Advocacy / AMAC Action In The Media / AMAC Action On Capitol Hill / Politics

Dan Weber Testifies Before the House Committee on the Budget

As part of the third and final installment of the House Committee on the Budget’s hearing series on Restoring the Trust for All Generations, Dan Weber was invited by Chairman Price (R-GA-06) to testify for and on behalf of the Association of Mature American Citizens (AMAC).  One of the most powerful committees in Congress, the House Committee on the Budget is launching a multi-year effort to restore the OASDI Trust Funds, save Social Security and Medicare, and restore the trust of the American people in their government.

As one of four witnesses invited to testify before the committee, Dan represented the concerns of millions of seniors nationwide about the state of Social Security and Medicare.  With a background in pension planning, Dan explained to Representatives from all over the country that it is harder for aging Americans to retire than ever before, that health care costs are sky-rocketing out of control, and that millions of young people do not believe Social Security will survive long enough for them benefit from the program.  Dan’s testimony stood as a stark, personal witness to the reality millions of seniors face nationwide.

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter
and Download the AMAC News App

Sign Up Today Download

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter!

Sign Up Today
Subscribe
Notify of
37 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Bob Dibble
5 years ago

What is AMAC doing to push back against proposed cuts to SS and Medicare? Why isn’t AMAC more visible? I get your ads for products and services that aren’t of interest to me but I don’t see Mr. Weber and others at press conferences and on FOX, CSPAN, etc. denouncing proposals that would hurt seniors if enacted. I admit that I might have missed those rare engagements but still… That is why I haven’t renewed my membership.

Bill Foster
5 years ago

What <r/ Weber to;d the committee SURELY was ALREADY known to its members who do NOT live under rocks. What AMAC should do – in my humble opinion – is formulate a SOLUTION that would make Social Security solvent for the next 50 years. The solution is some combination of increased taxes , possibly indexed to income and size of the business, and some increase in the age at which full retirement benefits are paid. If no solutions are soon imposed, in about 2028, benefits will suddenly be cut by about 25%.

Simply stating the obvious about medical costs, etc., is NOT going to get the job done.

Carroll H. George
5 years ago

If Social Security reserves are invested in government bonds, doesn’t that mean that that Social Security reserve is directly national debt? In other words, for Social Security to retrieve any of that reserve it would increase the national debt? I will be 97 in a couple of months, and my mind is fast fading, so perhaps you could help me out on this.

PaulE
5 years ago

To answer your first question, there is no real surplus of money left in the so-called “trust account” (there isn’t really a trust account, merely an electronic booking designation indicating the source of the money was from FICA taxes). The so-called SS IOU’s are in “special purpose” Treasury bonds that are neither tradable on any open market nor have any value beyond what the federal government chooses to politically value them at. In simple speak: worthless paper.

What money is collected via FICA taxes each week is what is used to pay current retirees every month. A simple pay-go system. Money comes in one door and goes out another. That is how the system has always functioned. In the past the government collect more in FICA taxes than they had to pay out in monthly SS checks, so a surplus built up over decades. That surplus was raided by JBJ and the Democrat controlled Congress in the late 1960’s to pay for the “War on Poverty”, various other social programs that were dreamed up and the national debt. Also the SS system is a promise to pay from the federal government, not an obligation to pay. So it isn’t part of the national debt, as that consists of only what the federal government is obligated to pay.

Hope this answers your question and congratulations on such a long life. Stay well Carroll.

Ralph
5 years ago

You’re mind is sharp as ever, Carroll. You got it exactly right.

Angela M. Rosati
5 years ago

Hooray for Dan! God bless you.

cragan
5 years ago

Thank you Mr Weber, thank you for speaking on my behalf.
I retired from a non profit organization and we have advocates who go to DC to testify why a bill introduce would cause the organization to fold. So, I appreciate your efforts.
Thank you.

Jo H.
5 years ago

I am a new member of AMAC and I thank you, Dan Weber, for giving conservatives a voice. We are stronger and louder together. I could never bring myself to join AARP because of their lobbying for the liberal agenda. Keep up the good work. You have my support and gratitude!

