Note: The Connecticut Media Group is not responsible for posts and comments written by non-staff members.

Linda McMahon’s dangerous plans could end Social Security and Medicare

|

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has released this new ad in the Connecticut Senate race that highlights Republican millionaire and former wrestling CEO Linda McMahon’s dangerous plans that could end Social Security and Medicare.   McMahon told Tea Partiers that she wants a “sunset provision” for Social Security and that she is open to Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney’s plans to end Medicare’s guaranteed benefits.  Both of McMahon’s plans would hit middle-class seniors with devastating consequences.

“Linda McMahon doesn’t need Social Security. She’s worth millions.  Maybe that’s why she’s called for a ‘sunset provision’ for Social Security,” says the ad’s narrator before replaying McMahon’s remarks to Tea Party activists about “sunset” provisions.  “That could end Social Security and we’d have to fight to renew it. McMahon’s also open to ending Medicare’s guaranteed benefit, just like Romney and Ryan,” the narrator continues.  “Linda McMahon: in it for herself, not for you,” the ad concludes.

MCMAHON DOESN’T NEED SOCIAL SECURITY BECAUSE SHE IS WORTH $238 MILLION             

According To Her Personal Financial Disclosure, McMahon Is Worth $238 Million. In September 2012, the New Haven Register reported that McMahon’s “personal financial statement, filed with the U.S. Senate, estimates her worth at $238 million.” [New Haven Register, 9/21/12]

 

MCMAHON CALLED FOR A SUNSET PROVISION FOR SOCIAL SECURITY AT A TEA PARTY FORUM

McMahon Said She Believed In Sunset Provisions For Programs Like Social Security. In September 2012, WFSB reported that “months ago, Linda McMahon was at a Tea Party event in Waterford, where she said she believed in sunset provisions for programs like Social Security.” [WFSB, 9/27/12]

Headline: Linda McMahon Proposed Social Security “Sunset” At Tea Party Forum. [Huffington Post, 9/26/12]

Huffington Post: McMahon Proposed A “Sunset Provision” To Social Security At A Tea Party Town Hall In Waterford, CT. In September 2012, the Huffington Post reported, “In little-noticed remarks at a Tea Party town hall meeting earlier this year, Republican Connecticut Senate candidate Linda McMahon proposed introducing a ‘sunset provision’ into the Social Security Act. McMahon, the former CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment, has consistently dodged questions about cutting government entitlement programs in her two Senate runs. Speaking before a group of Tea Party supporters in Waterford, Conn. on April 20, however, McMahon said she would consider making major changes to Social Security, from raising the retirement age to means-testing benefits. She also proposed introducing a ‘sunset provision’ — the legislative term for putting an expiration date on a law unless it is renewed.” [Huffington Post, 9/26/12]

McMahon On Social Security Solvency: “I Believe In Sunset Provisions When We Pass This Kind Of Legislation, So That You Take A Look At It 10, 15 Years Down The Road To Make Sure That It’s Still Going To Fund Itself.”  At an April 2012 Tea Party town hall in Wallingford, CT, McMahon received the question, “Do you believe that Social Security and Medicare are in financial trouble, and if so, what would you do to strengthen them?” McMahon responded, And I think that we’re going to have to do that in a bipartisan fashion in Congress. We cannot continue doing things the way we are doing with Social Security. We’re just simply going to be bankrupt. And I do believe that, that there are ways to look at, you know, what we’re trying to do when we put Social Security in place? We didn’t go back and review it. In other words, I believe in sunset provisions when we pass this kind of legislation, so that you take a look at it 10, 15 years down the road to make sure that it’s still going to fund itself.” [CT 2nd District Tea Party Patriots Meet & Greet, Waterford, CT, 4/20/12]

SUNSETTING LEGISLATION MEANS ENDING IT ON A SPECIFIC DATE AND FORCING IT TO BE REAUTHORIZED IN ORDER TO CONTINUE.

Reporting On McMahon’s Comments On Sunsetting Social Security, WFSB Noted That A Sunset Provision “Usually Means That It Ends At Some Point.” In September 2012, WFSB, reporting on McMahon’s comments on sunsetting Social Security, noted that a sunset provision “usually means that it ends at some point.” [WFSB, 9/27/12]

Reporting On McMahon’s Comments On Sunsetting Social Security, The New Haven Register Noted That To Sunset Legislation Means To End It On A Specific Date And Force It To Be Reauthorized In Order To Continue. In September 2012, the New Haven Register, reporting on McMahon’s comments on sunsetting Social Security noted that“to sunset legislation means it ends at a specific date and to continue such a program, it would need to be reauthorized.” [New Haven Register, 9/27/12]

MCMAHON SAID SHE WAS OPEN TO ENDING MEDICARE’S GUARANTEED BENEFIT, JUST LIKE ROMNEY AND RYAN

McMahon Said She Would Be Open To Privatizing Medicare, Possibly With A Voucher Program, A Plan Supported By Mitt Romney’s Running Mate, Paul Ryan. In September 2012, WFSB reported that McMahon “said she would be willing to look at privatizing Medicare, possibly with a voucher system, a plan supported by Mitt Romney’s running mate, Paul Ryan.” [WFSB, 9/27/12]

Mitt Romney Said His Plan For Medicare Was “The Same” As Paul Ryan’s. “In an interview with ABC Green Bay affiliate WBAY, GOP presumed presidential candidate Mitt Romney says, ‘Actually, Paul Ryan and my plan for Medicare is the same. If not identical, it’s probably close to identical.’” [ABC News, 8/16/12]

AARP: Paul Ryan Budget’s Medicare Voucher Plan Removes Medicare’s Promise of Secure Health Coverage. “On Medicare: “By creating a ‘premium support’ system for future Medicare beneficiaries, the proposal will increase costs for beneficiaries while removing Medicare’s promise of secure health coverage—a guarantee that future seniors have contributed to through a lifetime of hard work.”  [AARP, 4/7/11]

Categories: General

Leave a Reply