Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Rand Paul: Social Security retirement age may increase


By Matt DeLong and Aaron Blake

Sunday Rundown: Today on the Sunday talk shows

FOX NEWS SUNDAY - Paul: Social Security retirement age on the table

Kentucky Senate candidates Rand Paul (R) and Jack Conway (D) took part in a debate, Sunday moderated by host Chris Wallace. Paul said he would support his Kentucky colleague, Mitch McConnell, for Republican Senate leader and that he supports federal funding to fight drugs in rural parts of his states -- both issues on which he has hesitated. He also suggested that the Social Security retirement age might have to be raised for younger Americans. Asked why he wasn't talking more about his opponent during his campaign, Paul said: "We'll wait for him to catch up in the polls and then we may revert to him." Most polls show Paul with a lead.

Conway, the state's attorney general, defended the Democratic stimulus and health care bills, but said he wouldn't have voted for the bailouts and has never supported the cap and trade energy bill. Conway said he would extend all of the Bush tax cuts. "It's no time to be raising taxes," he said.


------

CBS: FACE THE NATION - Richardson to Dems: Stop complaining

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson (D) said Democrats need to "stop complaining and realize that we have a month to go" before the midterm elections. "We should stop firing at each other," Richardson said, adding that there are enough Republicans firing at Democrats. Gov. Ed Rendell (D-Pa.) predicted that Democrats will "definitely" retain control of the Senate in November and said his party has "a chance to keep the House." He warned Democratic voters who may be thinking about sitting out this election that Republicans have said they plan to issue subpoenas and "have one investigation after another."

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Conn.), representing Congress' left flank, said progressives are concerned that President Obama hasn't stood firmly enough on the side of the middle class and committed to a progressive agenda like President Franklin Delano Roosevelt did during the Great Depression with the New Deal. Nevertheless, Sanders said the president and the Democratic-controlled Congress have made "very significant accomplishments," including the health-care and financial overhuals, and the economic stimulus package.

------

CSPAN: NEWSMAKERS - Thune: GOP could use a 2012 candidate like me

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), who has recently stoked speculation about a potential presidential run in 2012, said he thinks there is room for a candidate like him in the race. "I think our country is looking for Reagan-esque, right-of-center leadership, someone who can in a hopeful way, inspire people to change the direction of this country," Thune said.

Addressing perhaps his biggest vulnerability in that campaign - his vote for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) bailout - Thune said the program's funds were misused by both the Bush and Obama administrations and said he has been among the leading voices calling for an end to the program. He said that he felt at the time that it was the right vote but declined to call the vote a "mistake."


------

CNN: STATE OF THE UNION - Cornyn predicts a GOP 'tsunami'

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), head of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, predicted a "tsunami" election in November, saying "the only question is how many seats we're going to pick up." His counterpart, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chair Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), denied that members of his party are trying to scare voters about GOP candidates such as Sharron Angle in Nevada and Christine O'Donnell in Delaware by focusing on their old comments, such as O'Donnell's admission that she once dabbled in witchcraft. He said it will be a problem for Republicans that their candidates are "outside of the mainstream."

Pakistani ambassador to the United States Husain Haqqani said his country "will take care of all terrorists on the Pakistan side of the border," but will do so on its own timeline. He said it is not a question of Pakistan being "unwilling or unable" to stamp out extremism within its borders, but rather a "question of terrain and geography." He added that in recent years, Pakistan has lost more soldiers fighting terrorism than any other country.

------

NBC: MEET THE PRESS

Off this week

By Matt DeLong and Aaron Blake  | October 3, 2010; 1:46 PM ET
Categories:  44 The Obama Presidency  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Ad of the Day: Texas governor's tarmac letter to Obama
Next: Joe Miller: 'There should not be' a federal minimum wage

Comments

Shouldn't we then also increase the retirement age for the Congressiona Pension program, and Federal Civil Service.

After all, they are also living longer.

Posted by: smi2le | October 4, 2010 9:13 PM | Report abuse

REWARD THE RICH, PUNISH THE POOR - VOTE REPUBLICAN!!!

Posted by: Bushwhacked1 | October 4, 2010 9:00 PM | Report abuse

Hasn't anyone noticed that G.W. Bush presided over one of the largest tax hikes ever? Social Security Payroll Tax has been going up yearly (the amount of income it is paid on, not the percentage).

First things first. If you want to keep the Bush tax cuts, eliminate his tax hikes!

