Did Dean really say this?

[knowledgeispower]

I was reading over an article from The Socialist Alternative and came across this line:


In 1995 Dean said: "The way to balance the budget ... is for Congress to cut Social Security, move the retirement age to 70, cut defense, Medicare and veterans pensions, while the states cut almost everything else" (Meet the Press, 6/22/03).


Did Dean really say this? Is this taken wildly out of context? I am hoping someone who watched the show can remember. This just concerns me, because Dean is a fiscal conservative and fiscal conservatives cut social programs. Or did you think he was going to cut the military? YEAH RIGHT.

[tjdee]

1. Of course he said it--in 1995.

So take that info as you will, I mean, it was 8 years ago and as his supporters here will tell you that people's ideas can change.

He's already said he won't cut the military. Dean plans to pay for social programs by stopping all the tax cuts.

[DoveTurnedHawk]

29. You're Generous

I wish everyone else would be as generous about Clark's voting record of 20 years ago or so.

Somehow, I doubt they will be.

DTH

[tjdee]

38. That's because Clark is one of them evil evil soldiers.

Defense=Evil! Evil I say!

[papau]

45. No - he did not say that - not in 95, nor since

In 95 he agreed with a previous speaker that a pay as you go SS system needed to balance outgo benefit checks with income from the payroll tax and redeemed Government Bonds from the SS Trust fund, and that the way to do this was raising the retirement age from Reagan's 67 - Reagan pushed and signed the law that raised it from 65 to 67 - to 68 around 2020, and 70 around 2043 (a solution I suspect that will be passed because of GOP resistence to any other solution).

Dean has since signed on to Clinton's solution of ending the cap on wages covered by the payroll tax - so the rich pay the same percentage "flat tax" on all their income that those of us making less than 85000 must pay.

On MTP Russert tried to spring that on Dean, and Dean said the above - which is the true story as to 1995 and as to his position now.

No military cuts have been proposed by anyone other than Dennis K.

[wuushew]

2. Are you citing an old quote or the MTP transcript?

I am kind of confused here

[knowledgeispower]

5. I don't know

That is how the article has it written. I am assuming they are quoting MTP which was quoting an old quote. :)

[quinnox]

3. I wouldn't be surprised

Apparently, he was a DLC "new Democrat" governor, but then started to run as a leftist as soon as he began his presidential campaign. It left a lot of people who were familiar with him in Vermont scratching their head, saying this isn't the Dean that governed their state, or so I have read from various news articles.

[clar]

13. nope

We're scratching our heads over the passion he's shown. Vermont politics are pretty laid back. Even Bernie differernt at home.
Dean's policies as he runs are pretty consistent with what he did here.

[knowledgeispower]

30. Not what I have heard

Did some candidate manage to get something like 15% of the vote running against Dean FROM THE LEFT as a member of the "progressive party" or something like that? I think it was in 2000. I'm sorry I can't be more specific, it is sort of a vague recollection. But I have definitely heard that many in Vermont considered him to be too conservative.

[Eloriel]

50. Yeah, the far left

A little like the votes Nader got in 2000.

Eloriel

[alphafemale]

4. Even if he did...That was EIGHT years ago!

Things change, people change their minds about details on policies.

[knowledgeispower]

10. I am not trying to "do" anything

I am just asking a question. I don't even have a candidate at this point (hell, I'm not even sold on voting for a dem).

This is what disturbs me about you Deanie supporters though. You don't want to hear and refuse to believe anything bad about your candidate.

But do you deny that Dean is a fiscal conservative? Has he not said so himself many times before? How do fiscal conservatives manage to balance a horribly overblown budget AND bring about all the social programs he is promising? Think about that.

[alphafemale]

23. Sorry. I'd edited. "Is that the best you can do"

Wasn't fast enough. I deleted the line

Is that the best you can do.

It was provocative.

I was hoping I deleted it before it was read.

Send key remorse...again. Sigh.



But, seriously.

If you've got to dig down 8 years...?

Dah-AMM!

