Dems PR stand on Social Security

[NVMojo]

Did anyone listen to Stabenow yesterday?

January 15 at 11:06 AM ET

CONTACT: (202)

Media Advisory

Senator Stabenow to Deliver Democratic Radio Address

United States Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) will deliver the Democratic Radio Address this Saturday, January 15, 2005. In her address, Stabenow talks about the Democrats’ commitment to keeping the “security” in Social Security.

WHO: United States Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI)
WHAT: Weekly Democratic Radio Address
WHEN: Saturday, January 15, 2005 -- 11:06 a.m. (EST)
WHERE: Major radio networks, including AP, ABC, NPR, CBS Radio, CNN Radio, C-SPAN, Armed Forces Radio Network, American Urban Radio Network, Voice of America Radio Network, BBC Radio, CBC Radio, and Australian Broadcasting Corporation

Below is an transcript of her remarks:

SATURDAY, JANUARY 15, 2005 AT 11:06 AM ET:

Social Security reflects the best of America’s values.

It is a promise our government makes to all Americans that if you work hard and play by the rules, you will be able to count on a basic quality of life and dignity in your older years.

Social Security is not a handout. It’s a benefit that Americans earn, by working hard all their lives and paying into the system.

But Social Security is about more than retirement. It is America’s insurance policy. It protects you whether you are a 22-year-old just starting your career or you are a 75-year-old enjoying retirement.

It’s not just about tomorrow- it’s about today. Social Security covers you if you lose a parent or if you become disabled.

Social Security is the great American success story.

Before Social Security, 50 percent of older Americans were living in poverty. Now, it’s only 10 percent. If that’s not a success story, I don’t know what is.

Some claim that Social Security is in crisis. But let’s look at the facts.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reports Social Security can pay 100 percent of its commitments until the year 2052, almost 50 years. Still, the program does face long-term challenges, and we should act to strengthen and improve the program for the long term.

Democrats want to be part of that effort, and it will require some hard choices. But to provide some perspective, the projected long-term Social Security shortfall is only one-fifth the cost of tax breaks enacted under President Bush.

Democrats look forward to receiving a detailed Social Security proposal from President Bush. But we are concerned by some recent leaks from the White House. A memo prepared by an Administration official suggests President Bush will push a privatization plan with deep cuts in benefits.

These cuts would be as high as 25 percent for some current workers, and 45 percent for retirees in the future.

And the benefit cuts would apply to all seniors – even those who choose not to invest in privatized accounts.

America’s insurance policy was never meant to be a privatized 401k plan or a high-risk investment – it was meant to be the secure foundation for your retirement.

I remember the looks on the faces on Enron employees, many with tears in their eyes, who told me, “Thank God for Social Security – it’s all I have left.”

Beyond its deep benefit cuts and added risks, privatization also would substantially add to the national debt. Our nation already is staggering under the largest budget deficit in history.

Taking on even more debt could destabilize financial markets, drive up interest rates, and stifle economic growth. It also would force our children and grandchildren to bear the burdens of more debt and higher taxes.

When I think about my own children and all young Americans across our country who have hopes and expectations for a secure financial future – I cannot imagine piling even more debt onto their shoulders.

Democrats hope that the President will reject privatization schemes that would require deep benefit cuts and massive increases in the national debt. We want to work with the President to strengthen and improve the program. Senator Max Baucus, our senior member on the Finance Committee, will be leading our caucus on this issue.

Democrats look forward not only to making Social Security more secure, but to developing new and innovative ways to promote savings, in addition to Social Security. Too few Americans are saving for their future, and we must address that. It’s simply not enough to maintain the status quo.

Democrats are committed to keeping the security in Social Security. At the same time, we want to look to the future to create new ways for Americans to build wealth and retirement security.

Because every working American deserves a secure retirement.

[annabanana]

1. "Democrats hope that the President will reject privatization schemes "

Now THERE'S a statement with guts....... Jiminy Christmas, what does it take for these guys to get ticked off?

on edit: is this truely what the party is reduced to?

[Mojambo]

2. She needs to tutor Emanuel before his next TV gig n/t

[LiberalEsto]

3. It's not a "Social Security crisis"

as the rethugs claim.

It's a Social Security coverup.

The thugs looted Social Security's surplus to pay for the Iraq war.
Now they're claiming a phony crisis to justify reducing benefits -- but it's mainly a way to conceal the fact that they stole it.

Al Gore was absolutely 100% right about putting Social security funds in a "lock box".

[madfloridian]

4. If people don't contribute to Social Security as much....what will happen.

Are the private savings accounts going to be privatized? Where will the money come from to keep enough to pay out in the traditional?

[kerrygoddess]

5. Nancy Pelosi's Statement today

Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today on a report in The New York Times today that the Bush Administration is using the Social Security Administration to promote his plan to drastically slash benefits:

"Once again, Republicans and the Bush Administration have demonstrated that they will stop at nothing to push their partisan political agenda. The Administration has distributed fake video news reports and paid a conservative journalist to support its education agenda. Now nonpartisan employees of the Social Security Administration are being forced to engage in partisan scare tactics by spreading false information about the future of Social Security to create a crisis and promote the President's risky plan for private accounts.

"That is wrong -- the Social Security Administration must not be used to undermine Social Security, which is crucial for helping American seniors achieve retirement security.

"The American people deserve an open and honest debate over the future of Social Security. All they are getting from the Bush Administration is half-truths and misinformation.

"There should be a full investigation into the charges made by employees of the Social Security Administration and any illegal political activities being conducted by the Social Security Administration should immediately cease."

http://www.lightupthedarkness.org/blog/default.asp?view=plink&id=235

[annabanana]

6. this is right on the money!

The civil servants are NOT ALLOWED to engage in partisan politics on the job! It's against the law!!

[madfloridian]

7. Good for her.

:hi:

[PROGRESSIVE1]

9. Nancy and Harry need to be our OFFICIAL spokespeople on...

the talk shows!

[JDPriestly]

10. Good for Representative Pelosi

This shows how forceful she can be when she gets up her courage. I hope we will see more of her fighting spirit.

[SharonAnn]

8. Where did you find that transcript?

[JDPriestly]

11. If you are young, from a middle class family

and think privatization and lower Social Security benefits will be good for you, stop and think about this. Assuming your parents are lucky enough to have some assets and plan to leave them to you, what do you think will happen to your inheritance if your parents have to dip more into their savings and maybe even sell their house and other property to stay alive? Remember, if your parents have paid the taxes on your inheritance when they earned it and structure how they leave it to you well, you may be able to receive at least some of it tax free. Even before the Bush tax cuts, you had to inherit a lot before you had to pay much tax on your money inheritance. Chances are good that you will pay even less tax on your it by the time your parents die. Do you really think it is smart to trade your inheritance for the chance to play a few pennies on the stock market?

If your parents are not financially well off, the choice is even clearer. Check your history books. Who do you think supported mom and dad before Social Security? And where do you think they lived? Similar answers to both questions -- their kids and with their kids. Think for yourselves. The only winners with Bush's plan are stock brokers.