J Clark
5 years ago

OASDI seems to be a catch-all for things the government doesn’t want to fund elsewhere. We need to limit the funds to those it was intended for originally and keep it out of the general budget reporting so Congress doesn’t keep spending this and claiming it lowers the deficit.

W. Brant Powell
5 years ago

Like many older citizens who are now AMAC members, I used to be a member of AARP. I departed because of AARP’s support for liberal policies that endangered America but there was not an AMAC to represent us then. Thank God Dan Weber started AMAC and is dedicated to providing a conservative alternative to AARP. Another responsible organization is the Heritage Foundation. I pray our nation can survive the financial assault by citizens who have no idea what result their ill conceived actions may bring.

Leroy Grant
5 years ago

a vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote for the fall of America and a This World Nation She backs Obama and it has been said that He Obama has been the only person in History to destroy a nation without firing a shot. I personally believe that guns will be confiscated, churches closed or burned to the ground and freedom as we know it taken away

Richard Farrell
5 years ago

I AM A AMAC member and they will do nothing we must get back to the principles that this country was founded on.
Obama is evil our only hope is Donald Trump! So, seniors get out and vote for TRUMP or suffer and i mean SUFFER. We are huge part of the population and if this chance passes kiss this country GOOD-BYE. It will be the seniors who will suffer the most. POLITICIANS have made arrangements for them and there family. They do not have to be part of OBAMACARE they passed a law protecting themselves. I called my Sen. when this vote was happening and Sen. Menendez told me we will all be on this together then in the dead of night kited a law thru for themselves. I asked why and. our staffs were leaving for other jobs without obamacare. Our reps are criminals and we should hold hearings for HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS. This is a tragedy i will in all likely hood be dead by my children and grandchildren will be second class citizens in there own country. GOD BLESS AMERICA and that will be changed to ALLAH AKBAR OR THESE UNITED SECTORS WILL WORK TOGETHER . It is a shame WAKE-UP

Gary
5 years ago

As a senior I am seeing much of what is being talked about here right now. Costs to seniors for necessary quality of life needs have either risen dramatically or become all but impossible to obtain. Many seniors are on a fixed income consisting of solely social security and their day to day living expenses, although cut to the bone, come nowhere close to covering the total costs for everything needed to live even a modest lifestyle. How many of these unfortunate people also have to make a decision of “Do we eat or buy the medicine(s) we need?”. NO ONE should EVER have to make a decision like that….NOBODY and especially NOT our senior citizens. But our “government” seems to care more about handing over massive $$$$ to illegal immigrants in the form of welfare, subsidized housing, free medical care and much more while our seniors are left to fend for themselves as best they can. This has all been much more prominent since Obama took office because he and the Democrat party are going all out to try and gain the Hispanic votes while far too many of our senior citizens, most of whom have worked hard their entire lives, will never enjoy the fruits of their labor in their retirement years .This is BEYOND disgusting.

Janelle Kavanaugh
5 years ago
Reply to  Gary

If we would discontinue giving any immigrants, legal or not, benefits such as food stamps, free health care, and other welfare items, they would be less likely to come. Everything should be in English, and they should be required to speak English. Only exceptions: Courtrooms where they may be the litigant and medical emergency rooms, for health care is essential. They haven’t paid for these in any measure; therefore why should they benefit?

James
5 years ago

I was an AARP member years ago until their “leadership” saw fit to ignore the majority of the members and put full support behind a Bill Clinton health care fiasco in the 90’s. As a long time AMAC member I have been sincerely hoping AMAC membership would overtake and surpass AARP membership. AMAC is the far better of the two entities and I believe our membership is on the rise. I can’t wait until AMAC eats AARP’s lunch!

Frfank Keeler
5 years ago

The cost of everything Seniors use and need are up double and sometimes triple the cost from 8 years ago and only modest COLA’s because the Government has seniors in the same category as government clerks. We need to adjust seniors Cola’s on what seniors need most food, energy and health care. Most seniors don’t buy new cars every other year or big screen TV monthly or surf boards, boats or PWC or the latest New York fashions. We buy food, energy(electric) and health care. To make matter’s worse we traditionally have our nest egg in secure investment like bank CD or FDIC account that today pay zero too little interest so we have the double wamy. If things get any worse it may be that we will have to move in with our kids or grandkids who we helped with everything from housing to education.

