How many times can the middle class be the “screw-ee” yet still vote for the “screw-er”?

Well, I normally don’t post on domestic politics, but the President’s new “progressive” social security plan is just too incredible to pass up. Both Paul Krugman's op-ed and Political Animal provide a good summary and discussion of the proposed canard policy. Essentially, the President attempted to repackage his social security plan as a progressive step to increase benefits to lower income earners while increasing the amount contributed by the wealthy (my, this sounds an awful lot like wealth redistribution--isn't this exactly the kind of policy Republicans quickly jump all over and lable "communist" when proposed by Democrats??). But it in fact would accomplish neither of these as Krugman notes (my emphasis):

"In fact, it's a plan to slash middle-class benefits; the wealthy would barely feel a thing. Under current law, low-wage workers receive Social Security benefits equal to 49 percent of their wages before retirement. Under the Bush scheme, that wouldn't change. So benefits for the poor would be maintained, not increased.

The administration and its apologists emphasize the fact that under the Bush plan, workers earning higher wages would face cuts, and they talk as if that makes it a plan that takes from the rich and gives to the poor. But the rich wouldn't feel any pain, because people with high incomes don't depend on Social Security benefits.

The average worker - average pay now is $37,000 - retiring in 2075 would face a cut equal to 10 percent of pre-retirement income. Workers earning 60 percent more than average, the equivalent of $58,000 today, would see benefit cuts equal to almost 13 percent of their income before retirement."

So, obviously the President has proposed this package because members of the middle class don't vote for him anyway and he is trying to pander to the poor. Right? RIGHT????!!!

Apparently not. Here are the exit polls from November’s election broken down by voter income (the number in parentheses represents the percentage of voters in a particular income bracket):

Under $15,000 (8%): 36%

$15-30,000 (15%): 42%

$30-50,000 (22%): 49%

$50-75,000 (23%): 56%

$75-100,000 (14%): 55%

So what does this tell us? Well for starters, the two largest income brackets, which combine to make up 45% of voters—essentially the most important group—voted 49% and 56% respectively for Bush. Those middle income earners need to wake up and understand how the President's policies (especially this one) actually affect their interests. Stop buying into all the bells and whistles and start learning the facts.

Now, I don’t know about you, but the people I know making between $30,000 and $75,000 are middle class, and they certainly are not “higher earners” as the administration has labeled them. Are they higher relative to those making under $20,000? Well by definition, yes. But this isn’t about relative income, but rather one’s absolute income, their expenses, and their ability to support a family and be able to retire comfortably (the President is supposed to be for stronger families I believe, and unfortunately stronger families cost more). This would be perfectly fine if one's expenses decreased as their income increased. But this certianly does not happen. If you earn $45,000/year when you are young but eventually make $70,000/year over the course of your adult life you certainly have greater monetary resources. However, if over your lifetime you have three children, buy a bigger house, pay for college, clothe and feed those three children (because remember, family is important), and essentially try to save on your own for retirement your expenses essentially explode and that $70,000 probably feels a like a whole lot less than the $45,000 did. So it makes absoluately no sense to treat these individuals as if they are "higher income earners". Given this I can see why so many middle income voters decided to cast their ballots for President Bush. No really, I can....

I will be following this story, as should you....

Filed as: Politics, Social Security, President Bush, Middle Class