DAILY MAIL WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON - On the marquee issue of Social Security, thedistinction between the candidates for the 2nd District congressionalseat is more significant than mere semantics, with the pair holdingmarkedly different philosophies on how to best preserve the programfor older Americans.
Should Social Security be a pure social insurance program, orshould the government permit individual investment of a portion ofSocial Security taxes, offering, if only in small measure, potentialrewards to those who plan ahead and take risks?
First-term Republican Shelley Moore Capito says she is willing toconsider allowing younger workers to invest 2 percent of theirpayroll tax in voluntary personal retirement accounts.
No way, says Democratic challenger Jim Humphreys. "Don't touch theSocial Security fund," he told the Daily Mail board Monday. "It needsthose monies; it can't be deprived of funds."
If just 2 percent of the current Social Security trust fund wereinvested in the now-faltering stock market, $31 billion would be lostsince 1998, he said, citing a study by left-leaning Washington thinktank Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.
People are free to invest their own funds in the stock market,Humphreys said, but Social Security should be a safety net.
Capito said the safety net is weakening. Within decades, it willbe paying out more in benefits than it takes receives in taxes. "Thefact of the matter is, we've got to find a solution to the problem,"she said.
Humphreys and Democratic surrogates have aggressively attackedCapito on Social Security, charging she supports privatization.
Armed with polls showing voters react negatively to the term,Republicans shun the word privatization; they say it suggests theSocial Security system will be "dismantled" and the funds invested"willy-nilly" in the stock market. Armed with their own polls,Democrats employ it for the same reason.
It's unsurprising that Social Security is a dominant issue in thecompetitive 2nd District race, political analyst Amy Walter said. Inan older, less affluent district, it could help Humphreys in hisrematch.
"It works in polls," said Walter, who works for the Cook PoliticalReport.
During Monday's editorial board meeting, Humphreys also criticizedCapito's vote for a Republican prescription drug plan. The House-passed measure is "lousy," Humphreys said, citing a Wall StreetJournal editorial. A gap in coverage means middle-income seniors payinto the system but get little help with moderate drug expenses. Theso-called "doughnut" could affect one-quarter of West Virginiarecipients, he said.
Capito replied, "I would say what's lousy is no prescription drugplan."
She said she shares some of Humphreys' concerns about the coveragegap but decided to back the Republican bill after introducing her ownmore generous version. The measure is a "good first step" and couldbe improved in negotiations if the Senate passes a bill, she said.
Humphreys said a $1.35 trillion tax cut approved a year ago couldbe rolled back, and the money used to pay for his drug plan, which hesaid would cost about $80 billion.
The pair also sparred over the issue of medical malpractice.Capito co-sponsored a bill to cap attorneys' fees and limit economicand punitive damages that passed the House last week. Citing thedowngrading of Charleston Area Medical Center's trauma unit, shesaid, "We've got a real problem."
Altering the tort system is not the right solution to a perceiveddoctor shortage in rural areas, Humphreys, a plaintiffs' attorney,said. He also dismissed the idea that the involvement of his lawpractice in an asbestos case involving Union Carbide would have anypolitical ramifications in his race. Other lawyers in his firm arehandling the case at this point. He said he didn't know how muchmoney he and the firm stood to receive if their case is successful.
Writer Karin Fischer can be reached at (202) 662-8732 or by e-mail at kfischer@dailymail.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment