Clear contrast in this campaign: Bruce Braley stands with Iowa seniors and families, Joni Ernst stands with millionaires and special interest groups
Experts: Seven in Ten Workers Would See Benefit Cuts from Privatization Proposal
Des Moines, IA - As Bruce Braley travels across the state to talk about his plans to strengthen Social Security and increase benefits for seniors, Joni Ernst is desperately trying to hide the fact that she supports privatizing this critical program and reducing benefits for Iowa seniors.
Today, Bruce will be in Cedar Rapids talking to seniors about Social Security while Joni Ernst is campaigning with Outsourcer-in-Chief Mitt Romney.
This latest push comes as Iowa voters are increasingly focusing on the campaign, and
the more they learn about Joni Ernst's plans that would hurt Iowa families, the more they support Bruce Braley and his plans to fight for all Iowa families, not just the wealthiest few.
Watch Joni talk about her plans to privatize Social Security:
http://youtu.be/dMYYFKAJEI0 Joni Ernst may try to hide her positions, but here are the facts:
FACT: ERNST SUPPORTED PRIVATIZING SOCIAL SECURITY
Ernst Said She Has "Talked About Privatizing Social Security As An Option."Ernst said: "First, yes, I have talked about privatizing social security as an option. Again, that is one solution. So what I'd recommend is we look at a number of solutions because we really don't know which way is the best way to go yet." [Des Moines Senior Roundtable, 9/03/14] (video & audio)
Ernst Said That Privatizing Social Security Is "An Option" And "One Solution." Ernst said: "First, yes, I have talked about privatizing social security - as an option. Again, that is one solution. So what I'd recommend is we look at a number of solutions because we really don't know which way is the best way to go yet." [Des Moines Senior Roundtable, 9/03/14] (video & audio)
Ernst Said She Supports "Personal Savings" Accounts For Young People In Place Of Entitlements, Said It Could Be Either "Interest Bearing Or Its Tied To The Market." "Ernst supports a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced federal budget and reductions to entitlement as well as discretionary spending. 'We need to look at younger workers, workers that are entering the workforce and we need to find a solution there. Something I am willing to look at is a personal savings account. It would be one that, whether it's interest bearing or it's tied to the market, I would need to look at the details, but that is something we need to consider." [Des Moines Register,
5/9/14]
FACT: PRIVATIZING SOCIAL SECURITY COULD ENDANGER CURRENT BENEFICIARIES
Expert: Privatization Poses Risks to Current Beneficiaries As Well. Said Kenneth Apfel, a former Social Security Commissioner, "The Bush Social Security plan poses a major threat to the economic security of future generations of older Americans. And it also poses major risks for current beneficiaries. At its heart, the proposal destabilizes the financing base of Social Security, which could over time threaten benefit commitments to current beneficiaries -- maybe not in 2005, but very possibly within a decade. To "save" Social Security, we don't need to weaken Social Security's financing base -- we need to strengthen it." [Campaign for America's Future,
10/21/04]
FACT: PRIVATIZING SOCIAL SECURITY WOULD CUT BENEFITS
Privatization of Social Security Increases Risks, Would Cut Benefits, Increases the Debt. According to the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, "privatization is not a plan to save Social Security; it is a plan to dismantle Social Security. Privatization means increased retirement risks, severe cuts in Social Security benefits, and a multi-trillion dollar increase in the federal debt. "Privatization diverts money out of Social Security into individual accounts leaving an even larger solvency problem. Privatizers fill this funding gap by dramatically cutting Social Security benefits. They cover the rest by borrowing money, thereby increasing the debt burden on all taxpayers by trillions of dollars over the next half century. With market-based accounts, the risk of an adequate retirement is placed entirely on the individual." [National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare
website]
CBPP: Seven in Ten Workers Would See Benefit Cuts from Privatization Proposal. In a 2005 report, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimated that seven of ten workers would have their benefits cut. They wrote, "All workers with income above $20,000 today would be subject to benefit reductions. Seven of every ten workers would be affected." [Center on Budget and Policy Priorities,
4/29/05]
FACT: ERNST'S PLAN TO PRIVATIZE SOCIAL SECURITY WOULD BE A WINDFALL FOR WALL STREET
Privatization Would Risk Retirement in the Market, While Creating Billion in Windfalls for Wall Street. According to the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, "Privatization will replace Social Security's guaranteed defined benefits with individual investment accounts. In other words, privatization would take money out of Social Security and have workers invest instead in Wall Street." According to MSNBC, even plans to partially privatize "Social Security could be a windfall for Wall Street, generating billions of dollars in management fees for brokerages and mutual fund companies." [National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare
website; MSNBC, 12/28/04]
Privatization a "Windfall for Wall Street," Worth Billions of Dollars. According to MSNBC, even plans to partially privatize "Social Security could be a windfall for Wall Street, generating billions of dollars in management fees for brokerages and mutual fund companies... because of the massive size of Social Security, with its 154 million covered employees, Mills estimated that even a simple program of individual accounts comparable to the TSP might generate $39 billion in fees, in present-value terms, over 75 years... a more complex menu of options, which might be offered to participants whose accounts grow beyond, say, $5,000, might generate $279 billion in fees over 75 years, boosting projected industry revenues by about 8.5 percent." [MSNBC, 12/28/04]
2004 Report Estimated $940 Billion In Fees From Privatization, "The Largest Windfall Gain In American Financial History." According to a report by prominent economist Austan Goolsbee, "Creating individual accounts in the social security system would lead to a massive increase in payments of financial fees to private financial management companies. Under Plan II of the President's Commission to Strengthen Social Security (CSSS), the net present value of such payments would be $940 billion...The fees would be the largest windfall gain in American financial history. The $940 billion payment to financial companies would be an increase more than 8 times larger than the decrease in revenue from the 2000-2002 collapse of the bubble." Plan II was the initial proposal that would create optional private retirement accounts, which the Bush administration favored. [The Fees of Private Accounts and the Impact of Social Security Privatization on Financial Managers,
September 2004; Omaha World Herald, 12/28/04]
Ernst Acknowledged That "It Might" Cost More To Privatize Social Security And "There May Be A Few Years Where It Is Difficult." In a May 2014 interview with the Des Moines Register, The Registerasked, "You'd take social security pay roll taxes out of the mix and let young people invest that, then that money isn't going to pay the seniors that you've promised -- That's gonna cost you more in the long run, isn't it?" Ernst replied, "Well, it might, and that's why I said we need to take a look at this. This is something I'm willing to take a look at. But there may be a few years where it is difficult, but we have to change it." [Des Moines Register,
5/9/14]
