National
Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform: the entire discussion
We are in the midst of a tempest over the commission
appointed by Obama to come up with recommendations to “heal
the deficit” which has been problematic for many of us,
as we knew they were “bipartisan” and that Social
Security and Medicare are on the table, even though they are
not the problem. In a nutshell, here is what happened:
Alan Simpson, co-chair of the Commission,
with Erskine Bowles, makes intemperate remarks insulting to
“Gray Panthers and Pink Panthers” (I have not
been able to find video of this). He says we are overreacting
fringe groups.
OWL Executive Director Ashley Carson writes
a great article on the Huffington Post refuting the comments,
including pointing out that there is no Pink Panthers group.
2 months later, someone shows the article
to Simpson and he rushes out a really weird e-mail to Ashley.
She works with other groups to make public the egregious remarks
and to call for his removal from the commission.
He writes an apology on letterhead. Too little
too late.
The good news: a huge spotlight shines nationally
on Simpson and on the Commission. FOX, CNN, MSNBC weigh in,
along with newspapers ranging from the Wall Street Journal
to the New York Times. We have the oppotunity to urge the
Commission to focus on the true causes of the deficits, the
two Bush wars and the tax cuts for the wealthy.
Tangentially, Gray Panthers and OWL get threir
messages out!
We are hopeful the Commission will refocus
and that people will join us in the fight for Social Security.
Access
Radio Show August 30: Charlene and Margie discuss the National
Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. The commission
was tasked with working on the deficit, which we view as less
important than dealing with jobs and the destruction of the middle
class. In adition it appears they are taking on Social Security
in a big way even though it has noting to do wiht the deficit.
This isue shot sky-high unexpectedly this week when Sen. Alan
Simpson, co-chair of the Commission, wrote a vulgar and insulting
email to the Excecutive Direector of the Older Women's League,
Ashley Carson, who did not take it sitting down. Go to http://www.owlca.org/simpsonaug2010.htm.
Or listen to our show!
Today is the first meeting of the President's National Commission
on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. Some of us have been paying
very close attention to the discourse leading up to this momentous
occasion. For example, Alan K. Simpson, one of the co-chairs
insists that the solution to fixing America's deficit is to
target Social Security.
Over and over again, he states that the Gray Panthers and the
Pink Panthers are the only people who are making noise about
not cutting Social Security benefits. Well, I have some news
for Mr. Simpson - there is no group called the Pink Panthers
working to protect Social Security. Is this some disgusting
attempt at ageism and sexism in one cutesy alliterative quip?
Not surprising given his record of sexism (i.e., Justice Thomas'
confirmation hearings) and his constant bashing of seniors (ever
hear the term "greedy geezers"? We can thank Simpson
for that).
Here are the facts:
• The average Social Security beneficiary in America receives
$13,900 annually.
• The average for older women receives approximately $11,000
each year.
• If the Commission decides to cut these benefits, older
adults, widows, children who have lost their parents and people
with disabilities will suffer.
Mr. Simpson continues to paint the picture that everyone receiving
Social Security benefits is living the high life - driving luxury
cars, dining out and living in gated communities. If this is
true, can someone please tell me where it is that I can retire
in the United States where I can buy my Lexus, make house payments
and never have to cook at home again on my $11,000?
Perhaps Simpson is confused, maybe because he lives the high
life, he believes all older adults live like he does. If he
doesn't need his Social Security check, then perhaps he should
donate the money to a homeless shelter, because that's where
many older single women will live if he reduces their benefits.
The statistics on poverty for seniors are alarming. The most
shocking of all is that almost one quarter of older African
American women live in poverty and that 45% of older women living
alone are poor. This means that each of these people lives on
less than $10,400 annually. Look at the numbers again. There's
a good chance any of us could be part of those numbers later
in life.
The President's Commission co-chairs need to focus on what got
us into this mess, and then come up with solutions to help America
get back on track. Social Security doesn't contribute to the
problem, and in fact runs an enormous surplus. First on the
agenda should be defense spending and second should be the Bush
era tax cuts - the leading contributors to the deficit. Please
let grandma keep her $900 a month; after all, she earned it.
www.socialsecuritymatters.org
The
Infamous E-mail from Alan Simpson to Ashley Carson:
Subject: FW: To Ashley Carson re 4/27/10 article
Attachments: BudgetCommiss SocSec Pt1 May 12 2010 Goss.pdf
From: Alan K. Simpson [mailto:alsimpson@vcn.com]
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 6:52 PM
To: Owl@owl-national.org
Subject: To Ashley Carson re 4/27/10 article
Ashley B. Carson
Executive Director, OWL
Dear Ms. Carson,
Someone was good enough to forward me your column of “Enough
with the Pink Panthers Bit” of April 27, 2010.
