Help Democrats Protect Social Security

[Guest Tom McMahon]

I wanted to give you a quick update on the debate over Social Security and ask you to take action.

 

Two weeks ago, Republican members of Congress went home to their districts and held town hall meetings with one goal: sell George W. Bush's risky Social Security privatization plan to their constituents. The result? Polls show that after a week of listening to the Republican sales pitch, the American people are more opposed than ever to the Bush privatization plan. The American people understand that 40 percent benefit cuts and trillions in additional debt will do nothing to preserve the long-term solvency of Social Security.

 

George Bush and the GOP leadership made a huge miscalculation when they decided to make a play to privatize Social Security -- a program that has lifted generations of senior citizens out of poverty. Democrats are united -- we've got Bush on the run and have a chance to hand the GOP a stunning defeat. We are winning this first major battle of 2005.

 

But President Bush isn't giving up on his plan to privatize Social Security. Instead, he's sending out his top officials -- including Vice President Cheney -- on a 60-day, 60-city tour to try and create public support where none exists.

 

And we're fighting back every step of the way. Democratic Congressional leaders are touring the country exposing the Bush Administration's risky scheme and protecting Social Security. The Democratic Party is airing radio ads in the cities where Bush's privatization tour stops.

 

We're winning this fight, but that doesn't mean it's time to ease up. You can help the unified Democrats in Congress stand up to Bush by letting them know you stand behind them. Sign our petition today to let Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and all the Democrats in Congress know that they have your support in the fight to stop President Bush's plan to privatize Social Security:

 

http://www.democrats.org/action/

 

We'll present the petition to Democratic leaders in Congress. Your support will make the difference in this fight.

 

Sincerely,

Tom McMahon

Democratic National Committee

[Guest Officer Thomas A. Porter D.P.O.]

 

"George W. Bush and his Dictatorship Corporation are causing the 'Daily' Suffering and Deaths of Poor American Disabled, Senior Citizens, Children, Veterans and Unemployed by Economic Deprivation. It leaves no finger prints at the Crime Scene."

 

The only way to change the course for all Americans is to call for the Impeachment of George W. Bush before he and his group of Greedy Thugs bring down America for good.

 

The Corporate Welfare Program of Emperor Bush that he started the day he first moved into OUR WHITE HOUSE was doomed to fail at the expense of all American

Citizens. When only the 1% Rich benefit then the 99% Suffer and Die. This only proves that Democracy ruled as a Republic is not taking place at the hands of the Republicans.

 

When there are no more jobs left, when there are no more benefits to maintain life, when there is no more affordable food left to buy, when there is no more

affordable gasoline to run our vehicles, then it will be to late. For Generations to come they will be paying for the actions of George W. Bush and his Fascist Administration.

 

As a great American United States Senator Robert C. Byrd stated, "This Republic was founded in part because of the arrogance of a King who expected his subjects to do as they were told, without question, without hesitation. Our forefathers

overthrew that tyrant and adopted a system of government where dissent is not only important, but it is also mandatory.

 

Failing to question, failing to speck out, is failing the legacy of the founding fathers." The only thing about Social Security that George W. Bush and his group of Corporate Thugs do not understand is that Social Security works and if it an't broke you don't try to sell a bill of goods to the American Public that are filled with greed for the 1% Rich. Private Accounts will only bring down the very fibers of the balance of Social Security.

 

The only thing we have to Fear in America is the Fascist we have living in our White House and those who only care about the 1% Rich who have no compassion for the 99% of their fellow American Citizens. Talk is cheap but actions speak louder than words. So far all we continue to hear from the Republicans is Greed

on a scale never heard before in America.

 

You can not maintain a Democracy ruled as a Republic if you continue to deny the basic Social Services and Social Services to those who need them the most. When you have failed to do this you have undercut the very fibers of our culture. There is no reason to even touch Social Security nor is there any place to allow anyone to deny the Benefits after paying into the system for years. It would appear the only people who have been hoodwinked are those who have been Bushinized by false promiseof reality from George W. Bush and his group of Thugs.

 

The Emperor is most surely not wearing any clothes. There are those and they are in the small group called the Administration who run this country under Emperor Bush who think he is wearing clothes.

