Sep 17, 2010
Jeff Miller Doubles Down On Social Security Privatization
This morning’s Ashville Citizens Times reports Jeff Miller [NC-11] was outraged that Representative Heath Shuler revealed to the public that Miller supports privatization. In his outraged impromptu press conference at this campaign headquarters, Miller reaffirmed his support for moving Social Security to private Wall Street accounts and for raising the retirement age. The Associated Press and Politifact have said that this position is “the same thing” as privatization. [Ashville Citizen-Times, 9/16/10]
“Jeff Miller’s just doubled down on a position that puts him far out of touch with the concerns of seniors in western North Carolina,” said Jesse Ferguson, Regional Press Secretary at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “In one breath he claimed a commitment to seniors and in the next he talked about gambling Social Security funds on Wall Street and raising the retirement age. Jeff Miller owes it to every family in this district to explain how his plans would risk their Social Security. Before Jeff Miller thought about running for Congress, he should have learned what his devastating policies actually mean and what they would do to real people.”
BACKGROUND
Associated Press Fact Check: Personal Accounts and Privatization: “It’s The Same Thing”. In 2008, the Associated Press wrote a fact check on Sen. John McCain’s attempt to distance himself from support for Social Security privatization. The AP wrote, “McCain and other Republicans once spoke more openly of "privatization" but realized people didn't like to hear that. Now they talk of "personal accounts." It's the same thing.” [Associated Press, 6/14/08]
Politifact: GOP Changed Name of Privatization to Personal Accounts From Polling. According to the Pulitzer Prize winning Politifact, “It was around this time that Bush and his party decided that most people didn't like the idea of "privatizing" Social Security. Pollsters found that if you didn't call Bush's plan "privatization" but instead called it "personal accounts," you could increase support for the plan significantly — even though it was the same plan.” [Politifact, 6/13/08]
Leading Privatization Opponent: Individual Accounts Means “Privatization”. According to AARP, “’Privatization’ is often used as shorthand for the idea of taking some of the money workers currently pay into the Social Security system and diverting it into individually owned accounts, where each worker would bear some risk for how his or her investments performed. These accounts would be ‘carved-out’ of Social Security.”
From AARP:
Diverting money away from Social Security and into individual accounts is risky and involves trading some of today's inflation protected, lifetime guaranteed benefit for an account subject to market risk and not guaranteed to last a lifetime or keep pace with inflation. Inflation, market turns or loss of employment can mean that your private account may not have enough money to provide an adequate benefit.
Unfortunately, there is a lot of debate on the semantics rather than the substance. Essentially it doesn't matter if you call the concept ‘privatization,’ ‘personalization,’ or anything else—diverting Social Security revenues into individual accounts shifts risk to the individual and hurts the financial status of Social Security itself.” [www.aarp.org/money/social_security/a2003-03-26-ssprivatization.html]
Want the latest updates? Follow the DCCC on Facebook and Twitter:
