A leadership aide to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid sends over this statement, answering any question of the extent of his opposition to cuts in Social Security:
"Senator Reid is absolutely opposed to raising the retirement age and is ready for any fight that comes his way on this particular issue."
There's going to be tremendous pressure to settle on raising the retirement age. That much is clear, from the way in which Washington has embraced the non-official recommendations of the failed catfood commission (which nonetheless are treated as some kind of gospel inside the Beltway) to the refusal of White House officials to rule out any changes other than privatization. Add to the mix the perennial "bipartisan negotiator" Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who continues to harp on it:
"As I said on 'Meet the Press,' I'm looking for a process that will lead to a vote on saving Social Security from bankruptcy this year, that would adjust the age," Graham said on WVOC radio in South Carolina.
Graham referenced as his model the deal cut between President Reagan (R) and Democratic House Speaker Tip O'Neill (Mass.) in the 1980s that provided for a gradual increase in the retirement age to 67.
"Ronald Reagan went from 65 to 67 with Tip O'Neill ... we could use that same type system, to go from 67 to 69, for people under 55," he said.
See how he slipped that bit of hysteria in there? Social Security is going bankrupt this year!!! Which is, of course, a blatant lie. And which also points out the utter folly of considering Lindsey Graham a worthwhile partner in negotiations of any kind.
Reid, Sen. Bernie Sanders, and the other strong supporters of Social Security are going to have their work cut out for them this session, and they will need all the help they can get to convince the White House that there is no grand bargain to be had on Social Security that will keep the program strong and sustainable. But this strong opposition to any change that reduces benefits, now and in the future, is a very good start.