Third Way’s Cowan and Kessler Call For the Radical Dismantling of Social Security

[sasha031]

In a recent Politico column, Jon Cowan and Jim Kessler, respectively the president and senior vice-president of The Third Way, criticize “progressives” for opposing deals which cut Social Security benefits.

They advise the Strengthen Social Security Coalition to “wise up and buck up the president so Social Security reform gets done in the coming weeks.” But their advice belies the expressed wishes of the American people. As poll after poll indicates, Americans across all age groups and ideologies overwhelmingly favor eliminating Social Security’s projected shortfall through increased revenues rather than through reductions in Social Security’s already modest benefits — just $13,000 a year on average.

Cowan and Kessler state the obvious, that “math knows no ideology,” but they fail to acknowledge that they do. Undisclosed is Cowan’s long history of flaming the fans of “intergenerational warfare” and calling for the radical dismantling of Social Security. For instance, in a 1995 Los Angeles Times op ed, he proclaimed, “The time has come to reinvent Social Security based on a “cut and privatize” approach that will be fair to all age groups.” Although no longer as threatening as when Newsweek quoted him in 1995 about his plans to “burn social-security cards in New Hampshire” to make a big splash in the presidential campaign, Cowan is hardly an objective voice when it comes to Social Security.
http://my.firedoglake.com/altmankingson/2011/07/12/third-ways-cowan-and-kessler-call-for-the-radical-dismantling-of-social-security/

[hobbit709]

1. when they hit retirement age

take away all their assets except for their SS check.
we can take bets on how long they would last.

[TBF]

2. I think we need to take away ALL of their assets now and see how they function.

Assholes.

[TBF]

3. Recommending for visibility -

so everyone can very clearly see what is happening here.

[Bluenorthwest]

4. Cowan and Kessler are scum

They are scum. They should grow up, buck up and learn to listen to the American people. Their whining need to be the center of attention, even when their ideologies are so strongly rejected by the public, point to their craven and self interested agenda.

[madfloridian]

5. Here are more details on Cowan's 1995 call to privatize.

Op ed from Third Way prez Cowan calling to privatize Social Security.

Current payout levels can't be sustained; let the retirement savings system go private for all but the needy.

Despite the truth about this imminent collapse of the system, Senate Democrats recently killed the balanced-budget amendment with claims that it left Social Security vulnerable to budget-balancing. And House Republicans swore in the 1994 elections that they'd never touch the program. Why this doublespeak from both parties? A simple political calculation: Older Americans vote, and Generation X doesn't.

Unfortunately for America, this lie-to-get-elected approach is disastrous for our long-term fiscal outlook and will squander any hope of repairing the system before the crisis strikes early in the next millennium.

The time has come to reinvent Social Security based on a "cut and privatize" approach that will be fair to all age groups. This reinvention should be based on three principles:

More at the link plus a 1992 article about Cowan's push on this issue.

Cross my heart and hope to die, I'll cut the deficit.

Their movement, called "Lead or Leave," has the great virtue of reducing the complexity of restoring fiscal balance to a bumper-sticker slogan. But why would politicians promise to end their careers because of a collective failure that's not any single member's fault? Because, say the "Lead or Leave" organizers, the deficit won't be attacked seriously until a majority of Congress accepts personal responsibility for it. By November, they hope to secure the pledge from 100 elected officials. Says Nelson: "If we tie members' political careers to this, reducing the deficit will become the highest priority."

[DefenseLawyer]

6. Privatizing social security means billions of public dollars going into private pockets

That's what every "privatization" scheme is at its core. It's not about efficiency or solvency, it's about finding another way to profit off working people by using the government has nothing more than a powerful and effective collection agency.

[VeryConfused]

7. This article is dishonest in it's characterization

if you read the original article that FDL writes about, it is nothing like the FDL characterization. Then again FDL is known for gross dishonesty so this article and it's lack of honesty is not surprising.

[chill_wind]

8. Bradley Foundation $$$,$$$ talking.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1442301&mesg_id=1448621

[somone]

9. Treasonous parasites

[roxiejules]

10. Keeping Fear Alive

The effort to undermine confidence in Social Security continues despite the facts:


http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/ss-2010-11-1.pdf


"The projections that are derived from the Social Security Trustees’ intermediate assumptions show that the program could pay all scheduled benefits for the next 27 years even if nothing is done. After 2037, the projections show that Social Security would still be able pay a benefit that is larger in real terms than what current retirees receive, even though it would be just 75 percent of the scheduled benefit. The payable benefit would continue to rise through time, so that even if nothing is ever done to change the program, a retiree in 2100 could anticipate a benefit that is more than twice as high as what current retirees receive today.


Adjustments put in place in 1983 could keep Social Security fully solvent into the 22nd century even if we waited until 2030 to act."