 

Let them go to the Mid East and fight the unjust wars against countries that have never been a Threat to America. You will then see all our Troops return home and

allow for charity to start at home once again. There is not one business that George W. Bush has ever owned that has not failed. The only way he could get into OUR WHITE HOUSE was to be appointed and stop the votes from being counted. There is no place for corruption to be allowed to continue. If not for Social Security there would not be anyone in America alive today. What is spent on Social Security is nothing when you compare to what is spent on weapons of mass distruction made in the U.S.A.!

[Guest Human]

In other words what you Democrats are saying is that you DO NOT want ANY Change.

 

By the way, I don't treat the people who read these posts as people who can't think, It would be nice if you could post in a manner that shows the people here , what your proposals ARE.

 

Let me give you an example here; in one of my posts on social security, I showed what privatization has done in a country like Chile. The mistakes that they have made, and a course of action that Republicans, and Democrats should choose in order not to repeat the very same mistakes.

 

 

( http://www.dcpages.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=3365 )

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Luke_Wilbur]

"We can never insure one-hundred percent of the population against one-hundred percent of the hazards and vicissitudes of life. But we have tried to frame a law which will give some measure of protection to the average citizen and to his family against the loss of a job and against poverty-ridden old age. This law, too, represents a cornerstone in a structure which is being built, but is by no means complete.... It is...a law that will take care of human needs and at the same time provide for the United States an economic structure of vastly greater soundness." -- President Roosevelt, August 14, 1935

 

 

Below is a photo of President Roosevelt signing Social Security Act of 1935. Also shown, left to right: Rep. Robert Doughton (D-NC); Sen. Robert Wagner (D-NY); Rep. John Dingell, Sr. (D-MI); Unknown man in bowtie; Secretary of Labor, Frances Perkins; Senator Pat Harrison (D-MS); Congressman David L. Lewis (D-MD).

[Guest Save the Republic]

New information turned up by FactCheck.org shows that the type of private Social Security accounts being proposed by President Bush would yield very little profit to the securities industry, contrary to persistent claims of a potentially huge "windfall" to Wall Street.

 

FactCheck discovered that the model for Bush's accounts -- the Federal Thrift Savings Plan for federal workers -- actually paid securities firms a net total of only 16 cents for every $10,000 in workers accounts. The TSP had refused to make that information public -- until now. It shows that fees actually being paid to Wall Street are hundreds of times smaller than some critics had assumed.

 

For that reason and others we find that ads run in Louisiana by the liberal Democratic group Campaign for America's Future are grossly misleading. The group is accusing Republican Rep. James McCrery, who is chairman of the Social Security subcommittee and a supporter of Bush's private accounts, of "corruption" for accepting campaign donations from Wall Street, which it falsely claims will "profit most" from private accounts.

[Guest TimP]

Ever since President Bush put Social Security atop the national agenda, the issue has received a great deal of attention. Unfortunately, much of this debate has involved one side or the other trying to score partisan points, instead of seriously discussing the system's challenges.

 

It is time to restore some common sense. First, we need to refocus on the target. The focus on 2042, the date the trust fund becomes insolvent, distracts attention from problems that will begin much earlier.

 

In 2008, the first baby boomers will begin to claim benefits, and soon after, the Social Security surplus will begin to decline. By 2018, tax revenues dedicated to Social Security will no longer be enough to cover benefit costs. ...

 

By 2025, the Social Security system will be running annual cash shortfalls of $100 billion per year in today's dollars -- a $200 billion swing from the cash surpluses the system is currently running. ...

 

Either we can make tough choices today or we can leave behind a fiscal time bomb.

 

The discussion should begin with a simple question: Does Social Security face a problem?

 

Legislators whose answer to that question is "no" should co-sponsor a bipartisan bill to do nothing in the 109th Congress and go on to other issues.

 

[A]nyone who agrees ... should ... begin a constructive dialogue about what should be done to preserve Social Security for our grandchildren.

 

The first step should be to have an open and honest national discussion. ...

 

Next, policymakers must put all ideas on the table. ...

 

[O]pposing personal accounts is not a substitute for offering a positive solution for dealing with the challenges that face Social Security ...

 

Finding a bipartisan solution that addresses Social Security's challenges honestly and responsibly will be difficult. But it is possible to keep promises made to today's seniors while granting future generations access to the same financial security today's retirees enjoy. ...

