Congressman Harold Ford, Jr., a Democrat from Tennessee, continues to lean ever rightward. If he keeps it up, he’ll be completely disowned by folks like the Congressional Black Caucus for daring to put victim-game politics where it belongs: in the back of the bus of history.
It’s a whole new world over here, my friend.
The Instapundit pointed to an article about Ford, written by Frank Cagle. He and a few colleagues interviewed Ford on a radio show:
Ford said he supports the Second Amendment right to bear arms, he is against partial birth abortion, he argues we have to stay in Iraq until we get the job done and he says he was encouraged on his most recent of four visits to the war zone. He wants to end pork barrel spending and balance the budget by making every department cut spending, and he wants to reform the tax code. (Source)
Being against infanticide is a start, but Ford needs to follow through with the same rationale that led him to that point and oppose child killing in general, no matter how old or what size the fetus.
Recognizing the need to cut spending to bloated social programs, as opposed to defense, for example, is one of the marks of a conservative, in my amateur and biased assessment. Based on bills Ford has sponsored and cosponsored in the current Congress, I can’t tell if he supports those kind of cuts.
I was glad to see that he cosponsored the House bill supporting the Pledge of Allegiance with “under God” intact.
Ford is clearly against certain “middle-class” entitlements…
It was in the area of entitlements that Ford made his boldest statements. He says we need to notify people 40 and under right now that they won’t be getting Social Security until they are 70. Increased life expectancy is threatening the solvency of the program. He also favors means testing so that those making over $300,000 a year would not receive a Social Security check. He is opposed to private accounts.
…but is he also against race-based entitlements? Inquiring minds. He favors increasing the retirement age but opposes private retirement accounts. I see. There’s no guarantee the Social Security system will be solvent even if the age is raised to 80; the very least the government can do is allow people to put SS into private accounts. Ford’s got a long way to go, but he’s making a good start.
(Side note: Since I started my own business, “retirement” doesn’t mean the same as it once did. I don’t have to retire in the traditional sense. When did the idea of leaving the marketplace and living out the rest of one’s life not earning money become the norm?)
Two years ago I wrote a post about Barack Obama’s speech at the Democratic Convention. White liberals at the former day job were electrified and giddy the next day. I read his speech, wrote a post, and referenced Harold Ford:
Our beliefs divide us, and that’s the way it should be. I have nothing in common with those who hate God, and they have nothing in common with me, who loves God.
My conclusion won’t surprise you. Obama is a liberal who doesn’t want to be called a liberal, just like all liberals. There’s nothing new here to see, people. Relative youth and freshness don’t change the fact that socialism and racial divisiveness by any other names are still socialism and racial divisiveness. I predict the Democrats will use the “articulate†Barack Obama for all he’s worth, then push him to the back of the room as they did with Rep. Harold Ford, Jr.
While Ford may never sign on with the Republican party (as I’ve chosen not to do) or drop membership with the Democrats, I hope he continues to think conservatively. It comes at a price, though. Fair-weather friends may turn their backs on him. Certain blacks will shake their heads in disgust, wondering what happened to the “brother.” The ignorant will call him names. But I’m sure he can handle it.
Moving rightward has a cost, but breaking the chains of mental bondage, thinking outside the victim box, seeing the world as it really is and not the way social utopians want it to be, and believing one can succeed despite obstacles are priceless.
(First photo by Michael Lavine, Men’s Health)
{ 2 trackbacks }
{ 23 comments }
La Shawn,
I appreciate the “hope” you have for Congressman Ford. And, I think he would be wise to heed your admonitions (based as they are on personal experience).
But I wonder what distinguishes Ford’s “lean ever rightward” from the carefully calibrated right turns Hillary Clinton has been making since she was elected senator. Isn’t Ford’s lean, like Hillary’s turn, just a patented triangulation strategy to co-opt conservative (Republican) voters. After all, like every other shrewd Democrat, they both know they can take the black vote (and most liberal voters) for granted.
That said, as politicians go, Ford comes as close as any to being worthy of genuine admiration and respect…..