[knowledgeispower]

25. Good point

Yeah, 8 years is going a long way back.

But the point of it is that Dean is a fiscal conservative. Now the quote in question makes him sound worse than a Republican, but I am willing to acknowledge that might not be the case anymore.

But still, how are we going to get something like national health care from a guy who doesn't believe in spending money? Or even something less extravagant than national health care: how about just making sure all children are insured? You still can't do that without throwing some money at the problem.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

11. Dean seems to change his positions depending on who he is talking to.

Political leader or political weather vane?

[alphafemale]

36. You go back 8 years to find something and call it a weather vane?

sorry...not buying it.

[blm]

6. Dean changed on the defense budget. Now says he WON'T cut it.

So don't worry. Maybe he's changed his mind on other things, too.

[dsc]

53. maybe you have heard of the

two wars that we are in now. Can you please tell me the war we were in in 1994? I don't recall it.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

7. "Dean: "No, no, no. I’m sure I did. I’m not denying I said that."

Russert: Well, in 1995, when you were advocating that position, you were asked how would you balance the budget if we had a constitutional amendment...
Dean: Yeah.
Russert: ...calling for that, and this is what Howard Dean said. “The way to balance the budget, Dean said, is for Congress to cut Social Security, move the retirement age to 70, cut defense, Medicare and veterans pensions, while the states cut almost everything else. ‘It would be tough but we could do it,’ he said.”
Dean: Well, we fortunately don’t have to do that now.
Russert: We have a $500 billion deficit.
Dean: But you don’t have to cut Social Security to do that.
Russert: But why did you have to do it back then?
Dean: Well, because that was the middle of—I mean, I don’t recall saying that, but I’m sure I did, if you have it on your show, because I know your researchers are very good.
Russert: Well, Miles Benson is a very good reporter for the Newhouse News.
Dean: Yes, he is. No, no, no. I’m sure I did. I’m not denying I said that.
http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/912159.asp?cp1=1

[knowledgeispower]

14. So that begs the question...

How do you balance the budget witth a $500 billion deficit, yet not cut social programs, and not cut the military? Repealing the Bush tax cuts is a start, but then where do you get $ to IMPROVE social programs? Where do you get $ to finance health care?

[VermontDem2004]

17. ...

and then you have got to restrict spending. You've got to control--well, here's what we did in Vermont. We had some mild tax cuts in the '90s, not the huge ones that most other states did. Secondly, we Dean "put a lot of money into a rainy day fund, and I never let the Legislature spend more than the rate of growth of the economy, so the biggest increase I think we had in the almost 12 years I was governor was I think 5.2 percent or something like that. And then we paid off a quarter of our debt, which is what Bill Clinton did when he was president.

Now, we're not cutting higher education, we're not cutting K through 12, we're not cutting Medicaid for kids, and we have a balanced budget. So if you restrain spending, which is long-term spending, that's the key to balancing the budget. But you've got to get rid of the tax cuts because the hole is so very, very deep. And Social Security, I--the best way to balance Social Security budget right now, other than stop taking the money out for the tax cuts, is to expand the amount of money that Social Security payroll taxes apply to. It's limited now to something like $80,000. You let that rise. I also would entertain taking the retirement age to 68. It's at 67 now. I would entertain that."

[sangha]

59. That makes no sense

Maybe Dean funded a "rainy day" fund in VT, but the last time I looked, the Federal budget was running a HUGE deficit. That makes it kind of hard to start a "rainy day" fund.

Futhermore, keeping the growth in spending at or below the inflation rate means "No more new social spending"

[fob]

37. Thanks Fean for the context. Here goes my take...

First of all his answer was in regard to the question of how to balance the budget if we had a constitutional amendment. The question is the same, how to balance th ebudget, the context is different.

Here is the relevant context today;
Russert: But why did you have to do it back then?