[Luke_Wilbur]

Here are the Social Security Policy Framers:

 

U.S. Senate

Subcommittee on Social Security and Family Policy

 

Santorum, Rick (PA), Chairman

Grassley, Charles (IA)

Bunning, Jim (KY)

Frist, Bill (TN)

Lott, Trent (MS)

Kyl, Jon (AZ)

Smith, Gordon (OR)

Crapo, Mike (ID)

Conrad, Kent (ND), Ranking Member

Rockefeller, Jay (WV)

Jeffords, James (VT)

Bingaman, Jeff (NM)

Kerry, John (MA)

Lincoln, Blanche (AR)

 

Members of the 109th Congress

Subcommittee on Social Security

 

Jim McCrery, LA Chairman

E. Clay Shaw Jr. , FL

Sam Johnson, TX

J.D. Hayworth, AZ

Kenny C. Hulshof, MO

Ron Lewis, KY

Kevin Brady, TX

Paul Ryan, WI

  Sander M. Levin, MI

Earl Pomeroy, ND

Xavier Becerra, CA

Stephanie Tubbs Jones, OH

Richard E. Neal

[Luke_Wilbur]

Today I spoke with the press correspondant for Congressman Xavier Becerra, CA.

I wanted to know what is the Democratic plan for Social Security. The response I was given is that there is no current Democratic Party plan for Social Security. Congressman Bacarra's office stated that Social Security would be solvent for the next 30 years.

[Luke_Wilbur]

Trying to dig a little deeper into the Social Security Issue, I contacted Congressman Charles B. Rangel office. I wanted to know his position on

the Social Security.

 

I was told that the President had a meeting with the Committee on Ways & Means at the White House. President Bush requested that he would like to present his Social Security privatization plan to the American people before the Committee on Ways & Means presented their response. As the ranking Democrat, Congressman Rangel agreed to the President's request. This is why the Democrats waited to release their statement against privatization after the President's State of Union Address.

 

In addition, Congressman Rangel's office stated that the President's privatization

plan does not relate to Social Security solvency. If the government is not allowed

to touch retirement investment accounts, where will the money come from to pay for Social Security?

 

What do you think?

[Human]

On the internet, the democrats have to be carefull on what they post because the people online can check with great speed if what they are saying is correct or not.

 

The Internet is not like Broadcast Corporations where the news is pre-digested for the general public. This is one of many advantages of being online, it will Keep both sides "Republicans, and Democrats" honest. ( at least on the internet.)

[Guest Axel]

Senator Lieberman believes that all who want to strengthen Social Security - as he does - have an obligation to engage in the important reform debate with an open mind and to offer constructive reform proposals. For example, Senator Lieberman in the past has been a champion of Kidsave, a plan which would complement Social Security benefits by providing children with seed money at an early age and help them develop a nest egg for retirement.

[Guest Ken Mehlman]

As the President and Congress have debated Social Security reform over the past couple of months, certain trends have emerged. Americans have learned more about the problems facing the current system, and thus, are more likely to recognize the need for changes in the future, including Personal Retirement Accounts. The following points are clear:

 

First, more people have come to understand the structural problems facing Social Security's solvency over the last two months, and thus, the issue has become more important to them. The latest Gallup poll shows that Americans think Social Security is now the most important domestic issue. At 12%, Social Security has increased by 8% since January and is a greater concern than the economy (10%), health care (9%), or terrorism (9%).

 

The increased importance of Social Security is confirmed by several other polls. This week's Battleground 2006 poll found Social Security (17%) as the "number one problem for the President and Congress to deal with." Also a recent Harris poll found 37% of Americans think Social Security is the most important issue for the government to address, an increase of 33% from last October when just 4% thought it was the most important issue.

 

Second, more Americans agree that Social Security needs strengthening. According to the recent ABC News/Washington Post poll, 72% of Americans think the Social Security system is headed down the road to a crisis or will require major changes in order to head of a crisis. Even seniors believe that changes are necessary to Social Security: a recent Ayres McHenry poll found 66% of Americans over age 55 believe that Social Security needs changes. A recent Gallup poll even found a majority of Americans (51%) believe that it is necessary for Congress to pass legislation to make changes to Social Security this year.

 

Third, as Americans hear more and more about possible reforms, support for Personal Retirement Accounts has increased. A recent Gallup survey found that 58% of Americans believe that Social Security Legislation should "include a provision that would allow people who retire in future decades to invest some of their Social Security taxes in the stock market and bonds."

Support for Personal Retirement Accounts has increased. According to a recent ABC News/Washington Post poll, fifty-six percent (56%) of Americans support allowing workers to invest some of their Social Security contributions in the stock market, while 41% oppose such an idea. The number of Americans who support PRAs has increased by a net of 6% since last December, when 53% supported the plan and 44% opposed it. This is the highest level of support for PRAs since the Post first asked the question in 2000.

