Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
"The Republican Pledge to Privatize Social Security"
The House Republican "Pledge to America"
would make permanent George Bush's tax cuts for the wealthiest
Americans, at a cost of more than $3 trillion over the coming decade.
Yet, the GOP gameplan
proposes to address the massive shortfall with a freeze on only some
domestic programs that would save about $100 million a year.
How will the rest of the massive budget deficits proposed in the GOP pledge be offset?
Buried in the 21-page document is the real pledge: a discussion of "reviewing" Social Security and other entitement programs" and a commitment to a program "requiring a full accounting of Social Security."
DC bureaucrat speak, to be sure. But it is not hard to translate.
"What's hidden in this pledge is the Republican pledge to privatize Social Security," says Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, of Florida.
Privatization of Social Security, a longtime GOP priority, was the first focus of former President Bush and the Republican cogressional majorities the last time they won an election cycle—in 2004. And, with they scheme to lock in Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy, the only way Republicans will avoid creating the largest deficits in American history is by ending the nation's commitment to its seniors and to its most vulnerable citizens—by gutting Social Security and functional Medicare and Medicaid programs.
"They clearly support privatizing Social Security. They clearly support turning Medicare into a voucher program," says Congresswoman Wasserman Schultz. noting that two key players in the House Republican Caucus—Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan and Virginia Congressman Eric Cantor—have are busy championing such proposals. "Paul Ryan and Eric Cantor wrote a book about it and are in the middle of a book tour promoting that."
Ryan and Cantor will have plenty of company if Republicans sweep this year's mid-term elections. Some of the party's leading contenders are explcit about their disdain for Social Security.
Appearing this week on an Alaska radio show, Republican Senate candidate Joe Miller—Sarah Palin's personal favorite—referred to maintaining Social Security programs as federal initiative where "government is into something that it shouldn’t have gotten into."
Miller is blunter than Republican leaders. But the "Pledge to America" makes the agenda clear enough. Either the pledge is an outline for massive new debts and deficits or it is a roadmap to the privatization of Social Secuity, Medicare and Medicaid.
To suggest otherwise would be to engage in what another George Bush once described as "voodoo economics."
- Posted in
81 Comments so far
Show AllThis political ploy on the "privatization of Social Secuity" by "republicans" is pathetic. No one but the most desperate democratic fool can take this DNC invention for anything but the BS it is.
This is what happens when you govern without a thought to what the citizens of the country want you to do. You are reduced to making up "straw man" arguments because your accomplishments are less than zero.
Pathetic.
The Democeats accomplishments are less than zero, but it is also true that the Republicans would like to privatize social security.
Cant you keep two thoughts in your mind at the same time?
What are you doing to change things? What activist organizations are you involved in down there in Austin?
Yes, they would have suggested it. Some even believe its a good idea. But that is not what this is about. That seems evident to me.
We older folks do have trouble handling more than one thing at a time tis true. We claim its because of the vast knowledge stored therein, some suggest otherwise.
I have found over the years that "activist" organizations are fairly useless. They start out with great aims but end with infighting and "staff" needs.
I prefer the direct approach. I work on at least four habitat houses a year (but never again in the summer months), I volunteer one day a week at our local food pantry, volunteer councilor for Vets and work in individual political campaigns when I find a candidate worthwhile. Including a few republicans over the years. Good people are not defined by party.
I no longer volunteer outside the country and I don't live in Austin. FAR too crowded and conjested. :)
There are indeed many who in anger want SOMETHING FOR NOTHING. Those who propose
these kind of secessionist viewpoints should consider carrying on 1) with no
state aid for anything at all (education,infrastructure,defense, hurricanes,
tornedos, roads, law enforcement and so forth.)2) No eligibility for social
security, medicare, medicaid, hospitals.3) They would not have to serve nor would
any corporations or businesses be permitted to manufacture for US defense
purposes. If a river overflows..well, that is THEIR problem. They can finance
any remedies.4) No representation in either body of Congress (Senator,Congressperson). Or in executive posts for which US citizenship is a requirement. After all, why should "my" money go to victims of hurricaines or tornedos.