And if you want to reduce social security benefits, start by eliminating the payroll tax which is used for general expenses, not social security... it is simply a cover for raising the tax rate of middle income earners by 7.5% above their nominal income tax rate. We pay 15% income + 7.5% payroll = 22.5% for general funding while rich people, despite their nominally high tax rate tend to pay only pay 17% after all their deductions, and only pay social security payroll tax on a vanishingly small part of their income if any.

If a separate social security tax were eliminated, andy any social security paid out of the general fund, then you could reasonably consider talking about reducing benefits.

Posted by: Don19 | October 4, 2010 7:04 PM | Report abuse

Hasn't anyone noticed that G.W. Bush presided over one of the largest tax hikes ever? Social Security Payroll Tax has been going up yearly (the amount of income it is paid on, not the percentage).

First things first. If you want to keep the Bush tax cuts, eliminate his tax hikes!

And if you want to reduce social security benefits, start by eliminating the payroll tax which is used for general expenses, not social security... it is simply a cover for raising the tax rate of middle income earners by 7.5% above their nominal income tax rate. We pay 15% income + 7.5% payroll = 22.5% for general funding while rich people, despite their nominally high tax rate tend to pay only pay 17% after all their deductions, and only pay social security payroll tax on a vanishingly small part of their income if any.

If a separate social security tax were eliminated, andy any social security paid out of the general fund, then you could reasonably consider talking about reducing benefits.

Posted by: Don19 | October 4, 2010 7:03 PM | Report abuse

If Congress is going to mess around with my promised Social Security benefits, then they should reimburse me for all the money they took out of my paychecks. I never asked for Social Security but I was forced to pay for it. If you force people to pay into something and then say you're going to keep their money, that's theft. It is not going to go over well with the public.

Posted by: Student_Of_Irony | October 4, 2010 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Several years ago, not even a Republican would have had the brass nuts to challenge a persons ability to acquire a Social Security assisted retirement. Now, almost all Republicans and some Democrats have climbed on the WALL STREET Solution to solving "THE PROBLEM."
I don't buy the idea that Social Security was killed by one president or another, but I do believe that inflation and a growing number of 60+ citizens have swamped the program. What I can't understand is the CAP on who contributes to Social Security. Why is it that everything over 250 K income is exempt from the Social Security tax?
It seems to me that there are too many exemptions for people making over 250 K above and beyond Social Security. The Tax code has become a country club play ground with out Reps and Senators joining in the romp. I disagree with the Tea Baggers on most things, but one thing that I agree with them on is that the people we've sent to congress in the past 50 years have become too cozy in their oak paneled offices and with their lobbyist friends.

Posted by: oren1956 | October 4, 2010 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Why would any sane American give Paul the time of the day with his fruitcake ideas?

Posted by: pkbishop1 | October 4, 2010 4:32 PM | Report abuse

Republicans loves to mess with Social Security. Ronald Reagan cut 60% from recipient of SS if they had paid into another government pension. Reagan ignored the fact that some paid SS in private industry and in the military. Republicans are mean to the bone and those who follow them are no different.

Posted by: truth1 | October 4, 2010 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Republicans loves to mess with Social Security. Ronald Reagan cut 60% from recipient of SS if they had paid into another government pension. Reagan ignored the fact that some paid SS in private industry and in the military. Republicans are mean to the bone and those who follow them are no different.

Posted by: truth1 | October 4, 2010 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Republicans loves to mess with Social Security. Ronald Reagan cut 60% from recipient of SS if they had paid into another government pension. Reagan ignored the fact that some paid SS in private industry and in the military. Republicans are mean to the bone and those who follow them are no different.

Posted by: truth1 | October 4, 2010 4:23 PM | Report abuse

With 85% of this country looking forward to social security one day.I think Rand Paul can foget about wonning a election based on taking social security from poor folk.Rand would do better if he was fighting to bring back jobs outsoure to China from the U.S.

Posted by: apez54 | October 4, 2010 4:11 PM | Report abuse

greatgran1: How can anyone live on this planet and be as uninformed as you about Social Security? SS was not a flawed program at all if your hero Ronald Reagan hadn't started robbing the SS fund to cover his tax cuts for the wealthy and the fund had been left to collect interest as it was set up to do then the SS fund would have money to fund it for a thousand years.You people blame the democrats when in fact they are the only party that tries to help you.The right gives Obama hell because he can't fix the disaster that Bush and the republican's handed him fast enough.After the past eight year catastrophe why would any thinking person want to hand power back to the irresponsible party that got us into this mess?Bush left Obama with two wars and a deficit that was through the roof an economy in the tank and job losses every month just to name a few.

