CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg

30%↑

15%↑

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

50%↓

50%↑

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

35%↓

30%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
September 20, 2011 06:30 PM UTC

On radio, Coffman says Social Security is "obviously" a Ponzi scheme

  • 12 Comments
  • by: Jason Salzman

(Seriously — is Mike Coffman trying to lose his seat? Or is he just hoping to make sure he can never win a statewide race again? – promoted by Colorado Pols)

Update: Politico’s David Catanese posts Coffman’s Ponzi-scheme comment and reports:

Even as recent as today, Democrats are attempting to link GOP candidates to Perry’s Social Security position, but it appears some are willing to openly embrace it without prodding.

————————

On a Denver radio program, “Kelley and Company” Wed., Rep. Mike Coffman called Social Security a Ponzi scheme and aligned himself with Gov. Rick Perry over Mitt Romney and other candidates in the race to be the GOP presidential nominee.

That’s news, if you ask me, especially the Ponzi scheme part, but it has yet to be picked up by other media outlets. Social Security is a hot topic, being the third rail of politics and all, but journalists could spice up this angle by interviewing Ponzi scheme experts, like Bernie Madoff. (Maybe not him, but his ilk.) Do they think Social Security is a Ponzi scheme?

Here’s what Coffman told Steve Kelley, host of “Kelley and Company,” on KNUS-710 AM:

I am obviously going to support whoever the nominee is. But I have to admit to you philosophically I am closer to Perry. Obviously, I hope he gets better on the debate stuff. I think he did good. I think he did better on Social Security. I think obviously it is a Ponzi scheme, but he has to say he is going to fix it. And he did that in the last debate where he didn’t do that in the first debate. Now I think that was positive. [BigMedia emphasis]

Listen to the audio clip here:

The trouble with Coffman’s statement is, obviously, that Social Security isn’t a Ponzi scheme, and Kelley should have called him on this.

My online dictionary defines a Ponzi scheme as an “investment swindle in which supposed profits are paid to early investors from money actually invested by later participants.” Maybe that’s what Social Security sounds like to people who think government shouldn’t collect taxes and devise programs to help people, but if you’re not one of those people, you probably understand that Social Security is no swindle, but actually a successful government-run retirement system based on a funding formula that’s worked, with rational adjustments, for 76 years. It will continue to be a lifeline for many seniors for 25 more years with no changes at all. And with minor tweaks, it can be made to work indefinitely, as the LA Times pointed out Sunday in an editorial titled “Social Security Is No Ponzi Scheme.”

Why does Coffman think Social Security an investment swindle? Kelley should pose this question to Coffman next time he’s on his morning show. But it looks like Coffman is thinking less about Social Security and more about Rick Perry.

Coming before Thursday’s GOP presidential primary debate, Coffman may be illustrating that people (like him) believe in Perry so much that they’ll say that something (Social Security) is obviously something that it’s not (a Ponzi scheme) just to make it look normal for Perry to say it (when it’s not). And to help him connect with his core GOP audience.

Even while Gov. Mitt Romney has attacked Perry’s “Ponzi scheme” comments, he’s  on record supporting the George Bush plan for partial Social Security privatization and has been attacked by Perry for likening the funding mechanisms of the program to “criminal” activity.

This sentiment against Social Security, if not the same phrasing, was echoed by Perry supporters, Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and Gov. Bob McDonnell of Virginia, who agreed with the arguments Perry was making while stopping short of going the Full  Ponzi.

Further complicating the storyline for Romney are recent polling data showing that Republicans are just as likely to be attracted to Perry’s Ponzi Scheme message as they are to be turned away, and may in fact break his way in the context of a conservative primary electorate.

And just yesterday came reports in Politico that Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, once a speculative candidate for president, came very close to the same wording in his upcoming book.

In Colorado Jane Norton did the same during her 2010 primary race against Ken Buck, but no one has resurrected this message at such a level in the presidential race.

In other words, the substance behind Rick Perry’s Ponzi scheme attack is in keeping with a broad range of Republican thinking. The question is whether his supporters will go once more into the Ponzi breach with him.

Coffman decided to do so.