 

Those eligible for Personal Retirement Accounts see benefits from them. According to a recent Pew poll, among those eligible for Personal Retirement Accounts, 56% believe investment would bring higher benefits; just 12% predict lower benefits and 55% would invest if given choice. Once PRAs are explained, a majority of Americans support them. According to the Democracy Corps poll, 40% of Americans support PRAs before they are explained, while 51% oppose them. However, after a plan for voluntary personal retirement accounts is explained, support rises to 54%, while 45% remain opposed.

 

Finally, as Americans follow the Social Security Debate, they trust President Bush more than Democrats to find a solution. According to recent polls by the Winston Group and NPR, President leads Democrats on who offers better ideas and who is working on a bipartisan basis.

 

 

Americans are realizing that Democrats are opposing Social Security modernization because they lack their own plans: The Democracy Corps poll also showed that 50% of Americans believe that Democrats are opposing President Bush's plans to strengthen Social Security just to block his agenda, while only 42% believe that they are opposing President Bush's plan because they have a better way to strengthen Social Security.

[ross]

I wonder if that is really Ken Mehlman. Sounds like something he'd say, though.

 

Ken, do you have any other defense of the plan other than that certain polls reflect a positive view of it? What actually makes it a good idea?

 

Private accounts sound like a good idea, if you trust the average citizen as an investor. I am a college man and still took a bath in the stock market in 2000. It's no walk in the park.

 

Of course the public believes there is a crisis, since that is practically all Mr Bush talked about for a good few weeks. It received major news coverage from a co-operative press corps. But is it really a huge problem? I'm not an economist, so I don't know.

 

From where I'm standing, raising the retirement age seems like a fine idea. The current age was designed in a different era, when people weren't living to be 85 and up with any regularity. If we get people working for even five years longer, we'd go a long way towards lessening the severity of this supposed crisis.

[Guest DNC]

Thursday, March 31 will be a Retirement Security National Day of Action in Washington, DC. Please join others who support Social Security and oppose those who wish to dismantle it for a rally and press conference starting at noon at 1845 K St., N.W. Together, we can show those who are funding the GOP effort to privatize our retirements that we won't let Republicans sell our retirement security to Wall Street.

 

Retirement Security National Day of Action

March 31, 2005

12:00 PM

1845 K St, N.W., Washington, DC

[Guest Roman]

Liberals call themselves progressives yet they stand in the way of progress. Liberals call themselves " educated " yet believe that paying into SS for 40 years and receiving exactly what you pay in at a zero percent return is a good investment.

 

Go figure.

 

 

Liberalism is a failed ideology that does not represent American people.

[Guest Allison Dobson]

Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) announced that he and his staff will embark on a Fix It, Don’t Nix It Social Security tour this month to talk to Iowans about the need to strengthen and protect Social Security. Harkin will hold meetings in Des Moines, Cedar Rapids, Davenport and Mason City in late April while his staff will hold meetings in all 99 Iowa counties beginning April 12, 2005.

 

“The President’s risky privatization scheme is not about strengthening social security, it is about shrinking it,” said Harkin. “I want to work with President Bush to preserve and protect Social Security, but I want to do it right. That’s why I want to reach all 99 counties so I can hear what all Iowans have on their mind about Social Security.”

 

President Bush’s privatization commission has proposed creating private Social Security accounts that would cut benefits by one-third or more, even for those who choose not to invest in privatized accounts. Workers could invest two-thirds of their Social Security contribution in stocks and bonds, but those returns could not make up for the deep benefit cuts and would be subject to the whims of Wall Street.

 

Even many supporters of the President’s plan acknowledge that private accounts have nothing to do with ensuring the long-term financial health of Social Security. In fact, to fund the private accounts, the government would have to borrow almost $5 trillion dollars over the first 20 years- much of that from foreign countries like China and Japan – making Social Security’s financial problems much worse and even further from being solved. In addition, the recent Social Security Trustees report confirmed that Social Security is on solid financial ground for years to come.

 

The President’s privatization plan would also jeopardize Social Security disability benefits, which are a lifeline to more than six million Americans. For many, that disability benefit check is 100 percent of their income. But the President’s privatization commission strongly indicated that disability benefits would be cut the same as retirement benefits.

