Social Security memo gives GOP smoking gun

The Washington Times ^ | 5.24.02 | Stephen Dinan

[mhking]

Republicans have obtained a congressional staff memo they say proves that Democrats want to use Social Security for scare tactics, not serious debate.

The memo, mistakenly sent by e-mail to a Republican staff member on Capitol Hill, contains an apparent draft opinion piece on Social Security and reaction from staffers in the office of Rep. Marcy Kaptur, Ohio Democrat. The memo argues that President Bush and Republicans want to "privatize" Social Security, which the author likens to "corporate gambling."

[mhking]

Democrats admit lying about Social Security in order to scare old folks.

[Young Werther]

"Round up the usual suspects and take them to headquarters where they'll be interrogated!"

[Registered]

If this had ended up in Democrat hands they would be on the Sunday talk shows holding copies of it up to the viewers. The GOP doesn't know how to use these "weapons".

[Robert357]

Maybe the GOP or a friendly group, should take out a full page add in the AARP Mature Living that shows the email, the newspaper article and then asks the Question to the AARP readers and their lobbying group of should Democrats who lie to those to whom Social Security is an important earned benefit, be supported in the fall elections?

I think that it is time for AARP lobbying to be confronted by its membership and for the NEA to be confronted by its membership on political support.

[ancient_geezer]

Gephardt: "It will break our contract with the American people"

SS a Contract with the American people????

What Social Security Trust Fund

"The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Fleming v. Nestor (1960), 363 US 603; that there is no Constitutional right to Social Security benefits. Social Security benefits can legally be cut or eliminated et any time, and beneficiaries have no recourse. The Court held that, "To engraft upon the Social Security System a concept of 'accrued property rights' would deprive it of the flexibility and boldness in adjustments to ever changing conditions which it demands."

Looks more like a Contract on the American people:

Alan Greenspan, 1997-Unfunded Social Security Liability

"For example, factoring in a 2 percent real annual rate of discount and including other technical assumptions, the value of recognition certificates the U.S. government would need to issue to ensure that all currently accrued legislated future benefits are paid would be roughly $9-1/2 trillion. Alternatively, at a 1 percent real rate, the value would be roughly $12 trillion, and at a 6 percent real rate, the value would be about $4-1/2 trillion."

[WIMom]

Scare-tactic smoking gun (DEMS CAUGHT RED HANDED)

Here's the letter:

Please excuse any typos.

-----Original Message-----
From: Little, Julie
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 6:20 PM
To: Katich, Steve
Cc: Fought, Steve
Subject: RE: Have at it...possible SS op ed

In response to your question: not entirely factually accurate. Here is my first pass.

Sue, I hope this is not under consideration for the pull out. Talk about scaring seniors, - this may be a little over the top. But it is sooo fun to bash Republicans.:)

-----Original Message-----
From: Katich, Steve
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 1:49 PM
To: Fought, Steve; Little, Julie
Subject: Have at it...possible SS op ed

Does the rhetoric match the facts here?

Upon reviewing the Bush Administration's 2003 budget, it is clear that the Administration has failed to learn the lessons from the Enron scandal. The President's budget raids the Social Security trust fund to the tune of $1.6 trillion dollars to pay for tax cuts for the wealthiest one percent of Americans and would give new tax breaks to corporations.

Americans want and deserve retirement security not retirement insecurity. Many senior citizens in America rely on the monthly Social Security checks that average $874. This is not pocket change; it is a lifeline. Without Social Security and Medicare many would not survive.

Privatizing Social Security- as Bush and most Republicans favor- is not the answer. The uncertainties of the market and corporate gambling with other people's money are no substitutes for the roc-solid guarantee of Social Security, an insurance program and disability program. It should not be overlooked that any one of us, or any one of our family members, could be struck by a disability at any time.

How is this actually happening? Despite voting 5 times to but Social Security in a 'lockbox' Republicans have just voted to raid the trust fund to pay for huge tax cuts. I voted against the Republican budget because I believe Social Security trust fund dollars should only be sued for Social Security.

If raiding Social Security weren't bad enough, Republican have also voted to pay huge tax rebates to some of the wealthiest most profitable corporations in our country. Not just little tax breaks and not just t his year, but Republicans would pay these corporate giants hundreds of millions of dollars over the next 10 years.