My answer would be;
First of all tim, suck me! Second, I said that back then because the question was regarding balancing the budget under the auspices of a balanced budget amendment. The quick answer was you would have to start cutting and those were some of the programs I chose to highlight as taking the biggest hit. Perhaps you don't understand how to debate, the point was to show what damge could be done to these programs. The other reason I brought it up back then was due to the US having a RESPONSIBLE President and the comfort of realizing he would work hard to find other ways. Which leads me to the final reason we CANNOT do that today, the most irreponsible pResident the Country has ever had is now in the WH, and he is already targeted the dismantling of those programs and more. He is in over his head.

Next asinine question, tim.

fob

[Fabio]

62. I am no Dean Fan

But this question is just a trap. To see someone quoted a little out of context can be tough. Even if its not the guy your rooting for.

I think I figured out the best possible answer (in my revisionist little mind).

The first part I am just repeating for context...
Russert: Well, in 1995, when you were advocating that position, you were asked how would you balance the budget if we had a constitutional amendment...
Dean: Yeah.
Russert: ...calling for that, and this is what Howard Dean said. “The way to balance the budget, Dean said, is for Congress to cut Social Security, move the retirement age to 70, cut defense, Medicare and veterans pensions, while the states cut almost everything else. ‘It would be tough but we could do it,’ he said.”
Dean: Well, we fortunately don’t have to do that now.
Russert: We have a $500 billion deficit.
Dean: (new comment) Yes, but the question was a hypothetical one. The reality is we dont have a constitutional amendment mandating a balanced budget -- which means we can borrow and makes choices about what we cut--and I cant imagine a situation where I would make those cuts.

[clar]

8. Transparent bash

Look, bud, you're not too clever here. Are you trying to say he said this on MTP in June? I watched. He didn't.

I live in Vermont. Our social programs were not cut to the bone while Dean was Governor. Far from it. Healthcare coverage was expanded, no matter what some people here may say. Under Dean we enacted the first mental health parity law. Insurance companies cannot cherry pick. Medicare was expanded through a waiver. Get real.

Vermont's not paradise, but it's in a lot better shape than most places.

As I said, transparent flame.

[Brian Sweat]

15. Why would an erstwhile Dean supporter bash his own candidate.

Also, the post clearly implies that if Dean said this, that he said it in 1995. If that is not enough for you, then the fact that half the other posts in the thread mention that it was 8 years ago should have helped.

[knowledgeispower]

16. Please refer to post #7

You will see a transcript that someone was so generous to provide. In that transcript you will see Dean acknowledging that he did say that in 1995, and he then went on to dodge the question of how anything is different today.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

34. Bad memory?

Dean: I’m sure I did. I’m not denying I said that.
http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/912159.asp?cp1=1

[wyldwolf]

9. Shhhhhh! You're bursting a lot of bubbles here!

Dean IS a lefty! Stop saying he's just pretending! :cry:

[knowledgeispower]

18. Ha! This is my whole point...

Deanies won't listen to reason. Dean has SAID SO HIMSELF that he is NOT A LEFTY. He considers himself a CENTRIST, a FISCAL CONSERVATIVE. Now, if that is the candidate you want, GREAT. I myself think Dean might be the best candidate from a pragmatist point of view. But if you are looking for a lefty: DEAN ISN'T IT!

[VermontDem2004]

21. I know he is a centrist

which is why I like him, now don't go on this attack mode "Deanies won't listen to reason", I know Dean has said he is a centrist, I posted that on the GD Forum about a week ago in response to those saying that he is "Pretending to be a lefty".

[knowledgeispower]

24. You are right

I should not have said that all Deanies like to pretend he is a lefty. Obviously some, such as yourself, admit (and even like) that he is a centrist.

But you can't deny that a large part of the Dean support base seems to not want to acknowledge this fact.

[VermontDem2004]

31. I will deny it

Many of his supporters defend him by saying that he is a centrist on alot of issues when opposers paint this picture that he is an Ultra Liberal. Most of his support base like the fact he is against the Iraq War, he balanced budgets, and where he stands on the issues, he has said he is a centrist almost everywhere he went.

[indigo32]

28. Pssst.... wanna hear a secret

we all already know that, it's everyone else who thinks we don't AND/OR can't seem to stop projecting their wishes for a lefty on the frontrunning candidate. It's as simple as that.
I am a lefty at heart.... but a pragmatist too.