PaulE
5 years ago
Reply to  Frfank Keeler

If you still have the vast majority of your retirement funds sitting in low to effectively zero interest CD or FDIC account, you’re in for a world of pain going forward. The Fed isn’t going to raising rates back up to what used to be normal levels for years. So you should consider a bit of diversification to generate yourself some much needed interest / dividend income.

Janelle Kavanaugh
5 years ago
Reply to  Frfank Keeler

Has anyone noticed that every time the government becomes involved in “our welfare”, costs of that benefit increase exponentially? Consider health care, medications, tuition rates, among many others. We would be so much better off if the government just backed off, got rid of so many regulations and taxes, and let a market economy take over. I think everyone would be surprised to see how quickly costs would level off.

PaulO
5 years ago

What did Ronald Reagan say about Social Security?

Excerpts from a 1981 letter Reagan penned to congressional leaders after his election:

“The highest priority of my Administration is restoring the integrity of the Social Security System. Those 35 million Americans who depend on Social Security expect and are entitled to prompt bipartisan action to resolve the current financial problem……….. I shall fight to preserve the Social Security System and protect their benefits…….. I will call on the Congress to lay aside partisan politics, and join me in a constructive effort to put Social Security on a permanently sound financial basis.”

PaulE
5 years ago
Reply to  PaulO

And Democrats fought him at every step of the way to do real Social Security reform. So you can cherry pick all the quotes you want PaulO, but the fact is the Democrat Party is the party that raided the Social Security trust fund, made the benefits taxable, removed the deductibility of the FICA withholdings. The same Democrat Party is now pushing hard to “means test” Social Security, which means, if the Democrats have their way, only those at the poverty level or slight above will get anything at all. So keep right on campaigning for Hillary and watching MS-NBC non-stop, since you’re obviously dumb enough to believe the Pablum your socialist party is preaching. Bet you got a thrill when that idiot started burning the American flag at the DNC convention. Of course, like you, he was too stupid to realize you can’t step on something burning without catching on fire yourself.

Do enjoy the balance of your weekend,

Ralph
5 years ago
Reply to  PaulE

Notice how he goes away when confronted with undeniable facts, Paule. He, like all dumacrats, cannot refute the truth, so they leave their mess for someone else to clean up.

Ralph
5 years ago
Reply to  PaulO

And the democrats voted it down, paulyo

PaulO
5 years ago
Reply to  PaulO

You bet Tip O’Neil fought against the increase in premiums and cuts to Social Security that Reagan proposed. Just like any good Democrat would.

But at the end of the day they were able to find compromise and passed the 1983 social security reforms.

Reforms that working baby boomers shouldered with hire premiums so our parents could have a secured and solvent social security system from which to collect their benefits.

Now these baby boomers are asking our present day elected officials to follow in the spirit of Reagan and O’Neil and strengthen and secure our Social Security for present and future beneficiaries.

PaulE
5 years ago
Reply to  PaulO

You of course try to sidestep the fact that LBJ and the Democrat Congress created the financial shortfall in the Social Security program to start with. Their raiding of the trust fund lead directly to the financial situation Social Security faced in the 1980’s. Which is why there was even a need for Reagan or O’Neil to even discuss Social Security in the first place. I realize you don’t want to address the chronology of events I laid out for you, because it shows the Democrat Party at the epicenter of every phase of the erosion of the Social Security program and that their so-called agreed upon solutions have actually lead to even more erosion of the program at a later date.

I do find your playing the “lets all just be reasonable and comprise” card rather amusing. Who did you borrow or should I say plagiarize the majority of the last sentence of your comment from? Been googling clips from CNN or MS-NBC again looking for snappy retorts?

Ralph
5 years ago
Reply to  PaulO

I don’t recall any “good democrats” in my lifetime! Could you name some?

