Tony Knowles on Social Security

Democratic Challenger for Senate (AK; previously served as Governor)

Against Social Security and Medicare privatization

Knowles will stand strong against deceptive efforts to privatize Social Security and Medicare, two important pieces of legislation of the 20th century. The current policies weaken the ability of these programs to provide for Americans, and are a threat to the integrity of the programs. Knowles opposes any efforts to cut benefits or raise the retirement age. Knowles does not believe in using the Social Security Trust Fund for general fund purposes. Source: Campaign website, TonyKnowles.com Jun 30, 2004

Maintain long-term solvency of Social Security and Medicare.

Knowles adopted the National Governors Association position paper:

The Issue

With the first federal budget surplus in a generation and estimates of non-Social Security surpluses ranging from $750 billion to $1.9 trillion over the next decade, the issue is whether Congress and the President will agree to dedicate a portion of the projected surplus to tax cuts and, if so, what the impacts on states might be.

How much of the potential non-Social Security surplus should be dedicated to tax cuts and breaks?
Absent any consensus on long-term legislation to ensure solvency of Social Security and Medicare, would major federal revenue losses for tax cuts risk shifting substantial entitlement burdens to states?
How would federal tax changes affect state income taxes?
What are key elements for states of any future major tax bill? In school construction? For retirement? For housing and economic development? For health care?

NGA’s Position

NGA opposes reductions from current discretionary spending levels or changes that could risk the long-term solvency of the nation’s Social Security and Medicare systems. NGA supports provisions to ensure reduced barriers to state and local capital finance through tax-exempt bonds and to ensure maximum flexibility in setting and maintaining state retirement plans and programs. Source: National Governors Association "Issues / Positions" 01-NGA16 on Aug 1, 2001

Click here for definitions & background information on Social Security. Click here for policy papers on Social Security. Click here for SenateMatch answers by Tony Knowles. Agree? Disagree? Voice your opinions on Social Security in The Forum.
*Other candidates on Social Security:*		*Tony Knowles on other issues:*
*AK Gubernatorial:* Frank Murkowski *AK Senatorial:* Frank Murkowski Frank Vondersaar Jim Sykes Lisa Murkowski Ted Stevens *Presidential:* George W. Bush (Republican for President) V.P.Dick Cheney (Republican for V.P.) Sen.John Kerry (Democratic nominee for Pres.) Sen.John Edwards (Democratic nominee for V.P.) Ralph Nader (Reform nominee for Pres.) Peter Camejo (Reform nominee for V.P.) David Cobb (Green nominee for Pres.) Michael Badnarik (Libertarian nominee for Pres.) Michael Peroutka (Constitution nominee for Pres.)	*2004 Senate Races:* (AK)Knowles v.Murkowski v.Sykes (AR)Holt v.Lincoln (AZ)McCain v.Starky (CA)Boxer v.Jones v.Gray (CO)Coors v.Salazar v.Randall v.Acosta (CT)Dodd v.Orchulli (FL)Castor v.Martinez (GA)Isakson v.Majette v.Buckley (IA)Grassley v.Small v.Northrop (IL)Obama v.Keyes (IN)Bayh v.Scott (KY)Bunning v.Mongiardo (LA)John v.Vitter v.Kennedy (MD)Mikulski v.Pipkin (MO)Bond v.Farmer (NC)Bowles v.Burr (ND)Dorgan v.Liffrig (NH)Granny D v.Gregg (NV)Reid v.Ziser (NY)Schumer v.Mills v.McReynolds (OH)Fingerhut v.Voinovich (OK)Carson v.Coburn (OR)Wyden v.King (PA)Hoeffel v.Specter v.Summers (SC)DeMint v.Tenenbaum (SD)Daschle v.Thune (UT)Bennett v.Van Dam (VT)Leahy v.McMullen (WA)Murray v.Nethercutt (WI)Feingold v.Michels	Abortion Budget/Economy Civil Rights Corporations Crime Drugs Education Energy/Oil Environment Families Foreign Policy Free Trade Govt. Reform Gun Control Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Jobs Principles Social Security Tax Reform Technology War/Peace Welfare Other Senators House of Representatives SenateMatch (matching quiz) HouseMatch Senate Votes (analysis) House Votes