Posted by: LDTRPT25 | October 4, 2010 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Every time he opens his yap I am shocked at what an idiot Rand Paul is. He's got the foreign policy knowledge of a garden slug, and frankly he doesn't understand aging or economics very well either. It's sad the people of Kentucky don't realize how stupid he makes them look.

Posted by: Nymous | October 4, 2010 12:46 PM | Report abuse

They also say benefit cuts for the young - then define that as 55! Even 50 is unnacceptable - it leaves no time to make up the difference. We have paid into it - either give me my due or pay back everthing I put in, with 7% interest compounded yearly. They better not screw with this - it will be ALL of their downfalls.

Posted by: Trout1 | October 4, 2010 11:58 AM | Report abuse

The republican party and its offshoot the tea-partiers are instruments of the super wealthy and work against the interests of the remainder of the population. However, the people who vote for them believe that they are doing themselves a service. The root of the whole thing is racism. Why hide behind good American values when what you really want is a return to the good old days when minorities were not given a voice in Government and important social affairs? Let's be wise and do the right things for Seniors who have already made their contributions and for the working class who provide commercial growth.

Posted by: fasm7700 | October 4, 2010 11:00 AM | Report abuse

Rand may be too honest for politics.

That said, we could use more like him in Congress.

Posted by: Benson | October 4, 2010 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Rand Paul deserves praise for his realism and forthrightness.

Unless our economy begins to grow at a very fast rate, we will need to adjust our spending, and that includes entitlements.

Posted by: junomoneta88 | October 4, 2010 10:24 AM | Report abuse

Jack Conway has flip flopped so many times on cap and trade, one doens't know what he really believes, except to follow to the letter Obama's far left agenda.
Paul realisitically knows at some point for Social Security for the young some adjustments have to be made.
The posters here who don't care are not dealing with reality. The young already feel that Social Security will not be there for them if some reforms are not made for them.
The Dems are so desparate at thie point they have to insult their base into voting. "Buck Up" Dems as Obama said.

Posted by: joanz3 | October 4, 2010 10:23 AM | Report abuse

Social security is going broke. The program was a flawed idea in the first place. Think about the serious money you would have, if allowed to keep that wasted money that went into this fund that the legislators stole for years. Someone has to be brave enough to tell the truth and I can guarantee you will not get the truth out of a cheesy greasy Democrats. Raising the age for younger workers is one thing they could do.
Look at the mess the Democrats have left us. They have had the WH less than two and Congress even longer. Our economy is in shambles. The wasted massive spending for special interests was embarrassing. The deficit is shameful. The healthcare takeover was the one that so outraged our family we will never be silent again.
If raising the age for receiving benefits for younger workers scares people, Then wait when these Democrats raise their taxes. Wait till they see what Obamacare is going to cost them. Boy will they have some reality then.

Posted by: greatgran1 | October 4, 2010 9:39 AM | Report abuse

If it's needed for the Democrats to "scare the voters" about candidates like O'Donnell and Angell, then there's something seriously wrong with the voters!

Posted by: thrh

________________________________________

You are correct. Candidates like O'Donnell and Angle need no help whatsoever in scaring the voters.

Posted by: WhateverHeSaid | October 4, 2010 8:09 AM | Report abuse

Raising the retirement age, huh? How many 50-65 year old people are now unemployed because of the age bias against hiring older workers? How many of the Republican members of the Chamber of Commerce will pledge to hire 50+ workers when they can get 20-50-year-olds for much less money? Just asking.

Posted by: MoPar8hd | October 4, 2010 8:03 AM | Report abuse

thrh - there has been something seriously wrong with the voters for quite a long time now. Otherwise we would not have had to endure the likes of GW Bush or everything that is going on now. Not that McCain was the way to go, but many of us saw right through Obama all the time and here we are. We have no legitimate choices now as literally no one, in spite of campaign rhetoric, gives a rat's patooty about most American voters. I shudder to think, not only about this year's election but the next and the next. The wealthy of the world own this country so don't kid yourself and they are not above using the likes of O'Donnell just to get the Repubs back in there and for no other use beyond that. Then, everyone will long for the good old days of the past two years. How soon we forget!

Posted by: nana1ellen | October 4, 2010 6:52 AM | Report abuse

If it's needed for the Democrats to "scare the voters" about candidates like O'Donnell and Angell, then there's something seriously wrong with the voters!

Posted by: thrh | October 3, 2010 10:45 PM | Report abuse

If it's needed for the Democrats to "scare the voters" about candidates like O'Donnell and Angell, then there's something seriously wrong with the voters!

