Be Aware: Rep. Reed Creates his own Social Security Facts!

Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan once wrote, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”

Rep. Reed released a  Statement on President Obama’s  2015 State of the  Union speech. The following is his comment about Social Security.

“I heard nothing tonight about how to protect the Social Security Retirement Fund from the impending insolvency of the disability fund. It isn’t fair to raid the retirement fund yet again for what would be a twelfth time.”

Rep. Tom Reed sponsored the amendment to the House of Representatives’ rule that limits the way the Social Security funds their programs. (see the previous New NY 23rd Article.) He contends that he wants to ‘Protect” Social Security. (Read his Social Security Amendment Press Release). The words, phrases and (to be kind) misinformation presented in his comments about Social Security in President Obama’s  Speech tells us something different. We’ll examine each sentence at a time:

“I heard nothing tonight about how to protect the Social Security Retirement Fund from the impending insolvency of the disability fund.”

Reading the first sentence of the statement one might not realize that both funds are part of Social Security System.  Notice how he treats the two funds– he wants to protect the Social Security Retirement Fund (each word capitalized) from the  and the insolvent (bad) disability fund.   That was no accident. Reed is  constantly belittling the fund that supports our disabled workers. He is laying the ground work, and gathering support, for his attack on Social Security.

The Disability Fund has been part of the Social Security System since President Eisenhower added it in 1957, fourteen years before Reed was born.

Let me remind you of how Social Security works:

Working Americans fund Social Security by having 6.2% deducted from our paychecks each pay period. Employers match that amount. Those deductions fund two different Social Security Programs— Old-Age & Survivors Insurance (OASI)–which Reed calls the “Retirement Fund”– and Disability Insurance (DI). Presently the Social Security Administration (SSA) puts 5.3% of your paycheck into the OAS Trust Fund, and 0.9% into the Disability Trust Fund.

In the past, when the SSA calculated that a fund would be getting low, it would adjust how the payroll deductions were divided between the two Trust Funds. They want  to make sure both Funds solvent. This  has happened 11 times since 1968—or once about every four years.

The Disability Insurance Trust Fund will be able to pay only 81% of the expected benefits to the disabled workers in 2016. Changing the amount that the Disability Fund receives by one-tenth of one percent would keep both Trust Funds solvent until 2033! Our payroll deduction would remain at 6.2%.

 “It isn’t fair to raid the retirement fund yet again for what would be a twelfth time.”

Rep. Reed uses the term “raid”  an awful lot when he discusses Social Security. “Raid” is not a neutral term. It is a negative buzz word that will rile-up support for Reed’s attack on the disability fund and disabled workers. If you check-out Reed’s Social Security Press Release you will see that he used “raid” four times.  He does not want people to know that Social Security Administration does as much as  possible is to keep both funds strong.

Rep. Reed told us if the retirement fund was  “raided”  again, it would be for a twelfth time. That is not true. He deliberately told us an un-truth. It is a lie. Pinochio Fraud

There have been 11 adjustments/raids between these two funds. In five of them, 1979, 1980, 1983, 1984 and 1997, the Disability Fund rate was reduced, and the Retirement Fund was increased! Reed claims that the Retirement Fund  was reduced (raided) all eleven times. Everyone who reads his Press Release assumes that Rep. Reed is telling the truth. He isn’t. To check for yourself follow the link to  SS Tax Rate Table 1979-Present, or  a more detailed article and chart which shows the yearly payroll deduction rates for both funds from the beginning of Social Security. Rep. Reed can’t play dumb. He is on the Social Security Sub-Committee and should have known how Social Security operates.

The two sentences from Rep. Reed’s “State of the Union” Press Release gives us enough doubt  to question his real reason(s) for his amendment to the House rules. Follow this issue closely. We’ll probably see other ways Rep. Reed wants to “Protect Social Security”. It won’t be pretty.

ssdireed15
Advertisements

About pystew

Retired Teacher, political science geek, village trustee. I lean a little left, but like a good political discussion. My blog, the New NY 23rd (http://newny23rd) is about discussing the issues facing the people of our new congressional district. Let's hear all sides of the issues, not just what the candidates want us to hear.
This entry was posted in Congress, Constituents, Economics, Health Care, Political, Reed's Views, Rights, Seniors, Veterans and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Be Aware: Rep. Reed Creates his own Social Security Facts!

  1. BOB McGILL says:

    Obama’s Social Security Disability policy busting Calif. general fund
    September 28, 2012 – By CalWatchdog Staff
    Sept. 28, 2012
    By Wayne Lusvardi
    Here’s the dirty secret of Gov. Jerry Brown’s Proposition 30 tax increase of $8.5 billion. Most of it would not go to education, as advertised. Instead, it indirectly would go to plugging a gaping budget hole created by the Obama Administration’s policy of taking people off unemployment rolls and putting them on permanent disability benefits. The Obama policy blew a $11.7 billion budget hole in California’s budget.

