Say it ain't so DiFi

So California Senator Dianne Feinstein, aged 82, is looking like she is going to stand for re-election in 2018. Of course a lot can change between now and then. Political climate change, at 82, her health may change, but my feeling on this has nothing to do with those sorts of thing. It really comes down to this. California needs two true progressive senators. Senator Feinstein is not now and never has been a progressive. While it is true that she has sided with the progressives on some issues, but only when that was the party line. I can't recall any time she has stuck her neck out to stand up for individual rights (Patriot Act) or protecting the New Deal (Glass–Steagall). She is and always has been at best a Corporate Democrat with a dash of chicken hawk and at worst a Democrat in Name Only. She has stood by the party in most cases but she has not led the party. As most in government do, she has done a decent job of representing her campaign contributors. But she has done less decent job of representing the working people of California. I am not saying that she has been a terrible Senator, she has not been. Only that she has been less than we need, especially now. Please madam Senator, step aside and allow someone show will advance the interest of the people against the encroaching corporate monolith. The battle between democracy and feudalism is rapidly approaching. You are not up to the task, and I am not entirely sure which side you would be on. Tweet

Primary the bastards

Social Security uses the CPI-W (Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers) to determine the cost of living increases.  While this is applicable to the population at large, it understates the fact that the older you are, the more you consume medical services.  As the fastest growing portion of that cost of living, this tends to understate the actual increase that retirees face in their cost of living.

This of course leads to the common problem among those social security recipients with the least supplemental income.  That is the question, do I buy food, medicine, or heat this month?  Which of these can I do without?

Now comes a proposal to use a different index for social security index,  the 'chained-cpi'.  This tends to understate the actual increase in costs even more.  It does not kill social security, it just makes it slowly wither away until it becomes so insignificant that nobody will object when it finally dies.

But the big lie is that this has anything at all to do with deficit reduction.  Social Security has not caused one penny of our current deficit.  And at the current rate of growth, it will be 20 years before it does become an issue.  And that 20 years could become 'the foreseeable future' if they would only eliminate the cap on wages subject to Social Security.

Now you would expect that the right would lie to you about why social security should be squeezed out of existence.  But when the same people who swore to defend it start talking this way, then there is only one alternative.  Primary them.

Every representative who calls themselves a Democrat that votes in favor of this lie should face a primary challenge from the left when they next come up for election.  And every Democratic voter should let their representative know that is the price they will pay for betrayal.

Every one of them campaigned on "Social Security is off the table".  Now the president has crumpled like a cheap suit, and many in the party are starting to waffle on their commitment.  Either they were lying to us all along, or they really are that stupid.  But if only I could get Obama into a poker game then I'd be set, and wouldn't need the Social Security.

Politicians of all stripes rely on your short memory.  Don't let this one slip by.  If they will screw you this way, there are no limits to what they will do to you.

Tweet