February 25, 2005
Larsen Social Security town hall tommorow

Don't forget that Democrat Rick Larsen is holding his Social Security reform town hall tommorow--the one being held at the Everett Senior Center, despite the fact that no reform proposals will affect anyone currently a senior. I'll be there to make sure someone points out this dishonesty, and I hope you'll join me. It's at 10:30 am at 3025 Lombard Ave in Everett.

If you can't make it, I'll be giving an after-action report during the second hour of Republican Radio, which runs from 11 am to 1 pm on 1300 KOL and many other stations around the Northwest, including Internet streaming.

If you want to get a sense of what Larsen will say, here's his Everett Herald opinion piece, which entirely ignores the facts brought up by Eric Earling in the same paper just days before.

I hope I'll see you there!

Posted by Timothy Goddard at February 25, 2005 05:52 PM | Email This
Comments
1. That should be "point out this dishonesty", not "dishonestly." I don't like to point out spelling errors, but I had to read that a couple of times.:)

Posted by: coastygirl on February 25, 2005 06:00 PM
2. Be sure to ask him about his TSP. Ask him why it is ok for him to have a Thrift Savings Plan Account but but it is NOT ok for you and I.

State, County, School Dsitricts & City workers have a investment type pension plan as well.
What IF I want more than the piddly amount my SS will pay me in 25 years.

Ask him about the calculator on the CATO Institutes web page.

Posted by: chardonnay on February 25, 2005 06:43 PM
3. Timothy

I know a little about mr larsen.when I lived
mt vernon about 2 years ago.rick larsen tried
to scare seniors about the changes in medicare
I challenged him on it and he folded like
a cheap suit.

larsen is nothing more than a robot for the democratic
party. He can't and won't think for himself
He does whatever the democrats want.

Posted by: phil spackman on February 25, 2005 08:16 PM
4. Intergenerational warfare is a useful term.

Posted by: Sandy P on February 25, 2005 10:24 PM
5. Timothy,

I hope to be at Larsen's Town Hall Meeting. Here are a few items I hope to address:
1. The Social Security Program should be removed/separated from the General Federal Budget!
2. A full accounting should be presented to the public; including annual receipts, disbursements, account balances and receivables!
3. Separate Social Security Disability Insurance from the general SS Program?
4. If Congress does not give up TSP for Social Security, then the control of the program should be removed from their "direct" control.
5. Is Social Security a good deal for minorities?
6. A 40 years privatization plan should be developed, finally solving the problem!
7. "Bonding around" the transition cash flow shortage years.
8. Allow participates to have accounts within the program earning interest (tax-free) and underwriting the shortage years.
9. Allow current and new retirees the election of leaving all, or a portion, of their monthly benefit within the program, in their accounts earning interest and underwriting the shortage.
10. My teanage son and his generation (and all future generations) will have a great retirement and a better career!

These are my thoughts and not once did I attempt to scare anyone. Thats why the debate has to be honest and removed from Congress!

Tom in Edmonds

Posted by: Tom on February 26, 2005 12:33 AM
6. I would love to see his face when you remind him that not one of those seniors would see a change in their S.S.

Posted by: Michele on February 26, 2005 02:17 AM
7. I would like you to ask Mr. Larsen why he doesn't want these Senior's children and grandchildren to have a retirement program that is as good or better than "The Galveston County, Texas Alternate Plan", encated in 1981. And then look at the Seniors and remind them that if the "Current" worker dies at age 61 and doesn't have any minor children living at home that the monies they paid into the SS program doesn't go to their estate. And that the governemnt takes that money and uses it to help pay those that live.

The following links are some articles about the Galveston County, Texas Plan:
http://www.tppf.org/government/perspect/holbrook.html
http://www.conservativenews.org/Nation/archive/200502/NAT20050203a.html

Posted by: Janet on February 26, 2005 06:28 AM
8. That should be "enacted", not "encated".
Sorry, Janet

Posted by: Janet on February 26, 2005 06:32 AM
9. quickly read the charles krauthammer article titled "2042"
he explains that SS will really be in crisis in 2018, not 2042. baby boomers will start retiring in large masses.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/charleskrauthammer/archive.shtml

Posted by: chardonnay on February 26, 2005 08:27 AM
10. Charles Krauthammer is right, but I say there really is a SS crisis right now. In just three years the SS surplus will begin decreasing. That means that in 2008 the amount of money collected over and above what is required to pay out in benefits will be less than it was the year before. That equates to a shrinking revenue stream for Uncle Sam. 2018 will be nothing more than a milestone - when Treasury Bills will no longer be purchased, but must be redeemed from the SS Trust Fund to pay benefits.

The bottom line is that by the time the next President is sworn into office, Congress will be forced to cut spending, cut SS benefits or start raising taxes to make up the difference in the shrinking tax revenues, because the surpluses between now and then will simply get spent.

Posted by: David R on February 26, 2005 09:34 AM
11. Y'all should show up there in hordes and keep firing questions at him - force him back into the cage he came out of, and keep pointing out that it is a trademark of the 'rat party to mislead seniors.

Posted by: KittyBurglar on February 26, 2005 09:41 AM
12. I read a theory about this entire SS discussion being a big coup against the democrats.

like we see right now, the dems spending all their resouces on going home and showing the big charts and spreadsheets and talking doom and gloom, using scare tactics with seniors,(spreading typical liberal cheer). They won't have the money to campaign in 06. It makes sense, since we know how they take the bait every time. The article was at National Review online or townhall.com
and in 06 when the R's have another gain in seats, they will pass the SS reform.

Posted by: chardonnay on February 26, 2005 09:48 AM
13. David R. is exactly right. The key date is 2007 when the surplus begins shrinking. Of course that date can be extended by a tax increase (either rate or extending the cap), but only temporarily.

I've taken to pointing out to anybody who supports doing nothing that what they are really supporting is a tax increase AND a future benefit reduction (perhaps both payout amt and higher starting age). There is NO do-nothing option. Unfortunately, most don't get it.

Posted by: TimF on February 26, 2005 10:00 AM
14. I hope that we'll hear a full blown report on how this goes. Alot of ignorant people out there...Hopefully there will be enough people of the right ilk there to hold Rick Larsen's feet to the fire, because I am convinced that he will use some form of scare tactic to delay the inevitable. My take is that the Dems will try and delay it until the day they get one of their own in as President so they will get credit for it - they will oppose simply because Republicans are the ones proposing it - doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

So - speak out and call bolshevik (BS) so that the truth is not obscured here by some lame excuses for why it doesn't need to occur yet or their reform that doesn't address the real problems that lie ahead by waiting until 2012. Don't forget to throw Medicaid - the real budget buster into the mix to show that it will be too late by 2012

Posted by: KS on February 26, 2005 11:25 AM
15. Let's look at the proposed changes to Social Security from the perspective of a young person -- let's say a 25-year-old. He'll turn 62 in 2042 and expect to receive benefits for at least 20 years -- 2062. Is he in favor of the proposed changes? Of course he is. It's a no-brainer. For him, it's replacing a system on the verge of bankruptcy by the time he retires with one in which he'll have a big pot of money waiting for him.

Now from the perspective of a 65-year-old retiree currently receiving a benefit check, is he in favor of the proposed changes? Why should he be? He's getting his check every month and everything looks rosey for the next 20 years or so. But, you say, he won't be affected by the proposed changes anyway. Could you blame him if maybe he doesn't believe that? It's not as if the government has never lied before (or at least been mistaken in their projections).

I think the administration is going about this in exactly the wrong way. Instead of trying to build bi-partisan support, they're trying to cram it down everyone's throat. I think they could get the elderly on board if they weren't so confrontational.

Which brings me to usanext.org who is targeting the AARP because they're opposed (no big surprise) to the proposed changes. You can say what you want about AARP, and "liberal bias" is what's being said now, but they have stood up for the elderly more than any other group. I find this attack by usanext.org disgusting. Is this what we've come to in this country? Is this how we handle those who disagree with us? I don't just blame the lunatic fringe on the right, there are plenty on the left too.

Here's what I'd like to see: set up a non-partisan committee and get Alan Greenspan to chair it and I'll go along with anything they come up with.

Posted by: Alan in Las Vegas on February 26, 2005 12:00 PM
16. Alan, Bush has tried to do this in a non-partisan way. His first town hall meetings about it were with Democrats. It's the Democrats who have refused to play ball. They made their minds up months ago. Additionally, Alan Greenspan has already come out in favor of personal accounts.

I'll post a full report on the meeting later tonight. For now, I'm going outside to enjoy the sun!

Posted by: Timothy on February 26, 2005 03:55 PM
17. Additionally, Alan Greenspan has already come out in favor of personal accounts.

That's right, he has. If there's one person in government who has respect from both sides of the aisle, it's Greenspan. You need people like him with no particular axe to grind (and there's darn few of those) to publicly state their opinions. I'd like to hear from Paul O'Neill and some actuaries.

Posted by: Alan in Las Vegas on February 26, 2005 05:47 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?