Some of what you say is true. Much is not – but that’s
nothing new about public life for me! I have news for you too,
my friend. There may be no group called the Pink Panthers working
to protect Social Security but I sure as hell am! I’ve
spent many years in public life trying to stabilize that system
while people like you babble into the vapors about “disgusting
attempts at ageism and sexism” and all the rest of that
crap.
Now hold on tight, because you won’t like what I’m
sending you. You may obviously be aware that the Social Security
system is “in trouble.” If you don’t agree
with that, then there is no need to read any further. But I
wish to share with you the presentation by Stephen C. Goss,
Chief Actuary of the Social Security Administration on May 12,
2010 to the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and
Reform. If you think the statistics on poverty for seniors are
alarming – then you need to read this little pamphlet
to know what is really alarming.
If we can’t get a handle on this system and make it sustainable
and assure long term solvency, and make some changes that are
“minor” at the present time and will become “major”
as each year passes, then take a look at the chart on Page 6
which I hope you are able to discern if you are any good at
reading graphs – or anything that might challenge your
biases and prejudices.
Anyway, have a look at it and if you should choose, you might
communicate with me. If you have some better suggestions about
how to stabilize Social Security instead of just babbling into
the vapors, let me know. And yes, I’ve made some plenty
smart cracks about people on Social Security who milk it to
the last degree. You know ‘em too. It’s the same
with any system in America. We’ve reached a point now
where it’s like a milk cow with 310 million tits! Call
when you get honest work!
Letter
from Ashley urging OWL members to sign the petition to Pres.
Obama
Dear OWL Members and Supporters,
I am appalled. This issue needs your attention.
In April, I wrote blog titled, "Enough with the Pink Panthers
Bit" on Huffington Post. I was tired of Alan Simpson using
the language "Pink Panthers" in reference to people
and groups who care about protecting Social Security. I believe
that he used this name to refer to women's organizations, without
calling us by name.
This morning I received an email from Alan Simpson, Co-Chair
of the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform.
Please click here to read it.
I'm sure you are as outraged as I am. Among other things, he
said, "We've reached a point now where it's like a milk
cow with 310 million tits! Call me when you get honest work."
Apparently Mr. Simpson thinks that defending the rights of women
is not honest work.
We have set up a petition online calling for his resignation.
The National Council of Women's Organizations is behind us and
women's leaders are lining up in support.
The
Letter sent by The National Council of Women's Organizations
(NCWO) to President Obama reads as follows:
We call for the resignation of Alan K. Simpson as co-chair
of the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform.
We have given the former Senator several chances at redemption,
but his email today to our sister member organization, the Older
Women's League, illustrates his clear disrespect for Social
Security, women and the American people, highlighted by his
degrading, sexist, ageist and profane language. In the closing
few sentences of the e-mail he states, "It's the same with
any system in America. We've reached a point now where it's
like a milk cow with 310 million tits! Call when you get honest
work."
The facts speak for themselves, but Mr. Simpson suggests that
anyone supporting people who most need help and who deserve
the benefits they paid for must be dishonest or stupid. Such
open contempt goes beyond the pale and cannot be tolerated from
someone in such a position of authority.
The National Council of Women's Organizations (NCWO) works
in coalition with many other campaigns to prevent misleading
and false attacks on Social Security. Forty-five percent of
women over age 65, who live alone, do so in poverty. Women,
who earn less on average for the same work as men, are hit again
upon taking Social Security benefits; due to lower lifetime
earnings, women receive on average less than $12,000 per year
in Social Security benefits, while men receive nearly $14,000.
Further, women are not living longer in retirement (low-income
minority women have seen decreases in life expectancy), and
cannot continue to work more years in physically difficult or
demanding jobs. Social Security is not an overly generous program
helping all seniors live out luxurious retirements. Social Security
provides a base level of replacement income for older Americans
who can no longer work, and any cuts to benefits, either in
the form of smaller checks or by raising the retirement age,
will hurt all generations, forcing more and more Americans back
into poverty.
It may be good politics to have such an enemy to play off of
heading into November, but Mr. President, it is time for you
to stand up for the millions of American workers who have paid
into Social Security on the promise of a secure retirement,
and put them ahead of political sportsmanship. Mr. Simpson must
be removed from this commission, either by his own will, or
by yours. Show American workers you mean what you say about
protecting Social Security. This is your chance.
