News Release Archive - 1998

WASHINGTON — On the eve of the National Summit on Retirement Savings, some analysts are denouncing new efforts to tilt the debate on savings and Social Security.

The Heritage Foundation released a report Tuesday, entitled “How Government Policies Discourage Savings,” calling for privatization of Social Security. But scholars and other researchers said today that such policy prescriptions would do irreparable damage to Social Security rather than save it.

Among those available for interviews are:

JANE D’ARISTA
A lecturer in the International Banking and Financial Law Studies Program at Boston University School of Law, D’Arista said: “We have a dual system, public and private. The public system does what it should do, redistribute income. A purely private system would widen the gap between rich and poor. Social Security provides a floor, so those who don’t have a lot can save something. It is also a very important system of preventing poverty, especially among the aging poor.”

DEAN BAKER
An economist at the Economic Policy Institute, Baker said: “Privatization is very unlikely to increase savings. If our system was modeled on Britain or Chile, two of Heritage’s examples, you’d be giving about $50 billion to whoever runs the fund, as compared to $2.8 billion to manage the existing system. Under privatization, instead of the government forcing you to send them money for Social Security, they’ll force you to send it to a stock broker. It’s still a tax. It’s just going somewhere else.”

THOMAS MATZZIE
Social Security Project Coordinator for the Institute for America’s Future, Matzzie said: “Throughout its history Social Security has faced forecasts of impending deficits. We’ve lived through this before. It’s difficult in terms of political will, but not in terms of policy remedy.”

JOHN HESS
Hess, a commentator and specialist on aging, termed Heritage’s call for more tax shelters on savings “demagogic” — since “earnings are taxed more than savings. Social Security could be made more fair by removing the ceiling on taxed earnings, and by taxing non-labor income such as dividends or capital gains.”

DOUG HENWOOD
The editor of Left Business Observer said that “there are countries with far more generous welfare states than ours that have higher savings rates. Also, one reason the savings rate has gone down is that the middle class has been squeezed, so they’re borrowers instead of savers.”

For more, contact Sam Husseini or Theresa Caldwell at the Institute for Public Accuracy, (202) 347-0020 or (202) 332-5055.

India-Pakistan Nuclear Escalation Deemed No Excuse for New SDI

WASHINGTON — Some arms experts expressed concern today over efforts to revive a new version of the Strategic Defense Initiative promoted during the 1980s by the Reagan administration.

A recent report from the Heritage Foundation following nuclear tests in South Asia declared that President Clinton \”should respond immediately by committing the United States to the development of an emergency missile defense program and to early deployment of a global missile defense system.\” But a variety of policy analysts said that such \”missile defense systems\” are dubious at best.

Among those available for interviews are:

ROBERT BOROSAGE
Co-director of the Campaign for America\’s Future, Borosage noted that many billions of dollars went into failed SDI tests. He said: \”Heritage and other right-wing ideologues keep calling for the rapid deployment of a system that has not yet proven it can work. It is hard to imagine a more bizarre way to waste money, and it is truly perverse that a group that claims to be conservative and against government spending would argue for wasting billions more deploying a system that does not work.\”

JOHN PIKE
Director of the Federation of American Scientists\’ Space Policy Project, Pike said: \”Missile defenses are clearly not an effective response to those missile threats that we do face. The nuclear tests by India and Pakistan make it more urgent than ever that we ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and negotiate a global ban on producing materials for nuclear weapons.\”

MERAV DATAN and ALYN WARE
Datan, research director for the Lawyers\’ Committee on Nuclear Policy, said: \”Building missile defense to protect the U.S. against the emergence of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles in India, Pakistan or any other state is entirely the wrong approach. It is like using buckets to attempt to catch the water from an overflowing bath rather than turning off the tap.\” Executive Director Ware added: \”The U.S. should begin multilateral negotiations on complete nuclear disarmament, in line with its obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Both India and Pakistan have said they would join such negotiations and any resulting non-discriminatory nuclear weapons disarmament treaty.\”

For further information, contact Sam Husseini or Theresa Caldwell at the Institute for Public Accuracy, (202) 347-0020.

Atomic Veterans and Downwinders Speaking Out on Pakistani Blasts

After today\’s nuclear detonations by Pakistan, some Americans who have experienced atomic testing firsthand are stepping up their efforts to warn against fueling a nuclear arms race.

While commentators from think tanks join with U.S. government officials in assessing the Pakistani tests, more acute concerns are being expressed by Americans who have seen mushroom clouds rise.