6)Use of airports and transportation (rail,shipping) should be by private arrangement between our Congress (minus them, of course) as with a foreign government with tarriffs and extra taxes as we wish to place on such use.
No...I think they want SOMETHING FOR NOTHING. We have financial problems in the
state in which I reside and (to use their terms), I see no reason why "MY" money
should go to someone else. They can pay for it themselves !!
SaboCat,
Mightymite is at least the second poster today you questioned what they personally do to support the progressive cause. Can't you make arguments without trying to suggest with a hypothical personal question, based on no knowledge of the person, that the poster lacks credibility. Do you think you are the only activist (if you really are one) that posts on CD?
Social Engineering: a method of attack, where someone makes use of persuasion, often abusing trust or naivety to obtain information that can be used to gain unauthorized access to computers or information.
Another way to do this is to get you "angry" enough to "prove" yourself with personal info. Volunteer and activist orgs and most other "small time" fellowships cannot afford "big time" information security, electronic or paper. Most of these orgs also collect a lot of personal data to make sure the volunteers are legit or at least safe(ie. not criminals or child abusers)
Maybe there is phishing going on!?!?!?
W specifically tried to privatize social security and the present crop of Republicans have stated that they definitely think it is a good idea (Paul Ryan's guidelines). How can you deny that they plan to do everything possible to transfer Americans' savings into the pockets of Wall St.?
@ mightymite: George Bush attempted to privatize parts of Social Security in 2005 but failed to get the votes. Recent GOP candidates for Senate such as Sharron Angle, Joe Miller and Rand Paul, et al, have also made noises about privatizing, 'personalizing,' or getting rid of SS and Medicare.
-- Angle says on her campaign website she wants to 'transition out' of Social Security and Medicare, and has said she wants the programs "personalized" (meaning privatized).
-- Joe Miller has said that SS and Medicare should be privatized because they are are "unconstitutional."
-- Rand Paul has claimed SS and Medicare are "socialism" and wants to see them privatized.
Get your facts straight, mightymite; to say this is some 'straw man' of the Dems shows you either haven't been paying attention or you're intentionally propagandizing.
I also hear a lot of talk about 'Social Security not being there for me.' from many diverse people. This has been drummed by the neo-cons and MSM for quite some time. It creates fear and resignation.
Of course the Dem's will not "save us", but their historic votes have kept congress from subverting entirely the SS program. If the people vote in these particular Rep's, congress will move to drastically change or eliminate SS because, as you say, that is their position. If Dem's keep their majority or gain seats in congress there is still a chance that any change will be moderate and it will not be eliminated. After all, that is the Dem's position.
I'm not so "stupid" as to think this will be totally altruistic on the Dem's part but it is better than the Rep's platform and plan.
Those evil, wicked, mean, bad, and nasty Republican villains are trying to take away my hard-earned Social Security!
Thank God citizens have an alternative! With our faith, hope, and unremitting financial and electoral support, the Democrats and Obama will soon save us and put things to rights!
Whatever would we do if we didn't have almost daily astute and insightful political analysis from "Nation" pundits like John Nichols to open our eyes and show us the way?
... Hmm, you know, these new fast-acting maximum-strength Stupid Pills really WORK! Glad I downed a couple before tuning in.
OS
Darn! We said the same thing except mine was pedestrian while yours was aptly creative. Kudo's and envy.
I confess: one reason I tune in to Common Dreams is that my sadistic self really, really, REALLY enjoys a good ol' John Nichols bashing. And there's no shortage of him (the cretin) or it here.
This document is another GOP declaration of war on the poor, elderly and even the middle class.
The disadvantaged among us merely want to be able to put food on their tables and have a roof over their heads. Yet, the Republican party would deny them these basic necessities and turn what little they have over to Wall Street speculators. Meanwhile, the GOP accuses others of engaging in "class warfare."
