Harry Reid on Social Security
Democratic Sr Senator (NV)
Similarly, the top Democrat in the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, refuses to acknowledge Social Security's most basic math. When asked when she would put forward a plan to fix Social Security, Pelosi responded: "Never. Is never good enough for you?"
This combination of policies--raid, ration, raise taxes, & deny the problem--will mean painful benefit cuts for current seniors and huge tax increases on younger working families, robbing them of the opportunity to save for their own retirements.
But Reid wouldn't let her off the hook: "Now she talks about, and has for years talked about, getting rid of Social Security. For years. Look what would have happened had we put this money in the stock market as was suggested by President Bush. This is an extreme idea, and it will destroy Social Security."
The Bush plan would take our already record high $4.3 trillion debt and put us another $2 trillion in the red. Thatís an immoral burden to place on the backs of the next generation.
But maybe most of all, the Bush plan isnít really Social Security reform. Itís more like Social Security roulette. Democrats are all for giving Americans more of a say and more choices when it comes to their retirement savings. But that doesnít mean taking Social Securityís guarantee and gambling with it. And thatís coming from a senator who represents Las Vegas.
Proponents recommend voting YES because:
Perhaps the worst example of wasteful spending is when we take the taxes people pay for Social Security and, instead of saving them, we spend them on other things. Even worse than spending Social Security on other things is we do not count it as debt when we talk about the deficit every year. So using the Social Security money is actually a way to hide even more wasteful spending without counting it as debt. This Amendment would change that.
Opponents recommend voting NO because:
This amendment has a fatal flaw. It leaves the door open for private Social Security accounts by providing participants with the option of "pre-funding of at least some portion of future benefits."
The mission of the Alliance for Retired Americans is to ensure social and economic justice and full civil rights for all citizens so that they may enjoy lives of dignity, personal and family fulfillment and security. The Alliance believes that all older and retired persons have a responsibility to strive to create a society that incorporates these goals and rights and that retirement provides them with opportunities to pursue new and expanded activities with their unions, civic organizations and their communities.
The following ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reflect the percentage of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position.
The Christian Coalition voter guide [is] one of the most powerful tools Christians have ever had to impact our society during elections. This simple tool has helped educate tens of millions of citizens across this nation as to where candidates for public office stand on key faith and family issues.
The CC survey summarizes candidate stances on the following topic: "Allowing individuals to invest a portion of their Social Security tax in private retirement accounts"
An endorsement by the NCPSSM indicates strong belief in preserving Social Security and Medicare (i.e., a strong stance against privatization, and for continued federal government involvement). Their mission statement:
"The National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare is one of the most effective and trustworthy sources for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid advocacy. Since 1982, we have been working for generations of older Americans who want our nationís health and income security programs secured for the future. Join us and learn more about how you can be a part of our intergenerational crusade."
|Other candidates on Social Security:||Harry Reid on other issues:|
Retiring in 2014 election:
Retired as of Jan. 2013:
Senate Vacancies 2013:
MA:Gomez(R,lost special election)
Senate races Nov. 2014:
AK:Begich(D) vs.Miller(R) vs.Treadwell(R) vs.Sullivan(R)
CO:Udall(D) vs.Buck(R) vs.Hill(R) vs.Baumgardner(R) vs.Stephens(R)
GA:Gingrey(R) vs.Nunn(D) vs.Perdue(R) vs.Handel(R) vs.Broun(R) vs.Kingston(R)
HI:Schatz(D) vs.Hanabusa(D) vs.Cavasso(R)
IA:Braley(D) vs.Whitaker(R) vs.Ernst(R) vs.Clovis(R)
IL:Durbin(D) vs.Truax(R) vs.Oberweis(R) vs.Hansen(L)
KY:McConnell(R) vs.Bevin(R) vs.Grimes(D)
ME:Collins(R) vs.D`Amboise(R) vs.Bellows(D)
MI:Land(R) vs.Peters(D) vs.Wiedenhoeft(R)
MS:Cochran(R) vs.McDaniel(R) vs.Childers(D)
MT:Edmunds(R) vs.Daines(R) vs.Bohlinger(D) vs.Walsh(D)
NE:Sasse(R) vs.Osborn(R) vs.
NH:Shaheen(D) vs.Martin(R) vs.Brown(R) vs.Smith(R) vs.Rubens(R) vs.Testerman(R)
SC-6:Graham(R) vs.Stamper(D) vs.Mace(R) vs.Bright(R)
SD:Rounds(R) vs.Weiland(D) vs.Pressler(I)
TX:Cornyn(R) vs.Stockman(R) vs.Roland(L)
WV:Capito(R) vs.Raese(R) vs.Tennant(D) vs.McGeehan(R)
Senate Votes (analysis)
Senate Office SH-522, Washington, DC 20510