|
|||||||
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|||||||
North Texas AFL-CIO Updates
Will
Bush Save Social Security?
"The rights and interests of the
laboring man will be protected and cared for, not by our labor agitators, but
by the Christian men to whom God, in his infinite wisdom, has given control of
property interests of the country, and upon the successful management of which
so much remains."
--George
F. Baer (Nineteenth Century Railroad Industrialist)
President George Bush's commission
on Social Security revision was appointed, he said, in an effort to rescue
Social Security from the prospect of financial ruin. He iterated that doing nothing could lead to draconian benefit
cuts, catastrophic tax hikes, unbearable pressure on the rest of the federal
budget, or borrowing that creates debilitating debt.
So, early in December, they came up
with a plan. It envisions draconian
benefit cuts, catastrophic tax hikes, unbearable pressure on the rest of the
federal budget, and borrowing that would lead to debilitating debt.
It endorsed personal investment
accounts as a way to supposedly restore Social Security to long-term
health. This was as expected, because
the committee consisted of only those who had previously supported privatization
of Social Security publicly. Even more
significant is the unexpected: The panel admits its numbers don't add up.
None of its three plans for personal
accounts pretends to restore Social Security to soundness over the seventy-five
year time frame used to measure the program's health. None shows that personal
accounts create a miraculous gush of money from the stock market, which in turn
would rescue Social Security from the strain of the baby-boom retirements. None
demonstrates how the ultimate price tag of two to three trillion dollars to
absorb the baby boomers is to be financed. None shows how the cost of carving
private accounts out of current payroll taxes would be paid for, while
simultaneously sending today's beneficiaries their checks.
No wonder. The Clinton Administration's pay-off-the-debt and have-a-surplus
economy has been a victim of Bush's reckless tax cuts for-the-rich, which
triggered the recession, and is predicted to produce deficits as far as the eye
can see. The Social Security surplus is
already being spent. The two to three
trillion dollars needed to privatize Social Security is, simply, not available,
and the president's handpicked commission doesn't want to admit that. Even if one of the three plans were adopted,
the commission would leave it to an unknown future president working with an
unknown future Congress to decide how to pay for it.
The commission further reports,
"Social Security's fiscal problem exists independently of the debate over
whether personal accounts should be part of the reformed system." What a revelation! So, private investment accounts don't cure what ails Social
Security. Those political proponents
for privatizing, one and all, have for years traversed this land to its
farthest reaches trumpeting the panacea of privatization.
Now they say they didn't really mean
it, that it won't work, and that it will not save Social Security.
For years, supporters of this flawed
scheme of privatization have called for its enactment as the only way to save
the plan, and now they tell us that it is not needed. It seems that candor by the commission to privatize has failed
Mr. Bush.
Yesterday's (December 27) lead
editorial in the New York Times
stated, "The combination of the economic slowdown and President Bush's
gigantic tax cuts have eliminated the option of using surpluses to pay for any
kind of Social Security program, or even to extend the system's solvency. Still, Mr. Bush has been pushing forward
with the idea of creating private retirement accounts with revenues siphoned
away from Social Security, a step that actually hastens the day when the system
becomes insolvent. During his
presidential campaign, Mr. Bush was always vague about whether benefits would
have to be cut in order to finance his privatization plan."
Will Mr. Bush listen to the august "Times?" Not likely. He only
listens to those who contributed great sums of money to his election campaign,
like Enron.
--Dallas
AFL-CIO Council, Gene Freeland Financial Secretary-Treasurer
(Special to the Union
Craftsman, January 2002)
**
AFL-CIO
Convention Shows We Are Standing Firm
About
1,000 delegates & others gathered in Las Vegas Dec 3-6
The national
AFL-CIO held its 24th convention in Las Vegas December 3-6. Even in the face of
what they termed the most aggressive anti-union initiative in recent history,
the federation stood its ground and actually enlarged its programs toward a
bigger and more politically powerful labor movement.
The
leadership that radically changed the course of America's largest labor
organization six years ago decided on even
stronger
programs, and was re-elected to continue to lead the fight for working
families' rights.
President
John Sweeney began the convention by honoring labor's fallen heroes from 9/11,
but went on to outline strong programs to meet today’s crisis for American
workers
President
John Sweeney admitted openly that the union movement had not organized nearly
the numbers of new members that are needed, but he continued to put organizing
at the front of all priorities. The federation has an ambitious program to
recruit
and train
5,000 more organizers and to pressure the affiliated unions to spend at least 30%
of all budgets on organizing. Several press conferences and events stressed the
importance of organizing. President Gerald McEntee of AFSCME
played a big role in pushing for organizing. He said that it was he who
originally suggested the 30% demand. Other major union leaders from the CWA, Teamsters, Office Workers (OPEIU), Needleworkers (UNITE!),
Steelworkers (USWA), Auto Workers (UAW),
played a part.
