Social issues define party politics

NEW YORK — NEW YORK Voters in this presidential election may face the starkest choice ever on the hot-button social issues of same-sex marriage, abortion rights and access to birth control.

Wedges could aid Democrats

Some political analysts suggest that the Democrats might see an advantage in shifting the campaign conversation away from jobs and toward divisive social issues. "Social issues are the best ammunition the Obama campaign has to pull independents away from Romney," conservative columnist Kathleen Parker wrote this week.

Even as most voters tell pollsters the economy is their chief concern, advocacy groups on the left and right are in high gear -- with bus tours, YouTube videos and fundraising -- pointing out the sharp differences between the parties in the current phase of the culture wars.

Indeed, President Barack Obama and the Democratic Party seem increasingly eager to raise these issues proactively. They are touting their support for same-sex marriage and accusing the Republicans of waging a "war on women" by opposing abortion rights and federal programs to boost women's access to birth control.

Republicans have responded by accusing the president and his party of waging a "war on religion" via the portion of Obama's health care law that requires contraceptives to be available for free for women enrolled in workplace health plans. Democrats respond that employers have no business forcing their morals onto their employees.

Issue: Sexual assault

Such wedge issues can be pushed to the forefront of the campaign unexpectedly. That occurred this week when the Republican Senate nominee in Missouri, Rep. Todd Akin, referred to women's bodies as being able to prevent pregnancies if they are victims of "a legitimate rape" while explaining why he opposed abortion in all circumstances. There's no scientific basis to support Akin's claim.

Republicans as well as Democrats criticized Akin severely. Obama called Akin's views offensive and said the idea of distinguishing among types of rape "doesn't make sense to the American people and certainly doesn't make sense to me." Republican candidate Mitt Romney called Akin's comments "insulting, inexcusable and frankly wrong."

While Akin apologized and said he would remain in the race, GOP officials and Romney made it clear they wanted him to quit.

The upcoming nominating conventions will highlight the contrasts between the parties on abortion and other issues.

Issue: Same-sex marriage

The platform for the Democratic National Convention is expected to put the party on record, for the first time, in support of same-sex marriage, echoing the stance taken by Obama in May.

Four states have gay-marriage measures on their ballots. In Minnesota, the vote is whether to put a ban on gay marriage in the state constitution, while voters in Maine, Maryland and Washington will decide whether to legalize gay marriage.

National gay-rights groups are pumping millions of dollars into these state campaigns, hoping to end a long losing streak. Thus far, gay marriage has been rebuffed in all 32 states that have held referendums on the issue.

Meanwhile, the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which denies federal recognition of same-sex marriages and affirms the right of states to refuse to recognize such marriages, is under criticism in courts. Several federal judges have ruled it unconstitutional.

The Obama administration is no longer defending the act, and has asked the Supreme Court to settle the legal fights over it.

Romney and his newly chosen running mate, Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, favor a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. The speaker list for their convention includes former Sen. Rick Santorum, a hardline opponent of abortion and gay marriage, and Mike Huckabee, who recently helped engineer an "appreciation day" for the Chick-fil-A fast-food chain after gay-rights groups protested its president's stance against gay marriage.

Ryan is conservative on social issues. He has voted against allowing same-sex couples to adopt, opposed repealing the ban on gays serving openly in the armed forces, and supported Personhood Amendments, which Democrats say would criminalize the use of birth control.

Issue: Abortion

Ryan, who told the Weekly Standard in 2010 that he was "as pro-life as a person gets," has earned perfect scores from the National Right to Life Committee and other anti-abortion groups. He co-sponsored measures asserting that life begins at the moment of fertilization and -- like Romney -- favors repeal of the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that established a right to abortion.

Abortion-rights groups were quick to assail Ryan.

"Make no mistake about it: Ryan is 100 percent behind the war on women agenda," said Nancy Keenan of NARAL-Pro Choice America.

Social conservatives welcomed Ryan's selection, even though it remains to be seen how outspoken he'll be about various hot-button topics.

"Paul Ryan's philosophy clearly includes the understanding that America's financial greatness is tied directly to its moral and cultural wholeness," said Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council.

North Carolina, one of the battleground states, had a referendum in May in which voters approved a constitutional ban on gay marriage.

The issue remains lively there, perhaps because it's more clear-cut than the economic debate, according to Tracy Tuten, a professor of marketing at East Carolina University in Greenville. She was struck by the intense responses -- from gay-marriage foes and supporters -- to the recent Chick-fil-A controversy.

"People were leaving work to go buy chicken sandwiches, or to protest buying chicken sandwiches," she said. "It's something they can wrap their head around."

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Pelosi: Dems oppose Social Security, Medicare cuts (AP)

WASHINGTON – The top House Democrat says she and fellow Democratic lawmakers will oppose including cuts in Social Security or Medicare benefits in any package aimed at reducing huge federal deficits.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi made the remark to reporters Thursday after returning to the Capitol from President Barack Obama's budget talks with congressional leaders. The leaders are looking for a compromise package that would extend the government's borrowing limit while also slicing trillions off future budget deficits.

