« NRCC Did "Damage Control" On Foleygate Earlier Than Suspected | Home | New DSCC Ads Attack Republicans On Character, Bush »

IL-06: Roskam Ad Attacking Duckworth On Social Security Filled With Distortions

One of the few deciding issues in the race between GOPer Peter Roskam and Dem candidate Tammy Duckworth -- a race which is too close to call -- has been Social Security. Roskam and the GOP have been hammering Duckworth relentlessly on the issue. The attacks have been full of distortions -- okay, outright lies. Case in point: Roskam's latest ad. Many of you won't be surprised by Roskam's mendacity, because you already know Roskam is one of TPM's top-flight Social Security "bamboozlers" (rundown on that here). Watch it:

Despite Roskam's dodgy past support of phase-out schemes, the ad claims Roskam is the candidate who would "protect" Social Security. The ad continues: "Tammy Duckworth supports cuts in Social Security benefits. She’d even raise the retirement age and Social Security taxes. But she would give our Social Security to illegal aliens." All three assertions are false.

The first of the three assertions -- that Duckworth supports "cuts" in benfits -- is based, the ad claims, on an AARP candidate questionaire on which Duckworth checked the box indicating backing for "a balanced Social Security plan for guaranteed benefits." The questionaire doesn't specify what the plan is, and doesn't say anything about cuts. But it's still somehow the basis for this charge.

Worse, the AARP has actually has now sent out a letter in the district telling voters to be on guard against Roskam's dissembling. The Oct. 30 letter warns voters that Duckworth's entries on the organization's form were distorted beyond recognition in another similar Roskam ad which made exactly the same charge. "Unfortunately, one recent ad wrongly attacks Candidate Tammy Duckworth for supporting the need for a bipartisan balanced plan," reads AARP's letter. "The ad mischaracterizes the position taken in the AARP Voters’ Guide as being in favor of specific options to achieve that goal." In other words, it was false then, and it's false now.

So that's the first bogus charge.

Now on to the second -- the charge that Duckworth would "raise the retirement age." The ad says the basis for the attack is an October 6th Daily Herald article (no longer linkable) which states: "Duckworth has said she’d consider raising the retirement age."

But it turns out the paper misquoted her. The next day, the Herald ran a correction -- distributed by her campaign -- noting that Duckworth had actually said she'd only consider raising it for workers who are not yet paying into the system. The correction ran on Oct. 7 -- yet the original falsehood is in Roskam's ad three weeks later.

And the ad's charge that Duckworth supports giving Social Security benefits to illegals? Untrue. Here's how the Chicago Tribune (via Nexis) puts it: "Duckworth actually favors the approach of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), which does not provide amnesty or Social Security to illegal immigrants, and she has called for adding 12,000 Border Patrol agents."

Three charges, three falsehoods.


6 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

This is not my CD, but I live in the same general suburban area of DuPage County where Roskam is from and have for over 20 years. Fortunately, the county demographics are changing, but he is one of these smug, white, suburban Republicans we have out here who make my skin crawl. After the 60's, DuPage county became one of the refuges for Chicago's "white flight". People like him profess a "superior moral background", but it is just a facade--inside, they are mean-spirited, selfish and bigoted. They have opinions about everything, but little real knowledge about anything, and they are as shallow as a sidewalk puddle after a 2 minute drizzle.

user-pic

DuPage County's been way too conservative for way too much time. We'll hopefully be bringing it into the light of the 21st Century come Nov. 7.

Independent Illinois Grassroots: IllinoisDemNet.com

user-pic

The claim that Duckworth doesn't support Social Security benefits for illegal aliens is true in the most legalistic sense but also very highly misleading.

All of the various amnesty schemes would suddenly declare millions of illegal aliens to be legal residents of some kind. One day they'd be illegal aliens, the next day they'd be legal residents. And, as such, "[n]ewly legalized immigrants would claim nearly $50 billion in federal benefits such as the earned income and child tax credits, Medicaid, and Social Security" (WaPo)

So, Duckworth and others don't support Social Security for "illegal aliens". They do, however, support it for "former illegal aliens who had suddenly been declared to be legal residents." That applies to both Kennedy-McCain (1033, which didn't pass) and the Senate bill that did (2611).

Regarding the Chicago Tribune's claim that McCain Kennedy "does not provide amnesty", that also boils down to word play: how do you define amnesty?

I call it amnesty because millions of prospective illegal aliens around the world will view it as an amnesty. And, they'll come here expecting amnesties in the future. And, all the millions of voters who were told it wasn't amnesty will no doubt see it as an amnesty as well.

user-pic

Gawd, I'm sick of the twistings that go on about social security.....

Folks,

1) The non-partisan actuaries figure that Social Security will need a correction to keep promised benefits in line with anticipated revenues over the next 75 years. They may be right or they may be wrong, but it's the best (albeit "soft") estimate we have.

2) If we accept their figures as the most honest, middle projection, we have to either raise revenues or cut benefits to keep the system in balance.

To attack those who would do one or the other is nothing but an attack on reality, and, heaven knows, Roskam's attack on Duckworth shows an amazing failure to be in touch with reality. Don't we already havbe enough folks in Congress who are out of touch with reality? Do we need yet another one?

Rather than listening to Roskam's ridiculousness, don't we need someone who can, at least, start from a position of reality in looking for solutions? I don't care if you think we need to raise the taxes, lower the benefits or some combination of both, isn't Tammy far more in touch with reality than Peter?

user-pic

The AARP has sent out a letter refuting the allegations made in the ads by Roskam. Also the kicker line of the ad has Roskam saying "we need a change in Washington". Maybe he doesn't know who is now in charge in Washington.

user-pic

Those "[n]ewly legalized immigrants" would also start paying into the system.

Social Security is not a savings plan.

Social Security is an insurance program.

Benefits paid to today's retirees come from the taxes collected from today's workers. More (legal) workers means more revenue.

So there is nothing wrong with the McCain/Kennedy plan. This is a problem in need of a solution -- some action is required. This is a reasonable approach.

And these ads greatly distort Duckworth's position on the issue.

-- ARG

Leave a comment

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address