Charles Dickens's London, where the poor died in the streets and were carted off to mass burials, is starting to look more and more like twenty-first century America.
"Charles Dickens's London, where the poor died in the streets and were carted off to mass burials, is starting to look more and more like twenty-first century America."
...the Republicans will drive the cart, and the Democrats will wield the shovel.
>>the Republicans will drive the cart, and the Democrats will wield the shovel
Are you suggesting these people would do WORK?
The Republicans would provide the cart at a 40 percent markup payable on installments with a 30 percent interest rate. They would then package up the "promissary notes to repay" into derivatives and sell them on the market again 15 times over.
The Democrats would supply the shovel at a 40 percent Markup but pass a law mandating the costs be equally spread amongst all taxpayers. Each "Citizen" would be mandated to buy three shovels or face a jail term.
The folk pushing the carts and wielding the shovels will , as usual , be the minimum wage warking class.
Your scenario is right on the mark, and of course, both Democrats and Republicans, in bipartisan spirit, will decree that any money saved from the aforementioned mass burials shall be distributed to the rich landowners who obtained such mass burial sites through the Law of Eminent Domain.
Gw
Beautifully said. I'm agog at the descriptive poetry today, an apt caricature of each party. Kudos and envy here too.
What you say is becoming quite true. Here in NC and in other parts of the country, morgues are fill up with the dead because families cant afford to bury them. Counties here pay for the disposal of these bodies, so I would not be surprised to see them recommend mass burials because of the economic hard times...
Our leaders should be hanging their heads in shame.
We're getting raped on both sides of the Fence. The republicans would rape us worse though.
Yea I agree with you. Both parties exist primarily to serve the rich, but the Democrats will occasionally throw a small bone to the average Joe/Jane, while the Republicans will not.
"...the Democrats will occasionally throw a small bone to the average Joe/Jane, while the Republicans will not...."
But that's just sad and demeaning. They are our public servants, their salaries paid by us. They shouldn't be throwing an occasional bone to us; they should be doing our bidding. Actually, I think we should be throwing objects at them for acting the way they are. Maybe, hopefully, that will happen in the future.
Also, as some others on CD have pointed out, the Dems in some instances can do more harm than the Repubs because people trust the so-called party of the working people to safeguard social security. The Dems might just accomplish what Bush Jr. and the Repubs couldn't - the gutting of social security. Just watch and see what happens when the Cat Food Commission is done doing its dirty work. The day they gut the social security that we've been paying into all these years -- in the name of austerity -- while giving trillions to the banksters and tax cuts to the filthy rich, might just be the day we see the sheeple finally rise up (or sit down, for a general strike).
The repugs thouroughly enjoy raping us until we're dead so they can then usurp our souls (accumulated energy).
This is the tenor of Lesser-Evilism, to a "T."
"We're getting raped by both the Repubs and the Dems, but at least the Dems won't rape us as hard."
Rape is rape. Murder is murder. Evil is evil. Whether it is a little bit of murder, or a lot of murder. You are like the people saying "You can't compare the United States to Nazi Germany! We may have killed 100,000 Iraqi citizens, but Hitler killed 6 million Jews! So the U.S. is less evil than Nazi Germany!"
Wrong.
STOP voting for evil. STOP voting to get raped. Whether they stick it in 6 inches - the Repubs, or 5 inches - the Dems, it is still RAPE.
START voting for what is RIGHT - 3rd party candidates. Whether they have a chance of winning or not, at least you voted your conscience, and against being raped.
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag, carrying a cross."
Sinclair Lewis, "It Cant Happen Here", 1935
Well, at least the Dims do use a little K-Y sometimes.
Gotta go pick a few tomatoes--- MD
I have written many responses comparing the Democratic Party to the designated losers in the World Wrestling Federation; or one of those runaway truck ramps filled with sand next to a freeway. (Whenever any real progressive momentum starts to build, the Democratic Party's leadership believes its role is to direct it into the sand pit until it is rendered harmless.)