Posted by: thrh | October 3, 2010 10:38 PM | Report abuse

How about we LOWER Randy-poo's retirement age to about, say, 13? Same as his IQ.

Posted by: thrh | October 3, 2010 10:31 PM | Report abuse

How about we LOWER Randy-poo's retirement age to about, say, 13? Same as his IQ.

Posted by: thrh | October 3, 2010 10:30 PM | Report abuse

How about we LOWER Randy-poo's retirement age to about, say, 13? Same as his IQ.

Posted by: thrh | October 3, 2010 10:29 PM | Report abuse


Raising the retirement age was also brought up by the Democrats this year because the unemployment rate is so high and less funds are going into the Social Security coffers.

I notice how the Journolistas try to spin Paul's statement to make it sound as though he's threatening Social Security for the young.

The Democrats have been talking about raising the age but it's amusing how the Journolistas try to make Paul the villain.

Posted by: janet8 | October 3, 2010 10:07 PM | Report abuse

Republican paymasters like T. Boone Pickens want massive big government subsidies for themselves, but tell the average Joe to suck it up and work longer.

You know, I work plenty hard. I don't want to work all my life and never get to enjoy my golden years just so some rich jerk wants an ever bigger slice of the pie.

Lower MY taxes. Lower MY retirement age.

Posted by: ShawnDavis1 | October 3, 2010 10:06 PM | Report abuse

hello everyone,im wholesale supplier online

Welcome to our website

===== http://www.shoes3.us/ =======

accept paypal or credit card and free shipping

We need your support and trust!!!

Dear friends, please temporarily stop your footsteps

To our website Walk around A look at

Maybe you'll find happiness in your sight shopping heaven and earth

You'll find our price is more suitable for you.

===== http://www.shoes3.us/ ========

Posted by: shoestrade01 | October 3, 2010 9:59 PM | Report abuse

Raising the S.S. retirement age?

This is such good news -- especially when U.S. corporations are firing anyone over 50 willy-nilly.

Earth to Rand Paul: We are human beings down here. What, exactly, are you?

Posted by: WhateverHeSaid | October 3, 2010 9:57 PM | Report abuse

''''''' http://www.yahcc.us '''''''''
The new update, a large hot ..


New era cap $9


EDHARDY BIKINI $ 16


Air jordan(1-24)shoes $30


Sunglasses Oakey,coach,gucci $12


Handbags(Coach l v f e n d i d&g) $30


Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $15


Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $30


Bikini (Ed hardy,polo) $18


FREE sHIPPING
'''''' http://www.yahcc.us ''''''


@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Posted by: fishse | October 3, 2010 9:48 PM | Report abuse

''''''' http://www.yahcc.us '''''''''
The new update, a large hot ..


New era cap $9


EDHARDY BIKINI $ 16


Air jordan(1-24)shoes $30


Sunglasses Oakey,coach,gucci $12


Handbags(Coach l v f e n d i d&g) $30


Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $15


Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $30


Bikini (Ed hardy,polo) $18


FREE sHIPPING
'''''' http://www.yahcc.us ''''''


@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Posted by: fishse | October 3, 2010 9:47 PM | Report abuse

Retirement programs of Federal workers and the generous pensions Congress has awarded themselves over the years are both, unlike Social Security, are unfunded mandates of the Federal government. My question for Mr. Paul is, "would he also agree to raising the retirement age for Federal workers and politicians to 70"?

Posted by: slim2 | October 3, 2010 8:38 PM | Report abuse

Earth to Post: Bernie Sanders is from Vermont; Joe Lieberman is the Indy from Connecticut. So which one are you referring to?

Posted by: threedy | October 3, 2010 8:06 PM | Report abuse

If they raise the age to collect social security can they please prosecute age discrimination? I know so many (especially in the hight tech area) who are over 50 and cannot find a job.

Posted by: alterego3 | October 3, 2010 6:30 PM | Report abuse

I missed Rand Pauls' comments. Did he insist that all the money raided from the Social Security Trust Fund (example: money removed to fund the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy) be replaced before the "new" retirement age was calculated?

I would think that only fair.

Posted by: shadowmagician | October 3, 2010 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Rand Paul didn't actually say he SUPPORTED federal funding, he just conceded there will always be a mix of federal and state and local involvement and he would like the focus to be more local than it is. He also said age for SS and Medicare may raise for the young, who have time to prepare for it, not for those already on it, who don't.

Posted by: sailingaway1 | October 3, 2010 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company