Saturday, November 11, 2006
AARP Survey: Public Strongly Opposes Social Security Private Accounts
Based on the article “New AARP Survey Shows Public Strongly Opposes Social Security Private Accounts” on MonteBubbles.net (website edited by William Hoehne and Joyce Chow)
Edited (with Introduction) by Dr. Don Rose
--
A recent survey by AARP, the organization devoted to seniors over 50, indicates that a majority of boomer voters and politicians alike seem to dislike using Social Security taxes to fund private accounts. More details on the survey results below. –Don Rose
--
A recent AARP survey finds that “boomer-plus” voters (age 42 and older) are strongly opposed to using Social Security taxes to fund private accounts. Of those polled, 72 percent said they oppose private accounts. Just 16 percent of those polled said they support such accounts.
An analysis of candidate responses to the 2006 AARP Voters' Guides in 45 competitive Senate and House races reflects that candidates are hearing the public's rejection of private accounts. AARP's 2006 Voters' Guides asked candidates whether they "support or oppose using Social Security taxes to fund private accounts." Out of 20 Senate candidates in some of the closest races in which Guides were available, 14 (70 percent) checked the box in opposition; only one (5 percent) expressed support, while 5 (25 percent) did not give an answer. Similarly, in 35 competitive House races, 60 percent of the candidates checked the box in opposition; only 3 percent expressed support, while 37 percent did not respond.
The guides also asked candidates whether they will "support or oppose a balanced Social Security plan to continue the program's guaranteed benefits for future generations." Of the 20 Senate candidates, 15 (75 percent) checked the box in support, one (5 percent) opposed and 20 percent did not respond. For the House races, 63 percent of the candidates supported a balanced plan, only 1 percent opposed, and the remaining candidates did not respond.
"It is clear from the responses to our Voters' Guides that an overwhelming majority of candidates oppose private accounts and support a balanced Social Security plan to continue this critical program for future generations," said AARP Director of Government Relations David Sloane. "These candidates have committed to strengthening and preserving Social Security, and voters will expect that they follow through on their promises."
The Election Watch survey was commissioned as a national telephone survey of 1,503 individuals age 42 and older. AARP wanted to take the pulse of the public's opinion on issues that members have indicated they want to hear about in the public discourse. AARP is a nonprofit, nonpartisan membership organization that helps people 50+ have independence, choice and control in ways that are beneficial and affordable to them and society as a whole.
# # #
The article above and the content it is based on are covered by a Creative Commons License. The information provided here is, to the best of our knowledge, reliable and accurate. However, while The Rose Review strives to provide true, precise and consistent information, we cannot guarantee 100 percent accuracy. Readers are encouraged to review the original article and gather more information before drawing conclusions and making decisions.
Dr. Don Rose writes books, papers and articles on many topics, including computers, the Internet, artificial intelligence, science and technology, and issues related to seniors. In addition to serving as writer of The Rose Review, he is also Editor In Chief of The LA Report.
Article Sponsor: Life Alert -- for more information on its emergency response services and other benefits for seniors nationwide, please visit the following websites:
http://www.lifealert.com
http://www.seniorprotection.com
http://www.911seniors.com
# # #
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
That AARP survey had a number of serious problems. In one question, they asked respondents whether they preferred a candidate who would strengthen the finances of traditional Social Security, or one who supported personal accounts -- as though these were antithetical propositions.
The problem with that framing is that it's exactly the opposite of the substantive situation. All of the Congressional proposals that repair traditional Social Security's finances in a sustainable way contain personal accounts. Whereas, no Congressional proposal has been put forward that would return the system to sustainable annual operations, without the accounts. AARP never informs their members or poll respondents of this.
AARP hasn't stopped at opposing personal accounts. Instead, they've made it impossible for themselves to bless any Social Security solution, by opposing at least one provision in every plan that would fix the system. In the last few years, AARP has come out against: personal accounts (many proposals), progressive benefit indexing (Pozen and Bennett proposals), price indexing (L Graham proposal), severing the contribution-benefit link (provisions in the Liebman-MacGuineas-Samwick, Diamond-Orszag, and Ball plans), or increasing publicly-held debt in the near term (Ball plan, personal account plans).
AARP has left itself no proposals that it can actually support. AARP has occasionally indicated a willingness to consider certain provisions, but overstates how much these would really accomplish. For example, AARP claims that raising the cap on taxable wages would fix more than 40% of the problem, but this is by an actuarial measure that is long discredited. A glimpse at the actual SSA scoring of this provision shows that it would solve only about one-seventh of the real long-term problem, far less than AARP states.
AARP is free to have any policy positions that it likes, but its surveys, policy positions, and general rhetoric have badly confused the real issues facing Social Security.
AARP's agenda is very difficult to discern. feverishb wrote a very interesting piece about AARP's lack of support for so many options. You'd think that IF they wanted to fix the problem ahead, and since they purport to represent millions of retirees, the only responsible thing for them to do would be to PROPOSE something--not OPPOSE everything.
My opinion? Their leadership has a different agenda. They should be called on this one!
Post a Comment