congressional & White House budgets by 15 percent;

•Freeze federal salaries, bonuses, and other compensation at non-defense agencies for three hears;


•Cap the number of federal political appointments at 2,000;


•Eliminate the Office of Safe & Drug Free Schools;


•Eliminate all earmarks.;


•Reduce unnecessary printing costs;


•Reduce funding to the Smithsonian and the National Park Service and allow the programs to offset the reduction through fees;


•Cut funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.




The most direct assault on Social Security, however, may not be the increase of the retirement age, but rather an attempt to tilt the program toward a welfare model and away from the current, universal insurance model that has made it popular and enduring despite 75 years of attacks. The co-chairs propose to "increase progressivity of benefit formula by creating a new bendpoint at the 50th percentile." Such a move would require means testing. In other words, the government would determine benefits based on a beneficiary's assets and other sources of income. Currently, beneficiaries are paid benefits based on their contribution over their working life. Replacing the social insurance model with a welfare model would erode support, encourage fraud and ultimately undermine the program.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/10/debt-commission-report-social-security-medicare-_n_781606.html

Well, maybe they'll subsidize cat food with the savings.

more fucking tax cuts.

The real insult will come when they tell us that it's all for our own good.

And you don't want to make them mad.

It's quite wondrous.

These guy's existence are an insult to my cat!

wtf?

"The most direct assault on Social Security, however, may not be the increase of the retirement age, but rather an attempt to tilt the program toward a welfare model and away from the current, universal insurance model that has made it popular and enduring despite 75 years of attacks. The co-chairs propose to "increase progressivity of benefit formula by creating a new bendpoint at the 50th percentile." Such a move would require means testing. In other words, the government would determine benefits based on a beneficiary's assets and other sources of income. Currently, beneficiaries are paid benefits based on their contribution over their working life. Replacing the social insurance model with a welfare model would erode support, encourage fraud and ultimately undermine the program."

i.e. It could be read as Bill Gates doesn't need the same SS payment as a life-time minimum wage worker in relation to the day-to-day costs of living.

The Co Chairs make a broad statement to the point here -



Of course the proof, as always, is in the pudding.

to Congress for approval and then on to a Presidential signature to be enacted. It's far from over.

Can someone explain?

SS is not a welfare program.
I'm surprised that there are any cuts in Defense what ever it is that they mean by Illustrative Cuts.

Cut corporate taxes? What does that mean, cut giving them the tax break or cut the tax rate? I mean really it had better mean the former.

Arguing against payroll caps and means testing at a time when the SS program is not sustainable for the generation following the boomers is unconscionable, imo.

Means testing will end up with a whole segment of the population who are not wealthy without any benefits.

"Means testing will end up with a whole segment of the population who are not wealthy without any benefits."

Unless something is done, poor retirees who follow the boomers will see benefit cuts.

is to fight & quit accepting the ruling class "solutions" to the "crises" that the rulers themselves create.

so that the wealthy don't have to carry their fair share. And all so that the boomers can't pat themselves on the back and tell each other that they never accepted "welfare"? It's not an argument that resonates with me.

What the hell is that all about? Cut seniors payments while reducing corporate tax rates?

They are corporate representatives.

Cut the Pentagon budget by 90%, problem solved.

Impossible? Mebbe so with the capitalists in charge, oh wait....:think:

FUCK THIS SHIT!

I wish he could get angry and forceful.

:wtf:

while other social programs have been defunded.

the cap is raised every year. it historically covers 90% of wage income.

" it historically covers 90% of wage income."

There is no principled reason to shield the other 10% of income. If you'll recall your history, the rich will oppose the poor having bread to eat if we allow them enough deference.

You have a misleading subject line...as usual. From your link:
"The chairmen of the commission will unveil their overarching recommendations for debt and deficit reduction on Wednesday afternoon, weeks before the official unveiling is expected.

The findings are not the final report of the commission, officially known as the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. Rather they are the specific suggestions of its two chairs, former Sen. Alan Simpson and former White House Chief of Staff Erskine Bowles. The ultimate findings will require the support of 14 members of the 18-member commission. And at this juncture it is unclear if the votes are there, sources familiar with deliberation say."


Let's be clear about what this is. It's two people lobbying for what they want because they know it won't get support from the full commission.

12 years from now?

• Set global target for total federal health expenditures after 2020 (Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, exchange subsidies, employer health exclusion), and review costs every 2 years. Keep growth to GDP+1%.


• If costs have grown faster than targets (on average of previous 5 years), require President to submit and Congress to consider reforms to lower spending, such as:

Increase premiums (or further increase cost-sharing)
Overhaul the fee-for-service system
Develop a premium support system for Medicare
Add a robust public option and/or all-payer system in the exchange

Wow. The fucking cast-iron balls on these people. "Oh, and let's not forget to make the Smithsonian and the National Parks into "pay to play" systems and cut Public Broadcasting."

AND a corporate tax cut?