    The Obama Administration’s loosened eligibility requirements for Social Security Disability have swelled the number of those on Medicaid in California.
    – See more at: http://calwatchdog.com/2012/09/28/obamas-social-security-disability-policy-busting-calif-general-fund/#sthash.GH5zWDTh.dpuf

  2. BOB McGILL says:

    gee, pstew if you didn’t create your own facts this blog would be only one page

  3. Deb Meeker says:

    As a business owner of a sole proprietorship, I pay 100% of my Social Security tax, which for 2015 amounts to -15.3% of the first $118,500 of income and 2.9% of everything above that amount.

    Tom Reed would much rather taxpayer’s “hard earned money” (another terribly overused phrase by Reed) be used for his cronies to be “compensated” for their funding of his campaigns, and given to unscrupulous banksters to play with.
    Reed has finally made the big time, and can no longer just be considered as opportunistic – he has reached the heights of a full on con artist.

  4. Anne says:

    As always, Bob, thanks for playing! But alas, your poor taste in “news” sources only cements your position as this blog’s biggest GIGO contributor. If you’d like some real facts, have a read here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/17/social-security-disability_n_1678773.html

  5. Anne says:

    As a full-time freelancer, I also pay 100% of my SS tax.

  6. pystew says:

    Bob, Rep. Reed LIED to his constituents. It wasn’t a half truth. He wasn’t spinning information. Answer this question: How can we trust him?

  7. pystew says:

    I wished the article would give details on the disability topics that were ‘loosened’. I don’t understand the connection between Disability Insurance and Medicaid. (I understand the relationship between Disability Insurance and Medicare.) Could you find more information about this?
    Workers have to earn enough Social Security work credits to be eligible to receive either Social Security Retirement or Social Security Disability. Social Security do not approve approximately 2/3 of the applicants. After appealing, that total raises to 40%.

  8. pystew says:

    Anne, thanks for the link to the Huntington Post article. I have save it and will use it a future article. The article has a link to a blog of Bud Meyers, who was in interviewed in the article. Here is a link to Mr. Meyer’s article Republicans Fighting for the Middle-Class. It is an article worth reading.

    http://bud-meyers.blogspot.com/2015/01/republicans-fighting-for-middle-class.html

  9. pystew says:

    Bob, find one thing that I have said in this article that is a LIE.

  10. Anne says:

    There aren’t any details there because that “loosening” is a figment of some bloggers’ imaginations. If you do a google search you mostly come up with a bunch of right-wing blogs that are all repeating each other (it happens a whole lot with this sort of thing). As the huffpo piece pointed out, the fact that the numbers of people eligible for disability is a result of some very quantifiable factors, none of which have to do with the Kenyan Usurper who currently occupies the White House. Much as the conservative blathersphere would wish it otherwise.

  11. catkestler says:

    Great article! Like I said, follow his big donors compared to how he votes and presents bills. All of them are connected.
    BTW, fraud in SSDI is only 0.4% and trust me, they put you through the wringer getting SSDI approved.

  12. Judi lutz woods says:

    The reallocation of SS funds between old age and disability 11 times since 1968, going Both ways as the need determined. Four of those times were under Reagan
    Now rep Reed states he pushed this new rule to force real changes. I have contacted his office four times asking what changes he would like to see. So far no one has answered this fairly basic easy question. So rep Reed is looking for major changes to SS but refuses to tell us what changes he is seeking.

  13. pystew says:

    You are certainly right about Reagan.There were constant changes in the formula, even raising the total amount deducted from our paychecks back then. The last time the relocation happened was 2000–fifteen years ago. The System is working well even through the recession, which since there were fewer workers it received less revenue, and the more retired and disabled workers it supported. Even though Reed would like to see real change “Reed did not offer any suggestions for saving SSDI. However, he called its projected bankruptcy unacceptable.” (Finger Lakes Times, January 8, 2015.) The ‘projected bankruptcy’ can be fixed by adjusting the funds by one-tenth of one percent.

    There are many clues that Reed is not promoting protecting Social Security–including using hot button words (raiding, bankruptcy, fraud, waste, abuse) and lying about ‘raiding’ the retirement fund. His pants must be on fire!

  14. whungerford says:

    At the Jan 31 meeting in West Elmira, Tom repeated the claim that SSDI is certain to be bankrupt and thus unable to pay benefits; he proposed no solution except to disparage alleged fraud and abuse and suggest that many currently considered disabled are undeserving.

  15. pystew says:

    The Canandaigua Messenger editorial, “Our View: Disability system deserves full funding” ends with “Let’s not threaten the benefits of those who can least afford to lose them because a relatively small number of people abused the system.” Follow the link to read the full article.

  16. BOB McGILL says:

    PSTEW, you twist everything

  17. BOB McGILL says:

    no you don’t, the people who pay you pay 100% of your SS, it’s just added to the cost of whatever it is you do 🙂

  18. BOB McGILL says:

    HUFFINGTON POST, HA, HA, HA, HA, I’M NOT EVEN GOING TO READ IT. That is so funny, you quoting the HUFFINGTON POST.

  19. BOB McGILL says:

    YOUR CUSTOMEDS PAY YOUR SS !!! If you don’t pad your bill to compensate for it, you’re dumber than I thought 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s