‘Extreme’ again
“Social Security,” a 30-second TV commercial by Patty Murray, criticizes George Nethercutt for cutting Medicare and wanting to privatize Social Security.
“How could Nethercutt break his promise and raid billions from the Social Security trust fund to pay for tax breaks for millionaires?” the narrator asks, as champagne glasses clink. “Now he wants to privatize Social Security and gamble your money in the stock market.”
The ad ends with a now-familiar tag line: “That’s George Nethercutt. Just too extreme for Washington.”
Nethercutt’s stance “It’s outrageous and blatantly false,” Nethercutt spokesman Alex Conant said about the ad. “George Nethercutt’s never said he wants to privatize Social Security. On the contrary, he’s always promised and voted to secure the benefits for seniors and near retirees,” Conant said. The best way to help Social Security is to create more jobs, he said. Putting more people to work will boost payroll taxes, multiplying the money available for Social Security. | Murray’s stance “He’s saying one thing in Washington state and doing another in Washington, D.C.,” Murray spokeswoman Alex Glass said. Nethercutt clearly supports privatizing Social Security, she said. “Anything that takes funds out of the Social Security trust fund and puts them in private accounts is privatizing Social Security,” Glass said. “We are currently raiding the Social Security trust fund to give massive tax breaks to the wealthy. The first thing we need to do is get our priorities back.” |
The bottom line Part of the issue here surrounds the word “privatize.” Since the stock market tumbled three years ago, many citizens have feared putting their money toward what they perceive as a risky investment. Some politicians are backing away from the word privatize because it scares voters. Here’s Nethercutt’s plan: He wants to study letting Americans redirect small portions of their payroll tax money into personal investment accounts. The money might be invested in stocks, in bonds or in other ways. Conant said government could start looking into such a plan for younger generations during the next few years, but people on Social Security now or nearing retirement wouldn’t be affected. So is that privatization? The Institute for America’s future, a progressive Washington, D.C., think tank, sent out comments from Social Security experts last week because President George Bush, like Nethercutt, supports setting up individual accounts for workers. The experts referred to the plan as privatization, said it wouldn’t solve Social Security’s problems and could make them worse. Heidi Hartmann, president of Women’s Policy Research, for example, said women would be hurt by such a plan because they earn less and live longer than men. One local economist, not included in the institute’s list, said Tuesday that to say Nethercutt’s plan involves privatization depends on how much control the government would have over how the individual accounts were managed. “Like in most political arguments, it’s my opinion that both people are right,” Avista Corp. chief economist Randy Barcus said. “It depends on how you characterize the situation. Mr. Nethercutt certainly would legitimately be able to say this is not privatization and Sen. Murray would be able to say that it is under specific conditions.” The ad says Nethercutt cut Medicare, and it refers to a Sept. 10, 1998, Spokesman-Review article to help support that. The article was an Ad Watch, similar to this one. Based on the article, it would have been more accurate for Murray to say in this new ad that Nethercutt wanted to spend less than the Democrats on Medicare. In 1996, Republicans wanted to restrict Medicare growth by $270 billion. Eventually, the two parties agreed to limit growth to $115 billion. | |
Ad watch is an analysis of campaign advertising that runs regularly during election season. Contact Megan Cooley at (509) 927-2165 or meganc@spokesman.com | For more information on the election, and to see selected campaign advertisements, visit the online election guide at: www.spokesmanreview.com/elections |