La Shawn,
Harold Ford, Jr. hopes to become US Senator from Tenn. He has already filed to run for the Senate. He attended St Albans school in DC with Jesse Jackson, Jr. His seat in Congress was held by his father, Harold Ford, Sr., for 22 years. He tried to unseat Nancy Pelosi several years ago and lost. The older guard support him, including Charlie Rangel. The Democrat party of today has been taken over by the far left faction. Harold Ford, Jr. knows that to be elected in Tenn. or President of the US, he must lean right compared to most CBC members. Leaving “under God” in the pledge keeps many people happy, both black and white, in Tenn. Tennessee is split into east and west by the Tennessee River and ideology. There are two other black congressmen that occupy a parents seat in the House.
James M. Barber
La Shawn:
I know how much you want people like Ford to be more conservative, but I am not convinced:
1 Refusing to privatize Social Security is a Democratic issue – following the “party line”. Not very conservative.
2 Denying Social Security to people making over $300, 000 is, again, Democratic boilerplate -class warfare, denying the most productive citizens who have contributed the most the most basic of benefits.
Sorry. This guy is a Barack Obama wannabe – voting liberal while singing the “moderate” song.
I hate to be negative, but my glass, when it comes to politicians, is half full. Anthony and James may be wise to suspect Ford’s motives. My negativity isn’t based upon Ford’s party affiliation, but on my basic distrust of the sincerity of politicians of either party.
Ford’s voting record, over time, will tell the tale. The old maxim applies: Pay no attention to what they say, but watch what they do.
Ok, we’ve got a quartet now. I can’t sing bass very well, but I’ll try.
Of course he’s still a little too much of a Lib for me
, but he was already dissed by his “friends” in the CBC. Back when he ran for House Minority Leader many in the CBC turned their backs on him and voted for Nancy “San Fran” Pelosi.
Oh but those are the same nuts that run around talking about “Black Unity”
.
At least he’s a Blue Dog Democrat though.
Should Harold Ford, Jr. join the Republican party, he would attain a leadership role providing his skills deserve it.
Staying in the Democrat party assures him his seat on the bus, but not in the leadership or in any meaningful post in a Democrat presidency. White Democrats really guard against letting the entitlement blacks in their party get too near the keys to the pantry. Thats why when promoting Democrat blacks they only appoint nut cases or well established team players like Vernon Jordon and Ron Brown.
Facts are facts. You can look it up.
Meanwhile, while he is leaning to the right, I will welcome his vote and voice, but I won’t leave the future of an unborn baby or my taxes unguarded in his hands.
Democrat or Republican, I am never comfortable with a guy who chooses French cuffs and cuff links.
When did the idea of leaving the marketplace and living out the rest of one’s life not earning money become the norm?
It’s a New Deal idea that had been brewing for a while, if I remember some of my Sociology classes corretly. Remember that until recently, the majority of the middle-class jobs in the US were hard physical labor that left them poor health in old age. The idea was to allow people to have a few years of leisure at the end of their lives – and remember that there was much less leisure time available back then for the average person.
As far as Ford’s opposition to privatizing some part of SS, I’m not ready to condemn that too strongly. The plans that I’ve seen floated don’t do a good job at laying out the options and costs. Especially the latter. I ran a few numbers as examples. One plan would allow workers to put 2% of wages (from the 12.2% SS tax) into a private account.
Here are some numbers:
Assumptions: monthly payments at the end of the month into the fund. 0% inflation, 0% growth in wages, so that investment returns are in current-year dollars. Worker starts at age 18, retires at 67 (current age for full SS benefits for younger workers). Median family income of $43,318 assumed. Deduct $50/year for account fees – about average for an IRA.
If returns are 4%, they will have $124,423 in the account. If they are 7%, they’ll have $346,891. This will throw off (at 4% for about 0 risk of running out of money before you die) $4,976 and $13,874 per year. Not a lot of money if the markets move sideways for long periods of time, as they did in the 70s.
The fees cut the principal, and thus the annual payout by $300 and $900 per year, respectively.