Among those available for interviews are:

WILLIAM BIRES
In 1951, Bires — then a 22-year-old private in the U.S. Army — witnessed several aboveground nuclear bomb tests at close range in Nevada. Now, Bires expresses deep concern about the latest turn of events. \”Anybody who isn\’t fearful of nuclear holocaust has certainly got their head in the sand,\” he said today from his home in Portland, Oregon. \”We\’re shaking our fingers at the Indians and Pakistanis, but I don\’t know who has the moral high ground. The U.S. is the most nuclear-bombed country in the world.\” Hundreds of nuclear warheads exploded at the Nevada Test Site.

JAY TRUMAN
Director of the Downwinders organization, Truman has worked with thousands of Americans who, like himself, have dealt with the aftermath of fallout from nuclear explosions in Nevada. He is one of the country\’s leading authorities on nuclear testing worldwide. He said that Pakistan\’s tests are \”frightening. It\’s the same nightmare back again. The nuclear arms race isn\’t over!\”

CORBIN HARNEY
A Native American who is a Shoshone elder and executive director of The Shundahai Network, Harney has actively opposed nuclear tests on Nevada land belonging to his people. He said: \”Nuclear testing is not the way. We\’ve already seen the result of all this bombing. It\’s taken many lives, and continues to take lives through sickness throughout the world. Today our Mother Earth has suffered.\”

ANTHONY GUARISCO
One of an estimated 300,000 members of the U.S. armed forces who witnessed U.S. nuclear test explosions at close range, Guarisco has been director of the Alliance of Atomic Veterans for more than a decade. He calls Pakistan\’s tests \”disappointing,\” but says the U.S. launched \”the beginning of the new nuclear testing age about a year ago with sub-critical tests at the Nevada Test Site.\”

For further information, contact Theresa Caldwell or Sam Husseini at the Institute for Public Accuracy, (202) 347-0020.

India\’s Nuclear Blasts Being Used as Excuse, Critics Charge

WASHINGTON — Efforts are underway to scuttle the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty under the guise of urging a go-slow approach by the Senate in the wake of India\’s nuclear tests, some experts said Friday.

Citing a new statement from the Heritage Foundation titled \”India\’s Nuclear Tests Show Folly of Rushing Test Ban Treaty,\” critics said that such declarations are part of an emerging effort to kill the test ban on Capitol Hill. Among those available for comment are:

SAM DAY
Day, former editor of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, said: \”The real answer is that we should not pull back from the CTBT.\” Challenging what he called a global nuclear caste system, Day said that India \”wants nuclear weapons too, since the U.S. is not getting out of the nuclear weapons business.\”

JAY TRUMAN
\”It is frightening and yet at the same time not at all surprising that the current nuclear crisis set off by India\’s tests would be used as an excuse to revive U.S. participation in another global nuclear arms race,\” said Jay Truman, director of the Downwinders organization. During the 1950s, Truman grew up in Southern Utah, where he watched mushroom clouds rise from the Nevada Test Site about 110 miles to the west.

ANTHONY GUARISCO
Guarisco was one of an estimated 300,000 members of the U.S. armed forces who witnessed U.S. nuclear test explosions at close range. Now director of the Alliance of Atomic Veterans, he said: \”We are absolutely positive that the best deterrent to nuclear war is the abolition of all nuclear weapons.\”

JACQUELINE CABASSO
Executive Director of the Western States Legal Foundation, she recently returned from international meetings in Geneva on nuclear non-proliferation.

PERVEZ HOODBHOY
A Pakistani physicist who is a visiting professor in the Nuclear Theory Group at the University of Maryland, he said that \”the United States enjoys complete supremacy in the nuclear field today. It has no need to test … since it has enormous data from previous test explosions.\”

DANIEL ELLSBERG
Currently director of Manhattan Project II, an anti-proliferation group.

For further information, contact Theresa Caldwell or Sam Husseini at the Institute for Public Accuracy, (202) 347-0020.

Critics Blast “Poisonous Recipe” For Retirement Policy

WASHINGTON — A national consortium of public-policy experts denounced proposals released today that would transform Social Security by setting up individual investment accounts and hiking the retirement age to 70.

The proposals came from a private panel of politicians, economists and business executives called the National Commission on Retirement Policy. The commission was handpicked by a conservative think tank, the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

“The commission is a dangerous farce,” said the Institute for Public Accuracy, a nationwide consortium of policy experts. “From the outset, the panel was rigged. It purposely excluded anyone who might defend the interests of working people and seniors. Now it has come up with a poisonous recipe for Social Security.”

Brookings, Heritage, AEI and Cato Are Most Often Cited

WASHINGTON-A study released Thursday found that conservative think tanks dominated much of the national debate last year.

