For private investment of IRA's, but against privatization
The Coleman campaign calls the Wellstone TV ad misleading because it implies that Coleman proposes to invest Social Security trust fund money in the stock market. What Coleman calls for is the creation of individual retirement accounts in which
Americans could voluntarily invest a percentage of their Social Security withholdings in stocks and bonds. Coleman's plan would allow workers, roughly age 50 and under, to privately invest two of the 13 cents per dollar they earn that's withheld
for Social Security.
[The new Coleman ad says]: "I don't support privatizing Social Security and I'll fight against anybody who would do that. A Coleman spokesman says Wellstone is wrong in equating Coleman's support for individual retirement accounts
with Social Security privatization. [A political analyst notes that] until the stock market plunged, supporters and opponents of the type of accounts Coleman is promoting generally referred to their plans as plans to privatize Social Security.
Source: Minnesota Public Radio, Election 2002 coverage
Sep 20, 2002
Voted YES on establishing reserve funds & pre-funding for Social Security.
Voting YES would:
require that the Federal Old Age and Survivors Trust Fund be used only to finance retirement income of future beneficiaries;
ensure that there is no change to benefits for individuals born before January 1, 1951
provide participants with the benefits of savings and investment while permitting the pre-funding of at least some portion of future benefits; and
ensure that the funds made available to finance such legislation do not exceed the amounts estimated to be actuarially available.
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."
This body has already closed the door on the President's ill-conceived plan for private Social Security accounts. The opposition to privatization is well-known:
Privatizing Social Security does nothing to extend the solvency of the program.
Transition costs would put our Nation in greater debt by as much as $4.9 trillion.
Creating private accounts would mean benefit cuts for retirees, by as much as 40%.
Half of all American workers today have no pension plan from their employers. It is critical that we protect this safety net.
Make no mistake about it, this is a stalking-horse for Social Security. It looks good on the surface, but this is an amendment to privatize Social Security.
Rated 0% by the ARA, indicating an anti-senior voting record.
Coleman scores 0% by the ARA on senior issues
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.
