Fox & Friends distorts news on Social Security benefits to suggest "Washington waging a war against seniors"
On Fox News, Steve Doocy asked whether the fact that "for the first time since 1975, there will be no COLA -- no cost-of-living increase -- for Social Security recipients" indicated that "Washington [is] waging a war against seniors," continuing Fox & Friends' pattern of repeatedly fearmongering about how health care reform will harm senior citizens. In fact, the Social Security Administration has used the same formula to index benefits to inflation since the 1970s, and although 2009 reportedly marks the first time the formula will translate into no cost-of-living increase, the Obama administration is urging Congress to provide seniors with tax rebates that are equal to a cost-of-living adjustment, as the hosts of Fox & Friends themselves reported.
Doocy suggests absence of increase in benefits is part of Washington's "war against seniors"
From the October 15 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:
DOOCY: And today we know, for the first time since 1975, there will be no COLA -- no cost-of-living increase -- for Social Security recipients. So is Washington waging a war against seniors?
Michelle Malkin, you're listening to Robert Rubin [sic] and what is going on in Washington. What up with that?
Doocy undermined by facts: Same formula used to calculate annual benefits since 1975
Social Security Administration has tied benefits to Consumer Price Index (CPI) every year since 1975. According to the Social Security Administration, "Since 1975, Social Security's general benefit increases have been based on increases in the cost of living, as measured by the Consumer Price Index. We call such increases Cost-Of-Living Adjustments, or COLAs."
SSA: "[B]enefits will not automatically increase in 2010 as there was no increase in the Consumer Price Index ... from the third quarter of 2008 to the third quarter of 2009." The cost-of-living adjustment for Social Security benefits is calculated by comparing third-quarter CPI with that of the previous year. Third-quarter CPI for 2009 was 211.001, down from the third-quarter CPI for 2008 of 215.495. Referring to changes to Social Security for 2010, the Social Security Administration stated that "benefits will not automatically increase in 2010 as there was no increase in the Consumer Price Index (CPI-W) from the third quarter of 2008 to the third quarter of 2009."
Wash. Post: 2009 marks "first time that the federal formula used since" 1975 "will translate into no increase at all." An October 15 Washington Post article headlined, "Stagnant prices prevent Social Security increase," reported:
An increase in benefit checks each January has been a yearly ritual since the mid-1970s, when the government moved to ensure that its subsidies to retirees, pension recipients and others who receive Social Security benefits kept pace with inflation. Thursday's announcement by the Labor Department will mark the first time that the federal formula used since then, which is tied to the consumer price index, will translate into no increase at all. That is because consumer prices have remained stagnant in the weak economy -- a sharp reversal from this past year, when Social Security checks grew by 5.8 percent, an unusually large amount.
Obama supports $250 payments to seniors -- the equivalent of a 2 percent increase. On October 14, President Obama announced support for $250 in recovery checks for 49 million Social Security beneficiaries, which the administration estimated would be the equivalent to a 2 percent increase in benefits. Indeed, during the discussion of a purported "war against seniors," Fox & Friends noted Obama's support for the payments, and co-host Gretchen Carlson stated, "I hate to be the political cynic, but I am wondering if in fact this stimulus plan for seniors is a way to coddle them back into liking Obama's health care reform plan, since by large numbers, they are the ones who oppose it."
Fox & Friends has repeatedly engaged in egregious fearmongering about the impact of health care reform on seniors
Death panels, rationing, other misinformation finds a home on Fox & Friends. Fox & Friends has previously advanced a bonanza of health care reform misinformation, including the falsehood that the bill requires the elderly to go before a "death panel," the falsehood that the House bill would force people into a "government-designed plan," the claim that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) called health care reform opponents "un-American," the suggestion that a section of the bill that would provide Medicare reimbursement to doctors for end-of-life counseling would create "end-of-life consultants" other than doctors consulting with families, and the prediction that the bill would create a system of rationing that would result in the disappearance of medical procedures such as dialysis for the elderly.
This is all about controlling the vote in 2010.
Support us, says Obama, or we'll kill you.
Like my hipster lingo? Let me know and I'll unleash all kinds of super-cool words your way.
Your statement, if not sarcasm, is not only stupid, it is woefully inaccurate.