Ain't no Deanies bubble being burst here.

[knowledgeispower]

32. So as a pragmatist...

Why do you think Dean is more qualified than Clark? I am not a "Clark guy", and not trying to prove a point here. I just want to know.

Is it because Dean is more electable?

Because Dean has political experience?

I am really sort of torn between those two right now in terms of who I support amongst the Democrats.

[indigo32]

35. I really don't know enough about Clark yet

to make alot of judgements about him. Dean is running a fantastic campaign, and does have experience. Wesley may win me over, but hasn't yet with my limited exposure. Dean wowed me the very first time I saw him. I'll support whomever gets the nomination... but for right now I'm staying loyal.

[gully]

43. Please add me to the list of non burst bubbles....

Sorry, I know Dean is a social liberal and a fiscal conservative. *yawn*

[VermontDem2004]

12. He said it in 1995

Look at his response when confronted about it.

MR. RUSSERT: ...calling for that, and this is what Howard Dean said. "The way to balance the budget, Dean said, is for Congress to cut Social Security, move the retirement age to 70, cut defense, Medicare and veterans pensions, while the states cut almost everything else. 'It would be tough but we could do it,' he said."

DR. DEAN: Well, we fortunately don't have to do that now.

MR. RUSSERT: We have a $500 billion deficit.

DR. DEAN: But you don't have to cut Social Security to do that.

MR. RUSSERT: But why did you have to do it back then?

DR. DEAN: Well, because that was the middle of--I mean, I don't recall saying that, but I'm sure I did, if you have it on your show, because I know your researchers are very good.

MR. RUSSERT: Well, Miles Benson is a very good reporter for the Newhouse News.

DR. DEAN: Yes, he is. No, no, no. I'm sure I did. I'm not denying I said that. I have...

MR. RUSSERT: But you would no longer cut Social Security?

DR. DEAN: But you don't--no. I'm not ever going to cut Social Security benefits.

MR. RUSSERT: Would you raise retirement age to 70?

DR. DEAN: No. No.

MR. RUSSERT: Would you cut defense?

DR. DEAN: You don't have to do that either. Here's what you have to do. You got to get rid of the tax cuts, all of them, and then you have got to restrict spending. You've got to control--well, here's what we did in Vermont. We had some mild tax cuts in the '90s, not the huge ones that most other states did. Secondly, we put a lot of money into a rainy day fund, and I never let the Legislature spend more than the rate of growth of the economy, so the biggest increase I think we had in the almost 12 years I was governor was I think 5.2 percent or something like that. And then we paid off a quarter of our debt, which is what Bill Clinton did when he was president.

Now, we're not cutting higher education, we're not cutting K through 12, we're not cutting Medicaid for kids, and we have a balanced budget. So if you restrain spending, which is long-term spending, that's the key to balancing the budget. But you've got to get rid of the tax cuts because the hole is so very, very deep. And Social Security, I--the best way to balance Social Security budget right now, other than stop taking the money out for the tax cuts, is to expand the amount of money that Social Security payroll taxes apply to. It's limited now to something like $80,000. You let that rise. I also would entertain taking the retirement age to 68. It's at 67 now. I would entertain that.

MR. RUSSERT: But the deficit's $500 billion. Half the budget goes to Social Security, Medicare and Defense. They asked Willie Sutton why he robbed banks? He said, "That's where the money is." You could close down the entire United States government, other than Social Security, Medicare and Defense and interest on the public debt, and you still wouldn't balance the budget.

DR. DEAN: But the problem for Social Security is that it is actually in fine shape until, I don't know, 2040 or something like that.

http://www.vote-smart.org/speech_detail.php?speech_id=M000009133&keyword=Meet+the+press&phrase=&contain=

[knowledgeispower]

22. Pay down the debt

See, this is actually why I like Dean (despite what some people think, I am not trying to "bash him" or "flame" anyone).