A critical factor that any private account plan has to mitigate are the impact of fees and expenses on plan returns. The financial industry is no angel when it comes to respecting consumers – look at the current bankruptcy law and the huge number of credit card offers that go out every day. I’d suggest that until the accounts get to some critical mass of dollars, they go into passive “total market”-type index funds, run as cheaply as possible. The only problem with that is pretty soon there will be calls to divest these funds of “bad companies” – tobacco stocks, gambling stocks, booze stocks, companies that do/don’t give domestic partner benefits, etc.
In short, the plan needs to be carefully written to protect the average worker from predators, and not be a handout to Wall Street.
BTW, Jane Galt at Assymetrical Information has written quite well on this in the past.
“He says we need to notify people 40 and under right now that they won’t be getting Social Security until they are 70.”
How conservative: using the government to mislead people.
Of the five Democrats in Tennessee’s congressional delegation, Harold Ford is by far the most liberal. His voting record backs that up. From 1996-2000 he voted in lock step with the CBC and the most liberal elements of the Democrat party. Since 2000, Ford has changed his rhetoric and voting pattern a bit to appeal to Republican voters in Tennessee.
Ford’s problem is, he’s taken both sides on most major issues at some point. He now talks about across the board spending cuts, balancing the budget, and middle class tax cuts. His rhetoric sounds like a Republican running in ‘94, but when pressed for specifics you’ll find Ford hasn’t thought past his conservative talking points.
On Iraq, since entering the Senate race last May, Ford has said he supported sending more troops, then he wanted a timetable for withdrawal, then he told Imus he would not have voted for the war knowing what he knows now, and now he’s come full circle back around to supporting the war and giving our troops the tools they need win. Ford’s taken every position imagineable on the war in Iraq, short of joining Murtha in calling for an immediate withdrawal.
Like Barack Obama, Ford talks a good game. He’ll probably have some crossover appeal in the general, but Tennessee voters should be wary. He’s a liberal in conservative clothing.
Let me make sure I understand this.. if I make over $300,000 a year (which means a much larger chunk of my income gets taken out for SS taxes) then I get penalized by not getting any of it back when I retire? Somebody please explain to me how that’s not deceptive, government sponsored socialism? I make too much therefore my previously paid SS taxes go to retirees who make less than me.
Speaking of SS.. whatever happened to the big deal W made about it? Wasn’t that a huge objective of his and the worst problem facing us according to him? Then it just quietly disappeared.
Thomas wrote: if I make over $300,000 a year (which means a much larger chunk of my income gets taken out for SS taxes)”
Actually, a smaller chunk of your income gets taken out for SS if you have $300k of earned income. SS taxes (OASDI, the non-Medicare part) stop at roughly $90k of earned income, so you would have $210k of income with no SS tax. Therefore as a percentage of income, your SS taxes go down. Of course, SS payments are not linear, so that a maxed-out contributor with $90k of income doesn’t necessarially get twice what a $45k income person.
Of course, asking high income retirees to forego SS is patently unfair.
Ford appears to be a decent person, it’s a shame when a declared Dem has more Conservative values than a lot of conservatives.
We are so over-run with RINO’s anymore, a breath of FRESH air is needed, but IMO, that *fresh air* has got to be Independent AND Conservative, both parties, Repub and Dem have left their members behind.
I agree with ech on the issue of Social Security. Privatizing it by using the options given to us on the table right now by the current administration would be a foolish idea.
I also disagree with Ford when he says that people making $300,000 a year or more should be deprived of their SS benefits. If you pay money into the damned system you deserve your damned benefits, no matter what amount of money you make during your lifetime.
I also disagree with the poster who claimed that people who make $300,000 a year or more are more productive citizens. That’s a load of class-based bullcrap. Wealthier citizens aren’t neccessarily more productive than anyone else.
Today’s partisan politics is the problem. It’s time for Congressional candidates to run on their own platform, instead of party loyalty. Partisanship politics makes it to hard to be flexible. America, African Americans as well, is too diverse to advocate or solicit a public policy of one size fits all. What works in California may not work in Tennessee. What works for me may not work for you. What will work is a political environment that will allow diverse solutions to diverse problems.
