Trump Can’t Derail Social Security, But Harris’ Filibuster Plans Can

Harris and her allies, not Trump, want to eliminate the biggest guardrail preventing partisan changes to Social Security.

There is a silent crisis growing in our society. But are we prepared to face it?



We are preoccupied with a great variety of problems. Some of us are concerned about climate change. Others detail the continuing fallout from COVID. Still another group looks with alarm upon the aggression of Russia and the growing appetite for power that appears to accompany China’s ascent. Many view the burst of innovation surrounding artificial intelligence as a major threat.

But there is another, much less heralded crisis going largely unaddressed that has the potential to affect virtually everyone physically, mentally, and spiritually.

That crisis has to do with the vast growth of an aging population accompanied by diminishing numbers of young people.

It has been known for some time that our entitlement programs that provide for the old are on an unsustainable path. Social Security, for example, began with a veritable army of young workers available to support the benefits awarded to each senior citizen. Over time, that margin has eroded drastically. While there were once more than 40 workers per beneficiary, the ratio is now closer to 2-1. The same problem applies to Medicare.

Western nations are facing this problem as a group. This much is well understood. What is less well understood is how to solve the problem as we continue to have fewer children but more old people who live longer. Any attempted reform appears to be a political nonstarter. And in the relatively near future, these programs are likely to become unsustainable.

But that problem is only the tip of the iceberg for modern societies such as America. We have been economically mobile. Families are spread out in sometimes distant locations across the generations. Elderly parents grow increasingly infirm without any immediate family in the area. Family ties are often strained because of divorces and other domestic disruptions. The once-large network of siblings who could divide up tasks of caring for parents has contracted substantially.

We need to develop more robust family, church, and community ties. Our families must grow closer together rather than more attenuated and spread out.

In addition, the two-income family has replaced the old single-provider model (virtually out of economic necessity) in which women stayed at home and tended to provide care for both younger and older generations.

Finally, and crucially, the old are living so long that their children who must care for them are often elderly themselves and can be easily overwhelmed by the task.

This last point threatens to be a straw that breaks the camel’s back as people who are already becoming less capable and less flexible are asked to make incredibly difficult decisions about their parents. Those decisions can be even more challenging when finances are not sufficient to support several years of expensive care in assisted living or nursing homes.

Under our current system, many families will exhaust the assets of their elderly parents and then have no choice other than to go through a process of pauperization as they transition to a Medicaid facility unless they are able to handle the caregiving themselves. There is little doubt that many people will find themselves beyond their resources and their own expectations and preparation as they encounter this problem.

The first two areas have to do with stewardship of resources. We all need to consider how to prepare ourselves and our families financially as best we can. That may require significantly less focus on accumulating goods and travel experiences and more on saving to provide for our future needs and for those we love.

In addition, American public policy will have to take greater account of the perilous dynamic of a large aging population supported by a smaller population of younger people.

Most important, however, is that we will have to become stronger spiritually and more connected as we try to face the crisis. We need to develop more robust family, church, and community ties. Our families must grow closer together rather than more attenuated and spread out.

How many of us can remember growing up surrounding by large numbers of relatives at family gatherings on birthdays and holidays? How many likewise have seen the decline of such events? How many have expectations of their church body (if they have a church at all) that are more oriented toward a consumer or entertainment experience than toward serious spiritual formation and filial relationships?

The challenge of aging parents and grandparents who reach the point of not being able to care for themselves is more pressing than it has ever been. Earlier generations were better situated and better prepared to deal with realities of aging than we are.

We need to start weaving the spiritual and social fabric back together, so that we can be responsible and loving toward our mothers and fathers.

Reports: Democrats’ Idea Of Progress Is Shoveling Billions Of Dollars To Illegals And Insurance Companies

The CBO reports show how the Inflation Reduction Act has proved anything but and how Biden and Harris' border crisis has increased spending.

Expect Big Changes To U.S. Health Policies After The Election

If current trends continue, the typical American family will spend 40 percent of its income on health care by 2030.

Sneaky Court Ruling Could Lock States Into Health Welfare For Able-Bodied Adults

Medicaid could soon turn into a fiscal version of the Eagles’ 'Hotel California' — states can check out any time, but they can never leave.

Everything The Biden-Harris Administration Doesn’t Want You To Know About Its Drug Price Controls

The Biden-Harris administration's scheme to establish socialist-style price controls is far worse than advertised.

Medicare Agency Just Gave Kamala Harris An In-Kind Contribution With Your Tax Dollars

This is Democrats' third use in recent years of legally dubious health insurer giveaways to protect them from political headaches.

Study Shows True Costs Of Health Care Spending Are Lives And Livelihoods

A new study provides more tangible evidence as to the true effects of rising health care costs.

Ted Cruz and Katie Britt propose 'IVF Protection Act'



Republican Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas and Katie Britt of Alabama are pushing a measure that would make it so that as a condition of receiving Medicaid funding, states may not bar the practice of in vitro fertilization.

The text of the measure defines in vitro fertilization as "the practice whereby eggs are collected from ovaries and manually fertilized by sperm, for later placement inside of a uterus."

'Dystopian nightmare.'

"The legislation would require, as a condition of receiving federal Medicaid funding, that states don't prohibit IVF," Cruz and Britt noted in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece. "IVF is profoundly pro-family. Some 2% of live births in the U.S. result from IVF, representing tens of thousands of families fulfilling dreams of parenthood."

"Our bill doesn’t impede states from setting up health and safety standards to govern IVF, nor does it compel any individual or organization to provide IVF against its wishes or beliefs. It simply ensures that access to IVF is fully protected by federal law, as there is currently no such federal law in place," the GOP lawmakers wrote. "This is an opportunity to unite on a shared bipartisan commitment to life, family, and personal liberty by protecting access to IVF treatments in every corner of America."

But BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey has offered a starkly different take.

"Included in the 'right to IVF' is the right to create, select, discard, buy, and sell living human beings. Dystopian nightmare," she tweeted in response to a post about the senators' proposal.

— (@)

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

GOP-Led Bill Protects IVF Industry But Not The Babies It Routinely Kills

It would be one thing if Republicans were calling for basic regulation of IVF. But Katie Britt and Ted Cruz are doing the opposite.