Walz campaign: Owatonna residents oppose Davis intent to privatize social Security

Another press release from the Walz campaign:

Owatonna Citizens Oppose Dr. Brian Davis’ Plan to Gamble Social Security on the Stock Market

In light of recent turmoil in the U.S. stock market, a group of Owatonna citizens held a press conference today to oppose 1^st District Congressional candidate Dr. Brian Davis’ plans to gamble Social Security on the stock market.

“As a retiree, I depend on Social Security to make ends meet,” said Sondra Von Arb, an Owatonna senior. “I don’t want Social Security gambled away on the stock market. Dr. Brian Davis’ plan to privatize Social Security is wrong for southern Minnesotans like me.”

Dr. Davis has routinely expressed support for some privatization of Social Security and has pledged to follow the MN Republican Party platform, which promotes privatization of Social Security for Americans of all ages.

“In this economy, we can’t afford Dr. Brian Davis’ plan to risk Social Security on the stock market,” said Lisa Heggedahl, a farmer in Hayfield. “I am paying into the system and will be paying for years to come. I want to know that when I retire, Social Security will be there for me.”

“Ordinary, middle-class Americans rely on Social Security to make ends meet,” said Richard Hackerson, a semi-retired Owatonna resident. “Dr. Davis’ willingness to gamble that away in the stock market shows that he is the wrong person for southern Minnesota . We need Tim Walz in Congress because he will oppose any attempt to privatize Social Security.”

Davis Said He Supported The Privatization Of Social Security. Davis said, “I do believe that people below a certain age should have the option to invest some of their Social Security in the private market.” [Winona Youth GOP Debate, 2/23/08, full transcription available on request]

Davis Said If You Want to Know Where He Stood on an Issue to Look at the Republican Party Platform. Davis said, “I want to reassure you that I’m a conservative platform republican I will cast those votes and I will advocate on behalf of our causes. I think our Republican Party platform in this state is great. Do you want to know where I stand; you can start with that document.” [Fillmore Co GOP Convention, full transcription available on request]

Republican Party Platform of MN (http://www.mngop.com/Roots/8a6031ab-af02-4ff7-b4375db06581aaea/Documents/2008%20RPM%20Platform.pdf)

Republican Party Platform Section 1, Letter P (Page 2): Allowing all Americans to invest some or all of their Social Security payments, continuing to fulfill our obligations to older Americans, and prohibiting Congress from using Social Security funds for any other purpose.

We would also like to draw our readers' attention to a long comment retired accountant  McPherson Hall on Minnesota Central left at our post, Does Matt Stolle of the Post Bulletin want voters in the dark about Davis's positions?:

Mr. Stolle:

Have you heard (or read) the September 24 story on KAAL ? The discussion concerned Social Security and Davis says privatizing, or allowing some of the payroll taxes to be invested, would be one way to help.
"So let's say 40% or 50% of payroll taxes could be included into a secure type of even a 403B plan, which would be bonds and securities that are very stable," says Davis.

  Yes, some citizens are concerned ... rightfully ... and they may support Congressman Walz, but KAAL asked the question.

I am concerned with your paragraph "The program's trustees have projected that Social Security will begin paying out more benefits than receipts in 2017. It will be financially exhausted in 2041."

Are you aware that the in August, the Congressional Budget Office issued an updated report on the Social Security funding requirements. The report, which forecasts out 75 years, finds that while the accumulating surpluses in the trust fund will be exhausted in 2049, ongoing revenues will still be sufficient to fund about 81% of promised benefits at the end of the 75-year period (in 2082). Further, the CBO report says, “future Social Security beneficiaries will receive larger benefits in retirement…than current beneficiaries do, even after adjustments have been made for inflation.”

Dr. Davis may be taking a preemptive strike since he knows that one way to increase funding for the reserve is to increase the taxable cap rate. Interesting that Dr. Davis, who is capped on how much he contributes to Social Security (currently set at $102,000 and in 2007, Davis was paid $411,780), is willing to allow workers to accept some risk.

Also I am confused with Davis comment "the Democrats have been taking money out of that". To my understanding Social Security reserve is still being funded ... and the Government's overall balance sheet is not in as bad a position because of the positive balance in the SS reserve. This has been the case forever ... and some of your readers will recall the Bush/Gore debate over how to whether a "lockbox" should be established so that the Government does not imply a better fiscal year statement by not recognizing the positive impact of Social Security overfunding. The overall fiscal balance sheet would look worse if the reserve for Social Security payments weren't used to offset other funding (such as Iraq). Why is Davis blaming the Democrats when President Bush and Congressional Republicans share some of the blame ?

But the good thing is that these citizens that prompted your article are addressing a concern. Let's not be so quick to minimize their concerns ... if Davis is elected, at least voters know what his plans are.