No candidate can solve each and every problem of his and her constituency. It is ridiculous for him or her to suggest he or she can. Just as well, it is foolish for his or her voters to think that he or she can. If Mr. Ford can produce a platform that the majority of Tennesseans can agree with, he’ll win the election. If not, he’ll lose. However, he must run on his platform and not his party’s. If his party’s platform conflicts with his, maybe its time for him to leave his party and be independent. If so, he just might get elected.
To me, its the candidate and his or her platform that matters and not the party.
ech,
I often hear that the “Bush plan” to privatize social security is full of flawed logic, numbers that won’t work and other charges.
The only problem is that there is no “Bush plan” per se. He asked that smart people get together and come up with privatization ideas. And he suggested a few guidelines.
Instead of creative thinkers proposing ideas, all manner of charges were leveled at him which included trying to destroy social security.
To disavow the possibility of privatizing retirement funds is to deny the efficacy of all pension plans, the reality of mutual funds, bond funds and the ready facts of state retirement funds, and the record of the country of Chile and its privatized system.
There are many examples of flawed privatization plans and more than a few that have failed entirely. But the broken social security system we currently have must be addressed.
The retirement age was raised just in time for the babyboomers to retire. It will be raised again in time for our (boomer’s) children to retire. What Ford is saying is logical but is hardly a radical departure from past practices and doesn’t, IMHO, indicate he is leaning to the right. What I do like about his statement is that it is a foregone conclusion, so 40 and under people should be notified of the inevitable change as soon as possible. I’d like him even more if he could engineer a bi-partisan “gang” to propose it as well as really work on other changes necessary to save the SS system for the next generation. If he is really leaning to the right, he would acknowledge that 401K’s (or the equivalent) are the answer to a secure retirement and that Bush was on the right track with his proposal, but he failed to get the train started and he (Bush) failed to convince even the AARP that he was on the right track. I am living proof that investing in a 401K (or equivalent) will supplement my income enough so that I can have a comfortable retirement.
And, just as food for thought, I remember being in my 30’s (nearly 30 years ago)and having bitter arguements with my now dear departed dad over the future solvency of the SS system for my own retirement. I resented paying into it. I was convinced it would be bankrupt by the time I reached 65 and thus I never counted on it for my retirement. When 401K’s came along, I jumped in with both feet. I only wish they would have been available when I was 30. I wouldn’t be comfortable today; I’d be rich.
Whenever someone suggests that government can do a better job of managing retirement savings than the individual, I have to laugh. Our government? Managing money wisely? That’s really amusing.
Would pay more attention if more Republicans would lean to the right. Actions speak louder than words. Politicians who run for office as one thing and then hedge their bets to insure re election are a (only one) root of the problem.
As for cutting bloated social spending, merely asking for accountability would be enough. Does the program produce the results it claims? Keep it. Does the program fail to produce results that can be measured? Cut it.
To put it in terms easily understood, shut down schools that harm children. Give raises (and praise) to those who effectively teach. Cut the ratio of administrators to teachers. Make part of the pay raise a bonus several years later to those who helped kids to help themselves. Don’t know how to reach many of the parents, most crying need of all.
TANSTAAFL.
There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.
Think this came from Larry Niven. Selling of the concept of a free lunch is an example of GIGO.
Don’t believe the hype! Harold Ford Jr. is only saying what he needs to in order to get elected to the Senate.
The Ford family is reviled by most Tennesseans.
The Ford family is reviled in Tennessee. Some of the most debased and godless … in politics are in that man’s family. He’s taking all the “right” positions concerning abortion, spending, and gay marriage but we know who and what he really stands for. Besides, even a conservative Dem gives Leftist Reid that much more relevance in the senate and times are too difficult to play around with having Dems in power in any branch of government right now.
Ford just to say the right things to get elected.
Just like every politician in history, conservative, liberal, etc. all the same….
What a rook—high-income earners get no s.s. after paying through the nose for it all these years??? NO WAY. What a gigantic rip-off! S.s. taxes are HUGE. We ought to know as self-employeds! We pay the full 15%, as you do, LaShawn. If that’s the thinking, then we BETTER have private accounts, because the whole s.s. then really IS just another welfare program that we all have to pay for and not get anything from, to boot.
Comments on this entry are closed.