The Count, Rep. Chris Chocola (R) of Indiana, just won’t quit.
He continues to deny that he ever supported privatization, let alone privatizing all of Social Security. Chocola claims that anyone who says this is either making it up or distorting his words.
So just for the record let’s put down, word for word, what he told an editorial board meeting with the Elkhart Truth back in October 2000 …
“Bush’s plan of individual investment of 2 percent of the money is a start. Eventually, I’d like to see the entire system privatized. It’s not a ‘risky scheme.’ There will be a series of investment options for people, professionally managed. If one isn’t performing for you, you can change every year. We’re not going to let people invest all of their money in Yahoo!
People will be smart enough to understand their risk level. I believe people can make good decisions, and I know they ask really good questions before they make decisions. Will somebody screw it up? No question. But the government is screwing up the whole thing right now.
The whole thing is optional, and it’s good for a couple of reasons. One, it’s your money and nobody can touch it. It doesn’t end up being borrowed by the federal government to pay off other things. Two, it gives you a much better return than you’d ever get out of Social Security. Right now, younger people are getting a negative return on their money.
The stock market has performed at 8 percent return over the past 70 years – that’s through wars and depression. If you give people the opportunity, they’ll build their self reliance and self respect because they’ll be making a direct impact on their lives.”
Less than a <$Ad$>month later, on the eve of the election, as his campaign started to swirl down the tubes, Chocola said that claims that he supported a total privatization of Social Security were false: “There is no one proposing, including me, a plan of total privatization.”
When he ran again in 2002 he said: “I do not support the privatization of Social Security.”
Yesterday at his townhall meeting, according to the South Bend Tribune, he claimed that “allowing people to divert a portion of their payroll taxes into personal accounts is at least one part of the final solution on Social Security.”
Final solution? How about, is that your final answer?
