While driving in to work this morning I listened to a commentary on KERA, the local NPR station. The commentator was Merrie Spaeth, a "communications specialist based in Dallas".
I don't think of NPR as liberal anymore - but I sure wasn't expecting this. The short version - Dallas NPR listeners this morning got an earful of BushCo propaganda, from a GOP shill. It was incredible, and I can't believe NPR carries this kind of shit with a straight face. What follows is a long comment, but I was so pissed off this morning I couldn't help it.
Spaeth's commentary was entitled "Social Security - Neither Social Nor Secure".
http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/kera/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=729874
Among the things she shared with her listeners (people like me, who expect NPR to be reality-based) were the following:
1. "The [Social Security tax] money doesn't go into a so called trust fund; it's used to pay retirees. The government has been collecting a lot more than it needs to pay out, but it's been spending that money on other programs."
Her implication is that the government will never pay the SS money back, that it will default on those loans. The money is gone - spent! She never tells you the money taken from the Trust Fund is handed out as loans - bills - exactly like the bonds issued to investors by the US government. She's saying the big, bad government squandered the dough and they won't pay it back. This is preposterous, and if true would cause every financial market on the planet to crash. If US T bills are worthless, the world is in trouble.
2. "When does the fund get into trouble? The answer to that is a political one - depending on which assumptions you make - but I'll go with Scott Burns of the [Dallas] Morning News who says - hold your breath - 2010, just five short years away. I won't go into the complex numbers which get him there."
Un-fucking-believable. She has your ear, and her first decision is to try to scare you with a bullshit fake "fact". She never tells listeners that the Congressional Budget Office and SS Trustees place the timing of fund "trouble" at around 2040 or 2050. She never tells us that "trouble" means SS will be able to pay out 70% or 80% of benefits, instead of 100%, and that even 70% of benefits will represent a big increase from current levels of payment. The fund will be far from "broke"! She never tells us that SOME of the SS trustees think the fund may NEVER get into trouble. She never tells us that predictions of looming problems are based on projections of very, very low economic growth for the USA, and that similar projections made in the 1980's and 1990s were later revised back - WAY back - as the economy outpaced predictions.
3. "There are two philosophies about Social Security. At one extreme is the view that government should have no responsibility and people should provide for their old age. You earn your money. You keep it. At the other extreme is the view, articulated by Swarthmore College professor Barry Schwartz, who says the 12 and half percent you contribute from your paycheck isn't your money at all. It's the government's money to allocate as it sees fit. That presumes that politicians are never influenced by who might vote for them. And of course, they've steadily raised benefits by saying people need the money, people who are then grateful and vote for them."
This is so chock full of shit I don't know where to begin. I guess it's simplest to say first that there are more options than these. Her option 1 is to do away with SS entirely. Her option 2 is to build a straw-man - a college professor, "Schwartz" - who says "It's not YOUR money", a line guaranteed to enrage red state voters. She tosses in the crap about "grateful" poor voters rewarding sleazy pols as a cookie for the listener's prejudices.
Last, Merrie does some magic - she produces a free lunch. She magically creates something from nothing. Watch how she does it...
4. "I'm betting that most people are in a "let's share" mode. We split the money - the government gets half your payroll tax to pay out now, and you get half to invest...Does this leave Social Security short of funds? Actually no, the elimination of Social Security liabilities in the future is so great that there is no so-called funding gap or transition cost - if - government puts the extra money into a real "trust fund" and doesn't spend it. But politicians aren't going to cut the budget. They'll keep spending that money. Is there another way to cover the gap? Yes. Raise the payroll tax to cover all income. A huge tax increase but palatable if I get my hands on half my payroll tax."
Isn't that something? Did you spot the trick? The way to get rid of the "transition cost" is simply to TAX ALL INCOME with the payroll tax.
