Tag Archives for Darell West

GOP Trial Balloon Called “Trojan Horse”

Published in Woonsocket Call on April 16, 2017

In previous years, the GOP leadership, now controlling both chambers of Congress, pushed legislative proposals to eliminate Social Security and Medicare by privatizing these programs. These attempts were clearly visible for all to see. But, we are in new political times with a GOP White House seeking the destruction of these programs, too, but as some say through the back door.

According to an Associated Press story, published on April 10, 2017, as the Trump Administration begins to learn from its failed attempt to repeal Obamacare, tax code reform is now on its agenda. One trial balloon, being floated by a GOP lobbyist with close ties to the Trump Administration, would eliminate the mandated payroll tax that all American workers pay to fund Social Security and Medicare.

“This approach would give a worker earning $60,000 a year an additional $3,720 in take-home pay, a possible win that lawmakers could highlight back in their districts even though it would involve changing the funding mechanism for Social Security, according to a lobbyist, who asked for anonymity to discuss the proposal without disrupting early negotiations,” says Writers Josh Boak and Stephen Ohlemacher in their Associated Press story.

Currently, about 163 million American workers pay Social Security taxes and 59 million retired and/or disabled persons collect monthly benefits. About one family in four receive income from Social Security. The nation’s social insurance and welfare program is a “pay-as-you-go-program.” Today’s workers support the program by paying their taxes into the program and the money flows back out to the program’s current beneficiaries.

GOP Stealth Attack on Social Security

Responding to the GOP trial balloon, in her blog post published last Tuesday on the Huffington Post, a politically liberal American online news web site, Contributor Nancy Altman, President of Social Security Works called the GOP trial balloon “a Trojan horse”, noting that “It appears to be a gift, in the form of middle class tax relief, but would, if enacted, lead to the destruction of working Americans’ fundamental economic security.”

If President Trump proposes “the Trojan horse, it would be the newest shot in the ongoing Republican war against Social Security. That war has failed so far. The American people overwhelmingly support Social Security because they appreciate that it provides working families with basic economic security when wages are lost as the result of death, disability, or old age. And it does so extremely efficiently, securely, fairly, and universally,” says Altman in her April 11, 2017 blog post.

According to Altman’s blog posting, after Trump and GOP lawmaker have suffered legislative defeats in their “frontal attacks” against Social Security to eliminate the programs “it appears they are contemplating a “stealth attack instead.” She noted, “In the 1980s, Republicans, who had long tried but failed to cut government programs directly, discovered a new tactic. They realized that they could undermine government and eventually force cuts to spending by cutting taxes and, in their words, starve the beast. Now, Trump is making plans to use that same tactic against Social Security.”

“Not only would the Trump proposal starve Social Security of dedicated revenue, it would ultimately destroy it. Social Security is not a government handout. It is wage insurance that the American people earn, as part of their compensation, and, indeed, pay for with deductions from their pay,” observed Altman.

Altman warns that GOP lobbyist’s proposal to eliminate the payroll tax to fund Social Security is consistent with Trump’s previous actions. “No one should be fooled by Trump’s campaign promise not to cut Social Security. Before he became a candidate, he called it a Ponzi scheme and advocated privatizing it. He chose, as his vice president, Mike Pence, who complained that the Bush privatization proposal didn’t go far enough, fast enough. As President, he has chosen a staunch opponent of Social Security, Mick Muvaney, as his budget director, and another staunch opponent, Tom Price, as Secretary of Health and Human Services (one of Social Security’s trustees.), she said.

In an email urging recipients to sign a petition to protect Social Security’s funding [the payroll tax], Michael Phelan, Deputy Director of Social Security Works noted, “For decades, Republicans in Washington and Wall Street bankers have told us that Social Security is going broke―even though Social Security has a $2.8 trillion surplus and can pay out 100% of benefits for the next 17 years and over 75% of benefits owed after that.” He warns the “Republican’s tax plans might be a self-fulfilling prophecy. By starving Social Security of funding, they could finally receive their wish―replacing Social Security’s guaranteed benefit with unstable Wall Street retirement plans.”

The “Great Wisdom” of a Payroll Contribution Tax

Max Richtman, President & CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, says, “It’s no surprise that the GOP lobbyist who suggested this dangerous idea and remained anonymous. After all, who would want to own up to an idea that would trigger the collapse of the most successful government program in U.S. history?”

Richtman adds, “Peddling this kind of scheme reminds me of President George W. Bush’s 2005 privatization proposal. Only in this case, the risk factor shifts from the uncertainty of Wall Street to benefit cuts that will almost certainly occur when Social Security is forced to compete for government funding with other discretionary programs. There was great wisdom in President Roosevelt’s plan for funding Social Security through a dedicated payroll tax. As President Roosevelt said, ‘We put those payroll contributions there to give the contributors a legal, moral and political right to collect their pensions…No damn politician can ever scrap my social security program.”