The joint study-conducted by sociologist Michael Dolny for Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) and the Institute for Public Accuracy (IPA)-found that in 1997, right-leaning think tanks accounted for 53 percent of media citations, while progressive or left-leaning ones received 16 percent.

Of the 25 leading think tanks studied, three of the top four had a conservative slant. The centrist Brookings Institution (2,296 cites) was the most frequently mentioned, followed by the conservative Heritage Foundation (1,813 cites). The conservative American Enterprise Institute (1,323 cites) and the conservative/libertarian Cato Institute (1,286 cites) came in third and fourth. These were the only think tanks mentioned more than 1,000 times in major media. They accounted for nearly as many citations as the next highest 21 think tanks.

The most cited progressive or left-leaning think tanks were the Urban Institute (610 cites) and the Economic Policy Institute (576 cites), which came in ninth and tenth.

The study, published in the May/June issue of FAIR\’s magazine Extra!, used the Nexis database of major newspapers, radio and TV transcripts. It is available at FAIR\’s website or from IPA.

IPA is a nationwide consortium of policy experts.

Spotlight on Donations Earmarked for Smoking-Related Issues

WASHINGTON ­ New questions are emerging about financial ties between the tobacco industry and the American Civil Liberties Union.

An article in the latest Nieman Reports, published by Harvard’s Nieman Foundation, cites internal ACLU documents that shed light on contributions from cigarette makers Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds to the national ACLU, its affiliates and the ACLU Foundation. The article, by former Washington Post reporter Morton Mintz, says that most of the money ­ totaling more than $1 million since 1987 ­ was earmarked for a national ACLU task force advocating “smokers’ rights.”

Mintz reports that in the same year that the ACLU started to solicit and receive tobacco money, it also “began to oppose legislation to curb tobacco advertising and its tax deductibility” as well as proposals “to require new, large warning labels on cigarette packs” and “to require smoke-free public places and workplaces.” But the ACLU did not tell the membership in fund-raising letters and publications that the organization was taking tobacco money while fighting anti-tobacco legislation, Mintz writes.

This year, on March 3, at a Senate committee hearing, the ACLU testified in strong opposition to restrictions on tobacco advertising.

Melvin L. Wulf, a former legal director of the national ACLU, contends that the ACLU “has tailored its tobacco-related positions to fit the industry’s interests.”

The Institute for Public Accuracy, a nationwide consortium of policy experts, called Tuesday for “full disclosure of the financial ties between the ACLU and the tobacco industry.”

Experts Say Program\’s Troubles Are Due to Private Health Care System

WASHINGTON — Renewed efforts are underway to popularize very damaging \”solutions\” for Medicare, some experts say.

One influential think tank, the Cato Institute, urged Wednesday that the federal government take major steps toward privatizing Medicare. The group claimed that \”successful Medicare reform\” must rely on \”the efficiencies, incentives, competition and productivity of the private sector.\”

But researchers associated with the Institute for Public Accuracy, a nationwide consortium of policy experts, likened the recommendation to putting out fire with gasoline.

Sumner M. Rosen, professor emeritus of social policy at Columbia University, warned Wednesday: \”The real objective is to shrink and weaken the role of government, and privatize these enormous streams of funds that are so attractive to the profit-seeking visions of the largest and most powerful economic, corporate and financial institutions.\”

According to Mark Weisbrot, an economist at the Washington-based Preamble Center for Public Policy, \”The problem is that private health care costs have not been brought under control because health care reform never happened.\”

In contrast to the conventional wisdom, Weisbrot added, \”the basic problems with Medicare are not demographic.\” Medicare\’s projected financing problems \”have nothing to do with the fact that it is a government program. Nor do they result primarily from the aging of the population. Medicare\’s costs are driven by the costs of private health care.\”

Weisbrot added: \”Over the next 30 years, the effect of medical care inflation will have four times as much impact as the baby boomers\’ retirement on the average family\’s real income.\”

John L. Hess, a policy analyst on economics and aging who covered such issues as a longtime reporter for The New York Times, denounced the Cato Institute\’s policy prescriptions for Medicare. \”What Cato is proposing would ruin Medicare and pull the plug on needy people,\” he said. Privatization scenarios for Medicare \”would favor the affluent over the less affluent, the healthy over the sick, and private insurance over public, mutual help. It would of course promote what private insurance specializes in — cherry picking.\”

The Institute for Public Accuracy also took issue with Cato\’s assertions regarding efficiency. It noted that the government spends roughly 2 percent of Medicare funds for administration, whereas private HMOs average ten times that for overhead and profits.

The Institute for Public Accuracy is a nationwide consortium of policy experts.