 |
 |
"The Young, the Restless and the Individual Social Security Accounts" S4 in CQ Magazine!
October 18th 10:57:34 AM
Students for Saving Social Security featured in this week's Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report!
"The president has observed a diminished appetite in Congress for an overhaul. But the issue, it is clear, is not going away. Long term, the debate will be decided by the nations younger generations."
"All the groups employees agree that theyre laying in for the long haul. A delay just makes us bigger and more powerful, says Jonathan Swanson, the groups co-founder."
Read the entire article
CQ WEEKLY VANTAGE POINT
Oct. 17, 2005 Page 2752
The Young, the Restless and the Individual Social Security Accounts
By Alex Wayne, CQ Staff
Perhaps you thought the debate over Social Security was over. After all, Americans United to Protect Social Security the liberal interest group that has led the charge against individual accounts has all but disbanded. AARP is spending more energy promoting its new Medicare drug benefit insurance plan than it is fighting President Bush's Social Security proposals. And Republicans in Congress are avoiding the issue like avian flu.
But in borrowed office space at 18th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, a handful of twentysomethings called Students for Saving Social Security, or S4, are trying to keep the Bush plan alive. On a recent Monday afternoon, they packed boxes with T-shirts, Frisbees and stickers. All the swag, which was headed mainly to young Republicans at college campuses, promotes individual investment accounts. The stickers are direct: Dont be, they read, followed by a large drawing of a screw. This isn't your grandfathers talking point.
The Social Security debate has been going on for 20 years, said Jo Jensen, the groups chief of staff, who has also been alive for 20 years. But this is new to us. Its definitely not dead to us.
The president has observed a diminished appetite in Congress for an overhaul. But the issue, it is clear, is not going away. Long term, the debate will be decided by the nations younger generations. Thats why you have the AARP joining forces with MTVs Rock the Vote initiative to oppose individual accounts and why S 4 is continuing to hang around in Washington long after the expected battle royal in Congress over the issue has fizzled out.
Older people had already made up their minds, said AARPs policy and strategy director, John Rother. The younger set was the only part of the population that was still in play.
Members of S say theyre keen to keep their target demographic in play. Once you do talk to someone, they get it, says Ursula Williams, who at 28 is S 4s elder stateswoman. Like Jensen, the multiethnic Williams brings a missionary zeal to the job; she left a job at a California public relations firm to fight for individual accounts, which she believes will help black families build wealth.
All the groups employees agree that theyre laying in for the long haul. A delay just makes us bigger and more powerful, says Jonathan Swanson, the groups co-founder.
And maybe more dedicated. Jensen is a Mount Holyoke junior who had a scholarship to work for GOP Rep. Rob Simmons of Connecticut this summer. But midway through she gave it up, after learning that Simmons doesnt back individual accounts.
She fines her office mates $1 if they pronounce each letter of AARPs acronym instead of just calling the group Aarp. Around these parts, the enormous interest group for seniors is known as Enemy No. 1. One recent Friday, an S 4 staffer wore a duck suit outside a downtown Metro station the message being that AARP and others are ducking the issue.
They do seem to be kind of obsessed with us, says Rother.
Source: CQ Weekly The definitive source for news about Congress. 2005 Congressional Quarterly Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Posted by Jo Jensen
Comments
Great work guys! I'm glad to be a chapter chair and finally part of the machinery. I hope that all is well in DC and keep kicking but for us!
Posted by Michael Miltenberger on October 18th 11:17:18 PM
Considering the fact the Crock the Vote made CQ, it just goes to show that you don't even have to have ideas, let alone good ones in order to be mentioned in CQ.
SS Equity Funds Equal More Big Government and Corruption! S4 Sucks It and Gives Change!
Posted by Noid on October 22nd 09:52:06 AM
It's sad that so much enthusiasm and youthful energy is being wasted on a lie.
Conservatives have opposed the concept of our federal government playing any role in providing economic security for seniors since the very beginning. Their argument for changing Social Security as we know it goes something like this…”The promise of a secure retirement is a ‘hoax’”. Taxes paid by workers will be “wasted” by the government rather than prudently invested. And the “so-called reserve fund…is no reserve at all” because it contains nothing but government IOU’s. Sounds familiar right? These aren't words created by a "new generation" of activists or even our President. These words were spoken by Republican presidential candidate Alf Landon before the first Social Security check was even issued and ultimately became part of the GOP platform in 1936.
It's no doubt so many young people don't have faith in Social Security...conservatives have been spent 50 years telling us it "won't be there". Well, it is...so why not spend the same amount of energy and dollars retooling the program rather than destroying it. If the Medicare privatization(Part D) is any example of how they think SS should work then we're really in trouble.
Posted by Kim Wright on October 25th 11:14:44 AM
Kim,
I find it difficult to respond to your post because you fail to include any facts to back up your assertions. However, I will do the best I can.
First, conservatives are not against _any_ government involvement in providing retirement security -- we are just against the way it is done currently.
Second, the promise of a secure retirement from Social Security _is_ a hoax. According to the Social Security Trustees, the guys who should know, SS will begin running a deficit in about 12 short years. Furthermore they say that it will only be able to pay about 70% of promised benefits by mid-century. In what way does this suggest that our retirement is secure?
Third, the trust fund _doesn't_ contain any money. It contains treasury bonds. I challenge you to find me one person who will argue that treasury bonds = real money.
"It's no doubt so many young people don't have faith in Social Security...conservatives have been spent 50 years telling us it "won't be there". Well, it is."
No ma'am, it isn't. By current estimates, the system cannot pay my benefits (I am 24).
"Well, it is...so why not spend the same amount of energy and dollars retooling the program rather than destroying it."
That is what we are doing. We are trying to move the system from a pay-as-you go system to a save-as-you-go system. If what you mean by "retooling" is raising taxes and lowering benefits, that has been done already (over 20 times) and the system still has problems.
Lastly, for most conservatives (and libertarians) dislike the Medicare Part D benefit. Why? Because it amounts to a government handout (just like Social Security). If you feel so strongly that Part D is bad, then you should be _in favor_ of SS reform. PRAs are so completely different from Part D that I don't know where to begin.
Posted by Jeremy Tunnell on October 25th 11:37:04 AM
Jeremy is correct.
I'd also like to add that getting a long-term rate of return of 1.76% is pathetic.
Posted by Adam Cahn on October 26th 09:38:32 PM
|
|
|
|
|
