Hillary Clinton’s Baby Steps on Social Security

New polling suggests she could be safe endorsing the more liberal position advocated by Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley.

Aug. 13, 2015, 1 a.m.

Hillary Clinton took her first step to the left on Social Security Wednesday, expressing an openness to taxing the rich more to keep the program solvent. But new polling suggests that the Democratic front-runner could be safe going even further and endorsing a more liberal position advocated by her primary opponents: expanding Social Security benefits.

Expanding benefits is the preferred policy of the so-called Elizabeth Warren wing of the party and Clinton’s two most prominent rivals for the nomination: Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley.

So far, she hasn’t been willing to go there. But as Sanders continues to rise in the polls and generate excitement on the grassroots Left, Clinton is likely to feel the pressure to be more precise about her policy prescriptions. And the significant enthusiasm for a democratic socialist in Sanders is the surest sign yet that many Democrats have moved left since Clinton’s last campaign.

Such a move would also give Clinton the clearest possible contrast to the other side. Republicans like Chris Christie and Ted Cruz, meanwhile, have discussed benefit cuts and partial privatization, respectively.

A new survey from the AARP, commemorating Social Security’s 80th anniversary, found that 61 percent of Americans believe Social Security’s current benefits—the average is $1,332 per month, though it varies by person—are too low. Large majorities of people 30 and older said that wasn’t enough; those 18 to 29 years old were roughly split between “too low” and “about right.” Almost no one thinks benefits are too high.

While O’Malley and Sanders have eagerly embraced expanding Social Security, Clinton has been coy. Her campaign demurred in April when asked by National Journal. During an economic policy speech last month, Clinton talked about “defending and enhancing Social Security and making it easier to save for the future.”

Wednesday, she went somewhat further, indicating that she was receptive to increasing payroll taxes on the rich to help fund Social Security, The Washington Post reported. Right now, no income above $118,500 is taxed to pay for the retirement program.

“I can understand why you’d think that was unfair,” the former secretary of State said in response to a question at a New Hampshire campaign event. She then outlined the changes she was willing to examine.

“We do have to look at the cap, and we have to figure out whether we raise it or whether we raise it a little and then jump over and raise it more higher up,” Clinton said.

That is a change for Clinton; in 2008, she had opposed Barack Obama’s proposal to lift the tax cap.

It starts to align her with Sanders, Clinton’s most serious primary rival at the moment. (A poll released Tuesday night showed Sanders leading Clinton in New Hampshire). Sanders has proposed legislation taxing income above $250,000, thereby keeping a pledge not to raise taxes on the so-called middle class. The Social Security actuary estimated the proposal would keep the program solvent through 2065 while also increasing benefits.

“At a time when over half of the American people have less than $10,000 in savings and senior poverty is increasing, we should not be talking about cutting Social Security benefits,” Sanders said in March when introducing his bill. “We should be talking about expanding benefits to make sure that every American can retire with dignity.”

In February, the Center for American Progress—founded by Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta and currently headed by her longtime policy adviser Neera Tanden—put out a report highlighting income inequality as the source of Social Security’s financial problems. One of the implied solutions then was raising taxes on the rich.

The AARP poll was conducted by phone with 1,200 U.S. adults and had a margin of error of 3.6 percentage points.

What We're Following See More »
Criminal Justice Reform Bill Clears Senate
1 hours ago

"The Senate passed a bipartisan criminal justice reform bill on Tuesday night, handing a significant victory to President Trump and senators who lobbied to advance the legislation before the end of the year. Senators voted 87-12 on the legislation, which merges a House-passed prison reform bill aimed at reducing recidivism with a handful of changes to sentencing laws and mandatory minimum prison sentences." The House aims to vote on the measure when it reconvenes later this week.

Judge Delays Flynn Sentencing
7 hours ago

Federal Judge Emmet Sullivan "agreed Tuesday to postpone Michael Flynn’s sentencing after a hearing to decide the punishment for President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser went awry." Sullivan gave Flynn a chance to reconsider his decision to plead guilty, adding that he could not "guarantee a sentence without prison time, even after the special counsel’s office recommended that Flynn not be incarcerated. After a brief recess, Sullivan and prosecutors agreed to delay sentencing so that Flynn could "eke out the last modicum of cooperation."

Ducey To Appoint Martha McSally To Senate
10 hours ago
Is White House Caving on Government Shutdown?
11 hours ago

"White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders seemed to endorse a potential spending deal that would include all of the remaining appropriations, including a Senate Homeland Homeland Security bill with $1.6 billion in wall-related funding. But as usual, there was a catch—President Donald Trump might insist on flexibility to use other funds already identified to get closer to his desired $5 billion."

VOTE IS 82-12
Senate Advances Criminal Justice Reform
11 hours ago

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.