Darrell West, Vice President and Director of Governance Studies at the Washington, D.C.-based the Brookings Institution, sees an uphill battle to formalize the tax policy to eliminate the payroll contribution to fund Social Security. “I don’t think Trump will be able to eliminate or reduce the Social Security tax because of its dire consequences for the program itself. The program is very popular with the general public and many recipients count it as their sole support. Republicans will get killed if they try to do this. It is not a viable option now or anytime in the near future.”

When Trump releases his tax code reform proposal, aging advocates must remember that the devil is in the details. Read the proposal thoroughly with a fine-tooth comb

Gray Power Can Turn a Campaign Sour

Published in Senior Digest on October 2004

After 24 years on Smith Hill that included a 10-year stint as House speaker, John Harwood’s career came to a surprising end recently when 33-year-old former prosecutor J. Patrick O’Neill’s grass-roots campaign brought home the votes.  The lopsided victory, 758 votes for O’Neill to 352 for Harwood, propelled the political novice into the district 59 House seat.

Two years ago, Harwood barely kept his long-held House seat after a vigorous political campaign by write-in independent candidate Bruce Bayuk.  According to Joseph Fleming, of Fleming & Associates, a Cumberland-based polling and political consultant, seniors casting votes for Harwood at the polling place in Kennedy Manor on Broad Street, played a key role in his victory in that election cycle.

Fleming, who also serves as a political analyst for Channel 12 News said that senior voter support for Harwood was almost nonexistent in the recent Democratic primary.  Senior voters joined with anti-Harwood voters throughout the legislative district to give the former House speaker the boot.

“Harwood lost better than 2-to-1 at the polling place in Kennedy Manor,” Fleming said. “Seniors decided it was a time for a change.”

Over the years, political candidates have made pre-election day pilgrimages to Pawtucket’s senior high-rises.  In District 59, both Harwood and O’Neill courted voters in high-rises, providing food during meet and greet events.

“It’s a myth that a good meal at a senior high-rise will ultimately equate to a vote,” quips Fleming. “Seniors may go down to eat the food, but it doesn’t mean that you’ll get their vote.  Everyone feeds them, but they can’t vote for both sides.” Moreover, he said, the majority of older voters don’t reside in senior high rises.

“Seniors read campaign materials look at the campaign issues and vote for people who reflect their views on these issues,” Fleming says.

Darrell West, a Brown University professor and political pollster, notes that seniors are the biggest voting block in Rhode Island. “Not only are they a sizeable group in numbers, they also are more likely to exercise their franchise to vote,” he says.

Ken McGill, registrar for the City of Pawtucket, agrees with West’s assessment.  McGill says that in any election, political candidates can count on senior voters to turn out in high numbers.

“Seniors were brought up respecting the right to vote and how important it is. They know what is at stake and pay careful attention to the issues that not only affect them, but  issues impacting on members of their family, McGill says.

“Compared to young people, seniors are 30 to 40 percentage points more likely to vote, West said. “Seniors vote because they are invested in their community and come from a generation where it was considered any honor to vote,” says West.  He added that young people tend to be very cynical about politics and more likely to feel their vote does not matter.

West said that seniors voter as a bloc only when they see their issues directly at stake in an election. “If an election centers on Social Security or Medicare, they are more likely to overcome differences by gender, income and ethnicity and cast a ‘senior’ vote,” he says.

Adds Kathleen S. Connell, director of AARP-RI, “There are many reasons why candidates look to the senior citizens for votes. One of them being, the issues that affect the concerned seniors are the same issues that will also affect the candidates and their families now or in the future.”  Also, candidates know that seniors are the most reliable and informed voters, she says.

One of the questions surrounding the upcoming election is whether seniors will support the Rhode Island GOP in its efforts to increase the numbers in the General Assembly?

“Seniors lean Democratic because the elderly typically has seen democrats speak out most forcefully about the need to take care of seniors and protect Medicare and Social Security,” says West. However, Republicans have made in-roads with moral or ethical issues, he says.

Aging groups are gearing up for the upcoming November elections to send educated voting seniors to the polls, Connell says.

“This year, some of our volunteers are participating in presidential debate watches with Rhode Island College, and we are distributing voter guides for them to track the candidate responses to issues of importance to AARP members.  They can use these guides to further study the issues before going to the polls.”

Richard Bidwell, executive director of the Rhode Island Gray Panthers, also sees the value of getting educated senior voters to the polls. With the backdrop of the upcoming elections, the Senior Agenda Consortium (SAC), founded by the Gray Panthers and now comprised of 20 aging groups, is working to improve seniors’ knowledge of issues and develop strategies to pressure candidates to support SAC’s legislative agenda.

 As it did two years ago, SAC, which is funded by the Rhode Island Foundation, will organize three regional forums, to prod the candidates to support its legislation positions on issues ranging from ensuring access to low-cost prescription drugs, better funding for community long-term care services and protecting RIPTA bus routes.  The results will be released to the media.