I have also written about Obama's complicit role in appointing a commission of right wing ideologues to reform Social Security.
I didn't wish to repeat those responses here.
Let's not leave out the Washington Generals! ;)
http://washingtongenerals.com/
+1000 and we deserve to, we have paid into it all our working lives.
OLD GUY: I just noticed something today. That not only do most people/workers have piss poor wages (relative to rising costs of living), the owners of media have convinced them that their extra pennies should be spent on products that kill or harm them slowly--like excessive alcohol, cigarettes, "snacks," and fake "foods."
I was thinking how complete "the great con" has become: that the supermarket cashier trapped in a life of poverty she has slim odds of escaping thinks she can "enjoy" a moment of "freedom" when she goes outside to smoke on her break.
Perhaps the collective lives of quiet desperation will soon become one loud, continuous, resounding primal scream.
The GOP is working on a new variation of this theme by getting the poor to vote for the very persons who will steal away the last dollars standing between them, old age, and homelessness.
Now that's something to vote for! (Obvious sarcasm here.)
I suppose if one is going to live a miserable grinding live working for poverty wages until retirement wherein "Privatized Social Security" will see you even worse off and sleeping in some back alley, those products that will kill will be seen by some as a "Humane way" of ending lifes suffering.
It another of those "Market based solutions".
Souix Rose, please forgive me for seeming to have such a violent attitude as it really isn't my own.
But if you stand in the lines at the supermarkets, talk with people fueling their vehicles, or just start a casual conversation with a stranger you happen to be walking in proximity to, there is this sense of anger. People, especially those who were born during the boomer years have noticed something amiss. This isn't their country anymore. There aren't the friendly attitudes towards one another. The goodwill people used to extend to others has turned to suspicion and distrust.
Once a connection is made between two people, all is well, but there is a huge amount of distrust. People aren't quite yet able to put their finger on what is wrong, thanks to the MSM. But times are a changing. I truly believe, based on polling data, that the average American is not as stupid as they are made out to be. Rather, I think that they are at a loss as to what to do. We have no representative government, we have no true rule of law, and for the average person on the street, the police are to be feared.
I truly believe that unless a viable political candidate comes along who actually wants to turn things around (and that being if they can, the Kennedys for example) we are going to have a revolt that will be comparable to those of Russia and France.
The people of this country have enjoyed what freedoms it has allowed for well over 200 years, and they aren't going to give those freedoms up to a bunch of spoiled richpigs without a fight.
Just my 2 cents worth and of course I could be wrong...
One scenario of your revolution that just may play out is that the uberclass will be guiding the violence via groups like the tea baggers. Dick Armey was instrumental in setting up the tea baggers through his lobbying group, and many others like him are now funding and organizing it. The end result will be that the hoi polloi will end up dead, and the uberrich will still be in control.
But history does show that when the separation between the overlords and the plebes gets too big, there is violence. JFK made the statement that "When peaceful change becomes impossible, violent change becomes inevitable." History has shown that over and over again.
LOL, Texas Aggie -- Dick Armey in his multiple roles as Republican Big Brother, Inner Tea Party honcho O'Brien, and Emmanuel Goldstein, fierce leader of the Tea Party opposition who was, in fact, a myth created by the Inner Party to keep track of possible revolutionaries. Who says the GOP Elite doesn't read? They've obviously learned their Orwell, uh, well.
Thank God "We" have Obama watching our backs.
http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=ask_this.view&askthisid=00456
What Nichols doesn't mention is that the Republican plan to privatize SS is contingent upon the success of Obama's Deficit Reduction Commission (aka the "Cat Food" Commission).
This group stacked with SS hating ideologues will report its "findings" after the upcoming elections. It's no secret that their outcome is predetermined...Social Security must be cut to pay for deficits it had no part in creating.
With that finding the first blow of what will ultimately be the death of SS will have been landed.
