GOP and White House agree to keep government open
October 27, 2015 6:12 AM   Subscribe

US political leaders have negotiated a budget deal with the White House that keeps the government funded through March of 2017. The bill will increase spending for domestic and defense programs. At the same time it will make a major change to the Social Security disability program. Under the agreement Social Security disability payments will move to a flat benefit at 125% of the poverty level, instead of a sliding scale based on pre-disability income. Conservatives and liberals have provided more detailed explanations.
posted by humanfont (16 comments total)

This post was deleted for the following reason: Hey, it's looking like some details here may not be accurate? Maybe a repost that's clearer will be better. -- taz



 
Congratulations Fox Newswatchers on SSD! You just voted yourselves poor!
posted by valkane at 6:22 AM on October 27, 2015 [7 favorites]


Under the agreement Social Security disability payments will move to a flat benefit at 125% of the poverty level, instead of a sliding scale based on pre-disability income.

They did it. I can't believe they fucking did it. They broke disability's back. They did it so easily and casually. Like a fucking bargaining chip in a poker game.

Holy shit. This is just, I can't even. The Tea Partyists are going to bemoan their leaders for giving in but they just got the crown fucking jewels of the last vestiges of welfare reform.

Land of the nothing's free. Home of the pay.
posted by Talez at 6:24 AM on October 27, 2015 [8 favorites]


That a budget deal to keep our govt open becomes a news item and worthy of posting on this site tells us how terrible things have become in governing our nation.
posted by Postroad at 6:24 AM on October 27, 2015 [1 favorite]


It's OK valkane, they'll just blame Obama for that.
posted by octothorpe at 6:25 AM on October 27, 2015 [2 favorites]


It's OK valkane, they'll just blame Obama for that.

Well, so will I. Of course the GOP wants to break SSDI--what's the point of being a liberal lame-duck president if you don't say "hell no, I'm going to veto that"? What happened to Obama standing tough for a clean vote on the debt ceiling? I'm glad we're getting sensible about the dumb sequestration thing, but this may be too high a price to pay.
posted by Pater Aletheias at 6:30 AM on October 27, 2015 [1 favorite]


Interesting in that this FPP links to two viewpoints: the "conservative" huge think-tank foundation, and the "liberal" homeless guy for the "more detailed explanations". I'm not sure what that signifies about the issue.
posted by HuronBob at 6:32 AM on October 27, 2015


I am speechless. Have any of these people tried living on SSD? It's fucking impossible even without cuts. You go through a meatgrinder of paperwork, office visits, disability determinations, usually failing to do some part of it right so you're thrust into utter poverty while you try again and again (or pay for a lawyer's help which takes even more money that you don't have), and then get practically nothing to live on. And then heaven help you if you ever try to get back into the working world.

It's an ugliness I can't even fathom, that they want to heap even more horror on disabled people, in addition to the humiliation and pain the current inhuman system poses.

And this is just a game to the psychopaths running our country. Let's bring the entire nation to the brink of financial ruin, just so we can chip away one more little bit of our decaying welfare apparatus. And it will just keep happening, and happening, because it works so well, because it lets politicians and pundits look serious, while people starve and die.
posted by mittens at 6:32 AM on October 27, 2015 [5 favorites]


How the wealthiest country in the history of the planet so consistently acts with the mindset that it's a pauper state and can't spare a dime for the needy, is so bewildering. The self-delusion is scary.

And the crazy part is that, up to and including the moment that government is put out of business and the very last penny in the economy is in the pocket of some über-wealthy plutocrat, people will still loudly blame liberals for their plight, so effective the right's propaganda machine has been.
posted by Thorzdad at 6:33 AM on October 27, 2015 [3 favorites]


Daft question here: Who defines the poverty level?

Could we set it as 30% of mean (not median) income?

Or by dividing (increase in total wealth this year) by (people in the country) and setting "poverty" at 50% of that?

Neither of those seem in any way unfair to me.

We do not take care of the poor and sick for economic reasons.

We do it because we are not monsters.
posted by Combat Wombat at 6:34 AM on October 27, 2015


...I mean, just to be clear, nobody's done anything yet? At most, this is a proposal at this point.
posted by Shmuel510 at 6:38 AM on October 27, 2015


The apocalyptic brinksmanship of the debt ceiling is how many republican darlings have made their careers in their heavily gerrymandered districts where the primary is the only barrier to office. Boehner and Obama seem to have worked this deal out, but I have some doubts about its passage.

Also, this is terrible for people who rely on SSI - I hope that it does indeed fail.
posted by codacorolla at 6:44 AM on October 27, 2015


Yeah, the last link begins with
UPDATE, 1250a Pacific, Tuesday: Please hop over to geordie's diary, for a summary of the draft bill in its current incarnation. The sordid change I discuss (okay, rant about) below is apparently NOT included in the bill right now. I trust the Rs and the Ds not one little bit to protect SSDI and disabled American workers. I still ask you to contact all of your elected officials tomorrow and tell them: NO cuts to SSDI are acceptable. Thank you, geordie, for doing the work! My panic consumed me.
posted by XMLicious at 6:45 AM on October 27, 2015 [2 favorites]


Hey, just wait until they get their hands on basic Social Security. Cat food for everyone over 65!
posted by valkane at 6:47 AM on October 27, 2015


And that update was made before this post happened, so did anyone RTFA?
posted by Huck500 at 6:49 AM on October 27, 2015 [1 favorite]


It's called the poverty level for a reason, and an extra 25% of poverty is pretty much still poverty.

(Especially when the official .gov definition of "poverty" is so jaw-droppingly low that I can't begin to imagine who on lives on that income.)
posted by wenestvedt at 6:52 AM on October 27, 2015


And the "conservatives" link—posted last week—is not a response to, let alone an explanation of, the proposal at hand.
posted by Shmuel510 at 6:54 AM on October 27, 2015


« Older But that's the way I like it baby I don't wanna...   |   I envy you, being a librarian. Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments