This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2013, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
Social Security has not contributed one dime to the national debt, yet President Barack Obama is considering cutting benefits in exchange for the wealthy elite doing what they've been avoiding for many years — pay their fair share of taxes. This is wrong.
For millions of seniors, especially those who live hand to mouth, it means cutting back or going without basic necessities, while life for the wealthy elite will remain opulent and virtually unchanged.
As explained in the recent New York Times editorial "Social Security, Present and Future," Social Security is solvent for the next 20 years but then has a shortfall. This can be solved by:
1. Raising the wage level subject to the Social Security payroll tax from the current $113,700 to $200,000;
2. Reducing benefits for upper-income recipients; and
3. Increasing the current 6.2 percent payroll tax by 1 percent, phased in over the next 20 years.
Except for upper-income recipients who don't rely on Social Security, these changes will maintain current benefits.
Obama campaigned in support of building a strong middle class and helping the less fortunate. A proposal to cut Social Security benefits would break that promise and betray the American people.
We expect better.
Andrew Kramer
Ivins