What does that have to do with anything? You obviously have a comprehension problem. I never said and the courts never said that Congress and the president can't reduce Social Security benefits. What I said, and what the Supreme Court said, is they can't do it arbitrarily. Presidents can propose it all they want...that doesn't make it constitutional.<quoted text>You Pseudo Liberals are gullible and all legal which Jimmy Carter Cut & reduced Social Security benefits but didnt eliminate them.
and here is an article since you dont remember Jimmy Carter doing it and Obama suggesting the same reducing Social Security.
Fri Apr 12, 2013 at 06:26 AM PDT.
President Obama Has Made Himself a Lame Duck
It's true that President Obama isn't the first Democratic president to propose cuts to Social Security. Jimmy Carter successfully cut Social Security.
A proposal from President Jimmy Carter in 1977 proposed indexing changes that effectively cut benefits for future retirees.
Right. Carter not only changed the index, he proposed doing so in a way that reduced benefits more than chained-CPI would. Carter also scaled back eligibility rules for Social Security's disability insurance.
How'd that work out for Democrats?
Carter's Social Security cuts left the door wide open for Ronald Reagan and the Republican Party to become the defenders of Social Security. Carter's mistakes in Iran were his own but Carter's cuts to Social Security hurt the Democratic party for a generation.
"Due process of law" as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court: "The due process article is a restraint on the legislative as well as on the executive and judicial powers of the government, and cannot be so construed as to leave Congress free to make any process ‘due process of law’ by its mere will.” Murray v. Hoboken Land, 59 U.S. 272