|
|
Flare-Ups in Battle Over Bush's Social Security Plan
By Sheryl Gay Stolberg and Richard W. Stevenson,
New York Times
February 24, 2005
Marshall Ramsey
The advocacy group Campaign for America's Future accused on Wednesday the subcommittee chairman, Representative Jim McCrery of Louisiana, of conflict of interest, saying he had accepted nearly $200,000 in contributions over four years from securities firms and commercial banks that could benefit from Mr. Bush's plan to let workers invest in retirement accounts.
On Thursday, the group will begin running newspaper advertisements against Mr. McCrery under the headline "Who Does This Man Work For?" in his hometown, Shreveport. In addition, it is using the Internet to raise money for television advertisements.
Mr. McCrery responded by accusing the group, which is backed by labor unions and left-leaning philanthropists, including George Soros, of "extreme liberal bias."
As Mr. McCrery and his detractors traded barbs, supporters of Mr. Bush's plan battled among themselves. The Cato Institute, the libertarian research organization that has long been a leader in pushing for private Social Security accounts, lashed out at USA Next, a conservative lobbying group that says it plans to spend up to $10 million on commercials and other tactics attacking AARP, the retirees' organization.
"This is not very bright politics," Michael Tanner, the director of health and welfare studies at Cato, said in a telephone interview. In particular, he objected to an Internet advertisement by USA Next that tries to paint AARP as an advocate of same-sex marriage. "Introducing homophobia and other things that are not relevant to Social Security reform is not helpful," Mr. Tanner said. AARP says it has no position on same-sex marriage.
But Charlie Jarvis, the president of USA Next, said his group would not back down. "We are going to make sure their members know their position on that and every other issue," he said of AARP, adding, "They can run, but they cannot hide."
The accusations, counterattacks and internal debate demonstrate the great lengths outside groups are going to build or demolish public support for Mr. Bush's plan. Groups like the Campaign for America's Future, MoveOn.org and AARP are spending millions to run advertising and generate opposition to personal accounts; on the other side, the Club for Growth, a conservative group, has pledged to raise $10 million, while Progress for America, which backed Mr. Bush in the election, is vowing to raise $20 million and has already run television advertisements promoting personal accounts.
On Capitol Hill, there are deep splits among supporters of personal accounts over issues like how big the accounts should be, whether to include deep benefit cuts in any overhaul of the retirement system and whether Mr. Bush needs to put forth more details. Now, outside the Capitol, USA Next is exposing fissures in strategy as well as substance.
The group has hired some of the same consultants who worked for Swift Vets and P.O.W.'s for Truth, the group that orchestrated the advertisements attacking Senator John Kerry's military record in last year's presidential campaign. USA Next's Internet advertisement, which ran on Monday as part of a test campaign, featured a photograph of a soldier in camouflage, crossed out by a red X, juxtaposed against a green check mark over two tuxedo-clad men kissing. The caption reads, "The real AARP agenda."
"You need to build a coalition to win this fight," Mr. Tanner of the Cato Institute said. "You're not going to get Social Security reform passed just through the right wing of the Republican Party. Groups like gays are disadvantaged by the current system, and I'd think we would want to bring them into the campaign, not insult them."
Mr. McCrery, an ardent proponent of personal retirement accounts, is among those who have raised questions about Mr. Bush's plan. Several weeks ago, he said he feared the proposal would give Democrats and AARP an opening to attack Republicans for undermining the Social Security trust fund. But after a visit from White House officials, he said he thought the idea worth pursuing.
Ellen Miller, deputy director of the Campaign for America's Future, said her group had decided to make Mr. McCrery its first target in its "Project for an Accountable Congress," which will examine how lawmakers raise money.
"Our plan is to do a multimedia ad buy on McCrery, and we may use the same tactic on other members," Ms. Miller said. She called on Mr. McCrery to refuse future Wall Street contributions "or hand over his gavel."
According to data collected by the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan group that tracks campaign spending, in the 2004 election cycle Mr. McCrery received similar amounts from health professionals and the insurance industry as he did from commercial banks and securities and investment firms. But in its report detailing Mr. McCrery's campaign finances, the Campaign for America's Future singled out the financial industry contributions, saying, "These financial ties call his impartiality on the issue into question."
The congressman's office dismissed the report as "a meritless campaign attacking McCrery's integrity." The Republican National Committee also defended Mr. McCrery, calling the advertising campaign against him "more angry rhetoric from the Michael Moore wing of the Democratic Party."
Glen Justice contributed reporting for this article.
|
|
