Social Security: Activists’ Mission vs. Gays’ Best Interest

From an op-ed by Andrew Lee in the San Francisco Chronicle:

If allowed to go forth, Social Security privatization will limit the ability of the government to act as arbiter of Social Security survivor benefits, and therefore recognition of beneficiaries.... Without sweeping federal redefinition, gays and lesbians will continue to receive unequal benefits. If they are to make the best of the situation, they should support private accounts, forming alliances with Republicans who support limited government.

Hat tip: Right Side of the Rainbow, which comments:

Personal accounts are so obviously in the financial interests of gay and lesbian Americans, who get massively ripped-off by Social Security when their partners die, that only one thing can explain the failure of gay political groups to embrace the president's call for reform: politics over progress.

Of course, when you see your mission as advancing a broad-based left-liberal agenda of bigger, more "caring" (i.e., intrusive and redistributionist) government, with more authority centralized with federal bureaucrats (who, after all, know best - at least when appointed by Democrats), then of course you'll use your perch to lobby against personal accounts. Which is what the National Gay & Lesbian Task force did when (as reported here last December) it organized more than 70 prominent gay rights "leaders" to sign a joint letter to Congress opposing personal Social Security accounts.

More Recent Postings
3/06/05 - 3/12/05

Comments are closed.