Top Republican: Raise Social Security's retirement age to 70

The Hill ^

[Sub-Driver]

Top Republican: Raise Social Security's retirement age to 70 By Michael O'Brien - 06/29/10 10:50 AM ET

A Republican-held Congress might look to raise the retirement age to 70, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) suggested Monday.

Boehner, the top Republican lawmaker in the House, said that raising the retirement age by five year, indexing benefits to the rate of inflation and means-testing benefits would make the massive entitlement program more solvent.

"We're all living a lot longer than anyone ever expected," Boehner said in a meeting with the editors of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. "And I think that raising the retirement age -- going out 20 years, so you're not affecting anyone close to retirement -- and eventually getting the retirement age to 70 is a step that needs to be taken."

The GOP leader said that Social Security was the most important entitlement to reform, though he also pledged that Republicans would bring legislation to the floor to repeal and replace the healthcare reforms passed earlier this year if the GOP wins back control of the House this fall.

But Boehner also floated several other reforms to Social Security, paired with raising the retirement age, to make it more solvent. Boehner said that benefits should be tied to increases in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) instead of wage inflation, and he suggested reducing or eliminating benefits to Americans with a "substantial non-Social Security income" while retired.

"We just need to be honest with people," he said. "I'm not suggesting it's going to be easy, but I think if we did those three things, you'd pretty well solve the problem."

Republican have made cutting spending and reforming entitlement programs a key part of their 2010 campaign message.

Watch the entirety of Boehner's explanation below:

[D-fendr]

Bush tried the best answer: Slowly convert it to a private investment fund.

[Hoodlum91]

Honestly, 70 is too low.

80 is the only way to make SS somewhat solvent again.

[RockinRight]

And was shot down by the Dems...they acted like he was literally going to feed old people dog food.

[DonaldC]

“Honestly, 70 is too low.

80 is the only way to make SS somewhat solvent again.”

Wonder what the job opportunities are for that age group.

[Frenchtown Dan]

I know where you are coming from.

I say kill S.S. now. The government should not be in the reitrement business, and it’s been used as a huge cash cow for anything and everything.

By the way, your son is not going to pay for whatever money I get from S.S., if I get anything at all. If he’s still in diapers, then in 20 years or so when he has a career, I’ll most likely be dead. More than likely he’ll be paying for your retirement.

[RockinRight]

I have basically the same idea...but would even add an FDIC-type insurance to the fund (as a carrot to get Democrat support).

[RockinRight]

Or do it at 70 but cut the benefit by 40%.

[Hoodlum91]

Walmart greeter?

SS wasn’t meant to be a retirement fund.

[CSM]

“means-testing benefits”

From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.

The exact same thing will need to happen in the “health care for all” fiasco. Death panels anyone?

[Notary Sojac]

Bill Clinton turned Newt inside out in 1995-96.

Yeah, he's a bright guy, but when it comes to being out front on a tough issue, he'll fold like a cheap suit.

[zeugma]

Bush tried the best answer: Slowly convert it to a private investment fund.

I like that idea, but I figure that everything we've had stolen from us thus far is just wasted money though. 

[zeugma]

The solution is gradual increase in the retirement age, as I noted upthread.

If by 'gradual' you mean one year for every two, that might work. Anything much slower is just not going to be enough to make a difference.

[Arizona Carolyn]

Well, my husband WAS 70 when he died........ so under this he would never have collected one dime of the money he paid in over all those years of working......

[omega4179]

No fn way. Companies are not hiring 58 year olds nevermind 60,65,68 year olds. Where are all these 65 year olds going to work?

[nathanbedford]

How many Republicans do you know at the courage to shut down the government to stop spending? How many succeeded in bringing spending under control? If you think that Newt was done in by Clinton, he was done in the same way that Sarah Palin was driven out of office in Alaska. Newt was driven out of office by a series of bogus ethics complaints and he was a largely abandoned by the Republicans who, sadly, acted true to form.

Gingrich enacted virtually all of his contract with America which was of course his conception. That conception changed the rules of the game and brought back the Republicans power. The breakdown of Republican resistance to spending began only with Newt's departure just as the real resistance to taxing began when Newt broke with George HW Bush over tax increases. The subject matter of this thread was the Republicans' ability to resist taxing and spending. By crafting The Contract with America Newt devised a way of getting around the shop worn but perennially effective Democrat arguments that the Republicans were putting grandma out on the ice and were consigning the poor to dumpster diving. He changed the game. There is no other Republican, Sarah Palin not excluded, who can play in the same league.

Bill Clinton with all his faults was a consummate politician. But so was Adolf Hitler. There is no one who could put Bill Clinton to flight as could Newt Gingrich, except Bill Clinton himself. Barak Obama possesses not half of the skills of Bill Clinton but he has been advanced beyond his competence because of his skin color. That aura has faded. The media can no longer immunize him from reality. But among the Republicans, Newt Gingrich can sting.

Gingrich did not fold like a cheap suit, a lot of Republicans ran for the weeds. The last 20 years without Gingrich has revealed the Republican Party to be the cheap suit. During the Gingrich era he put together a coalition which took back the House, enacted The Contract with America, balanced the budget, and impeached a scoundrel. What Republican today can you name who can fairly promise to match that record?

[Dr.Syn]

A deal is a deal.

When I was first forced into paying my earnings into the SS system it was with certain understandings as to when I would get it back. To change the age is akin to breaking a contract with no recourse.

It is not my fault that the Congress stole my money for the current budgetary spending and never put it into the SS TRUST FUND so that its earnings would grow it enough to pay for my retirement.

[Marie]

The fact of the matter is that *somebody* is going to have to touch that third rail. Social Security needs to be reformed. And whoever develops the stones to deal with this mess is going to be punished for it.

[logician2u]

It's good to know there's a discernible difference between the Democrats and the Republicans.

Democrats look for imaginative ways of raising taxes, especially on "the rich."

Republicans, OTOH, are always discovering new ways to cut the costs of gummint programs. They'd prefer that to raising taxes, even if it means sticking it to their own constituency, middle class Americans.

Neither party's leadership wants to do what needs to be done: eliminate the socialist programs that are dragging the country down.

[Mr. K]

bite mee ass wipe I am almost 60

[Melas]

Might be ok if there wasn’t a gray ceiling. Harder than hell to find a decent job after 55 or so.