Republican Tim Burns Campaigns with Social Security Privatization Advocate.

Republican Tim Burns Campaigns with Social Security Privatization Advocate.
Burns, Supporters Endorse Dangerous Plan that Would be Devastating for Western Pennsylvania Seniors

Out of touch Republican millionaire Tim Burns (PA-12) is once again going out of his way to prove that he is clueless when it comes to what’s best for Western Pennsylvania. This evening, Burns is campaigning with Congressman Bill Shuster, another out of touch Republican who supports a dangerous plan to privatize Social Security that would slash benefits and gamble the program on Wall Street. The Republicans support this plan despite the devastating impact that plan would have on seniors in Western Pennsylvania.

Millionaire Burns has already proven that he could care less about Western Pennsylvania; in addition to endorsing a plan to raise middle class taxes, Burns also sold his company to get rich quick even though he knew it would lead to job loss in Western Pennsylvania.

“Even though Western Pennsylvania didn’t need any more reasons to prove that Republican millionaire Tim Burns is grossly out of touch, here he comes with some more anyway,” said Shripal Shah, Regional Press Secretary for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “The Republican plan to privatize Social Security that Burns and his supporters are backing would have a devastating impact on seniors in Western Pennsylvania who are already struggling. Burns’ failure to grasp how damaging his platform would be for Western Pennsylvania proves how clueless he really is when it comes to what’s best for the district.”

BACKGROUND:

• Republican millionaire Tim Burns is campaigning with Congressman Bill Shuster in Johnstown this evening. [Daily American, 4/2/10]

• Shuster has long been a vocal supporter for the risky Republican plan to privatize Social Security. [Patriot News, 3/06/05; Associated Press, 4/28/01; Associated Press, 4/20/01; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 5/08/01; USA Today, 5/15/01; Dallas Morning News, 5/7/01]

o Privatization would cut benefits. According to the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, “privatization is not a plan to save Social Security; it is a plan to dismantle Social Security. Privatization means increased retirement risks, severe cuts in Social Security benefits, and a multi-trillion dollar increase in the federal debt.

o “Privatization diverts money out of Social Security into individual accounts leaving an even larger solvency problem. Privatizers fill this funding gap by dramatically cutting Social Security benefits. They cover the rest by borrowing money, thereby increasing the debt burden on all taxpayers by trillions of dollars over the next half century. With market-based accounts, the risk of an adequate retirement is placed entirely on the individual.” [National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare website, accessed 4/6/10]

o Privatization would gamble social security on Wall Street. According to the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, “Privatization will replace Social Security's guaranteed defined benefits with individual investment accounts. In other words, privatization would take money out of Social Security and have workers invest instead in Wall Street.” [National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare website, accessed 4/6/10]

o The Century Foundation reports that privatizing Social Security would allow Wall Street to “reap windfalls from your taxes” because brokerage houses, banks, and mutual funds have been very active in the campaign to privatize Social Security” and “stand to gain enormous fees if billions of dollars are shifted each year from Social Security payments into accounts under Wall Street management.” [The Century Foundation’s Social Security Network, accessed 4/6/10]

• In 2002, Burns said he supported NDCHealth buying his company TechRx despite the fact that he knew it would lead to layoffs in Western Pennsylvania. [Pittsburgh Business Times, 5/31/02]

• In a May 2009 interview on Front Lines Blog, Tim Burns stated his support for the regressive Fair Tax, even though it would only benefit those making over $200,000 a year. In Pennsylvania, middle income Pennsylvania families would see their taxes increase by $3,818 per year. The top one percent would see their taxes cut by $187,080 a year. [Front Lines Blog, 5/14/09; Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy; Factcheck.org, 5/31/07; PA2010.com, 3/29/10]