Dr. James H. Rust
5 years ago

The government is going into further debt at the rate of $1.5 billion per day. The national debt now exceeds $19 trillion. Interest rate on government debt are the lowest in my memory. The rate on the 30 year bond is around 2 percent. I remember in 1981 looking at 30 year bonds and the interest rate was 13 percent. Naturally, I did not invest in them because my Merrill Lynch money market fund was paying 18 percent.

High interest rates on government debt can occur in the future and our national debt will spiral out of control. Inflation rates will have to be hundreds of percent per year and all savings destroyed.

Much of the government spending is on useless attempt to control nature’s weather by eliminating use of fossil fuels over unfounded fears of carbon dioxide from fossil fuel use causing catastrophic global warming(climate change). Due to President Obama’s October 5, 2009 Executive Order “Federal Leadership in Environment, Energy, and Economic Performance” all federal agencies are engaged in the “Green Warfare”. The Department of Defense has paid as much as $400 a gallon for biofuels.

Annual government waste in this area is in the hundreds of billions per year. The government claims they are going to protect our grand children from global warming in the future. This effort will leave our grandchildren in a state of poverty never seen in this nation. AMAC members must get involved in stopping this nonsense and vote proponents out of office.

James H. Rust, professor of nuclear engineering (ret. Georgia Tech)

PaulE
5 years ago

This is the most reasoned, well articulated and soundly based on pure facts response so far this morning sir. Very well done. Obviously in the current politically correct, politically socialist environment that exists on most colleges today, you would either be ostracized by your so-celled “peers” or find your employment terminated. The truth must be suppressed at all cost in what used to be referred to as institutions of higher learning. Now sadly, most are apparently little more than socialist propaganda indoctrination centers to prepare young minds for their place in the new world order.

Yes, the so-called “green agenda” is the biggest, most well organized financial scam perpetrated not only on the American public, but the world at large. This is a multi-trillion dollar a year tax on the world when you add up the cumulative regulatory burdens imposed around the world. This is an unnecessary and punitive tax on global productivity, that is systematically designed to lower the living standards of billions of people. All so a relative handful can enrich themselves beyond their wildest dreams. As you are no doubt well aware, the same cadre of individuals and their companies have been involved, in various aspects, since this current iteration of the “end of the world” hoax, which is what “climate change” actually is, was launched in the early 1970’s. The multitude of so-celled “green energy initiatives” around the world, all based on a phony premise, have made vast fortunes for the individuals and their families.

Yes, if the American people still have any sense left in them, they of course need to vote politicians who support this scam out of office. That would be the first step, in a multi-pronged approach, to unwinding the regulations and policy initiatives associated with this scam.

PaulO
5 years ago

As a retired employee of Georgia Tech, you receive your retirement benefits from TRS, Teachers Retirement System of Georgia. A retirement system funded by the state of Georgia not the federal government.

So that’s why you don’t mind coming on here and dissing Social Security.
You don’t get retirement benefits from Social Security.
You get them from the taxpayers of Georgia.

Ralph
5 years ago
Reply to  PaulO

No wonder you make the stupid commie comments you do, paulyo. Your above post explains it all. SS is my money. Yours is the taxpayers of Georgia.

John
5 years ago

Why not start w/all the money congress stole [they call it borrowed] from within the social system to spend on other things. That was done for many years with a so-called promise to pay it back. Instead, more $$$ was stolen [they call it borrowed]. When I borrow money from a bank I have to not only pay it back within a specified time, but, also with interest. What our own gov’t did was they stole our money, lied about re-paying, then lied more. Back in the 1960’s it was realized social security had a surplus, further, it left alone, and even if it earned only 1% interest, it would have never run out of money.
You see raising taxes is a complete waste of time only to have our gov’t take it out for what-ever they feel may or may not be a good idea. Now, which one of you are going to explain this in a reply as to where in hell is all that money.

