I.
From the New York Times:
AARP, the powerful lobby for older Americans that has been seen as one of the leading opponents of Social Security benefit cuts, said on Friday that it was open to modest reductions in benefits for future recipients....
“Our goal is to limit any changes in benefits,” John Rother, AARP’s policy chief, said in a telephone interview, “but we also want to see the system made solvent.”
Mr. Rother said the group’s stance on possible cuts, which was first reported in The Wall Street Journal in Friday’s editions, should be seen less as a major change in position than as a reflection of the political and financial realities facing the Social Security system and the country as a whole.
“You have to look at all the tradeoffs,” Mr. Rother said, “and what we’re trying to do is engage the American public in that debate.”...
But other advocacy groups that are pushing to preserve Social Security benefits accused AARP of effectively abandoning its core constituency. ...
As word of AARP’s position set off debate in Washington on Friday, the group’s chief executive, Barry Rand, issued a formal statement saying that the group’s position had not changed in any substantive way and refuting what he described as “misleading” media reports.
II.
From Politics Plus:
Many years ago, I joined AARP. Even though I had opted out of receiving special offers from their partners, a virtual rainforest flooded my mailbox, with offers for everything from Depends to senior vacation retreats. I am on the “do not call list”. Nevertheless I was harassed half to insanity with telephone solicitors that said they can call me, because they had a “business relationship” with me as “AARP partners”. I complained long and loud to AARP, but they were insensitive to my needs. It seemed apparent to me that AARP was far more interested in marketing to me than representing or informing me. AARP betrayed me by supporting the Bush Part D plan without demanding that US made drugs, imported from Canada, be allowed. I tore up my membership card and mailed them the pieces. Now they have betrayed senior citizens again.
III.
Two days ago -- two days ago! -- AARP put out a press release promising "a new television ad campaign to urge Congress not to make any deal to pay the nation's bills that would result in harmful cuts to critical Medicare and Social Security benefits..." (emphasis added). This is to be a national multi-million dollar ad buy. Notice that key word "harmful" in AARP's press release. This ad buy appears to be an effort to convince the world that the AARP isn't selling out its membership. The ads will, in effect, be an effort to sell Social Security cuts since AARP is telling the world that it would never accept anything harmful.
By the way, AARP is also planning nation-wide town hall meetings to convince its members to accept Social Security cuts -- as long as AARP declares those cuts not to be harmful.
These AARP town-hall meetings could get interesting. I hope they get media coverage.
IV.
Does anyone like or respect or trust the AARP? Not that I know of. The right wing finds it just about as obnoxious as the left.
4 comments:
AARP exists to advance the its own and its clients' interests. It's not a public interest advocacy group for seniors. They sell insurance and what you see is what you get.So, what organization ends up on the WH's list of people to consult about SS and Medicare/Medicaid? Why, AARP, of course! Because they are so dedicated to the public's interest, right? NOT.
The public should rip their AARP cards and attend the town hall meetings to protest AARP's stance on cutting benefits. The problem is that the SSA trust fund is being used to fund wars and bring down the the deficit. The taxpayers have an obligation to make the trust fund whole again.
AARP's support of ObamaCare was based on selling insurance policies. That and other of their actions make it clear that they have, and will again, sell their members out.
The baby boomer problem is a real problem. It isn't the catastrophe painted by some opponents of Social Security, but it will create a financing strain from about 2020-2040 (or 2050 depending on how long we boomers linger). So despite the fact that Social Security is not in danger of going broke, there will be a need for some tinkering. Reasonable people can disagree whether tinkering means lifting the FICA cap on wages, raising the retirement age, or some other change. Add to that a Republican Congress that would not under any circumstances consider an increase in the FICA cap.
I don't see AARP as selling out their membership just because the acknowledge the possibility that changes may be made to the financing system.
Post a Comment