Quick Fact: Rove claims proposed $250 checks intended to pacify seniors "angry about Medicare cuts that the administration's proposing"
Fox News contributor Karl Rove claimed that an Obama administration proposal to send $250 checks to senior citizens was spurred because seniors are "angry about Medicare cuts that the administration's proposing." In fact, the Obama administration has stated that the checks are a response to the lack of a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) for Social Security in 2010.
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
From the December 8 edition of Fox News' Happening Now:
ROVE: Well, look, the economy is going to recover. The question is, is it gonna -- are the things that we do going to retard its recovery or speed up its recovery? Saying we're gonna give people money to retrofit their homes for energy efficiency, or we're gonna give them money if they buy an energy-efficient appliance, or we're gonna give $250 to every senior because they're angry about Medicare cuts that the administration's proposing -- those things will not hasten the day when Americans go back to work.
Fact: Proposed checks to Social Security beneficiaries intended to offset lack of COLA increase
As President Obama explained during a town hall meeting in New Orleans, the one-time payment of $250 to seniors and others on a "fixed income" would roughly offset the absence of a COLA increase to their benefits under Social Security. From his remarks:
OBAMA: Well, first of all, let me point out that under the formula Social Security would not see a COLA this year, an automatic COLA increase because we've actually had deflation. Right? Costs have gone six percent. But because of the hardships that folks on fixed income have still experienced, I've been supportive of the idea that a one-time $250 payment to seniors would be an appropriate approach which would approximate -- would come out to about 1.8 percent increase. Okay. So that just deals with the issue of what's going on with Social Security. [Town hall, 10/15/2009]
Indeed, CNNMoney.com reported on October 15 that "There will be no cost-of-living increase for 57 million Social Security beneficiaries next year because consumer prices have fallen," adding, "It marks the first time that Social Security benefits have not been increased year over year since the cost-of-living adjustment was put into effect in 1975." The article further reported:
To help counterbalance the hit, President Obama is calling on Congress to send another $250 relief payment to seniors and other Americans to stem the economic strain.
"Even as we seek to bring about recovery, we must act on behalf of those hardest hit by this recession," Obama said in a statement Wednesday. "That is why I am announcing my support for an additional $250 in emergency recovery assistance to seniors, veterans, and people with disabilities to help them make it through these difficult times."
BTW, my parents and grandmother [97 on January 2] will not get increases this year. They aren't complaining. They understand the situation. They will enjoy the $250. When one lives on a fixed income, every little bit helps.
TARP, Halliburton, Cash for Clunkers (Auto Industry), Bank Bailout, Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac, AIG, Bear Stearns ...
There seems to be a whole lot of cherry picking going on.
Actually, if you are a conservative then you understand that yes, we SHOULD operate like that. To be conservative is to adhere to tradition and in THIS country, the tradition is to care for those less fortunate. Guess you missed that.
And, if we had National Health Care like every other civilized country in the world, your friend and I wouldn't have to worry about getting hit with a major medical expense.
And I am also supportive of caring for those less fortunate, I just don't need government to come in and take my money to do it.
More whining. So, in your deranged scenario, someone with medical bills they can't pay or need money for food/shelter should go door to door asking for help or sit on a street corner selling pencils.
Thanks for caring.
I don't believe you.
j / k
They probably got over-rewarded this past year because of that badly-weighted COLA and were to get underrewarded this coming year. It's not really an option to take back some of that extra money that they got last year or explain to them how they got too much money, so the only option available is to give them some compensation for the lack of a COLA this year.
It's fair. Not fair to everyone, but it's the fairest thing that can be done at this point in time.
What's not fair is me falling off my chair laughing at that post of yours and nearly breaking my neck. You are a gem Sue, you really are!
LOL!!
I never said we're giving them more this year because we gave them too much last year, but yeah, that's about it - because they got so much last year, and because they have become accustomed to getting extra each year, they're getting a bonus this year too.
I never said I approved of it, but simply was explaining it to you.
Sorry it was beyond your capability to understand.
benefactor of the month? You sound like Limbaugh yourself.
Power bill up 7%
auto insurance up 5%
food up 4% every 3 months
telephone up 4%
cable ,if they can afford it is up 4%
personal and property tax up 5%
medical copays up 5%
natural gas up 8%
Add all this up and WHO is the poorer this economy ?