CNN's Foreman falsely claimed McCain "has always said" private accounts "should be in addition to" Social Security
SUMMARY: CNN's Tom Foreman falsely claimed that Sen. John McCain "has always said" allowing young people to set up private Social Security accounts "is not instead of Social Security; this should be in addition to Social Security." In fact, McCain supported President Bush's 2005 Social Security proposal, which would have allowed workers to divert up to 4 percent of their wages into a private account, thereby removing it from the money available to pay Social Security benefits for current retirees.
On the September 28 edition of CNN: Special Investigations Unit, host Tom Foreman falsely claimed that Sen. John McCain "has always said" allowing young people to set up private Social Security accounts "is not instead of Social Security; this should be in addition to Social Security." In fact, McCain supported President Bush's 2005 Social Security proposal, which did not propose adding private accounts to the existing system but, rather, proposed allowing workers to divert from their payroll taxes up to 4 percent of their wages into a private account, thereby removing it from the money available to pay Social Security benefits for current retirees.
As Media Matters for America has noted, in a March 3 Wall Street Journal interview, McCain reportedly reiterated his support for private Social Security accounts: "Actually, I'm totally in favor of personal savings accounts and I think they are an important opportunity for young workers. I campaigned in support of President Bush's proposal and I campaigned with him, and I did town hall meetings with him." A Journal article about the interview quoted McCain saying: "As part of Social Security reform, I believe that private savings accounts are a part of it -- along the lines that President Bush proposed." Bush's plan called for "allowing [younger workers] to put part of their payroll taxes in personal retirement accounts" and to put the money in those accounts "into a conservative mix of bond and stock funds." McCain also said on the July 8 edition of CNN's American Morning, "I want young workers to be able to, if they so choose, to take part of their own money, which is their taxes, and put it into an account, which has their name on it. Now, that's a voluntary thing, it's for younger people. It would not affect any -- any present-day retirees or the system as necessary."
From the September 28 edition of CNN: Special Investigations Unit, with guest washingtonpost.com writer Chris Cillizza:
FOREMAN: We're going to start off first with Social Security and what Barack Obama said about John McCain. Listen.
OBAMA [video clip]: If my opponent had his way, the millions of Floridians who rely on it would have had their Social Security tied up in the stock market this week. [cut] Millions would have watched as the market tumbled and their nest egg disappeared before their eyes.
FOREMAN: Boy, to say that down in Florida where there are so many retirees. Chris, explosive words, but are they true?
CILLIZZA: Well, you know, the issue here is, it's a function of this Social Security privatization or partial privatization that George W. Bush pushed after the 2004 election and went nowhere. It would allow younger people to put -- voluntarily put some of their money into the stock market, but no, older voters would not be required to do so. This is an attack that Democrats have used very effectively, though, in both the 2006 election and congressional candidates are already using an echo of that attack in 2008 as well.
FOREMAN: So all of those older folks there are actually under no threat at all from McCain's plan; it's about what younger people might do in the future. And McCain has always said this is not instead of Social Security; this should be in addition to Social Security, correct?
CILLIZZA: That's right, that's exactly right. It's an option that you can opt into. But remember, Social Security isn't called the third rail of American politics for nothing, the old you-touch-it-you-die kind of thing that people are very worried about having their benefits either taken away or reduced in any way, shape, or form, and that's why it makes for a good political attack.
FOREMAN: So we'll take a look at the true-false chart, and we're gonna put a big false under that claim by Barack Obama.
"McCain STILL Proposes Privatizing Social Security—Despite What His Website Says. McCain told the Wall Street Journal he still backs a system of private retirement accounts that he supported in 2000 and President Bush pushed unsuccessfully. The Journal reported he “disowned” details of a proposal on his 2008 campaign website that says he would “supplement” the existing Social Security system with personally managed accounts. But when asked about the position change he denied it and promised to change the website to reflect his true position. “I’m totally in favor of personal savings accounts… As part of Social Security reform, I believe that private savings accounts are a part of it—along the lines that President Bush proposed,” McCain told the Journal.[Wall Street Journal, 3/3/08; Campaign Website, accessed 3/3/08]"
http://www.aflcio.org/issues/politics/mccain_retirement.cfm
Mary59: Very good post. The whole presidency of FDR is viewed by Conservatives as the WORST period in U.S. history. Social Security is but one example of this dangerous man's overall dynamic. FDR was a strange man, at least a man that the Conservatives had no way of understanding. From a very rich and powerful old money family, FDR had the unusual ability to empathize with ordinary folks. He understood that some people are not wise in the ways of the world and, even though good, hard-working and patriotic, did not have the savvy to deal with markets, stocks, retirement, etc. FDR's ideology was completely at odds with the prevailing Conservative ideology, which basically said, "I've got mine. F**k you." Nothing has changed.
Forgive me if I use myself as an example. When I looked at my paycheck and saw the amount I was paying into the FICA account, I wondered if I could have the foresight to put that money aside in a private place, like stocks or some other low (or high) risk plan. Knowing the difficulties I had just putting "food ON my family", mortgage payments, car, insurance, huge Federal Income Taxes, etc., I would never have the willpower to do so. I resented the rather large amount deducted for FICA, but, my better instinct told me to just let it be. I am not a stupid man, just not a sharpie like some of my fellow teachers who DID put a lot of their money into the stock market (both husband and wife working three and four jobs). Some of them lost everything but their regular New York State Teachers' Retirement and SOCIAL SECURITY. This, even BEFORE the current melt-down. On my part, lack of courage, guts, or planning, I opted for the safe agenda. Old FDR understood working grunts like me. It isn't that Conservatives don't understand us, they just don't care.
You are absolutely correct. The Republican approach is completely ideological concerning both Social Security and health care. Many historians credit FDR with preserving basic conservative principles and values with his needed reforms. He was the real compassionate conservative. I think this country will regret both Bush presidencies for a very long time. Too often, both represented an aristocracy that is simply out of touch with everyday working people, the heart and soul of this country. PR and spin are no substitute for principled and informed leadership when it comes to handling a major crisis. The principle that FDR understood well is that we are all in this together. As Barack Obama has said from day one: E Pluribus Unum. We need most desperately to restore this cultural ethos!
Donaldmd, my father was one of those conservatives who hated the new deal. Under his tutelage I wrote an essay in high school about Herbert Hoover and how he was unfairly blamed for the Depression. Some of the programs he started were adopted by Roosevelt and FDR got the credit for them. (I think the CCC was one) If a program actually helps lift people out of poverty in old age, it's a success. My dad always thought that the Democrats were too eager to tax people and develop social programs that were inefficient and wasted money.
However, my dad also collected his social security (and had absolutely NO luck in the stock market)
Tom Foreman: dishonest, or merely incompetent?
Either way, he has no business posing as a journalist.
Yesterday, on CNN's The Situation Room -- home of the longest tease on television (so long that I often do not stick around for the story) -- Wolf Blitzer made the inaccurate statement that Sarah Palin's Alaska approval rating is over 80% (I am not quoting him exactly). But, as any informed citizen knows, her approval ratings -- even in Alaska -- have been dropping dramatically. That is just a fact. (I believe her approval ratings in Alaska are closer to 60% now, but they might be even lower.) So, just where are we supposed to go these days for reliable reporting?