OWL - The Voice of Midlife and Older Women
1828 L Street NW Suite 801
Washington, DC 20036
Toll Free: 1.800.825.3695
I am writing to add my voice as both Convenor of the Sacramento
Gray Panthers network and a very active member of the Older
Women’s League. I have devoted my last four years to activist
work on behalf of seniors, with an emphasis on healthcare issues
and the preservation of Social Security. But more than that,
I live on Social Security. You may have noticed jobs are scarce,
and trust me, they are even scarcer for over 65 women In fact,
I live in a small duplex and had just this week to choose between
rent and car payments, and I chose rent; my car was repossessed
this week.
So to add insult to injury, I found out about Sen. Alan Simpson’s
disgraceful treatment of one of our own, Ashley Carson, Executive
Director of the National Older Women’s League. I am also
a friend of hers. She is enormously professional, intelligent,
articulate and well-spoken. We were all shocked by his letter
to her and frankly, I suspect he may be impaired in some way.
He certainly is a terrible choice to lead the National Commission
on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. He has a history of putting
his foot in his mouth, his hostility to Social Security renders
him anything but dispassionate, and his temperament invalidates
him from making decisions that affect every senior in this country.
Please add my name to the growing insistence that he is unfit
for this job.
Margaret J. Metzler
margiemetz@hotmail.com
916-921-5008 or 248-6148
Sacramento, CA www.owlca.org or www.gpcal.org
Simpson
apologizes to Carson: Too little Too late.
August 25, 2010
Ashley Carson
Executive Director
Older Women’s League
1828 L Street NW Suite 801 Washington, DC 20036
Dear Ms. Carson,
My wife Ann and I are in Yellowstone National Park for the opening
of the new visitor center, so I only just now have had the opportunity
to read your response to my recent e-mail. I apologize for what
I wrote. I can see that my remarks have caused you anguish,
and that was not my intention. I certainly did not intend to
diminish your hard work for the Older Women’s League.
I know you care deeply about strengthening Social Security,
and so do I, just as deeply. I remember your testimony at our
public hearing in June about the importance of retirement security
for women. Over the last 40 years, I have had my size 15 feet
in my mouth a time or two. To quote my old friend and colleague,
Senator Lloyd Bentsen, when I make a mistake, “It’s
a doozy!”
Next time I’m in Washington, perhaps we could meet in
person, and I could learn further of your sincere concerns.
Most sincerely,
Alan Simpson
Washington, DC -- Today, Ashley Carson, Executive Director
of OWL, received an apology letter from Alan Simpson for his
inappropriate e-mail.
Carson released this statement:
"I am very appreciative of Mr. Simpson's quick apology
and for his acknowledgment of wrongdoing. That said, OWL's position
that Mr. Simpson should resign from the National Commission
on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform has not changed. This is
much more than a "foot in your mouth" situation. Mr.
Simpson has demonstrated a consistent, decades-long, pattern
of making statements that are offensive to seniors, to women
and that are just plain unacceptable in 2010. There are consequences
for actions -- especially when those actions result in uniting
people who fight for a common purpose. We, the advocates, do
honest work day in and day out to help disadvantaged individuals
create better lives for themselves and their loved ones. His
actions demonstrate that he does not possess the judgment necessary
to make objective recommendations about some of America's most
valued programs."
Sen.
Alan Simpson takes on Older Women—and we fight back!
Margie Metzler
August 27, 2010
Note: OWL and Gray Panthers are both available for comment
and we both have very active Sacramento chapters.
Recently, the blogosphere has buzzed with reactions to an intemperate
e-mail Sen. Alan Simpson sent Aug. 23 to Ashley Carson, the
Executive Director of the Older Women’s League (OWL),
a 30-year-old organization that advocates for midlife and older
women. (See our local chapter website, http://www.owlca.org/simpsonaug2010.htm,
for the full story.) Most inflammatory were his comments about
“people like you (who) babble into the vapors,”
“that crap,” “it’s like a milk cow with
310 million tits!” and “Call when you get honest
work!” OWL has alliances with most senior’s groups
and women’s advocacy organizations, and this coalition
has called for his resignation as co-chairman of the White House-created
National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform.
Now, this is, shall we say, titillating stuff. But you need
to know that OWL women, including me, are not the type to get
all a-twitter at condescension and vulgarities. We are made
of sterner stuff.
Our most important concern here is that the President’s
focus on the deficit is inappropriate and unwise when our bigger
problems are the lack of jobs and the downward spiral of our
middle class.
