An American Progress Update to the one that started a long thread. SOCIAL SECURITY -Playing Politics
The Social Security Administration is intended to act as a neutral body, administering the program while staying well above the muck of partisan politics and policy debates. Thanks to the Bush administration, that's no longer the case. According to the New York Times, the Social Security Administration recently developed a new "tactical plan" to help the White House market its all-out campaign to convince Americans the system is in crisis. Internal documents show Social Security officials told employees to get the word out that "Social Security's long-term financing problems are serious and need to be addressed soon." The new crisis-marketing plan also said Social Security managers should "discuss solvency issues at staff meetings," "insert solvency messages in all Social Security publications" and spread the word at places like farmers' markets and "big box retail stores." Another internal document "encourages the agency's public affairs specialists to spread the word that 'Social Security reform is a presidential priority' and personal accounts are an essential element of his approach." Agency employees mindful of the agency's independent position have complained to officials that "they are being conscripted into a political battle over the future of the program." THE DECLARATION OF AN INDEPENDENT AGENCY: The Social Security Administration is supposed to work outside the realm of partisan politics. In 1994, Congress passed legislation to establish a three-person, independent oversight board for the agency, removing it from the supervision of the Department of Health and Human Services, which operates as part of the politically minded White House. Sen. Patrick Moynihan, the bill's author, cheered its passage, saying, "With this bill we hope to increase public confidence in Social Securityâby insulating the program from politics." The bipartisan bill â which passed unanimously in both the House and the Senate â was supported across the board by nearly every organization with an interest in Social Security, including the AARP, the National Council of Senior Citizens, and the AFL-CIO. WHITE HOUSE CONFIRMATION: This weekend, White House spokesman Dan Bartlett was asked about using the Social Security Administration to help the president convince Americans the system is in crisis. He replied, "There is no expectation that career employees would be asked to advocate on behalf of any specific prescription for Social Security." Look closely â that's a non-denial. True, the Social Security Administration stops short of directly advocating the "specific" White House plan. It does, however, cite the findings of a plan similar to the president's. And whipping up public fears about the nonexistent crisis adds to the drumbeat, assisting the president in scaring up public support for his privatization plan. NOT THE FACTS, MA'AM: The Social Security Administration claims warning Americans the current system is in danger is merely a factual message. Not so, says the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. According to its independent assessment, Social Security will be able to pay all benefits through 2052. Even after this date, the CBO found, the program will be able to pay a higher benefit than that received by current retirees. SQUANDERING THE TRUST FUND: Under White House control, the Social Security Administration uses money from the trust fund to pay for propaganda claiming that the program is in crisis. (This is similar to the way the administration diverted money from the critically underfunded No Child Left Behind Act to pay conservative commentator Armstrong Williams to shill for its education policy.) Dana Duggins, of the Social Security Council of the American Federation of Government Employees, stressed that "Trust fund dollars should not be used to promote a political agenda." LEAVING OUT THE DISABLED: Another point to keep in mind: Social Security is crucial to more than the retired. AP reports, "Disability benefits may not be safe from the across-the-board cuts that are likely in President Bush's proposal to allow personal investment accounts in the Social Security program." Today, an estimated 16 percent of Americans receiving Social Security benefits are disabled workers and their dependents. Disabled beneficiaries typically have worked less and need benefits sooner; cutting their benefits leaves them without income. The impact of accounts on beneficiaries who aren't retirees, however, "has not been publicly discussed by the Bush administration." http://www.americanprogressaction.org/site/pp.asp?c=klLWJcP7H&b=294332 Gary Denton _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
