Joined by Congressman McNulty, Gillibrand signs pledge to oppose President Bush's plan to privatize Social Security
John Sweeney is not committed to protecting Social Security
Hudson NY - Kirsten Gillibrand, Democratic Congressional Candidate in NY-20 was joined by Rep. Michael McNulty today in signing Citizen Action's pledge to keep the promise of Social Security. It has been almost two years since President Bush announced his Social Security privatization plan and John Sweeney still refuses to take a stand on the proposal, which would decrease benefits for thousands of district residents. Sweeney has failed to stand up to the President and party leaders on Social Security even though he said Social Security is the "the single greatest issue that my office has to deal with every day.'' (The Times Union, 12/2/1999)
Gillibrand is committed to ensuring the viability of Social Security and will fight against a privatized system, "I will never support the privatization of Social Security." Gillibrand added, "I would consider lowering the payroll tax on income under $90,000 and take 1% of all income above $90,000 to guarantee Social Security's solvency. This new formulation will create significant tax cuts for middle class families and small businesses, and support Social Security for future generations. I do not support spending the Social Security trust fund to pay for discretionary spending, and I will oppose measures to reduce the guaranteed benefits under the current law."
SOCIAL SECURITY PLEDGE
- I pledge to the people in my district and to all Americans that I will work to keep the promise of Social Security.
- I will publicly oppose the President's July 2006 proposal to divert $721 billion from the Social Security Trust Fund to create private accounts.
- I will oppose any Social Security plan that:
- Cuts guaranteed benefits to pay for private accounts;
- Weakens the system by diverting money from the Social Security Trust Fund to pay for private accounts;
- Increases the federal deficit to pay for private accounts.
Conversely, since the President's proposal in February 2005, Sweeney has avoided taking a side on privatization even when pressured by the AARP and a coalition of labor and civic groups demanding a response. To date, he has refused to oppose the plan to privatize Social Security.
- February 2005: When asked for his stance on the President's plan Sweeney responded, "the beginning of what should be a lengthy and spirited debate." (Poughkeepsie Journal, 2/3/2005)
- March 2005: Sweeney, said it is "premature" to ask him whether he supports the president's proposal. "I can't answer a direct question about it because there is not a direct proposal. No one has given members of Congress - those of us who might be open to be supportive - anything to sink our teeth into." (New York Sun, 3/14/2005)
- June 2005: Sweeney Still Stalls: "I want to see the debate unfold." Sweeney also encouraged lawmakers to stay "above the fray" adding "I don't think anybody has the clarity to make a decision yet." (The Times Union, 6/28/2005)
- September 2006: Sweeney didn't address privatization with the Post-Star in a recent article. (Post-Star, 9/24/2006)
- Social Security is the most important issue facing New York's seniors, and Sweeney has voted several times to spend the Social Security surplus, and he has voted against making Social Security solvent. Yet another example where Sweeney will declare the importance of an issue yet refuses to take a position -- and his constituents are still waiting for a response.
There are roughly 130,069 people in NY-20 who receive Social Security checks each month.