Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News

Drudge Retort

User Info

Gal_Tuesday

Subscribe to Gal_Tuesday's blog Subscribe

Menu

Special Features

Wednesday, March 26, 2025

Mallory McMorrow doesn't claim to have all the answers for the Democratic Party. But as the 38-year-old Michigan Democrat gears up for a likely Senate run next month, she says generational change is needed--including at the leadership level. read more


DOGE cuts are making the Social Security Administration fall apart.


The Internet Archive is among the few efforts that exist to catch the stuff that falls through the digital cracks, while also making that information accessible to the public. read more


Monday, March 24, 2025

Advocates say the changes will disproportionately impact the most vulnerable Americans. read more


It has been difficult to chronicle the enormous losses to Palestinian families during Israel's offensive in Gaza, one of the most destructive in recent history. Working with journalists in Gaza, we reconstructed what happened to one large family in a single moment.


Comments

FTA: "I think it is" time for Schumer to step back, McMorrow said. "There's still this idea that Democrats and Republicans are still abiding by the same rules and still believe in the same norms and systems and structure. There seems to be a lack of recognition that this is no longer the Republican Party. This is a MAGA party. And the same approach is not going to work."

And:

Q: Democrats have been struggling to find their footing since Donald Trump won in November. Is there an ideological shift that needs to take place?

A: I don't know that it's ideological, more just the approach. I think that what is very clear--was clear in 2024 throughout the election cycle, and even still now--is there are a lot of people who don't know what Democrats stand for, and what Democrats can and will do for them in a way that gives them a vision of something that they want to vote for. That transcends political ideology, but it's just back to basics. How do you approach this moment? How do you respond to a Trump presidency, and the fact that Elon Musk has access to basically all of the government, and they are very comfortable rapidly tearing it down?

I think it's less ideological and more: Are you willing to fight for a future, and what is that future? And can you clearly articulate that to people?

Q: The operative axis, you're saying, revolves less around whether Democrats should move left or right, but around whether they should fight or accommodate?

A: Right. It's fighting. Because right now, what people see is Donald Trump and Elon Musk and everybody who's in there right now are more than comfortable paring down the government piece by piece. The checks and balances no longer exist. So you either fight for a future or you don't. And that isn't about whether a party moves left or right or center. It's just, is there a future or not, and how do you fight for it?


Compare this reporting from the Washington Post with a report put out yesterday by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities on the dangers DOGE poses for Social Security, emphasis mine:

The Administration, Musk, and DOGE have engaged in four types of activities that each present a clear danger to Social Security but together create the potential for significant damage to the program:

Launching rhetorical attacks on Social Security programs, including false claims of massive fraud--providing a pretext for actions that could undermine eligible beneficiaries' access to benefits.

Engaging in deep cuts to staffing, new restrictions on phone-based services for the public, and "agency-wide . . . restructuring" and "massive reorganizations" of SSA that are neither well thought-out nor wise " all of which threaten SSA's ability to serve seniors and people with disabilities effectively while providing a potential excuse for privatizing key services.

Jeopardizing the reliability of SSA's systems, including through the sharp reduction of staff with technical expertise of systems that serve some 73 million people, or 1 in 5 people in the United States, each month.

Threatening the security of people's personal information by giving untrained DOGE political appointees unprecedented access to sensitive SSA data.

These four dangers (see Figure 1) compound one another--rather than making improvements that would help Social Security beneficiaries now or in the future. Social Security is highly accurate and efficient--with a payment accuracy rate of 99.7 percent and administrative costs of only 0.5 percent--and has successfully paid benefits for over 85 years. After years of underfunding, SSA needs more staff--not fewer--to give the nation's retirees and people with disabilities the service they deserve.

www.cbpp.org

"These are the very changes Visitor_ assured us weren't Trump's doing and have been in the works for years."

This story keeps getting worse and worse. It turns out that the SSA is rolling out changes to the phone service in just two weeks rather than in two years as would normally be the protocol, and all because DonOLD Trump is pushing them to do so:

Social Security rushing service cuts at White House request, sources say

The Social Security Administration is rushing cuts to phone services at the White House's request, the agency's acting commissioner told Social Security advocates in a meeting on Monday, two sources who attended tell Axios.

Why it matters: These changes will strain the already struggling Social Security system and could even deprive some people of benefits entirely, according to current and former employees and advocates for retirees. . . .

Driving the news: Acting commissioner Leland Dudek said the changes in question would usually take two years to implement, but will be made in two weeks instead, the two sources said, on condition of anonymity due to fears of retaliation.

Dudek also said the changes, happening so fast and with little public understanding, will create opportunities for scammers, one of the sources said.