The
federation could honestly claim increasing clout for working families in the
political arena. But they intend to do much
more. They previously
had a program to get 2,000 union members elected to public office, and they
exceeded the goal with 2,500. They
doubled that figure on December 5 and set up a special school and political
fund to support unionists willing to run for office.
One of the
most important campaigns that union members will face in 2002 is the battle for
the U.S. Senate in Main. UAW member Chellie Pingree has
already given up her State Senate seat in order to carry labor's banner into
Washington!
Top
Democratic and Republican office holders addressed the convention. They thanked
the federation for past support and
asked for
continuing help. The percentage of votes cast from union households has grown
continuously and stood at 26% of the total vote last year.
Like most
national labor meetings these days, delegates took part in several pickets and rallies in the host city.
International
Delegate Joseph Nkiso of COSATU in South Africa made contributions to the AFL-CIO
meeting
**
Economy
Is "A Basket Case"
What
everyone who has paid attention knew, but was vehemently denied by our court
appointed leader, we are officially in a recession. Have been since last April according
to the nonprofit National Bureau of Economic Research. As recently as
mid-November, U.S. government officials were depicting a rosy outlook, calling
the International Monetary Fund's declaration of a mild U.S. recession
"too pessimistic."
Although it
was exacerbated by September 11 and the ensuing economic free fall,
unemployment has continued to rise and other signs-such as falling industrial
output and weakened commercial bank lending activity-point to a still-weakening
economy.
While
initial jobless claims rose by 54 thousand to 488 thousand for the week ending
November 24, at this pace, the unemployment rate will continue to increase.
Insured jobless claims are now over 4 million-the highest level since December
1982 (When Ronald Reagan was president). Some 7.7 million Americans are
unemployed and 748,133 layoffs have been announced between September 12 and
November 19.
Staffing
cuts continue in manufacturing and high tech sectors; Boeing has begun
notifying its workers of a series of layoffs that will total 38,000 by
mid-2002, the largest single corporate layoff proposed since 9/11. The services
industries lost 111,000 jobs in October, the largest recorded monthly decline
for this industry, and retail trade fell by 81,000 jobs.
Staggering from
the declining economy, states have cut $11 billion from their education
budgets, according to a report by House Democrats. Massachusetts Democratic
Senator Edward Kennedy is urging more federal funding to help make up for the
shortfall. House and Senate negotiators are trying to resolve differences
between a more generous Senate-passed education bill and a House version that
would provide about $9 billion less for education programs.
Two signs of
economic resilience cited by Wall Street-retail sales, which surged 7.1 percent
in October and housing starts-are less optimistic when examined closely. The
rise in retails sales, driven by interest-free auto financing, mortgage
re-financing and lower energy prices, does not appear strong enough to generate
a recovery. Moreover, sales will likely taper back as auto purchases revert to
more normal levels in the coming months. While housing starts were above
expectations in October, slipping by only 1.3 percent, building permits, an
indicator of future activity, were down 3.6 percent to their lowest level since
December 1997.
Why is it
that every time Republicans succeed a Democratic President, the economy takes a
fall? The Bush folks have been in office less than a year and the economy is a
basket case already. The answer is simple. Republicans are elected by the
wealthiest people in the U.S. When the rich win, they want their elected
lackeys to return their political investment tenfold. The way George W. did
this was to take money out of circulation and to give it to his supporters, the
wealthiest, in the way of tax cuts for them. The tax plan that Bush was touting
for his handlers was a raid on the U.S. Treasury. They raided the Social
Security Surplus Fund. They used up the tax surplus that the Clinton Administration
had achieved by being fiscally responsible.
They do the
same thing every time they are returned to office, billions of dollars out of
the economy. All that money was diverted from the cost of running this country.
The wealthiest Americans received the money and the workers received the shaft.
They lost and will continue to lose their jobs as long as Republicans are in
office. In Texas, the unemployment rate went from 4.0 in October 2000 to 5.2 at
the end of September this year, and is picking up speed throughout the U.S.
What needs
to be done about this Republican economy? Congress must pass an economic
stimulus package that will provide extended and improved unemployment insurance
benefits. Now!! The Senate Republicans in November killed legislation that
would have provided $67 billion to do just that.
The problems
of the economy are, simply put, there are just too many Republicans in office,
and there is really only one solution for that.
--Dallas AFL-CIO Council
Financial Secretary-Treasurer Gene Freeland
[Originally published in
the Union Craftsman]
**