New deficit plan still eyes Social Security trims
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
WASHINGTON (AP) — The co-chairmen of President Barack Obama’s deficit commission are sticking with politically explosive proposals to raise the Social Security retirement age and curb benefit increases in a revised plan to wrestle the deficit under control.
The new plan by Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson, to be publicly unveiled Wednesday, faces an uphill slog because of proposals to curb Social Security and Medicare costs, curtail a huge assortment of tax breaks like the deduction for mortgage interest and almost double the federal tax on a gallon of gas.
Though the ban appears unlikely to win enough bipartisan support from the panel to be approved, Bowles declared victory on Tuesday, saying that he and Simpson have at least succeeded in initiating an “adult conversation” about the political pain it will take to cut the deficit.
Bowles acknowledged the plan faces resistance from the 18 deficit commission members. Obama named the commission in hopes of bringing a deficit-fighting plan up for a vote in Congress this year, but it appears to be falling well short of the 14-vote bipartisan supermajority needed.
A new version of the plan, obtained by The Associated Press, makes mostly minor changes to a draft that whipped up enormous controversy when unveiled earlier this month. Some domestic spending cuts are modestly higher than previously proposed, and health care savings from overhauling the medical malpractice system would reap less than proposed earlier this month.
Unlike their original proposal, Bowles and Simpson stop short of calling for caps on medical malpractice awards. Instead they recommend changes in how awards are made.
But other proposals remain the same. Among them are a gradual increase in the Social Security retirement age to 68 by 2050 and 69 by 2075, using a less generous cost-of-living adjustment for the programs and increasing the cap on income subject to Social Security taxes.
The plan also retains a 15-cents-per-gallon increase on gasoline, a three-year freeze on federal worker pay and cutting 200,000 workers from the federal payroll through attrition.
The proposal obtained by the Associated Press was a draft that was still undergoing changes Tuesday evening.
— Eliminate congressional pet spending projects, known as “earmarks.”
— Reduce the corporate income tax rate to 28 percent from 35 percent, and stop taxing the overseas profits of U.S.-based multinational corporations.
— Overhaul individual income taxes and corporate taxes. Gives Congress the choice of reducing the top rate to as low as 23 percent and no higher than 29 percent. The lower the rate, the fewer the tax credits and deductions available to taxpayers.
Under one scenario proposed by Bowles and Simpson, taxpayers would face three tax brackets of 12 percent, 21 percent and 28 percent. Taxpayers would still be able to claim an earned income tax credit and child tax credit as well as all standard deductions and exemptions. Capital gains and dividends would be taxed at ordinary income tax rates. Taxpayers could claim a mortgage interest deduction up to $500,000 and only on their primary residence.
If Congress does not undertake a comprehensive overhaul of the tax system by 2013, the plan calls for a “fail-safe” provision that would trigger across-the-board reductions in tax breaks, designed to raise revenue by $80 billion in 2015 and $180 billion in 2020.
Bowles was White House chief of staff when former President Bill Clinton negotiated a balanced budget plan in 1997; Simpson is a former GOP senator from Wyoming,
Only Bowles and Simpson are guaranteed to support the plan when the panel votes. None of the 12 House members and senators named by Obama have committed to the proposals, though Bowles and Simpson could pick up support from nonelected deficit hawks — like Democrat Alice Rivlin — who won’t have to defend themselves to voters.
“I don’t know if we’re going to get two votes or five votes or 10 votes or 14 votes,” Bowles told reporters. “There are enough reasons to vote ’no’ in this plan for anybody to vote ’no’.”
A supermajority of 14 of the 18 panel members would have to approve recommendations for a possible vote in the lame duck session of Congress. That seems out of reach, but Bowles says it’s just as important to have jump-started a national debate on what it’ll really take to bring the deficit under control.
“Our goal in this whole process has been really simple,” Bowles said. “It’s basically been to start an adult conversation here in Washington about the dangers of this debt and the deficits we are running.”
Added Bowles: “The era of deficit denial in Washington is over.”
More like this story
Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.
Please review our Policies and Procedures before registering or commenting