Commentary: Congress shouldn't pander with Social Security pay-out | McClatchy Washington Bureau

×
Sign In
Sign In
    • Customer Service
    • Mobile & Apps
    • Contact Us
    • Newsletters
    • Subscriber Services

    • All White House
    • Russia
    • All Congress
    • Budget
    • All Justice
    • Supreme Court
    • DOJ
    • Criminal Justice
    • All Elections
    • Campaigns
    • Midterms
    • The Influencer Series
    • All Policy
    • National Security
    • Guantanamo
    • Environment
    • Climate
    • Energy
    • Water Rights
    • Guns
    • Poverty
    • Health Care
    • Immigration
    • Trade
    • Civil Rights
    • Agriculture
    • Technology
    • Cybersecurity
    • All Nation & World
    • National
    • Regional
    • The East
    • The West
    • The Midwest
    • The South
    • World
    • Diplomacy
    • Latin America
    • Investigations
  • Podcasts
    • All Opinion
    • Political Cartoons

  • Our Newsrooms

You have viewed all your free articles this month

Subscribe

Or subscribe with your Google account and let Google manage your subscription.

Opinion

Commentary: Congress shouldn't pander with Social Security pay-out

The Kansas City Star

November 16, 2010 02:26 PM

U.S. House Democrats apparently are preparing to put the “lame” into the upcoming lame duck session with a piece of pure political pander. There is no justification for approving a $250, one-time payment to all Social Security recipients.

While those receiving Social Security point out that they haven’t had an inflation-adjusted increase since 2009, it must be noted that the last adjustment was made using record high energy prices as a basis. That created a 5.8 percent bump in benefits, an increase that even now still exceeds inflation for the last two years.

In fact, energy prices today are significantly lower than the level accounted for by the 2009 adjustment. Social Security, therefore, is paying out what recipients are owed.

Beyond basic fairness, the results of this month’s election imply that voters —including voters receiving Social Security — want Washington to cut government spending and reduce the federal deficit. It has become increasingly obvious that controlling government spending means Social Security reform. The United States can’t cut spending while handing out unjustified bonuses totaling $14 billion.

To read the complete editorial, visit www.kansascity.com.

Read Next

Opinion

This is not what Vladimir Putin wanted for Christmas

By Markos Kounalakis

December 20, 2018 05:12 PM

Orthodox Christian religious leaders worldwide are weakening an important institution that gave the Russian president outsize power and legitimacy.

KEEP READING

MORE OPINION

Opinion

The solution to the juvenile delinquency problem in our nation’s politics

December 18, 2018 06:00 AM

Opinion

High-flying U.S. car execs often crash when when they run into foreign laws

December 13, 2018 06:09 PM

Opinion

Putin wants to divide the West. Can Trump thwart his plan?

December 11, 2018 06:00 AM

Opinion

George H.W. Bush, Pearl Harbor and America’s other fallen

December 07, 2018 03:42 AM

Opinion

George H.W. Bush’s secret legacy: his little-known kind gestures to many

December 04, 2018 06:00 AM

Opinion

Nicaragua’s ‘House of Cards’ stars another corrupt and powerful couple

November 29, 2018 07:50 PM
Take Us With You

Real-time updates and all local stories you want right in the palm of your hand.

McClatchy Washington Bureau App

View Newsletters

Subscriptions
  • Newsletters
Learn More
  • Customer Service
  • Securely Share News Tips
  • Contact Us
Advertising
  • Advertise With Us
Copyright
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service