Boyd
5 years ago
Reply to  John

As you said, the money has been thrown away on programs these legislators deemed more important than fulfilling the Social Security contract with those who generated the surplus in the first place – working Americans whose paychecks were diminished via the payroll tax.

ronc
5 years ago
Reply to  John

Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He promised:
1.) That participation in the Program would be Completely voluntary,

No longer Voluntary

2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual Incomes into the Program,

Now 7.65% on the first $90,000

3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year,

No longer tax deductible

4.) That the money the participants put into the independent ‘Trust Fund’ rather than into the general operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government program, and,

Under Johnson the money was moved to The General Fund and Spent

5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income.

Under Clinton & Gore Up to 85% of your Social Security can be Taxed

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Security check every month
and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government to ‘put away’ — you may be interested in the following:
———— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— —-
Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the independent ‘Trust Fund’ and put it into the
general fund so that Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically controlled House and Senate.
———— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— —
Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A: The Democratic Party.
———— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— —–
Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?

A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the ‘tie-breaking’ deciding vote as President of the
Senate, while he was Vice President of the US
———— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— –
Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants?
A: Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party.

Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive Social Security payments! The
Democratic Party gave these payments to them, even though they never paid a dime into it!
———— — ———— ——— —– ———— ——— ———
Then, after violating the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away!

And the worst part about it is uninformed citizens believe it!
in the discussion

PaulE
5 years ago
Reply to  ronc

The general knowledge level of the average citizen has been declining for decades. The so-called progressive public education programs that have been in effect have been marvelous at producing well indoctrinated drones capable of repeating the progressive (socialist) dogma that has been relentlessly pounded into their heads. However, they are functionally illiterate in almost everything else. Sound bites and slick marketing imagery now pass as “knowledge” amongst the vast majority of Americans. This has of course lead to the ascendancy of major party candidates openly preaching socialism / communism to throngs of cheering crowds.

Your conclusion that a significant proportion of the population now believes the Democrat lie that it is the Republican Party that is targeting Social Security, even after all the numerous examples you’ve stated that the Democrats have been the ones actually doing it for decades, is just illustrative of how far cognitive reasoning has declined in the general population.

PaulO
5 years ago

You put the issue of strengthening and preserving social security for our senior’s front and center where it should be Dan Weber.

We thank you.

Barbara
5 years ago

“save Social Security and Medicare, and restore the trust of the American people in their government.”

Who’s Fighting For Social Security… AMAC IS!

While they’re at it, they can look at issues relative to the new ‘security standards’ at My Social Security (ssa.gov/myaccount).

This notice was received yesterday VIA eMAIL – “Starting in August 2016, Social Security is adding a new step to protect your privacy as a my Social Security user. This new requirement is the result of an executive order for federal agencies to provide more secure authentication for their online services. Any agency that provides online access to a customer’s personal information must use multifactor authentication.”

A ‘text-enabled’ cell phone number is now required so when one logs in the cell phone number is entered and a security code is sent to the phone. Once the text is received, the ‘code’ can be entered and one can get to their account. If you don’t have a cell phone or choose not to provide a number (my cell phone is for me to reach out to others when and if necessity requires, not for the world to reach me) then you can’t access online. One can, however, make a phone call or write a letter. That sets us back 10 or 15 years.

My DOD pay site provides 2 manners of logging in with no convoluted approach. I think that someone at SSA should be rethinking this asinine decision. ‘They’ have my email address, send the code to that. Better yet, find another way to authenticate.

Choosing not to provide a text enabled cell phone number OR not having such a cell phone, means that options available are a) make a phone call and tie up employees that the online access was supposed to free up for other responsibilities or b) send a letter via USPS.
In either case, the convenience of technology for both the agency employees and the account holder have been ‘tossed out the window.’

Boyd
5 years ago
Reply to  Barbara

Wait, didn’t a Federal Court in Texas just say that it was unfair to have to show ID in order to vote? Apparently, an affidavit signed by another person is a satisfactory proof of the right to vote. Now we see an uneven standard here. There seems no end to the hoops one must jump through to claim what’s yours!

Rocky
5 years ago
Reply to  Barbara

Barbara, You’ve made some excellent points! In addition, where I live in mountainous upstate NY, many seniors don’t have and/or can’t afford cell phones, only land lines. And large geographic areas don’t have ANY cell service. So, no chance of this authentication system working very well here.

37
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x