Posted on 04/13/2005 10:33:05 AM PDT by Chi-townChief
The debate over President Bush's proposed Social Security reform is spawning new pro- and anti-groups nearly every day. The latest is Conservative Republican Seniors Against Bush.
Actually, that's not a new group. But the moniker describes many seniors who voted for Bush and are members of the AARP. The AARP has 35 million members, more than the population of Australia or Canada. One survey shows that nearly 40 percent of them are self-identified conservatives.
This makes sense, since most people when they sign up for the AARP aren't thinking politics so much as "cheap stuff." The group offers discounts on everything from drugs to flowers to cruises, helping make growing old in America about never having to pay full price again. But the $12.50 annual dues payments of conservative members happen to fund raucously unfair attacks on the central domestic-policy proposal of a president they overwhelmingly support. But, hey — what are political principles compared with a 25-percent discount on a stay at a Marriott in Boca Raton, Fla.?
In attacking Bush's proposal, AARP defenders might say the group is only doing its job — standing up for the interests of its members. Nonsense. The Bush proposal wouldn't touch anyone 55 years or older, and thus leaves the vast majority of AARP members undisturbed. What the AARP is advocating for is not the financial well being of its members so much as an ideological vision of an entitlement state that limits individual choice and emphasizes governmental dependence.
This is the only reason a seniors organization would go to such lengths to oppose personal savings accounts as part of Social Security for young people, who aren't AARP members now and would probably be better off for having the accounts when they are old enough to become members. In other words, by opposing the accounts and proposing other fixes to the system — such as tax increases and benefit reductions — the AARP is essentially doing nothing to protect its current members at the same time it hurts its future members.
Another sign that the AARP is driven by politics is that it has stumbled into that common pitfall of partisan advocates — hypocrisy. In one of its ads it has a couple saying of investing in the stock market: "If we feel like gambling, we'll play the slots." This from an organization that offers its members the opportunity to invest in 38 separate mutual funds. To date, the AARP doesn't encourage its members to play Internet poker or slots on its website, a sign that it doesn't truly consider investing equivalent to gambling.
The AARP takes a nice cut from each mutual-fund sale. What the organization has done brilliantly is to leverage its status as a popular conduit of cheap services and goods for seniors — from which it makes countless millions in royalties — into credibility and power as a liberal lobbying group. The AARP has such a strong brand that it can demagogically attack Bush's proposed Social Security reform as "Social Insecurity" (oh, what clever wordsmiths at the AARP) with more street cred than other shrill liberal outfits such as MoveOn.org.
But the AARP is not going unchallenged. A new conservative seniors group called USA Next is ripping into the AARP, riding a wave of publicity from its (rather ham-fisted) attack on the AARP on the issue of gay marriage (an AARP affiliate in Ohio opposed an anti-gay marriage constitutional amendment in the state). USA Next is making its case not just on political grounds, but with a dagger aimed at the heart of the AARP's appeal — cheaper discounts on travel!
Discounts aside, the imperative for Republican seniors who support Bush's reform should be clear: Because Bush's second term — at risk in the fight over Social Security — is important; because individual choice is superior to governmental dependence; because hypocritical and dishonest advocacy should be shunned, not subsidized with membership dues — quit the AARP.
— Rich Lowry is author of Legacy: Paying the Price for the Clinton Years.
I shred the AARP crap and send it back to them in the prepaid envelope...
Anyone have any experience with USA Next?
Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my ‘miscellaneous’ ping list.
Good - did you join USANext?
Conservative Republican Seniors Against Bush...SHOULD READ...Conservative Republicans Against Bush's Soc. sec. reform or C.R.A.B.S.
No, but I'm considering it.
I've just trashcanned their liberal garbage for the last 20 years but it keeps coming.
I quit about a month ago in the wake of the elections and the quote that my Mom and I recieved for supplementary medicaid insurance...$250.00/month! Why the AARP couldn't do any better with 35 million members? They simply don't want to do better as they sleep with the liberals on National health Care. Therefore, their agenda, furthered by the membership dues, does not necessarily meet the needs of the membership, but their liberal leadership at the expense of their membership. They get their agenda paid for as they attack Social Security reform, when they believe people are better off for the government to OWN the workers retirement rather than the worker OWNING HIS RETIREMENT. I did join USA Next in the recent drive by Art Linkletter, but have not had time to investigate the discounts, programs, etc...gotta be worth 12 bucks.
Why join either one, all I want the government to do is stay out of my life 100%, eliminate all the illegal/unconstitutional social services including SS and Medicare.
So do you belong to another seniors' group or what? I don't want AARP but I want the benefit (in other words, I selfishly want discounts on stuff)
I am getting the cards too....how do you get out of that one?
The only organizations I belong to are ones that I consider represent me, the NRA and AOPA.
LOL!!!!
Good one..!!
I am a member of USA Next and recommend them. As they are much smaller than AARP, the product selection is smaller, but growing. I know Charlie Jarvis (their chairman) well. He is an effective spokesman for conservative values and is a man of integrity. They deserve our support.
Just as Rush appropriately calls the NAACP the NAALCP (add liberal) the AARP should also be AALRP.
Hopefully, NRO and Rich Lowery will do a followup on this aspect of AARP membership claim and blow the whistle on them. Also, he could give the statistics on the ages of the membership, real or drafted, and point out that they are hardly limited to SS and Medicare subscribers. You could contact AARP directly and hope they act on it, tho I personally doubt that it would make it past the waste basket. Color me cynical where the AARP is concerned.
I always make sure to include as much of that day's junk mail as will fit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.