I was stunned. Bewildered. Here I had a commentator on one hand using GOP talking points straight out of Grover Norquist's bag. And her final solution to the problem was a big tax increase. It just didn't fit. You listen to this lady and you KNOW at the end of the day that her plan is to gut SS payments while at the same time shift mounds of cash into the hands of investment managers. Given today's Congress, there is NO WAY a payroll tax will ever be created to cover all income. Do you think people getting paid $150K, $200K, $300K and up per year are going to sit quietly and see that money taxed at a higher rate? The GOP would shriek and howl. Merrie Spaeth MUST know that...
Her aim is to scare us into believing SS is doomed, and then push us into accepting decreased benefits, and a shift of 50% of payroll taxes into the hands of money managers. And the stuff about taxing ALL income to cover benefits for the current SS dependants...well, that will be quickly forgotten. The "political will" for such a tax increase doesn't exist, and, after all, its and "ownership society".
So, I wondered, who is Merrie Spaeth?
5 seconds worth of Googling did the trick.
http://www.williambowles.info/guests/swiftvets.html
" Merrie Spaeth - Provided media consulting to Swift Boat Vets; longtime friend of Hutchison; longtime supporter of/donor to Bush campaign; provide debate prep for GHW Bush; met with and gave media training to current, top White House officials; close associate to John O'Neill; Advised smear campaign on John McCain in 2000."
More: http://www.yuricareport.com/Campaign2004/SwiftBoatVetsAdAgainstKerryExposed.html
"Mr. Lezar, who died last year, was married to Merrie Spaeth, a powerful public relations executive who has helped coordinate the efforts of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. In 2000, Ms. Spaeth was spokeswoman for a group that ran $2 million worth of ads attacking Senator John McCain's environmental record and lauding Mr. Bush's in crucial states during their fierce primary battle. The group, calling itself Republicans for Clean Air, was founded by a prominent Texas supporter of Mr. Bush, Sam Wyly. Ms. Spaeth had been a communications official in the Reagan White House, where the president's aides had enough confidence in her to invite her to help prepare George Bush for his vice-presidential debate in 1984. When asked if she had ever visited the White House during Mr. Bush's tenure, Ms. Spaeth initially said that she had been there only once, in 2002, when Kenneth Starr gave her a personal tour. But this week Ms. Spaeth acknowledged that she had spent an hour in the Old Executive Office Building, part of the White House complex, in the spring of 2003, giving Mr. Bush's chief economic adviser, Stephen Friedman, public speaking advice. Asked if it was possible that she had worked with other administration officials, Ms. Spaeth said, "The answer is 'no,' unless you refresh my memory.'' "Is the White House directing this?" Ms. Spaeth said of the organization. "Absolutely not.''...About 10 veterans met in Ms. Spaeth's office in Dallas in April to share outrage and plot their campaign against Mr. Kerry, she and others said. Mr. Lonsdale, who did not attend, said the meeting had been planned as "an indoctrination session."..."That was an awakening experience," Ms. Spaeth said. "Not just for me, but for many of them who had not heard each other's stories."
There you have it. There's more, much more, but you gget the picture.
This morning, on NPR - National Fucking Public Radio - listeners got to hear "objective" commentary from a "communications specialist" concerning the biggest domestic issue currently on the Congress' plate.
And the person giving this commentary was a former Reagan WH worker, someone who prepped the first Bush for his VP debates, someone who shares friends with Karl Rove, someone who was at the very heart of the Swift Boat disinformation campaign. Someone who donated money to Bush's campaign.
I wonder why NPR didn't mention Ms. Spaeth's history? I wonder why NPR didn't tell me who Ms. Spaeth worked for? I wonder why NPR is shilling for Bush? I wonder why no alternative viewpoint has been aired? I wonder why no rebuttal followed Spaeth's obvious lies?
This is how they'll do it, folks. They'll place reasonable-sounding people in places you don't expect. NPR, for example. These people are not amateurs - they're paid professionals. This lady Spaeth makes Janeane Garofalo sound like an un-tutored nut-job.
Watch out for NPR.