The second highest expenditure of federal taxes is paying interest on the deficit. You decrease the deficit, you decrease the interest. You eliminate the deficit, you eliminate the interest. Then all that money that you had been paying in interest becomes available in the budget, right?

Wrong. Instead it would just go to tax cuts, like it did in the 90s when we had surpluses. This is why the "pay down the deficit plan," as nice as it sounds, simply won't work. But then again, what would?

[unfrigginreal]

19. Well lets see...

many folk back in the sixties thought that it made sense to subsidize anyone out of work regardless of their reasons. In other words, we believed that it was a good thing to give welfare to those that were lazy.

Most of those folks hold a different opinion today...why, because they realized that giving freeloaders an easy ride wouldn't fix the problem but exacerbate it.

The comparison isn't great but it shows that opinions will change depending on the economy.

Dean considered raising the age based on the economy of the time...that's a plus, not a minus in my book.

[knowledgeispower]

26. Raising retirement age "a plus"?!

Raising the age of retirement is NEVER a plus. It is already way too fucking high at 67. What is it most European countries...55 or something like that? No, screw that. I don't think ANY Democrat should EVER say that. EVER.

[unfrigginreal]

44. Yes, thinking as a pragmatist makes a hell of a lot more sense...

then pandering to a select constituency.

[sangha]

60. Rove agrees

Your arguments are right our of the RNC playbook (lazy, special interests, etc)

[DemocratSinceBirth]

33. Somebody Who Refuses To Work But Can

and I am purposefully exempting single mothers , children and the physically challenged are parasites....

I doubt there has ever been a movement in history that endorsed parasitism...

Please provide a better analogy...

[unfrigginreal]

51. You must be awfully young...

our party supported that very thing for decades!

[sangha]

61. It never happened.

Able-bodied males rarely receive welfare.

[alphafemale]

20. Changing a position - Who was against Reproductive Freedom?

Until recently?

Who conveniently abandoned a stridently Pro-Life stance in order to appeal to a Liberal base?

An 8year old off the cuff remark about a policy detail when the speaker had no ability to affect what the law would be pales in comparison to someone abandoning a career long stance against reproductive freedom.

[VermontDem2004]

27. I have no problem with people changing their positions

on certain issues, if you do change your position people critizise you for flip flopping in order to gain votes, but if you keep your position you are still critized about being wrong on the issues or far right, etc. I guess people never changed their minds? Anyways, have you changed your mind about certain things since 1995? I sure as hell have.

[bread_and_roses]

39. That any physician

...who must know the toll that work like waitressing, road repair, retail, data entry, masonry, carpentry, etc. etc. take on the human body would EVER suggest raising the retirememnt age is beyond my comprehension. It shows either a lack of comprehension or a lack of regard for the grim realities of many working people's lives, however long ago it was. We should all be asking why, in the richest country in the world, we work longer hours, have less vacation, and expect our seniours to continue working until they are nearly 70. And any candidate calling themselves a Democrat should be out there talking about this.

[Cha]

40. Hi! I just posted this on another thread...and it is pertainant to

this..

"I think Dean is an evolving person and I like it that he's not stuck


in some year where he said.. that's it there's no more to learn!

[alphafemale]

48. Thank You!

September to Remember.

I trust you're doing your part? :hi:

[mbali]

54. The problem is

that Dean doesn't just come out and say he's changed his mind. First he denies he ever said such a thing, then when confronted with proof, he seems to try to convince everyone that his current view is consistent with his previous statements. Only when backed into a corner does he finally acknowledge that maybe he changed his mind. He's coming across increasingly like a man who just can't admit that he's ever wrong or that he's capable of making a mistake.

We're still waiting for him to back off of his totally discredited comment about race. But instead of just admitting that he was wrong - after having been given every opportunity to do so - he stands his ground and insists that HE'S right and everyone else is wrong. He's looking less and less like a straight-shooter and more and more like an arrogant and stubborn man.

[IranianDemocrat]

41. WOW THE REPUG LITE IS EXPOSED!

No...I was beign sarcastic. This was 8 years ago and I don't care. I love Dean's fire and I would gladly vote for him if he receives the nomination.