Signals have emerged that the White House would consider culling savings from Social Security and Medicare. But Pelosi, a California Democrat, says Democrats believe those two programs should not be used to pay for tax breaks for the rich.

Republicans have opposed ending some tax loopholes for the wealthy.

View the original article here

Democrats Oppose Talk of Cuts to Social Security - New York Times

As word spread that Mr. Obama was considering large savings from the use of a different measure of inflation to reduce the annual cost-of-living adjustment in Social Security benefits, Democrats joined with lobbyists for older Americans to reject the idea. Representative Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, the senior Democrat on the House Budget Committee, said Democrats would oppose changes in Social Security benefits as part of the deficit-reduction talks.

“Any discussion of Social Security should be on a separate track,” he said. Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the House Democratic leader, said, “Any savings should be plowed back into making Social Security stronger.”

Representative Sander M. Levin of Michigan, the top Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee, said, “The proposal would place new burdens on the backs of seniors.”

Representative Xavier Becerra of California, a member of the House Democratic leadership, said, “The cuts in Social Security benefits would grow larger as retirees age, and seniors who rely most on Social Security to pay for basic necessities would receive the biggest benefit cuts.”

On the Senate floor, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island, said Thursday: “Social Security and Medicare benefits should not be on the table. Social Security is not the cause of the deficit, and beneficiaries should not be made to shoulder the burden of deficit reduction.”

In particular, Mr. Whitehouse said, Congress must not “cut benefits through backdoor methods such as lowering the cost-of-living adjustment.”

Republicans are concerned about the growth of entitlement programs, including Social Security and Medicare. Some, like Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, support the idea of an alternative measure of inflation, known as the chain-weighted version of the Consumer Price Index, because they believe it is more accurate. But the party, waiting to see details, has not taken an official stand.

Lobbyists for older Americans were blistering in their criticism of the proposal, which, according to the Congressional Budget Office, could reduce federal spending by more than $110 billion over 10 years.

“This is nothing more than a backdoor benefit cut that Washington hopes Americans won’t notice or understand,” said Max Richtman, executive vice president of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare.

He said Social Security beneficiaries did not receive a cost-of-living adjustment this year or in 2010 because inflation, as measured by the standard Consumer Price Index, was so low.

AARP, the lobby for older Americans, said last month that it might be open to modest reductions in Social Security benefits for future recipients. But A. Barry Rand, the group’s chief executive, tried to quash the inflation adjustment idea, saying that “AARP will not accept any cuts of any kind to Social Security as part of a deal” to reduce the deficit and increase the debt limit.

The proposal under discussion would affect current and future beneficiaries. Any move to exempt current beneficiaries would reduce the amount of savings.

Supporters of the proposal argue that the current measure of inflation overstates increases in the cost of living because it does not adequately reflect how, when faced with higher prices, consumers change their buying habits, substituting cheaper items for more expensive ones.

On the other hand, some economists say the current measure understates the impact of inflation on older Americans, who tend to spend more of their income on health care. Medical prices have been rising faster than the overall price index.

Budget negotiators are also discussing a proposal that would use the alternative measure of inflation to adjust income tax brackets and other provisions of the tax code, like the standard deduction and the personal exemption amount.

This proposal would raise nearly $60 billion over 10 years, as more Americans would find themselves in higher tax brackets.

Republicans, adamantly opposed to any form of tax increase, worry about an increase that might result from using the new measure of inflation to adjust tax brackets.

Representative Robert E. Andrews, Democrat of New Jersey, said he would consider changes in the Social Security benefit formula only as part of a giant deficit-reduction package that included substantial new revenues and cuts in military spending. If the alternative measure of inflation is more accurate, he said, it would be “logical, consistent and desirable” to use it in adjusting tax brackets and Social Security benefits.

Grover G. Norquist, a prominent conservative strategist who is president of Americans for Tax Reform, said he saw a big difference. Reducing Social Security benefits would be a cut in spending, and “that would be fine,” Mr. Norquist said. But he said using the new price index to set tax brackets would be a tax increase, in violation of the pledge made by Republican leaders.

Stephen C. Goss, the chief actuary of Social Security, said the alternative inflation measure could reduce annual cost-of-living adjustments so the benefit for a retiree turning 85 in 2035 would be about 7 percent lower. The cuts are cumulative and would have a larger effect on older beneficiaries, who depend more on Social Security as a source of income.

Congressional Democrats said that using a different version of the Consumer Price Index could also reduce Medicare payment rates for some health care providers, including ambulatory surgical centers, clinical laboratories and suppliers of durable medical equipment like wheelchairs and respirators.

In addition, they said, the proposal could eventually increase the number of Medicare beneficiaries who must pay higher premiums because they have incomes above a certain level — $85,000 for individuals and $170,000 for married couples this year.

View the original article here