posted
I have a feeling that Bush will be dropping this particular sales pitch in his campaign to promote his Social Security plan. The criticism of the pitch is pretty dang obvious. (Make sure you read down to the last paragraph.)
Rather than try to explain it, here's the article from the Chicago Sun-Times article, with Obama's harsh (and justified, imo) critique:
WASHINGTON -- Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) said Thursday that President Bush's argument for African Americans to support his Social Security plan is "offensive."
Bush is courting African Americans with the pitch that the Social Security system is unfair to black men because of their shorter life expectancy.
Obama said the notion that Bush would tailor his Social Security appeal to blacks by talking about their shorter lifespans -- without linking it to the causes of the death rate -- was "stunning'' and "puzzling.''
Obama said he would prefer the president not frame his Social Security argument "in racial terms.'' Obama's strong words may have special significance since he is the only African-American senator.
Last Jan. 11 at a White House forum on Social Security, Bush said "African-American males die sooner than other males do, which means the system is inherently unfair to a certain group of people. And that needs to be fixed.''
Bush is traveling across the country to win backing for his proposal to divert a portion of Social Security payroll taxes to fund individual investment accounts. Democrats oppose the creation of these private, or personal, accounts and said they will not deal with any presidential proposal until they are taken off the table.
"I frankly found the statement that the president made somewhat offensive,'' Obama said at a press briefing with Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), focusing on the impact the creation of individual investment accounts would have on blacks.
"There is no doubt a disparity in the lifetime opportunities between white America and black America. And that is something that everybody at this table is committed to closing,'' Obama said.
Group: Blacks get a lousy deal
He criticized what he said was the cynical use of disparities as a reason to dismantle Social Security. Instead, people should be talking "about how are we going to close the health disparities gap that exists, and make sure that African-American life expectancy is as long as the rest of this nation."
"The notion that we would not be talking about lack of health insurance, and reducing diabetes, and reducing incidents of AIDS, and making sure that African Americans have the wealth and the income to save into retirement and supplement Social Security is stunning to me."
Maya Rockeymoore, a vice president of research and programs at the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, said at the briefing that Social Security survivor and disability benefits -- which are part of the package that includes retirement payments -- are used by African-American families and the conversation about change should deal with all three aspects of the program.
Stephen Moore, president of the Free Enterprise Fund, which is backing Bush's bid for investment accounts, defended the approach. "I think the Republicans should go into the black communities and let people know what a lousy deal they get from Social Security."
Obama, Moore said, did not take issue with the "fundamental truth'' that there is a racial death rate disparity.
"This is not about why the life expectancy is lower," Moore said. "It is about the fact of life that blacks do die at younger ages and they get a relatively worse deal out of Social Security than whites."
Said Obama, "This is as if the president is arguing for privatization of fire protection because our houses aren't worth as much as houses in rich neighborhoods. Or maybe we could privatize police protection because if we get robbed, our stuff is not as nice. It defies logic.''
posted
Well, hes right. Why should African-Americans be trated differently? Maybe if Bush revealed some of the changes that would take place for Afircan-Americans, they would understand what he is saying better. Aas it stands, I would take it as an insult also.
I've always liked Obama. During the election, he said some things that made me think he should have been running.
posted
Wow. And where exactly in Bush's plan does it say that African Americans can begin drawing from their private investment accounts earlier than white people to offset their shorter life expectancy? Oh right, it doesn't. If it did, there would justifiably be a public outcry. So where does Bush get off citing race as a reason to support his plan, again? After all, the exact problem he's citing wouldn't even be addressed by the social security "reform."
Posts: 894 | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: After all, the exact problem he's citing wouldn't even be addressed by the social security "reform."
The thing about Bush's plan is that it is not designed to address any of the problems he's identified. Seriously.
Bush's "reform" addresses two problems that he will never, ever, acknowledge in a press conference:
1) He is personally opposed to a federalized savings plan. 2) The rich do not receive as much benefit from Social Security as they would if they plowed that money into their existing accounts. The very rich, in fact, receive practically no benefit at all.