I'm glad though that Deanies know how Clarkies feel with all these slandering threads taken out of context and out dated.

[stickdog]

42. No, he didn't.

Do you see any quotes around that statement?

[tjdee]

46. He admitted it to Tim Russert.

Take a look at the MTP transcript.

He said he was SURE he said it.

[papau]

47. Please see my post above - Dean is misquoted as to context, and

as to current position

[DemDogs]

55. Context seems clear to me.

He said it, now he runs away from it. I don't care what his position is, but I want all our candidates to be completely truthful -- otherwise, how do we nail Bush? And HD is having some trouble being the "staight talker"

[stickdog]

63. He admitted he said,

"The way to balance the budget is for Congress to cut Social Security, move the retirement age to 70, cut defense, Medicare and veterans pensions, while the states cut almost everything else" to Tim Russert?

Yeah, I'm sure that happened.

:eyes:

[mbali]

52. Here's a quote:

Here's a transcript from the February 28, 1995 Crossfire:

Sen. BOB PACKWOOD: I've said many times that I think we should raise the retirement age about the year 2015- raise it by that time to about age 70 and that we're going to have ask members of Congress, judges, congressional employees, all federal employees and Social Security recipients to maybe consider taking an increase that isn't quite as much as the cost-of-living increase.

MICHAEL KINSLEY: Between now and the year 2002, not in the year 2025?

Sen. BOB PACKWOOD: No, I'm- I'm saying change the retirement age to about-

JOHN SUNUNU: Senator Pryor-

Sen. BOB PACKWOOD: -to about age 70 around the 2015, and you don't wait until 2014 and then spring it on some poor devil and say, 'Oh, tough luck. You're 64, but we're raising it to 70 next year.'

. . .

HOWARD DEAN: I am very pleased to hear Bob Packwood because I absolutely agree we need to reduce the- I mean, to increase the retirement age. There will be cuts and losses of some benefits, but I believe that Senator Packwood is on exactly the right track, and we need to deal with the Social Security retirement age and get it out of the budget.


He sounded pretty unequivocal about it at the time. Strange that he couldn't remember.

[Yupster]

56. Time Warp

Seems like such a long time ago that Packwood was being chased out of the Senate.

[MGKrebs]

49. Arghhh.

Vermont, like many other states, MUST balance their budgets every year. When faced with this dilemma, cuts must be made. Vermont, and many other states, do this all the time, and Vermont is not devoid of social programs because of it.

Throwing around a huge federal deficit number, and then assuming a hypothetical premise that we have to find all that money THIS YEAR is absurd. We can embark on a plan that will eventually get us back "in the black".

Having said that, I disagree with my candidate on this issue. I do not feel it is necessary to balance the federal budget every year, and I do not think Congress will pass anything like it in my lifetime. Nevertheless, it is an honorable goal.

[RetroLounge]

57. Yawn... Yawn... Yawn... Yawn...

Boooooorrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrring...

:boring::boring::boring::boring::boring:
:boring::boring::boring::boring::boring:
:boring::boring::boring::boring::boring:

Oh wait, you said: I'm not even sure I'm gonna vote for a Democrat. or words to that effect.

Which is essentially the same as voting for Bush (see Nader, 2000).

and so then you are here for what reason?

[many a good man]

58. Dean wants to move the center to the left

Dean stated in the Washington Post something to the effect that 30 years ago he'd have been called a Rockefeller Republican. Supposedly Clinton thought his administration was acting like Eisenhower Republicans. Socially moderate fiscal conservative.

Dean sounds really good on traditional Democratic social issues in a common sense way that has appeal. He backed Civil Unions because the Court ordered it. The culture wars are over and the liberals have won. All you have to do is support the court rulings and preach tolerance.

Dean will set fiscal policy back on a rational footing. He'll expand Medicare to insure all the poor. Then we can say "with a little more taxes (on the rich and corporations) see what else Americans have." Then someday US will start to catch up to the Europeans...