Second, even if we were to accept the Commission’s misguided
focus, we are incensed that it is largely unwilling to consider
dispassionately all the possible ways of reducing the deficit.
We’ve been promised by the President and by the Commission
Co-chairs that “everything is on the table,” but
some members, including Sen. Simpson, have exhibited a long-term
hostility toward Social Security and a relentless inability
to focus on real solutions. Social Security doesn't contribute
to the problem, and in fact runs an enormous surplus. First
on the agenda should be defense spending and second should be
the Bush era tax cuts - the leading contributors to the deficit.
However, since Sen. Simpson’s irrational comments have
moved the focus to Social Security, here are the facts:
First, Social Security is not bankrupt. In
fact, there's a $2.6 trillion surplus. It’s true that
the federal government has borrowed most of that to pay for
the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the Wall Street bank
bailouts, and for the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy. It
wasn’t their money - it belongs to American workers.
Second, the program is paying out more than
it takes in for two reasons: baby boomer retirements and the
recession. And guess what, we planned for this. Economists
have known for decades that baby boomers would start to retire
this year, and so nearly 30 years ago, workers started contributing
more to the program so that when they all retired there would
be enough money to cover them
Finally, since Sen. Simpson coined the expression “greedy
geezers” and appears to believe that we are living in
luxury on Social Security, here are a few more facts:
The average Social Security beneficiary in
America receives $13,900 annually.
The average older woman receives approximately
$11,000 each year.
If the Commission decides to cut these benefits, older adults,
widows, children who have lost their parents and people with
disabilities will suffer.
The statistics on poverty for seniors are alarming. The most
shocking of all is that almost one quarter of older African
American women live in poverty and that 45% of older women living
alone are poor. This means that each of these people lives on
less than $10,400 annually. Look at the numbers again. There's
a good chance any of us could be part of those numbers later
in life.
Please let grandma keep her $900 a month; after all, she earned
it.
My name is Shirley - I am a long time resident of San Bernardino,
Ca., and I am a member of OWL.
I am not a “lesser person” nor am I or have I milked
the system as perceived by Alan Simpson, Co-chairperson of the
National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility. He has offended
older adults and other widows, children who have lost their
parents and people with disabilities. Me. I worked hard, paid
into Social Security, when widowed it helped me continue to
work and care for my children. Now, retired it is one leg of
my retirement plan. However others are not so lucky and I share
these facts:
• The average Social Security beneficiary in America receives
$13,900 annually.
• The average for older women receives approximately $11,000
each year.
The statistics on poverty for seniors are alarming. The most
shocking of all is that almost one quarter of older African
American women live in poverty and that 45% of older women living
alone are poor. This means that each of these people lives on
less than $10,400 annually. Look at the numbers again. There's
a good chance any of us could be part of those numbers later
in life.
The three-legged retirement model is a thing of the past. Once,
a person could count on Social Security and a pension. For many,
those days are over and a punishing economy has left many without
any savings. For many, a Social Security check is the only thing
keeping them from being on the street – and it is not
enough to keep them from living in severe poverty!
The President's Commission co-chairs need to focus on what
got us into this mess, and then come up with solutions to help
America get back on track. Social Security doesn't contribute
to the problem, and in fact runs an enormous surplus that was
borrowed to pay for military expenses in Iraq. This was borrowed
and required to pay back. Yes, it needs tweaking but not by
raising the retirement age. And even with tweaking, Social Security
does not contribute to the deficit problem one iota.
Over 105 organizations are commenting and petitioning for Alan
Simpson’s removal. I hope readers will review and take
action and follow this commission on their radar screen. www.owl-national.org
Shirley Harlan, OWL Southwest Region National Board Member
Contact: Natale Zimmer, Communications Director
E-mail: nzimmer@owl-national.org
Please read the letter Donna Wagner sent to President Obama:
Dear President Obama,
OWL was shocked to receive the attached letter this morning
from Board Member Joan Bernstein and her husband, Merton Bernstein.
Mr. and Mrs. Bernstein co-authored Social Security: the System
that Works (Basic Books, 1988, paperback 1989. She is a long-time
national board member of OWL and its former Board President.
He is Walter D. Coles: Professor of Law Emeritus, Washington
University and a founding board member of the National Academy
of Social Insurance. They also collaborated on The Future of
Private Pensions (Free Press/Macmillan) which won the Elizur
Wright Award in 1965. These respected and accomplished advocates
and experts on Social Security do not deserve to be the targets
of Alan Simpson's inappropriate bashing any more than the others
he has attacked in the past.