Who would benefit the most if Republicans had their way? Enron, General Electric, and Chevron to name a few. It is painfully obvious that the Administration's priorities are complete misguided: placing tax breaks for the wealthiest individuals and huge corporations above protecting the sacred funds in the Social Security trust fund is wrong.

What happened to the surplus and how did the Administration get to the point of raiding the Social Security trust fund? The single biggest cause of the depletion of the surplus and the return of deficit spending is again, tax cuts skewed to benefit the rich. Just one short year ago the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office projected a 10-year surplus, not including the Social Security surplus, of $3.1 trillion; not, the projection has plunged to a deficit of $742 billion, almost $1 trillion.

For far too many of our nation's elderly and disabled, Social Security is the difference between absolute poverty and living their advanced years in dignity. Tax cuts for the wealthy and for huge, profitable corporations is not the answer to ensuring Social Security for generations to come. Neither is privatization. American families work hard and pay into the system, and they should be able to count on Social Security when they retire.

[KarlInOhio]

Social Security memo gives GOP smoking gun

The pubbies will handle this like kidzone.com tells kids what to do with a gun:
3: What should you do if you find a gun or a rifle?
A: Don't touch it! And tell your mom or dad right away!

[hchutch]

There is more than one way to skin a cat...

By letting it be known that the memo is here, and the fact that at least one Dem admitted it was not "factually correct" (what is that - Demonrat for "lies"?), and by putting it out in a press release, we have, to an extent blunted a portion of the attack before it even gets out of the trenches.

Of course, it might not stop Gephardt from that Enron meeting in Houston, but the memo will help make a LOT of counterpoints in the fall. Remember the parable of the old bull and the young bull, and apply the lesson it teaches. IMHO, the President has been very good at applying that lesson, and the Dems have been flustered big time.

[The Raven]

>>"Privatizing Social Security- as Bush and most Republicans favor- is not the answer. The uncertainties of the market and corporate gambling with other people's money are no substitutes for the roc-solid guarantee of Social Security"

No WAY !!!

There's no guarantee. No way, no how. And the seniors should be aware of that. And on top of that....if you die - there's zero money to your heirs. None. It's not a savings account.....it's a promise. They can change it tomorrow. And they will change it - there's no way to fund the chain letter.

[DemoSmear]

"If that is scaring people, then we're going to have to go back to the dictionary and figure out the word 'scare,' because if it's scaring them, it's scaring them because of what is in the president's proposal," House Minority Leader Little Dick H. Gephardt said.

Little Dick,

The word scare appears in the dictionary, the same one that defines "is", "demagoguery", "demogoron", and "demon".

[CPT Clay]

A Massive, intense, efficient pre-emptive strike would work best. C'mon we know it's the only trick left in their book!!!!!

[Paul Atreides]

Don't expect much action from The Get-Along Gang.

[opticoax]

Who was on the distribution list?

Al Hunt, Margaret Carlson, Eleanor Clift, entire NYT editorial page, Brokaw, Jennings, Rather.

[BlackbirdSST]

Democrats admit lying about Social Security in order to scare old folks.

Gotta love that email! Blackbird.

[hchutch]

Well, the old saying (well, slightly paraphrased) works again:
Give the Dems enough rope, and they'll hang themselves. :)

[GailA]

The TN aarp is urging it's members to BACK the benedict naifeh flat 4.5% income tax plan..they neglected to tell their members that their SS checks and pension checks if they pay Federal IT on them would be subjected to benedict naifeh's State IT. All so they can save a few pennies in sales tax on food or things like asprin.

[RichardEdward]

smells like a setup to me

[Feiny]

Looks as if the Washinton Times is the ONLY paper reporting this....if the tables were turned & a Republican had written a memo admitting they were wrong on an issue but would continue to pursue it because is was sooooo fun to bash Democrats.....I think we all know this would be the top story leading every newscast & front page.

Just more proof of media bias. Not to mention the incompetance of Republican leadership....they should be all over this one.

[mhking]

Not to mention the incompetance of Republican leadership....they should be all over this one.

You would think Lott would use this to club Daschle and Gephardt severely about the head. But this shows his continued ineptness when it comes to running the GOP on the Hill.

[Feiny]

That is the truth....sad, but true.