* Would allocate all Social Security surpluses towards saving Social Security and Medicare by using such surpluses to reduce debt held by the public until Social Security and Medicare reform is enacted. The bill would prohibit the use of Social Security surpluses for any purpose other than reforming Social Security and Medicare.Well, that is essentially what is happening right now. SS surpluses buy bonds to hide the deficit because they are counted in a different account.
* Would provide that it is not in order in the House or Senate to consider concurrent resolutions on the budget or any other legislation that would set forth an on-budget deficit for any fiscal year. This "point of order" provision would not apply to Social Security reform legislation or Medicare reform legislation as defined in this bill. Nice, but a little pointless now. You can't have a deficit unless you really, really want to (as shown by the last term).
* Would provide that any official statement/publication of the surpluses or deficit totals of the U.S. Government, as issued by the Office of Management and Budget or the Congressional Budget Office, shall exclude outlays and receipts of the OASDI program. Separate Social Security budget documents showing OASDI outlays and receipts would be required.This one was good. It would have shown that even during the years Clinton claimed to be running a surplus the general budget excluding SS was still running a deficit (although it was a round-off error in the world of Obama's trillion dollar deficits).
* A supermajority of 60 percent of each House of Congress would be required to override the provisions of the bill.And the whole thing turns to crap with 60 votes. That puts some real gums in the legislation.
So, why did the Democrats vote against it?
I wish to hear their explanation.