Dudek acknowledged the policy could increase fraud risks for beneficiaries, according to one attendee. He said in the past Social Security had been too "thoughtful" in considering beneficiaries before making changes.

www.axios.com

Too "thoughtful" in considering beneficiaries in the past?!? You have to ask yourself: Why the rush? And the answer seems to be, by their own admission, that they want to prevent people from receiivng benefits:

These changes will strain the already struggling Social Security system and could even deprive some people of benefits entirely, according to current and former employees and advocates for retirees. . . .

Some beneficiaries could effectively be blocked from receiving benefits, per an internal Social Security memo, viewed last week by Axios.

In related news:

"Deport every person under the sun": ICE detains Cubans during immigration appointments

Cuba doesn't consistently accept American deportation flights--as many as 42,000 Cuban nationals remain in the U.S. despite having deportation orders. That means that deportation to Cuba is a headache for the federal government. Several Latin American countries have agreed to accept U.S. deportees from other countries, and experts warn that Cubans could also be sent to Guatemala, Honduras, Costa Rica and Panama. Under a deal it brokered with the Biden administration, Mexico already takes back Cubans who arrive at the southwest border. An El Salvador mega-prison recently received hundreds of Venezuelans as part of a deal the Trump administration made with Salvadorean president Nayib Bukele last month.

Lawyers note that for South Florida's Cuban community, many of whom supported Trump's presidential campaign, the rapid immigration enforcement changes may come as a surprise.

"People come out in favor of the face-eating leopards," Prada said. "And then they get surprised when the leopard eats their face."

The detainment of Cubans by ICE in Miramar is stoking fear in South Florida's immigrant community, said Allen, a Miami immigration attorney for over three decades. He said he believes the Trump administration is trying to "intimidate" people and cause panic so they voluntarily return to their home countries.

The panic, however, isn't only affecting immigrants, Allen said. Immigration officers are being pressured for not detaining enough people, and judges and government lawyers are also being strong-armed into rejecting people's efforts to stay in the U.S.

www.miamiherald.com

Josh Marshall @joshtpm.bsky.social

The first and most important thing to know about last night's Exec order is that it's intended to break current law and allow people throughout the federal gov look at yr tax returns. Beyond that it's intended to compel states to turn over all their data to the fed govt.

2/ Taken together it's intended to create big data sets about targeted citizens for various kinds of harassment, intimidation, prosecutorial abuse etc. Very standard big brother stuff. Much of it is against current law. But more generally, when you pay taxes you give the govt info for ...

3/ for the specific purpose of collecting taxes, not to use for other reasons. This isn't some vague concept. It's the law. Similarly, when you indirectly give medical information, it's for the purposes of either anonymized public health data or for reimbursement through Medicare/Medicaid, etc.

4/ The point is the information is provided for specific lawful reasons and "silo'd" inside the government precisely because it's provided only for that reason. The aim of this new EO is to create thick packets of data on targeted individuals, for a different kind of federal govt that aims ....

5/ to punish or go to war with people who don't do as the incumbent president says or refuse to support the president. It goes back to the foundations of the civil compact itself. We choose elected officials to serve the public and do so impartially. The Trump model is you get executive ...

6/ power and use it to go to war with the people who don't support you.

7/ Final point. In general, I don't like to "AI" every issue. But here it has some relevance. These are potentially very big data sets across many aspects of life, economic transactions, medical records, political activity, educational records. It's very much the kind of stuff you'd want to pour ...

8/ machine learning/AI models and generate lists of people who might be inclined to oppose the incumbent President and then financial resources, social networks, etc that wld make them powerful opponents. We shld be assuming this kind of administration will already be doing stuff like that ...

9/ with data that can be purchased commercially - the kind of profiles generated by sales data, social media graphs and so forth. But there's a reason why IRS data is so prized and guarded. Sure you can buy a lot of data abt anyone just for a price. But when you layer on IRS data, medical records...

10/ you go to a whole new level. This stuff is deeply inculcated in the career staff at the IRS. Very, very strict need to know barriers to access to tax and financial data. There's been a steady flow of firings and resignations at IRS over the last six weeks as DOGE keeps demanding more access ...

11/ to data and more specifically as they demand that law enforcement and ICE get access to tax records. Now it's important to be clear here. When there's a criminal investigation the appropriate authorities already can get access. But that's the same way that the cops can get a warrant from a ...

12/ judge to search your home. The whole framework of probable cause etc. The analogy here would just be the cops can go into any home they want at any time. The point being DOGE has already been at work on what this EO demands.


skywriter.blue

Drudge Retort
 

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy