Obama Debate Release on Clinton & Social Security

Clinton Puts Everything On the Table When it Comes to Social Security; Says That "Anything Could Be Considered" By Her Bipartisan Commission.  In response to a question why she refuses to put forth a plan for addressing the fiscal crisis facing Social Security, Clinton said, "Well, Tim...we would have a bipartisan commission.... I am not going to be repeating Republican talking points. So, when somebody asked me would something like this [lifting the caps] be considered? Well, anything could be considered when we get to a bipartisan commission."  [Debate, 10/30/07]Clinton Said She Will Take No Position On How To Fix Social Security; Said She Would Advocate A Bipartisan Commission But Not "As A Presidential Candidate Or As A President." "Clinton said she will take no position on how to fix Social Security and made it clear she does not regard it as a front-burner issue. 'I do not believe it is in a crisis,' she said of the retirement program. . She said she would follow President Ronald Reagan's example by appointing a bipartisan commission to study the issue and avoid making her own recommendations until it reports back. 'I'm not advocating any of it as a presidential candidate or as a president,' she said. 'But I am strongly advocating a bipartisan process, similar to what we had in '83, and when that gets set up, as I hope it will be when I'm president, then I'm going to see what the bipartisan members are going to come up with.'" [Washington Post, 10/10/07 <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/09/AR2007100902284.html?hpid%3Dtopnews⊂=AR> ]

Clinton Wouldn't Say What She Would Do To Fix Social Security And Whether She Would Raise Taxes. Clinton, on whether she would raise payroll taxes to pay for social security said, "First, I do think that it is important to talk about fiscal responsibility.  You know, when my husband left office after moving us toward a balanced budget and a surplus, we had a plan to make Social Security solvent until 2055. Now, because of the return to deficits, we have lost 14 years of solvency.  It's now projected to be solvent until 2041.  Getting back on a path to fiscal responsibility is absolutely essential. Number two, I think we do need another bipartisan process. . Well, I'd take everything off the table until we move toward fiscal responsibility and before we have a bipartisan process. I don't think I should be negotiating about what I would do as president.  You know, I want to see what other people come to the table with. . I'm not putting anything on the proverbial table until we move toward fiscal responsibility.  I think it's a mistake to do that." [NH DNC Debate, 9/26/07]

Clinton, Who Refuses To Say Publicly How She Would Preserve Social Security, Privately Told A Voter That She Would Consider Raising Social Security Taxes On High Income Earners. Clinton gave a private clue on an issue she has refused to discuss publicly _ how to preserve Social Security in the long term. Clinton told an Iowa voter she would be willing to consider an idea that her Democratic rival John Edwards has been promoting _ raising Social Security taxes on high-income earners. Afterward thee voter approached Clinton so he could pose for a photo with her, introduce her to his children and discuss the issue further. She told him she didn't want to put an additional tax burden on the middle class but would consider a "gap," with no Social Security taxes on income from $97,500 to around $200,000. Anything above that could be taxed. Asked for an explanation of Clinton's thinking, spokesman Howard Wolfson said in an e-mail, "there are many ideas that are worthy of discussion, but Senator Clinton believes that we need to first focus on fiscal responsibility." Neither Wolfson nor Clinton explained what that would entail. [AP, 10/11/07 <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/11/AR2007101101292.html> ]

FLASH BACK -- 1993: White House Aide Leon Panetta: Hillary Clinton "Insisted On Considering Cuts In The Social Security And Federal Retirement COLAs When Just About Everyone Dismissed The Idea As Too Controversial." "The president's First Adviser, Hillary Clinton, also participated in shaping the budget. 'They both have strong social conscience but both are equally practical and hardheaded as well,' [Leon] Panetta said. In some ways, Hillary appeared to be better than the president at estimating the consequences and likely opposition to policy changes. When she wanted to, she could be quite tough. She insisted on considering cuts in the social security and federal retirement COLAs when just about everyone else dismissed the idea as too controversial. In the end, Clinton himself decided not to shave one percentage point from the COLAs; but the cuts remained in play right up until the end of the budget negotiations." [Newsweek, 5/3/93]

WHAT DO PEOPLE THINK ABOUT CLINTON REFUSING TO TAKE A STAND?

Ø      Washington Post: Clinton's Argument About Social Security That Fiscal Responsibility Will Shore Up The System Is "An Irresponsible Dodge." The Washington Post wrote in an editorial that "listening to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), you'd think nothing ails Social Security that a little bit of fiscal responsibility wouldn't cure. If something more is needed, Ms. Clinton isn't saying what. Private accounts are off the table and, Ms. Clinton adds, cutting benefits or raising the retirement age is 'not an answer.' . Because Social Security increases are pegged to wages, rather than inflation, economic growth alone won't solve the problem. Fiscal responsibility first is fine; fiscal responsibility only is an irresponsible dodge, as Ms. Clinton well knows." [Editorial, Washington Post, 9/30/07 <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/30/AR2007093001209.html> ]

Ø      Union Leader: "It Is Impossible That Sen. Clinton Has No Preferred Method For Dealing With Social Security." The Union Leader wrote in an editorial that "Clinton refused to tell the American people how she would address the very real and immediate problem of Social Security solvency. Asked four times how she would make Social Security solvent, she dodged every time. No answer. Her campaign Web site does not even mention Social Security. Her Senate Web site does, but it states only that she supports it and opposes 'privatization.' Saying 'fiscal responsibility' and 'bipartisan process,' as she did repeatedly at the debate, does not a plan make. It is impossible that Sen. Clinton has no preferred method for dealing with Social Security. The only conclusion is that she has a plan but does not want the American people to know what it is." [Editorial, Union Leader, 9/27/07 <http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Clinton%27s+big+dodge%3a+No+plan+for+Social+Security%3f&articleId=a9a6676d-8b69-47e1-b283-861e96fb5cfd> ]

Ø      Yepsen: Clinton's Refusal To Discuss Options She'd Consider For Making Social Security Sound Was "The Sort Of Tepid Mush That Has Surrounded The Issue For Years." "Clinton's refusal to discuss the options she'd consider for making Social Security sound was the sort of tepid mush that has surrounded the issue for years.  She said she'd appoint a commission to study the problem. Joseph Biden correctly pounced on that answer by saying: 'Presidents are supposed to lead.'" [Yepsen, Des Moines Register, 9/26/01 <http://blogs.dmregister.com/?cat=33> ]

Ø      Washington Post: Clinton Demonstrated She's Not Seriously Ready To Take On The Issue Of Social Security. The Democratic presidential candidates finally took up the issue of Social Security at their Thursday debate in Davenport, Iowa, and Hillary Clinton showed she still believes the topic is the third rail of American politics (Touch it and die.) . Clinton's initial response to Woodruff on Thursday night demonstrated she's not ready to talk seriously yet about one of the biggest issues looming as her Baby Boom generation moves into retirement. What she said in Davenport was: let the economy handle it. Clinton said the solution is merely to return to the economic prosperity of the 1990s. . On Social Security, she gives every indication that she is not yet ready to be so straightforward. She has long espoused fiscal discipline as part of a Democratic economic platform, and she is correct that robust economic growth over a sustained period of time will help ease the program's solvency problems. But as several of her rivals said on Thursday, and many leading experts long have argued, that alone is not likely to be the entire answer. Confronting that reality may be risky politics for a politician whose supporters skew older rather than younger, which may be why the Clinton who appeared on stage in Davenport sounded so cautious, rather than the voice of experience she claims to be." [Washington Post, 9/21/07 <http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/09/21/post_88.html> ]

Ø      Examiner: Clinton's Promise Not To Act-In Effect, To Be Responsible-Defies Reason When It Comes To Social Security. The Examiner wrote in an editorial that "In words a more thoughtful Clinton likely would have avoided, the leading Democratic presidential contender told a cheering crowd of AARP policy wonks and political activists that when she's back in the White House, there won't be any talk about cutting or privatizing Social Security. 'This is the most successful domestic program in the history of the United States. When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything,' she said. Also off the table will be any benefit cuts or increases in the retirement age. In Clinton's world, Social Security is going to go right on just as it is. Even allowing for the expected rhetorical excesses of a candidate seeking support from the nation's largest liberal lobby, Clinton's promise not to act - in effect, to be irresponsible - defies reason. . Face reality, Clinton, or the country will face the consequences." [Examiner, 9/10/07 <http://www.examiner.com/a-926140~Clinton_s_Social_Security_fecklessness.html>