His entire "reform" is meant to address these two things -- to destroy the federalized Social Security program and make it possible for the rich to optimize their already copious savings. It only makes sense from that perspective.
Of course, that's a hard sell. So he's tried on a number of different "solutions," only to let them fall by the wayside when the press points out -- correctly, so far -- that none of them are solutions to the actual problems he briefly identifies.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Only African American Senator? The hell? But, I totally agree with him. Bush approach is just... outrageous..
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:"There is no doubt a disparity in the lifetime opportunities between white America and black America," Obama said. "The notion that we would cynically use those disparities as a rationale for dismantling Social Security as opposed to talking about how are we going to close the health disparities gap that exists, and make sure that African-American life expectancy is as long as the rest of this nation ... is stunning to me."
The administration and conservative scholars have quietly suggested that blacks may be more inclined to support the Social Security changes because, on average, whites live to age 78 and blacks to 72. So blacks, after contributing to Social Security their whole lives, are more likely to die before collecting their fair share.
"African-American males die sooner than other males do, which means the system is inherently unfair to a certain group of people," Bush said this year at a forum on Social Security. "And that needs to be fixed."
The president campaigned in Louisville and Montgomery to try to ease anxiety among retirees and give political cover to Republican lawmakers facing voters in midterm elections. Bush did not use the African-American argument in either stop on Thursday.
So, apparently Bush has figured out that this isn't the winning strategy he might have thought it was. I wonder if his statements in the forum were a planned "trial balloon" or one of those "unscripted moments" that don't work well for him (I still have painful memories of watching him - live - refer to a "crusade" after 9/11.).
Even if Bush drops it, there are still conservative think-tanks defending it.
So... why is it "divisive" if liberals bring up racial disparities in income and healthcare, but it's OK for conservatives to bring it up in this context? More to the point, why did they think it would be OK?
Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think if Bush actually talked about the issues that cause African American life spans to be shorter, he might find he has a lot more support.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why does it feel like I read about Bush's plan to woo blacks a month ago. I'm pretty sure that the initial story is at least that old, maybe even two months.
It makes me think that having a black Senator is like the Drudge report. Obama can bring up all of those issues that are ignored. I can only hope that he isn't pigeoned holed as a one issue Senator for having to be the one to denounce Bush's indecency.
Edit:
Idemosthenes:
Here is where I first read about it. I think the times had an article a few months ago, too.
posted
"I can only hope that he doesn't get him pigeoned holed as a one issue Senator for having to be the one to denounce Bush's indecency."
I totally agree, Irami. This is going to be a difficult role for him to avoid. He is an outspoken, moral man, and he is unique in his role. He will be continously quoted, and most of those quotes are probably going to be taken as anti-Bush. I've always worried that the media will totally undercut what his real message is in their eagerness to dramatize his story.
Posts: 499 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Has anyone else read the autobiography Obama wrote ( Dreams from my Father ) after serving as Harvard's first African-American head of the Law Review? It has an 'update' in the beginning, but is primarily about his childhood and young manhood.
My mom and I are half in love with him.
He is a surprisingly good writer (I say surprising because I always imagine Harvard Graduates as overly wordy and syntactically challenged) and his story is compelling.
I, too, hope that he isn't seen as a one-issue senator. He cares deeply for his constituents--ALL of them--and I hope that he can affect change.
Posts: 1545 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: I can only hope that he isn't pigeoned holed as a one issue Senator for having to be the one to denounce Bush's indecency.
Yeah, it's a danger. Hopefully, he'll be used to denounce other indencencies.
Besides which, I think Obama is probably really tuned into that danger. In Illinois, he established a track record of reaching out to multiple constituencies. So he never got pigeonholed as being a "one issue" legislator here - but that's easier to pull off on the state level than the national one.
I missed the Bush statement when it first came out, and kind of wondered about it. My guess is that the strategy is to make sure people don't forget it now that the marketing effort for the Social Security plan is in full swing.
Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
