For the first time in more than two decades, Social Security is doling out more in benefits than it’s collecting from payrolls — and candidates in the 3rd Congressional District are coming to blows over the issue, even though they agree on a few of the central aspects.
As it stands, certain individuals can get early benefits at 62, but the full benefits for the general public don’t kick in until age 67. Many lawmakers on the federal level, however, are pushing for a bigger number.
Neither Republican Jeff Landry, a businessman and attorney from New Iberia, nor Democrat Ravi Sangisetty, an attorney from Houma, want to see any major changes to the age cap for folks nearing retirement. But the devil is in the details, as they say, when it comes to Social Security.
Based on the findings of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, nearly 23 percent of Social Security’s financial gap would be closed if the minimum age of eligibility were increased to 68 and a third would be buried if the age were 70. Right now, there’s even a presidential study commission working up a number of its own recommendations — on this, the 75th anniversary of Social Security.
“My position on Social Security is clear,” Sangisetty says. “We must protect the promise we’ve made to our seniors. We cannot raise the retirement age, reduce benefits or cut cost of living increases.” He has not released any other details on what he would do to shore up Social Security.
While Landry says he personally feels like the retirement age should be increased in general, he opposes raising the program’s age cap specifically for people who would benefit in the near future from Social Security. In a recent mailer to voters, Landry promised to “not change or raise the retirement age for any worker nearing retirement” and “to shore up the system by making changes without raising taxes.”
Landry says he is also interested in exploring the impact of raising the program’s age cap for future participants, rather than those about to enter the program, and wants to see a study conducted on whether private citizens can receive special benefits as part of the Social Security program as members of Congress do under the Federal Employees’ Retirement System.
Both Sangisetty and Landry have promised not to accept any special perks or retirement benefits if elected to Congress.
On the whole, there does seem to be some public support for making serious changes to Social Security. According to a Bloomberg News survey released last week, 72 percent would “consider” and 31 percent “strongly consider” removing the Social Security tax cap so that wages over $107,000 a year are subject to the tax. Lumping those two polling categories together, 60 percent would at least consider privatizing Social Security and another 64 percent would consider raising the minimum age. The topics were broached with participants as ways to reduce the federal budget deficit.
More than 100,000 individuals in the 3rd Congressional District, which includes portions of Acadiana, receive Social Security benefits. During the past quarter century, Social Security built a surplus of $2.5 trillion, but that surplus shrank as the federal government borrowed from it to fund other programs, Sangisetty argues.
Today, trustees predict Social Security will be out of money in fewer than 30 years, he adds. “Washington stole from our future when they borrowed from Social Security,” Sangisetty says. “We need to recommit to our obligation to seniors and our children, we need to make sure Social Security sees its 150th anniversary.”
Landry, for his part, says he would not ignore threats to the solvency of Social Security and is open to investigating changes. “I also understand that there is a need for a modernized secured retirement system that gives more freedom to today’s workers,” he says, “a system that workers can use to build secure wealth and prosperity for their retirement and their posterity.”
MAY 23 Here's a story in the Picayune about some statistics that must come as a blow to folks who believe that any private school can do a better job of educating kids than any public school: Danielle Dreilinger reports that only 30 percent of the voucher kids are passing. That's less than half of the state wide average, she says. It's an interesting statistic because most of the schools (if not all) taking voucher kids have never had their students' standardized test scores released to the public before.
MAY 23 Stephen Sabludowsky blogs on Bayou Buzz about auditor requests here. Recently the state GOP started crowing about a request from the Legislative Auditor, claiming they were being targeted because of their anti-tax stance. (Uh, your what?) Denial and hyperbole aside, the state Democratic party blew holes in that theory with an email announcing they'd received the same request, Sabludowsky writes here.
MAY 23 Jim Brown blogs about the senate race in this post. He says that, given Bobby Jindal's "lack of traction" on the national stage, it might make more sense for the governor to consider running against Mary Landrieu for the senate seat. Since Tim Teeple left the Cassidy team, it makes sense he might land on a Jindal for Senate team, Brown opines.
MAY 23 In this Louisiana Voice post, blogger Tom Aswell writes of rumors that his nemesis, state Superintendent of Education John White, may be soon departing Louisiana for a federal post. It's hard to believe, given his performance, Aswell says, but stranger things have happened. An anti-White BESE member says that, if true, White is quitting before he can be fired.
MAY 23 In this post on American Zombie, blogger Jason Berry writes about the Mother's Day shooting. Mayor Landrieu said that "this is not who we are," but the fact is, this is New Orleans, Berry writes. The violence infused in the city is the result of a culture created by "sins of omission or sins of commission," Berry writes. It's not a problem that can be solved by legislating, policing, praying or publicizing, he says: Someone's got to understand what's happening first.
MAY 23 This post in the Westside Journal tells us what Port Allen Mayor Deedy has been up to lately: vetoing ordinances, apparently. This story is most interesting, however, when it delves into a petition that has been circulating around the city lately. It accuses the former mayor of a lot of nasty things; the former mayor says it is full of lies and "broken syntax" which may be a larger offense in his eyes.
MAY 23 This editorial posted in The Advocate is a bit confusing. The writing is poor - definitely not up to the usual editorial writing standard there - and the point is hard to grasp. Apparently, the writer is saying that privatization of state efforts is OK, as long as there is oversight and transparency, but Jindal's not good at that, and the legislature shouldn't over-react. Okey Dokey. Can't they get one of them Pulitzer-winning people to write an editorial?
MAY 23 This post on The Lens gives you links to a new Google Earth tool that allows you to see any spot on earth transform over the past 30 years. Bob Marshall, who covers the coast for the paper, says that in the case of Louisiana's coastline, it's possibly something you don't want to see, because it's not a pretty picture. There are several clips here, showing critical areas erode away. For Marshall, it was vindication for all those times he was met with eye-rolling when he talked about erosion.
Most Read
in case you missed it
Subscribe to this comment's feed