Soc. Sec. Enters Elections; Bush Remarks Please Democrats, Perplex Republicans

[Demeter]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401330.html

Social Security Enters Elections
Bush Remarks Please Democrats, Perplex Republicans

By Lori Montgomery
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 25, 2006; A07



In recent days, Bush has said Social Security remains one of the "big items" he wants to tackle next year and he continues to "believe that a worker, at his or her option, ought to be allowed to put some of their own money . . . in a private savings account, an account that they call their own."

"Just when you thought your Social Security was safe from privatization, George Bush is bringing back his plan to privatize Social Security and cut guaranteed benefits," declared a news release from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, the party's fundraising arm for Senate races.

Democratic strategists were gleeful about the chance to draw a sharp distinction between the parties on Social Security, an explosive issue among elderly voters. "I couldn't believe it. What an opening," Democratic pollster Celinda Lake said. "I think he had an out-of-body experience."

Some Republicans were equally perplexed by Bush's timing.

"I guess you could argue if it gets Iraq off the front page, it was probably a good thing at this point," said Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.), a top Republican strategist who opposed the president's Social Security plan. But a new White House push on the issue "is not going anywhere. This president never likes to back down. I think he's putting it on the table, but I don't think anybody's going to pick it up."

[Virginia Dare]

1. Keep talking chimpface, I hope it hurts Tom Davis...

I'd like to remove him as my Congressman forthwith.

[The Backlash Cometh]

2. Yeah, when it comes to Social Security, Democrats are security moms.

We want security in our retirement funds, not just be part of a pyramid group for Wall Street.

[bigluckyfeet]

3. The GOP

will put people on the street so wall st can make a dollar.

[Boo Boo]

4. "I couldn't believe it."

Well, at least y'all caught it the second time. Cripes.

The man said in an interview with WSJ a while back that if Republicans still had control of Congress after the midterm elections he was going to privatize SS. This was an attempt to mobilize part of his base, to get them to pony up the big bucks to the RNC. It's been driving me nuts that the Dems failed to capitalize on that statement, because it was actually more damning than the one quoted above. He didn't sugar coat it with qualifiers like "his or her option"---he was talking to stock brokers, not Joe Sixpack.

Dems should make a quickie ad like the VoteVet armored vest ad and run it in every competitive race around the country. Just show the WSJ quote, an unflattering picture of Bush, do a little voice over about Republicans wanting to hand SS over to Big Money Special Interests, and then have some kindly old couple say, "After what happened to our 401K, we can't afford to gamble with Social Security."

When Repubs touch the third rail, they damn well better get jolted.

[Vidar]

5. Bush is campaigning well for the democrats. We should encourage him.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

6. Clinton reversed Republican spending of Social Security cash begun

under Reagan, but Dubya IMMEDIATELY restarted it. During his first five years alone, Dubya has spent $671 billion of our Social Security. By the time he's through in 2009, Dubya will have squandered well over a TRILLION Social Security dollars.!

Social Security cash flow now is PEAKING, just before the oldest Baby Boomers start retiring at age 62 in 2008. The SS cash flow is projected to turn negative in a decaade or so from now. Dubya thus is squandering the last and largest amounts of positive Social Security cash flow, while claiming to be trying to "save" Social Security. Retirements promised to Boomers were 100 percent paid-for with payroll taxes, but Dubya's spending spree on boondoggles and giveaways to the wealthiest is going to make it fiscally difficult for future Congresses to make good on Social Security promises.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The following table comes from the Congressional Budget Office. The "Total Deficit or Surplus" is the algebraic sum of the "On-Budget Deficit or Surplus" (column 3) and the "Social Security Cash Flow" (column 4)

The "Social Security Cash Flow" (column 4) has been positive since 1983, when recommendations of the Reagan/Greenspan Social Security Reform Commission were implemented. These "reforms" raised FICA payroll taxes on the poor and middle classes by about a quarter to fund a 60 percent cut in marginal tax rates for the wealthiest.

Whenever the "On-Budget Deficit or Surplus" (column 3) is positive (as it was in fiscal 1999 and 2000, under Bill Clinton), no Social Security money is being spent to offset the Federal Budget. Whenever it is negative and greater in absolute value than the "Social Security Cash Flow" (as it was every year from 1983 to 1997 and every year since 2002), the entire positive cash flow from Social Security is being spent to subsidize Budget spending.

In other years (1999-2001), only part of positive Social Security Cash Flow is being used to subsidize Federal Budget Spending. For example, from October 1 2000 to September 30 2001, only $32.4B of $163.0B in Social Security cash was wasted, because Bush was not in power for the whole fiscal year, and because it took some months to push through his giveaways to the wealthiest.

The total Social Security Cash flow spent to offset Federal Budget deficits during fiscal 2001-2005 thus is $ 671.6 BILLION, including column 4 for 2002-2005, and column 3 for 2001.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From http://www.cbo.gov/budget/historical.pdf :

"Revenues, Outlays, Deficits, Surpluses, and Debt Held by the Public (Billions of dollars)

Fiscal Year, Total Deficit or Surplus, On-Budget Deficit or Surplus, Social Security Cash flow

Clinton
1993 .. -255.1 .. -300.4 ... 46.8
1994 .. -203.2 .. -258.8 ... 56.8
1995 .. -164.0 .. -226.4 ... 60.4
1996 .. -107.4 .. -174.0 ... 66.4
1997 .... -21.9 .. -103.2 ... 81.3
1998 ..... 69.3 .... -29.9 ... 99.4
1999 ... 125.6 ....... 1.9 .. 124.7
2000 ... 236.2 ..... 86.4 .. 151.8

GW Bush
2001 ... 128.2 .... -32.4 .. 163.0
2002 .. -157.8 .. -317.4 .. 159.0
2003 .. -377.6 .. -538.4 .. 155.6
2004 .. -412.7 .. -568.0 .. 151.1
2005 .. -318.3 .. -493.6 .. 173.5

[underpants]

7. Actually it was included in the last budget request

Conyers said he was on it but I never heard what became of the funding they stuck into the budget request. The way that everything is voted on at the same time now it might have gone through.