Partial Transcript of KNUS morning radio program, “Kelley and Company,” Wed, Sept. 14, 2011.

KELLEY: Before we let you go, Congressman Coffman, the debate the other night I thought was excellent on CNN. It was a little more refined and a little opportunity to get a back and forth going. Of course Tim Pawlenty has backed Romney. Where do you stand right now, even 14 months out?

COFFMAN: I am obviously going to support whoever the nominee is. But I have to admit to you philosophically I am closer to Perry. Obviously, I hope he gets better on the debate stuff. I think he did good. I think he did better on Social Security. I think obviously it is a Ponzi scheme, but he has to say he is going to fix it. And he did that in the last debate where he didn’t do that in the first debate. Now I think that was positive. [BigMedia emphasis]

KELLEY: I see CNN really trying to blow up the HPV vaccination. The executive order he signed down in Texas. You don’t think that is going to haunt him?

COFFMAN: Not in the general election. I think it is certainly going to cost him some in the Republican primary. That is why I am interested in why CNN is weighing in on the issue. Because it is actually more a moderate position that he quite frankly took. I wouldn’t have done it. But that is probably more sympathetic with the general electorate than it is with a more conservative Republican primary voter.

KELLEY: With that, we thank you and will talk with you down the road, Congressman.

Comments

12 thoughts on “On radio, Coffman says Social Security is “obviously” a Ponzi scheme

  1. “warfare” and a plan which was never misrepresented as an investment plan and in which everybody knows that what’s paid out in benefits to retirees is supported by what’s paid in by workers is a “Ponzi scheme”.  Somebody needs to give these folks some dictionaries.  

  2. Coffman is known to covet Udall’s Senate seat.

    Any chance this is positioning himself as a true-blue batshit crazy teabagger in a potential primary against (generic Republican candidadte)?

    1. Fuck this nonsense.  This bullshit meme that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme is a criminal disservice to the country, promoted by people who seem driven to exceed the poverty-wealth gap of the robber barons – a return to idealized socialite parties that the peasants of the world would feel inadequate to even emulate nevermind attend, where corporate fatcats once again return to their exclusive place in the halls of government and the working class – all poor, naturally – have no meaningful voice because their uneducated and uncouth manner does not deserve such representation.

      This is the true class warfare being waged today – the wealthy, aided by the willfully ignorant and blissfully misguided, dragging this country back from the economic revolution that made this country the envy of the world’s economies and idealized democratic visions.

    2. But pick your battles. So far this summer Coffman has gone out of his way to alienate Latino voters and now voters who rely on Social Security. Colorado statewide elections are decided by small numbers of Independent voters — and Coffman, who wants to challenge Sen. Udall in 2014, is quickly eroding the field of potential supporters.

      1. I think Coffman is defining and differentiating himself for voters, and our disagreement is over the true negative impact of what he is saying. I believe that by 2014, the crisis with Social Security will be plainer to see than it is today. By than, Coffman could appear prescient.

        1. Saying that Social Security needs to be reformed is fine; calling Social Security a Ponzi Scheme is not. The latter makes it easy to attack Coffman as someone who thinks we should do away with Social Security, and if you think Unaffiliated senior citizens are going to be okay with that by 2014…well, let’s just say we wouldn’t want to be in Coffman’s shoes. Maybe the problem with Social Security will be plainer to see in 2014, but that still doesn’t mean that voters are going to support a candidate who would appear to want to get rid of it altogether.

          It’s all well and good to “define and differentiate” yourself as a candidate — so long as your definition might actually appeal to the moderate voters that decide statewide races. Sen. Udall is no doubt happy to let Coffman differentiate himself the way he has this summer — with attacks on Hispanic voters and now Social Security.  

  3. http://www.cepr.net/index.php/

    Here is an excerpt:

    At its most basic level, Ponzi schemes are based upon the deceptive premise that for a small investment, investors will receive enormous returns. The real outcome with such schemes is often no return at all.

    This is clearly not the case with Social Security.

    Social Security is not based on any deception. You can find all the information you want about the program’s past, current and projected future finances in great detail in the annual Social Security trustees report. You will never find this sort of transparency with a Ponzi scheme.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

246 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!