 

“I hope that after the President finishes his campaign to privatize Social Security, he will realize that the math simply does not work and that he has not thought this through,” said Harkin. “I hope that he will sit down with Congress to come up with a reasonable, bipartisan plan for strengthening Social Security.”

[Guest Roman]

Liberals think it is " progressive " to keep people paying into a retirement fund with a zero precent return after 40 years.

 

Go figure.

 

Liberals are disgusting power hungry obstructionists that slaughter their young to avoid personal responsiblity.

[Guest LAW]

Weekly Address: President Obama Promises to Protect Social Security from Republican Plans to Privatize It

 

WASHINGTON – On the 75th anniversary of Social Security being signed into law, President Obama promised that he would protect it from the Republican leaders in Congress who have made privatization a key part of their agenda. Despite the financial crisis, they still believe that gambling Social Security on Wall Street is a good idea. This President will not let that happen. For several generations, Social Security has been a promise to America’s seniors – that they will have the chance to retire with dignity – and he will safeguard that promise.

 

 

Remarks of President Barack Obama

As Prepared for Delivery

August 14, 2010

Washington, DC

 

 

Seventy-five years ago today, in the midst of the Great Depression, Franklin Roosevelt signed Social Security into law, laying a cornerstone in the foundation of America’s middle class, and assuring generations of America’s seniors that after a lifetime of hard work, they’d have a chance to retire with dignity. We have an obligation to keep that promise; to safeguard Social Security for our seniors, people with disabilities, and all Americans – today, tomorrow, and forever.

 

Now, we’ve been talking for a long time about how to do that; about how to make sure Social Security is healthy enough to cover the higher costs that are kicking in now that baby boomers are retiring. And I’m committed to working with anyone, Democrat or Republican, who wants to strengthen Social Security. I’m also encouraged by the reports of serious bipartisan work being done on this and other issues in the fiscal commission that I set up several months ago.

One thing we can’t afford to do though is privatize Social Security – an ill-conceived idea that would add trillions of dollars to our budget deficit while tying your benefits to the whims of Wall Street traders and the ups and downs of the stock market.

 

A few years ago, we had a debate about privatizing Social Security. And I’d have thought that debate would’ve been put to rest once and for all by the financial crisis we’ve just experienced. I’d have thought, after being reminded how quickly the stock market can tumble, after seeing the wealth people worked a lifetime to earn wiped out in a matter of days, that no one would want to place bets with Social Security on Wall Street; that everyone would understand why we need to be prudent about investing the retirement money of tens of millions of Americans.

 

But some Republican leaders in Congress don’t seem to have learned any lessons from the past few years. They’re pushing to make privatizing Social Security a key part of their legislative agenda if they win a majority in Congress this fall. It’s right up there on their to-do list with repealing some of the Medicare benefits and reforms that are adding at least a dozen years to the fiscal health of Medicare – the single longest extension in history.

 

That agenda is wrong for seniors, it’s wrong for America, and I won’t let it happen. Not while I’m President. I’ll fight with everything I’ve got to stop those who would gamble your Social Security on Wall Street. Because you shouldn’t be worried that a sudden downturn in the stock market will put all you’ve worked so hard for – all you’ve earned – at risk. You should have the peace of mind of knowing that after meeting your responsibilities and paying into the system all your lives, you’ll get the benefits you deserve.

 

Seventy-five years ago today, Franklin Roosevelt made a promise. He promised that from that day forward, we’d offer – quote – “some measure of protection to the average citizen and to his family against&hellippoverty-stricken old age.” That’s a promise each generation of Americans has kept. And it’s a promise America will continue to keep so long as I have the honor of serving as President. Thanks for listening. Thanks for watching. And have a nice weekend.

[Guest Human]

Well Law! I can think of 18 million ways that your group "Democrats" is trying to bust Social Security.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Weekly Address: President Obama Promises to Protect Social Security from Republican Plans to Privatize It

 

WASHINGTON – On the 75th anniversary of Social Security being signed into law, President Obama promised that he would protect it from the Republican leaders in Congress who have made privatization a key part of their agenda. Despite the financial crisis, they still believe that gambling Social Security on Wall Street is a good idea. This President will not let that happen. For several generations, Social Security has been a promise to America’s seniors – that they will have the chance to retire with dignity – and he will safeguard that promise.

