Saturday, June 16, 2012

When it comes to Social Security, Rory has a plan

From the Times Ledger:

State Assemblyman Rory Lancman (D-Fresh Meadows) went on the offensive Tuesday, saying he is the only candidate in the race for the newly created congressional seat centered around Flushing who has a plan to fix Social Security.

“Our seniors, and those who will soon become seniors, deserve more than a head-in-the-sand approach to Social Security from their member of Congress,” Lancman said. “And so far I’m the only candidate in this race that has offered a real plan to save Social Security without reducing benefits, raising the retirement age or privatizing Social Security altogether.”

Lancman favors eliminating an exemption on Social Security taxes paid on an individual’s income over $110,600. If the exemption is eliminated, he said, the program would remain solvent for another 75 years. It is widely predicted that by 2033 the program will be unable to provide 100 percent coverage to seniors if no legislative action is taken.

Lancman blasted his opponents, City Councilwoman Elizabeth Crowley (D-Middle Village) and state Assemblywoman Grace Meng (D-Flushing), for what he called their idea that job growth alone will allow more people to pay into the system.

But the two candidates countered that the increase in Social Security payments would essentially be a tax.


Anonymous said...

as if a freshman congressman (Wannabe) could institute ANY change in Washington. He'd be there essentially to carry the water for his seniors.

Anonymous said...

Crowley, Meng, and Lancman... Looks like im not voting.

Anonymous said...

The Daily News endorsed him, and spent a lot of ink explaining his strong pro-Israel stance. Yep, I guess that's the litmus test for a Congressman from Queens, New York.

Anonymous said...

a congressman from nyc with Tax Enough Already beliefs would be a blessing.

keep alert ,they are here and willing.

Anonymous said...

Rory Lancman is by far the strongest candidate and the smartest. This one is a no brainer.

Anonymous said...

Cousin Liz Crowley is a spoiler to divide the anti-Meng vote. Lancman is running a competent campaign and, if elected, will own little to Boss Joe Crowley who supports Meng. Are you following this?

As for dropping the cap entirely on "Federal Insurance Contributions Act", that's not going to happen. The fiction that Social Security is a "trust" and not a general tax has to be maintained.

Anonymous said...

NY Times has endorsed Meng today. It claims that Lancman "often leaves behind a trail of irritation."

Anonymous said...

"Trail of irritation?" Do they have one example of this?

Or is The Times in the business of spreading unsubstantiated gossip on the most qualified contender in the race?

Anonymous said...

If any of these morons at the Times were really following the Lanceman campaign or anything that is happening in Queens they'd retract that statement. None of them tell it as straight as Lanceman!

Anonymous said...

tax and spenders will not survive this "Depression Election" in 2012.

California , Va. , N.C. and maybe Wisconsin and W.Va. are getting smart to the "all talk- no real jobs B.S. from the NYS/ obama progressives.

the social engineering laws forced on the NYS and NYC population ,without citizen votes, will backfire in 2012.

the above mentioned pols. are part of the problem.

JoeTheEconomist said...

There is virtually no research that says what he is proposing will help fix anything. Most of the research is out of agenda driven think-tanks, much of which simply links to itself.

You are also not quoting him correctly. He said that his plan will fix the system over 75 years. This statement isn't close to fixing Social Security. The reason is that the 75 year figures hide the full cost of the system.

The 75 year statements are generally those politicians who want to deceive the listener. 3 times in my lifetime we have fixed the system for 75 years. Yet I am not anywhere close to 75.

Anonymous said...

lanceman and meng voted FOR the NYS EQUAL MARRIAGE LAW , along with other democrat queens politicians, this year.

the religious groups are not liable if they refuse to marry same -sex couples. it is the law in NYS.

does this law increase s.s.i. benefits for the couples ? does the survivor get the higher benefit of the two ?