Yes, according to the latest Gallup Poll.
Texas Gov. and presidential candidate Rick Perry’s comments on Social Security, which include calling it a “Ponzi scheme,” appear to be a non-issue for most Republicans. However, they could cost him support with independents should he ultimately win the 2012 Republican presidential nomination. As many Republicans say they are more likely to vote for Perry for president because of his views on Social Security as say they are less likely — 19% each. Among independents, 12% are more likely to vote for him and 32% less likely.
These results are from a Sept. 13-14 USA Today/Gallup poll, conducted less than a week after Perry made his comments about Social Security during the Sept. 9 Republican presidential debate — repeating something that appears in his book “Fed Up,” published last year. Perry’s chief rival for the Republican presidential nomination, Mitt Romney, has subsequently jumped on the issue as a way to paint Perry as out of touch with mainstream views and unelectable.
In fact, Perry’s statements on Social Security are more likely to harm his campaign indirectly by weakening his perceived viability than they are to turn off Republicans who disagree with his views. In contrast to the 19% of Republicans who say they would personally be less likely to support Perry over his Social Security views, 37% believe those views would hurt his chances of being elected president if he were the GOP nominee. Just 17% say they will help his chances.
I think most American voters understand how current social security recipients are not drawing upon funds that they paid into the system. They realize it is the young folks who are having money withdrawn form their pay checks that is funding their retirement.
But……social security has been a successful program and Texas Governor Rick Perry may do OK with Republicans in a primary election but will struggle in a general election unless he clarifies his remarks.
President Obama and his media meisters will try to scare senior citizens (who vote in great numbers) into thinking that Perry will end Social Security. Perry and the Republicans cannot allow this to happen.
Independents tilt even more strongly toward perceiving the issue hurts rather than helps Perry’s electability, 40% vs. 11%.
The majority of Republicans DO want to preserve Social Security.
The chart:So, what does this all mean?
Rick Perry will “walk back” his comments on social security and develop a Paul Ryan type plan to “save” the system. If Perry does not, he will be attacked unmercifully by Mitt Romney in Florida where there are many social security recipients who will vote in the early GOP primary election. Note this poll on Republicans is early without the benefit of a negative Romney media campaign.
Perry will not have to worry about the Democrats spinning his statements on Social Security because he will not be the GOP nominee.
The latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll has some very stark findings for budget hawks who want to tackle America’s mounting deficit.
Less than a quarter of Americans support making significant cuts to Social Security or Medicare to tackle the country’s mounting deficit, according to a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, illustrating the challenge facing lawmakers who want voter buy-in to alter entitlement programs.
In the poll, Americans across all age groups and ideologies said by large margins that it was “unacceptable” to make significant cuts in entitlement programs in order to reduce the federal deficit. Even tea party supporters, by a nearly 2-to-1 margin, declared significant cuts to Social Security “unacceptable.”
At the same time, a majority supported two specific measures that lawmakers might employ to shore up the shaky finances of the main entitlement programs.
More than 60% of poll respondents supported reducing Social Security and Medicare payments to wealthier Americans. And more than half favored bumping the retirement age to 69 by 2075. The age to receive full benefits is 66 now and is scheduled to rise to 67 in 2027.
Depending on how they are structured, those two changes could eliminate as much as 60% of Social Security’s underfunding, according to experts. Support for the two ideas in the poll is “impressive,” said Chuck Blahous, one of the program’s public trustees and a former Bush administration official. “I wonder if [public] receptivity is increasing.”
The poll comes as Republican lawmakers, many elected on promises to slash federal spending, have focused mostly so far on cuts to non-defense, discretionary programs. But many political leaders say meaningful deficit reduction cannot be accomplished without making changes to entitlement programs.
Here is a graphic representation of the poll:
Of course, Americans don’t want the bad news and they certainly don’t want to cut their own entitlements. But something will have to be done if we want to reduce the debt we have to foreign nations and to spur economic activity. A bankrupt nation beholden to foreign investors certainly will not pay out ANY benefits.
Means testing is fine and a modest increase in the retirement age is OK. This can be done relatively easily and should be done immediately. If this takes care of 60 per cent of the problem in future years, then the GOP controlled House can move on to other budget cutting issues. 60 per cent is a start – even 40 per cent is good.
Naturally, the Democrats will demonize the Republicans to senior citizens but modest changes now and quickly will force President Obama to act either in a fiscally responsible manner or not.
Political Cartoon by Michael RamirezAnd, the Obama Administration is INCREASING spending while insolvency looms for social security and medicare?
Even as Congress hunted for ways to finance a major expansion of health insurance coverage, the Obama administration reported Tuesday that the financial condition of the two largest federal benefit programs, Medicare and Social Security, had deteriorated, in part because of the recession.
As a result, the administration said, the Medicare fund that pays hospital bills for older Americans is expected to run out of money in 2017, two years sooner than projected last year. The Social Security trust fund will be exhausted in 2037, four years earlier than predicted, it said.
Spending on Social Security and Medicare totaled more than $1 trillion last year, accounting for more than one-third of the federal budget.
Does anyone REALLY think that the United States can afford universal health care coverage and Obamacare? Hell, America cannot afford the system we have now.
Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama D-Ill., speaks to senior citizens, Friday, June 13, 2008, in Columbus, Ohio, as his wife Michelle Obama looks on
If anyone believes that Barack Obama as President and the Democrat controlled Congress would limit Social Security payroll taxes to increase for taxpayers ONLY making more than $250,000 a year then Flap has a New York bridge to sell you.
Democrat Barack Obama would apply the Social Security payroll tax to all annual incomes above $250,000, which he says would affect the wealthiest 3 percent of Americans.
The payroll tax is now applied to all income up to $102,000 a year, which covers the entire amount for most Americans. Under Obama’s plan, the tax would not apply to incomes between that amount and $250,000. But all annual income above the quarter-million-dollar amount would be taxed under his plan.
1. There are insufficent number of “BALLERS” to exact the amount of money to make Social Security solvent.
2. Most of these taxpayers faced with increasing taxes would divert their income stream to non-earned income compensation which would NOT be subject to the increased taxation.
This is a prime example of the consistent Democrat age and social class pandering act.
Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose – The more things change, the more they stay the same.