The attached letter was sent to the Bernstein's home address
in response to a blog they co-wrote and OWL posted in May 2010.
The reply, dated June 2, 2010, was received this week, and was
sent with a copy of the same attachment from Stephen C. Goss
that Mr. Simpson sent to Ashley Carson last week. The continued
attacks on supporters of Social Security, especially when taken
with the fact that Social Security in and of itself does not
contribute to the deficit, demonstrate that Mr. Simpson lacks
the judgement to lead a serious conversation on deficit reduction.
Insulting the intelligence of respected experts on Social Security,
which Mr. Simpson himself is not, and accusing them of mishandling
the facts shows that Mr. Simpson's bias is an insurmountable
obstacle to an objective discussion about the deficit. As such,
he must be removed so that American can have an honest conversation
about our financial situation. We once again ask you to reconsider
you appointment of Alan Simpson to the National Commission on
Fiscal Responsibility and Reform.
But I want to go beyond the 300 million tits and focus on the
substance of his arguments. Because Simpson keeps bringing something
up in these emails, whether to OWL’s Ashley Carson or
CEPR’s Dean Baker. He keeps mentioning Stephen Goss’
report to the cat food commission from May 12 of this year.
I’ve obtained the slides from that speech, and I have
to say, I don’t think Simpson knows enough about Social
Security to even collect it, let alone head a commission devoted
to its future.
The presentation basically explains the Social Security system
and how it works. It’s a primer, if you will. Slide 5
shows, in my view, that a commission focused on the budget deficit
has no business involving itself in a separately funded program.
It says that “Trust Funds enforce long-term budget neutrality”
and if the Trust Funds get exhausted by 2037, which is the current
schedule, “Spending is limited—-NO annual budget
deficit.” In other words, Social Security cannot run a
deficit and will adjust to the available funds. Regardless of
whether you think that’s a good idea, the fact is that
the program has basically no impact on the budget deficit whatsoever,
unless you contort yourself into the lie that paying back the
US Treasury bonds in the Trust Fund represents a “raid”
on the budget. That’s what Matt Bai did in his preposterous
story today, claiming that the $2.5 trillion in the Trust Fund,
backed by the full faith and credit of the US government, “is
sort of like saying that you’re rich because your friend
has promised to give you 10 million bucks just as soon as he
wins the lottery.” No, it’s like saying you’re
rich because your friend owes you 10 million bucks by force
of law.
Slide 6, which Simpson specifically pointed out, is merely
the recitation of what the trustee’s report showed this
year: all scheduled benefits can pay out until 2037. That’s
27 years of solvency, which I’d gather is better than
practically every program in the federal government. What’s
more, it makes Bai (and Simpson, who has made the same argument
on occasion) look like an idiot for his stupid Trust Fund metaphor,
because the 27 years of solvency assumes full repayment of the
Trust Fund. That would be the point of Slide 7, “Solvent
as Long as the Trust Fund Has Assets.” Slide 10 also shows
this. It may look “scary, scary, scary,” but it’s
showing the completely normal data from the trustee’s
report. Simpson must think we never saw that before. I think
he hasn’t.
As for the best solution in the future, I hardly think the
answer for the potential cuts in 27 years is to make cuts today.
As Goss says on Slide 11, the current program structure is sustainable
with adjustments. It’s far more sustainable than Medicare,
Ag subsidies, or just about 100 other things in the budget.
Goss continues, “Sustainable is what Americans want and
are willing to pay for.”
Hardly anyone knows that the payroll tax which pays for Social
Security is capped at $106,000. Even if we carved out up to,
say, $300,000 and then continued the tax on up, to capture the
amount of compensation – 90% – expected by the program
at the outset, we would have filled the gap almost entirely.
As for the rest, believing so strongly in a 27-year projection
is kind of nuts. We didn’t budget for any other program
in 1983 based on what would happen in 2010: only Social Security.
As Goss concludes on Slide 19: “No Need to “Bend”
the Cost
Curve (% of GDP) for Social Security.” Medicare is clearly
the bigger problem, and the changes in the Affordable Care Act
only covered part of the job. If Simpson were in any way credible,
he’d get to work, not only on a better overall health
care system, which would lower Medicare costs concurrently,
but the inefficiencies in the overall budget, like runaway defense
spending, Ag subsidies, contracting and a host of other problems.
Social Security, despite being a lower-order issue, seems like
all this commission is going to deal with. And Simpson’s
comments show a bias against the program as well as a lack of
understanding about it. That’s why he should be fired,
not for obscenity or anything else.