Voters will now have the choice: Either let democrats cut SS benefits or hand power over to Republicans and let them privatize it.
However, both roads ultimately lead to Wall Street pilfering the funds.
The Democrats' compliance and participation in the theatrics is the key.
Bush aptly proved that the public will fight back if you simply announce your intentions to burglar the fund outright.
Hence, they need the Dems to play the "good cop".
This necessitated the creation of the catfood commission acting under the absurd pretense to cut payments in order to save the system...when their actual job is to land the first deadly strike and create a false choice.
You cannot vote to protect SS within the confines of the two party system as both parties support its demise.
No more need be said. An excellent posting.
However, if anything, you are being too charitable in assigning the Democrats merely the role of apparatuses in the "theatrics,' rather than being instrumental in pulling the levers themselves.
The Democrats are first and foremost, a party of finance capital through and through.
The real 'deus ex machina' in this abysmal drama are the Republicans.
"Vote Democtatic?"
"Why of course!"
"John Nichols and Norman Solomon say so."
America cannibalizes itself.
The people cheer!
Both parties work for Wall Street.
Wall Street wants those funds.
Wall Street will get those funds.
Unless the public rises up.
Pretty simple.
"Unless the public rises up." –(Cygnus-X1-isaHole)
The public will not 'rise up.'
This is America.
Pretty simple.
Start building the guillotines RIGHT NOW!
Unfortunately I fear you are correct. Out politicians are now so totally corrupt, the only way to make them do what is right for average people is if the fear for their lives when they walk the streets of DC.
Exactly correct. Good analysis.
We continue our slide toward Third World status.
---------------------------------
I would rather vote for what I want and not get it, than vote for what I don't want and get that. -- Eugene V. Debs
CYGNUS: Nice political chess-game analysis. You're right-on. Obama greased the skids so the GOP can seal the deal. Few things are uglier than the continued sell-out of the American people. When sociopaths run the nation, throw the lion's share of assets at already rich amoral bankers and the MIC with its insatiable death (to others) wish... it's not a stretch to see these same tainted minds turn policy against their "own" people.
Karma's boomerang (a/k/a karmic blowback) is operating.
Almost amusing how the lemmings are lead to their own demise.
"Vote for us and we will let you give us your money and you can get nothing for it".
Privatization of social security would be the biggest giveaway of public assets ever in history. Worthy of banana boat dictator fleecing status.
Another Nichols article?! We had to endure one yesterday.
After yesterday, I cannot bear to read another one from this sycophantic apologist for the status quo.
His underlying message: Rs bad, Ds not perfect. Vote D in November you pathetic peons. I have books to sell.
There are two major errors in this article:
1. The Democrats and Republicans have already been working to privatize SS behind the scenes. Look me up in the archives for details since I don't feel like repeating here.
2. Not all Republicans are on board. In my district, Scott Rigell, Republican against incumbent Nye, had this to say.
http://www.scottrigell.com/protecting-social-security/
Not that I trust a former Marine turned auto business owner to protect SS but I thought that it might be necessary to correct the author on this one.
Max, I would usually tell you that you can always trust a Marine, unfortunately there are some you cannpot. The first clue is when they become politicians.
You could say that about former Senator Chuck Robb, current Senator Jim Webb, and plenty of other Republicans and Democrats in my state who served before entering politics. For Rigell, I would say that being a car dealer a long time ago was more than enough to ruin his trustworthiness with his entering politics to keep it that way. If there is one thing I further hate about former soldiers running for politics, it's their photo shoots. Their wives and children may be hugging their soldiers and smiling but I do not for one moment believe that they are all that happy that he served except to see him alive.
Coming back alive counts. Frankly I hate to see guys putting up their pictures in uniform when they run for office. Some serve, some do not, but neither should comment on it. Serving doesn't mean you know diddly more than anyone else about politics.
Just as in the general population, some Marines you can trust (Semper Fi), but others, like Oliver North, will patriotically lie to save their own asses.