Talk About Platner’s Other Perversions and Creepiness; Leave His VA Stuff Out of...
Maine Führer: Graham Platner Wins Dem Primary
So Long, Nancy Mace
Platner Is No Nazi, but Hegseth on D-Day Is; We Get a Lesson...
When Leadership Loses Its Moral Compass
Our Informational World Is Getting Smaller
Kristen Welker Insults President Trump With 'No Evidence' Guff
An Obama-Era Border Crosser
More Money Won’t Fix Our Schools. Mississippi Data Proves It.
College Grads Hurt by H-1B Visas
Fight Night at 1600: The Outrage Industry Meets the Octagon
June Belongs to the Nuclear Family, Not LGBTQ Activists
Sometimes Justice Does Prevail
Karmelo Anthony Has Just Been Handed His Sentence
NJ Moves to Criminalize Interference With Abortion and 'Gender-Affirming Care' Procedures
OPINION

Buying the Votes of Senior Citizens

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
Buying the Votes of Senior Citizens

It's hard to instill confidence in the U.S. economy when Washington keeps finding new and creative ways to spend money it doesn't have.

Take President Obama's proposal to send additional $250 checks to Social Security recipients -- on top of the $250 checks they already received as part of the president's $787 billion economic stimulus package.

Advertisement

Because seniors don't need a cost-of-living increase, the president wants to give them a bonus. Don't even try to follow the logic. You can't find it.

Going Rogue by Sarah Palin FREE

Last week, the Obama administration announced that for the first time since automatic Social Security cost-of-living increases were instituted in 1975, there will be no cost-of-living increase in 2010 because the cost of living declined in the period used to calculate the payment.

As it turns out, seniors got a too-big cost-of-living adjustment -- 5.8 percent -- for 2009. So that January adjustment was like a raise of about 4 percent above inflation. Hence, there is no justification for a 2010 cost-of-living increase.

Except: the D.C. Beltway abhors a spending vacuum -- at least for a demographic with high voter turnout. So Obama proposed giving Social Security and disability recipients, as well as veterans, an additional $250 "to help them make it through these difficult times." The cost: $13 billion to $14 billion.

Where are Republicans on this? For all their talk of fiscal responsibility, the GOP leaders have an uncanny affinity toward any plan that throws tax dollars at elderly voters, whether they need the money or not.

Of course, there's a twist that is supposed to show Republicans in a cleaner light. GOP House leader John Boehner wants to fund the $250 checks for 57 million recipients by spooning the money out of the pot of unused stimulus money. The Obama administration, Boehner explained in the Washington Post, "supports borrowing the money needed to fund these payments." For his part, Boehner would siphon the billions needed to bankroll this bonanza from Obama's pot of borrowed money.

Advertisement

Now you know how the fiscal year that just ended produced a record $1.4 trillion federal deficit. Both parties overspend with abandon -- and they'll keep on doing so as long as they can concoct the thinnest pretext to blame the other party.

Of course the AARP is on board. A press release praised "$250 in economic relief to millions of seniors who count on Social Security to pay their bills" -- as if the COLA did not more than make up for any inflation.

Said Obama: "We must act on behalf of those hardest hit by this recession." But that would be the unemployed, not the retired.

"In the midst of a recession, when we are appropriately worried about unemployment and underemployment, we can't forget about seniors who are also hurting," Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., told the Washington Post. What does that even mean?

It means everyone has a hand out.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement