Toomey Says His Plan to Privatize Social Security "Would be a Very Important Start"

[blue neen]

RCP: Your campaign website, under “spending,” complains of “wasteful pork projects, multiple bailouts, the so-called stimulus, and new government programs.” But what about entitlements?

"Toomey: You know, I’ve always said that we need to reform our big entitlement programs. These programs are not sustainable in their current form and so we’re going to have to put them on a secure footing. That’s what we have to do.

RCP: OK, how do we do that? Do we raise the retirement age? Do we cut benefits?

Toomey: I’ve got a whole chapter in a book that I wrote that deals with how I think, one of the ways I think we could reform Social Security to make it viable. So I have provided great detail on that whole idea. That would be a very important start.

Of course, in Toomey’s book, the first subhead under the “Transforming Social Security” chapter is “Personal Accounts Lead to Personal Prosperity.” And it’s really no surprise, considering Toomey’s reaction to President George W. Bush’s privatization scheme. “I have been arguing for many years in favor of Social Security personal retirement accounts,” Toomey said at the time. “I’m thrilled that the President is taking up this critical issue.”

Of course, as a Center for American Progress Action Fund analysis found, under a Bush-style privatization plan, an October 2008 retiree would have lost $26,000 in that year’s market turmoil, and if the U.S. stock market had behaved like the Japanese market during that retiree’s life, the private account would have lost $70,000. And it’s likely not a coincidence that Toomey didn’t let the word privatization into his response, as polls show that such a plan is highly unpopular."

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/08/19/toomey-privatization/

[old mark]

1. PA Democrats should hammer Toomey on this - this won't play well here for him...

:-)


mark

[Cirque du So-What]

2. You're right about that!

I will make Toomey's stance on privatizing SS the centerpiece of my GOTV effort over the next few weeks.

[blue neen]

3. Yes. Here's the key sentence:

"And it’s likely not a coincidence that Toomey didn’t let the word privatization into his response, as polls show that such a plan is highly unpopular."

The strange thing is...Toomey doesn't seem to be saying much these days. IMHO, it's because his campaign doesn't want PA and the nation know what an extremist Toomey really is!

[Cirque du So-What]

4. I don't remember whether I've heard the word 'privatization' in any of Joe Sestak's ads or not

but he should be mentioning it frequently. I'm gratified to see quite a few more ads for Joe Sestak. For awhile, it was wall-to-wall Toomey ads - those godawful 'Sestak = Pelosi' ones. They're still around, but at the moment, I believe Joe Sestak is seeing more airtime.

[old mark]

5. Toomey is still accusing Sestak of being a dangerous liberal, which

is why I support Sestak in the first place...

Toomey is really saying little or nothing about his own past or his policies...I believe we can beat him in November.

mark

[Dawson Leery]

6. Sestak is trailing at this time.

I know he is a late closer. He needs to bring that same performance to this race.

[blue neen]

7. We're counting on him to do just that.

Sestak is a good guy. He can win this. :)

:dem:

[old mark]

8. I am going to send his campaign -and Onorato's-a few bucks before November,

and a few to the guy in Ohio running against Boehner...he'e a really smart young guy, and a reall liberal.

mark