BTW, I know this is a cheap shot, but Gretchen Carlson is fat. Before any on Fox News takes another swipe at Michele Obama's arms, they should take a look at Gretchen's 'guns'.
If the CPI didn't increase, then there is no reason to increase the Social Security benefits. Does it have to increase every year?
Wasn't it Bush and the Republicans that wanted to get rid of Social Security?
And No, the Republicans don't want to get rid of SS, they just wanted to privatize it.
And, yes, the Republican Club DOES want to get rid of SS . . . privatizing it would destroy it.
Kind of like the health care.
Bush's SS proposal was a money hole:
"The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) has estimated the transition costs for private accounts to be $4.9 trillion through 2028, and it reported on March 24 that 'Private accounts, unless financed by contemporaneous benefit reductions or tax increases, entail trillions of dollars of borrowing.' The burden of paying these transition costs will fall on all Americans, not just those who opt for private accounts."
Contrast this to the Democratic health care plan being debated now:
"WASHINGTON - Health care legislation drafted by a key Senate committee would expand coverage to 94 percent of all eligible Americans at a 10-year cost of $829 billion, congressional budget experts said Wednesday, a preliminary estimate likely to power the measure past a major hurdle within days.
The Congressional Budget Office added that the measure would reduce federal deficits by $81 billion over a decade and probably lead to continued reductions in federal budget deficits" in the years beyond"
Exactly.
And what will you hear in response to you shooting down his argument?
Crickets.
I actually agree with the health care reform and disagree with the SS reform that was proposed.
Can you read? No one said you thought privatization was a good idea. Strawman argument.
Oh, and by the way, you are just diverting the topic thread again as this has nothing to do with privatizing SS. So I guess my response to you was feeding the troll. Sorry about that.
What he said was, and I quote, "If you liked what you had going you wouldn't have to change anything."
So yes, Bruce did say that it wouldn't change anything for people who choose not to opt out of SS. He said exactly that. How did you possibly miss that?
I didn't bring up privatizing SS, so no, I didn't derail the thread. I tried, and succeeded, in debunking his argument.
But yeah, your personal attack was an attempt to derail the thread. Your lie about what Bruce actually said was an attempt to do that too!
So, your fake apology is actually an obvious admission that it's exactly what you were trying to doo, derail the thread!!! You aren't fooling anyone.
That's right, it was RightON himself, with this statement in this posting.
"And No, the Republicans don't want to get rid of SS, they just wanted to privatize it."
Just crazy! I swear.
He's figured out what a thinking, educated person knows - that despite the fact that the CPI hasn't shown an increase, that measure doesn't adequately reflect the costs of being a senior citizen in our nation. As such, next year it will cost them more to survive despite the fact that the CPI stayed fairly flat.
There is a good argument to be made that for senior citizens, gas costs shouldn't be weighed so heavily and their cost for medical insurance co-pays and drugs should count more heavily.
Just because the CPI didn't go up doesn't mean that seniors' cost of living hasn't gone up. It has. That's why Obama is offering a $250 one time bonus - to make up for the fact that the CPI isn't great at mapping the costs of seniors. It's a generic consumer price list, and is not aimed for an older consumer.
"On the December 14 edition of FOX News' Special Report with Brit Hume, the "FOX All-Star" panelists agreed that Social Security's annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) is ripe for a cut, since the increase is indexed to wages rather than to actual cost of living, and wages generally increase faster than the cost of living. But this is incorrect. Social Security COLAs are tied to inflation -- that is, to increases in the actual cost of living. The wage index is used only to calculate a recipient's initial benefit level upon entering the program."
Thanks, Media Matters.
"But to make the sensational claim that Emanuel says health care should not be extended to the disabled is a gross distortion of his position, lifted out of context from an academic paper in which he poses philosophical ideas but doesn't necessary endorse them. Emanuel's hefty medical record also counts for something, as well his unequivocal public position against euthanasia and doctor-assisted suicide. We rule Bachmann's statement False."
I've known that it's a lie since August when Politifact debunked it.
How come you don't know this same, easily-accessible fact? Why don't you go to a source like Politifact.com or Factcheck.org before you come here and try to educate us, you uneducated fool?
Betsy McCaughey and Michelle Bachmann have been lying to you. And you lap it up like a kitty. It's sad.