Verified answer

Thank you for posting this question. I am embarrassed that Republicans were the majority to vote "no" on this. There's plenty of money that has not been used yet from the March 2009 spending bill. And the fact that Congress voted themselves a 2.9% raise in 2009 is appalling, (which by the way, my Republican representative voted against). I am a Republican and don't necessarily agree with entitlement programs, but our seniors have lived on and have depended on SS for many years, and many of them have no other source of retirement income. For Congress to say that consumer prices haven't risen, just shows you that they don't live in the real world. Have they ever been to a grocery store or a gas pump?

I'm with Vinny up there. Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them...

If all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does.

You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on

appropriations. The House of Representatives does.

You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country. I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound

reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

It's up to us to seperate the true public servants from the self servants in BOTH parties

I say lets vote in Social Security Seniors to the Congress and Senate, and vote no on all the politicans raises. Throw the bums out in November.

Not to argue, but this wasn't a cost of living increase. Cost of living increases are built into the SSN program. This was a "bonus", if you will, that some people in Congress proposed because the cost of living actually went down last year, so those on SSN were not going to get their accustomed bump. I can see both sides of this argument, but have to side with the fiscal conservatives on this one.

Yes, I do. It saddens me that the only reason people are coming together in "patriot" groups and other activist and anti-government groups is because we have a black President and a Democratic government yet Republicans are the ones who have been robbing and deceiving America while destroying it from the inside.

the super Senator Byrd from West Virginia is lifeless. So he won't be drawing something. in the event that they labored interior the deepest sector in the previous being elected to place of work and paid interior the considered necessary volume of quarters they are going to be eligible for Social protection. as quickly as a regulation that reward the congressmen is enacted it turns into written in stone. Your ranting against the gadget is like Don Quixote jousting on the wind mill. i'm uncertain I choose your figures yet i understand the spirit of what you assert is authentic. they could desire to be paying into Social protection like the rest people. the folk who're paying into the ordinary public workers Retirement gadget have a matching deal. yet you would be able to desire to remember with the PERS recipients that it truly is their Social protection and Pension rolled into one, and it would not even come on the fringe of equalling Social protection no longer to indicate a pension too. so as that they extraordinarily a lot screwed themselves. And in the event that they draw it out early they pay a whopping 30 p.c. penalty to the Feds and State. i understand, I cashed mine in in the previous I have been given divorced. The ex have been given maximum of it, yet it truly is yet another tale.

Yes, I say chuck out all 535 from BOTH parties and start over.

It was Senate that voted no.

Last I checked, half didn't make a whole.

How was it supposed to be paid for when the U.S. is broke?