Danny Diaz: Pelosi Provides No Plan for Social Security

[paineinthearse]

Brian Jones must be taking a breather. One can only rant so much in one day.

=================================================

:puke: RNC Deputy Communications Director Danny Diaz: Pelosi Provides No Plan for Social Security

2/6/2005 1:21:00 PM


----------------------------------------------------------------------

To: National Desk, Political Reporter

Contact: Danny Diaz of the Republican National Committee, Office of Communications, 202-863-8614, Web: http://www.gop.com

WASHINGTON, Feb. 6 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Following is a statement by RNC Deputy Communications Director Danny Diaz, regarding Rep. Pelosi (D-Calif.):

"Representative Pelosi well represented the 'party of no' this morning. Offering criticism rather than leadership, the San Francisco liberal falsely characterized the President's plan to fix Social Security. It's apparent that today's Democrat Party still doesn't understand America is looking for solutions rather than political attacks."

-- Danny Diaz, RNC deputy communications director

------

Pelosi Provides No Democrat Alternative on Social Security:

When Asked For A Democrat Alternative Plan On Social Security, Pelosi Dodged The Question And Claimed: "It's Not A Question Of Alternative." ABC'S GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: "Well, you heard Senator McCain there. He said opponents of the President's plan have an obligation to come up with an alternative. What's your alternative?" PELOSI: "It's not a question of alternative. The President has described this as a crisis. The President is making a proposal. We haven't seen the full plan, but let's just say this right up front. Democrats agree that if we have a long-term challenge, and we do in social security, that we should address it now before it turns into a crisis." (ABC's "This Week," 2/6/05)

Pelosi Described Social Security As A "Long Term Challenge," And Not A Crisis. "Democrats agree that if we have a long-term challenge, and we do in social security, that we should address it now before it turns into a crisis." (ABC's "This Week," 2/6/05)

Desperate Pelosi Relied On Factually Inaccurate And Retracted Language To Attack President's Social Security Plan:

Pelosi: "If You Took A Private Account At The End Of The Day You Would Have To Pay About 70 percent Of Your Original Social Security Benefit To Offset. It's Called A 'Claw-Back Not A Name Many Are Familiar With. It's Called A 'Claw-Back Not A Name Many Are Familiar With." (ABC's "The Week," 2/6/05)

Factcheck.org Issued Clarification On "Claw Back" And Removed The Term From Its Release. "We originally used the term 'clawback' to describe the sum of money that the government would require workers to use to purchase an annuity upon retirement. The White House does not use that term and specifically denies that the mandatory annuity purchase requirement constitutes a 'clawback.' We have removed our references to that term to characterize the mandatory annuity purchase." (Factcheck.org Website, http://www.factcheck.org, Accessed 2/6/05)

The Real Meaning of The Term "Claw Back:" "A 'claw back' is typically a feature of a plan where the government guarantees a certain combined benefit from the traditional system and the personal account. Under such a plan, the better your account does, the less you get from the government. Therefore, the gains in the accounts are 'clawed back.'" (The White House, Office Of The Press Secretary, "Setting The Record Straight," Press Release, 2/3/05)

Why The President's Plan Does Not Fit That Definition: President Bush's plan "does not have a 'claw back.' Under the President's plan, you, not the government, get all the gains in your personal retirement account. The amount you receive from the government is NOT reduced if your personal account does well. The better your account does, the better off you are." (The White House, Office Of The Press Secretary, "Setting The Record Straight," Press Release, 2/3/05)

Washington Post Issued Correction Explaining It Was Wrong In Saying Portion Of Worker's Personal Account Would Be Taken Back By Government. "The Washington Post incorrectly reported Thursday that the balance of a worker's personal account would be reduced by the worker's total annual contributions plus 3 percent interest. In fact, the balance in the account would belong to the worker upon retirement ..." (Jonathan Weisman, "Benefit Cuts Would Offset Contributions," The Washington Post, 2/4/05)

------

:puke: Paid for by the Republican National Committee. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate committee.

http://www.usnewswire.com/

[CindyDale]

1. Tell him to come to DU. We got a plan.