I have read many articles about Republican plans to cut Social Security, but I thought they would happen down the road, if at all.  It turns out that cuts to Social Security are in the works for this year – and they will affect people who are currently on Social Security.

I was reading the Time Goes By blog which is written by a retiree who worked for many years as a journalist.  I think she goes by the name “Crabby Old Lady”.

Here is some of the post:

The House budget for fiscal year 2011, passed in the wee hours of Saturday morning, calls for about a $1.7 billion cut to Social Security. But wait.

If you have been following Time Goes By posts about the program over the years, you know that Social Security is self-funded, including administrative costs. So what gives? How come Congress can cut those administrative costs?

Here is how: Social Security and SSI benefits are mandatory spending, meaning they are authorized by permanent law. They can be changed under certain circumstances, but that is not what is at risk right now.

Administrative costs, which have remained at about one percent of revenue for many years while providing excellent service, are discretionary spending. This means they are subject to the annual appropriations process (the budget) and Congress can change the amount every year affecting the number of employees and therefore, level of service.

Right now, because the government has lacked a budget for FY2011, administrative costs are frozen at 2010 levels – $11.5 billion – and the House budget cut of $1.7 billion, passed over the weekend, would leave only $9.8 billion.

The National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM), in a 18 February letter to Congress, pointed out what this cut means to the program:

“It means having to wait longer to get an appointment to file for benefits. It means not receiving a decision in a timely manner. It means getting a busy signal when you call an office or the Agency’s toll-free 800 number telephone service.

“It means not having your change of address or direct deposit information processed in a timely fashion.

“And finally, it means significant employee furloughs or even office closures, resulting in even greater degradations of service to America’s seniors.”
If the federal government shuts down, non-essential employees cannot go to work. Last week, both the president and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said Social Security checks would be delayed, and that would almost immediately affect those of us (about half of Social Security recipients) who receive our Social Security direct deposits or checks on the second Wednesday of the month (9 March).

If your monthly budget is as tight as mine, that is a disaster. Sure, I can eat, but some people won’t. And depending on how long a shutdown lasted I, like many others, couldn’t pay some bills on time. The 1995 “Newt Gingrich shutdown” lasted five days and Congress is much more polarized this time.

So in preparation, I’m arranging to transfer some money from elsewhere into my checking account. What about you?

The Center for American Progress addressed the issue of elderly poverty and seniors’ economic security in “The Not-So-Golden Years”:

“Social Security is tremendously effective in helping seniors and their families stay out of poverty. Its benefits kept 14 million elderly Americans out of poverty in 2009. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimated in an analysis of 2008 Census data that the elderly poverty rate would actually exceed 40 percent in most states without Social Security benefits. The majority of people kept out of poverty by Social Security are elderly, but the Census data shows almost a third of those kept out of poverty are under 65 and include more than 1 million children.”

The National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare has released a new poll  on Americans’ views on Social Security, proposals for raising the retirement age, and cutting benefits. The national telephone poll, conducted June 24-June 30^th by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center, shows a growing disconnect between the average American’s economic priorities and those being debated in Washington.

Poll highlights include:

• Only 2% of Americans believe Social Security is a major cause of the deficit with 77% opposing any changes in Social Security as part of a deficit reduction plan.
• Two out of three Americans (64%) think Social Security provides security and stability to our economy while only 20% see the program as a drain on the economy. 70% believe this recession underscores the critical role Social Security fills for families.
• Virtually all Americans polled (98%) believe Social Security funds belong to the people who contributed them and their beneficiaries and a majority (71%) say Social Security is a promise made to all generations that should not be broken.

Andrew Smith, Director of the University of New Hampshire Survey Center, said he was surprised at the lack of major differences among people of different political persuasions. He said the survey’s responses showed that “Republicans and Democrats alike understand there is a deficit out there and they don’t think Social Security is the cause of it, “