 

 

Remarks of President Barack Obama

As Prepared for Delivery

August 14, 2010

Washington, DC

 

 

Seventy-five years ago today, in the midst of the Great Depression, Franklin Roosevelt signed Social Security into law, laying a cornerstone in the foundation of America’s middle class, and assuring generations of America’s seniors that after a lifetime of hard work, they’d have a chance to retire with dignity. We have an obligation to keep that promise; to safeguard Social Security for our seniors, people with disabilities, and all Americans – today, tomorrow, and forever.

 

Now, we’ve been talking for a long time about how to do that; about how to make sure Social Security is healthy enough to cover the higher costs that are kicking in now that baby boomers are retiring. And I’m committed to working with anyone, Democrat or Republican, who wants to strengthen Social Security. I’m also encouraged by the reports of serious bipartisan work being done on this and other issues in the fiscal commission that I set up several months ago.

One thing we can’t afford to do though is privatize Social Security – an ill-conceived idea that would add trillions of dollars to our budget deficit while tying your benefits to the whims of Wall Street traders and the ups and downs of the stock market.

 

A few years ago, we had a debate about privatizing Social Security. And I’d have thought that debate would’ve been put to rest once and for all by the financial crisis we’ve just experienced. I’d have thought, after being reminded how quickly the stock market can tumble, after seeing the wealth people worked a lifetime to earn wiped out in a matter of days, that no one would want to place bets with Social Security on Wall Street; that everyone would understand why we need to be prudent about investing the retirement money of tens of millions of Americans.

 

But some Republican leaders in Congress don’t seem to have learned any lessons from the past few years. They’re pushing to make privatizing Social Security a key part of their legislative agenda if they win a majority in Congress this fall. It’s right up there on their to-do list with repealing some of the Medicare benefits and reforms that are adding at least a dozen years to the fiscal health of Medicare – the single longest extension in history.

 

That agenda is wrong for seniors, it’s wrong for America, and I won’t let it happen. Not while I’m President. I’ll fight with everything I’ve got to stop those who would gamble your Social Security on Wall Street. Because you shouldn’t be worried that a sudden downturn in the stock market will put all you’ve worked so hard for – all you’ve earned – at risk. You should have the peace of mind of knowing that after meeting your responsibilities and paying into the system all your lives, you’ll get the benefits you deserve.

 

Seventy-five years ago today, Franklin Roosevelt made a promise. He promised that from that day forward, we’d offer – quote – “some measure of protection to the average citizen and to his family against&hellippoverty-stricken old age.” That’s a promise each generation of Americans has kept. And it’s a promise America will continue to keep so long as I have the honor of serving as President. Thanks for listening. Thanks for watching. And have a nice weekend.

[Guest LAW]

KEEP THE PROMISE

[blueyankee44]

Its a shame that a Non President can get away with taking from the poor and call it sane. Its a bad decision to make when it complicates lives whom have done nothing wrong.Its a shame that citizens whom voted into office this so called non- passionate relic of a man whom has no kindness and no preservation of the basic laws of the United States and its citizens.This is not a friendly and loving man for any of man-kind whom do not agree with him.Obama is not qualified to even be near the White-House .

[Guest American4Progress]

Republican members of Congress have tried a few tricks to avoid facing their constituents this summer: some held only “pay-per-view” town halls, one put out a “watch list” of local activists , others confiscated cameras from town hall attendees, and many simply refused to hold town hall meetings at all.

 

Those who did hold town halls, however, heard a few messages loud and clear. Here’s a rundown of the top messages constituents delivered this August.

 

Where Are the Jobs?!

 

With the unemployment rate hovering around 9 percent and the House GOP threatening to kill, rather than create, millions of jobs, constituents were not shy about voicing their anger.

[Guest HUMAN]

My group is trying to keep your group from regulating this country to death.

 

Or haven't you noticed?

 

I just want to know one thing from you American4RegressivePolicy; Why is your group so intent on destroying jobs in this country?

 

Short term jobs is not going work, neither is the land grabs that your group is involved in.

It destroys local economies real quick.

 

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Republican members of Congress have tried a few tricks to avoid facing their constituents this summer: some held only “pay-per-view” town halls, one put out a “watch list” of local activists , others confiscated cameras from town hall attendees, and many simply refused to hold town hall meetings at all.

 

Those who did hold town halls, however, heard a few messages loud and clear. Here’s a rundown of the top messages constituents delivered this August.

 

Where Are the Jobs?!

 

With the unemployment rate hovering around 9 percent and the House GOP threatening to kill, rather than create, millions of jobs, constituents were not shy about voicing their anger.