Keating Campaign Launches New Social Security Ad
Quincy, MASS. – On the eve of the 75th anniversary of Social Security, Bill Keating today reaffirmed his commitment to seniors by pledging to fight efforts to raise the retirement age. Keating is the only candidate in the race for the Massachusetts 10th Congressional district who is opposed to raising the retirement age of social security recipients.
“The Social Security Act is the most important anti-poverty program in history,” Keating said in renewing his pledge to fight social security benefit cuts. “When Franklin Roosevelt signed Social Security, more than half of all elderly American citizens lived in poverty. Today social security provides senior citizens with a reliable source of income, security and well being that must not be tampered with,” Keating added.
Rob O’Leary has publicly stated that he favors raising the retirement age for social security. Video of O’Leary’s statement in support of boosting the retirement age for Massachusetts seniors can be seen here:
The Social Security act was put into place to deal with the social problems created by the great depression. During the worst economic downturn since the 1930’s it is shocking to see that any candidate would support denying benefits to seniors.
“I remain firmly committed to the senior citizens who receive social security,” said Keating. “I refuse to deny seniors these crucial benefits by raising the retirement age. It’s a hardship for those who perform physically demanding work, those who suffer age discrimination in finding work, and those who care for loved ones. All Americans, not just a privileged few, have a right to live and retire with dignity.”
The Bill Keating campaign celebrated the 75th anniversary by releasing a new web ad. The ad can be viewed here:
###
Bill is going to collect $120,000 for a pension when he retires. Little bit of self-interest there Bill?
His pension is completely legal and as a DA he didn’t pass the law to set it. The SJC has also ruled that pensions constitute an implied contract and cannot be revoked or modified retroactively. He’s not the first to make out well on pension and I’ve never liked you picking on people like this. Either discuss the issues in this race or butt out.
Keating was a Senator when they made DAs group 5 retirement? I don’t know how you can assert that he wasn’t. It happened in 1996, I believe, well before he left the Senate in 1998.
<
p>Period.
I just meant DAs don’t get to set their own pension. I don’t know how he voted and apparently the vote was not enough to make Norfolk voters not elect him DA. Whatever – it’s the law now and I just don’t like billxi’s attitude.
Actually, there is no self interest. When you get a state pension, you don’t get social security. Even if you paid into the SS system…you just lose all those contributions.
<
p>And as you already know, Keating is donating his pension to a charity he founded to help kids who have been abused. All of it.
To That Story? I’m interested in reading it.
http://www.boston.com/news/loc…
I’ll stop bitching now.
something, but at reduced rate. (cf. the Windfall Elimination Provision and the SSOffsets which affect spouses:http://www.socialsecurity.gov/pubs/10007.html) And you still qualify for all Medicare benefits. And Christopher, for those of us who are not pleased with the Bulgers and Marty Meehans of the world ripping us off, it is most definitely an issue–though maybe not for you.
Some may get ss, he won’t. http://www.ssa.gov/pressoffice…
2/3 of 60K drops SS benefit to zero.
which does indeed affect the spousal benefit with the Windfall Elimination Provision which requires that a different formula be used for the SS benefit if one also receives a government pension. No one is denied a benefit if she/he has the quarters, but the benefit is reduced because a different formula is used. So if he has the minimum 40 quarters he will receive a monthly check, though reduced from what it would be otherwise.
I recommend this site at SS which explains both the Spousal Benefits Exclusion and the Windfall Elimination http://www.socialsecurity.gov/…
…for pension reform, but I’m not going to begrudge individual politicians the benefits which are legally theirs.
… also known as until the voters stop watching.
My understanding is that when SS was first enacted the age was older than life expectancy. Today with people not only living longer, but staying active longer it seems both fiscally sound and very practical to raise the age.
Chris, I see where you are coming from. But the age was raised from 65 to 67 already. Not every job is one you can keep doing into your 70s. Sitting at a desk is one thing, but those are not necessarily the people who will be relying most on SS for retirement income. The recent commission on reforming SS came up with dozens of things that could be addressed to make up the gap. Raising the retirement age is, in my mind, the most regressive.
There are various options to address the shortfall (when it occurs in 30 or so years), those who immediately leap to say raise the age are not the ones advocating for people with working class jobs…they seem more like advocates for those with incomes over $106,000 who pay no Social Security on income over that amount.
…getting rid of the cap on income levels that you mention. I’m also wondering whether there is anyway to categorize jobs such that certain careers can retire earlier than others.
My husband is a retired Union carpenter. At the time of his retirement, the average retiree collected only 19 pension checks. The solution is not to raise the retirement age IMO.
Does anyone my age believe you will see any SS in retirement? I do not.
<
p>Before I retire I fully expect to see:
A raise in the “Retirement” age
SS become “means” tested (if you have saved your whole life you do not need SS)
removal of the income “cap” without increasing of benefits
<
p>The reason you stop paying a $106k is because SS was supposed to be “you get out what you put in” and if you made 106k or 106million, you got the same benefits. If you raise the cap my guess is you do not raise the benefits for the person paying more… but I don’t think he will be getting any SS anyway.
<
p>Personally, I am saving like crazy to protect myself in retirement. SS is the biggest pyramid scheme out there.
O’Leary has on many occasions given long answers to how he feels on social security, and all the ways he thinks we can do something to fix the system, without raising the retirement age. I heard him doing so in Quincy just last week, at Mayor Koch’s cookout.
<
p>But because he won’t put his head in the sand, and say that it is totally off the table… even though we could be talking about people who haven’t retired yet, or aren’t close to retirement, or even started working yet, he gets blasted.
<
p>Don’t voters what a candidate who wants to actually fix a problem as opposed to just tell us all the reasons why we can’t fix it… or ways we can’t fix it?
<
p>It frustrates me so much.