Barney joins LBR in airing television ads, but he repeats false Social Security claim.
It’s your generic political ad, professionally produced, and it is likely airing only on cable and not over air out of Philadelphia (as that would be prohibitively expensive). Still, airing and producing this ad likely took a good chunk of Barney’s cash on hand.
The ad, though, repeats a false claim that Barney is the only candidate with a plan to protect and expand Social Security. Lisa Blunt Rochester objected to a mailer Barney put out (but that I have not received or seen) that made similar claims:
In a press release objecting to this mailer and claim, Rochester said:
It is certainly appropriate for candidates to highlight their differences on the issues. What’s disappointing is that Sean Barney’s campaign has chosen to ignore the facts. His mailing claims – without any basis in reality – that I oppose his plan on Social Security. Just because Barney’s campaign may not have heard me talk about Social Security doesn’t make his claim accurate.
Democrats in Delaware shouldn’t make false claims about their opponents. I hope he will apologize for his error and send out a mailing to everyone who received the original mailing letting them know the facts.
Furthermore, securing Social Security and Medicare for future generations should be a top priority for every candidate running for Congress. As the only candidate who has directly helped people get their benefits while working for then-Rep. Tom Carper, I have a deep understanding of what programs like Social Security and Medicare mean to families. I support raising the income cap on social security contributions, allowing Medicare to negotiate for lower prescription drug prices and finding new ways to raise benefits where possible. In fact, virtually any Democratic candidate running for office today would agree with these principles on Social Security. It’s a no-brainer.
I have not seen Bryan Townsend object to the mailer, but I am sure he agrees with Lisa, since he has been doing town halls up and down the state all summer on strengthening the middle class, and in press releases announcing the town halls, he has said the following:
“Social Security and Medicare are two of the greatest programs ever created by our government,” Townsend said. “While some in Washington want to privatize Social Security and make cuts to Medicare, I pledge to protect and strengthen these critical programs for our seniors.”
He has also produced this white paper on Protecting and Strengthening Social Security and Medicare.
It’s a shame that Barney has to misrepresent his opponents in such a fashion.
Sadly, Barney is desperate and will say ANYTHING to get himself elected. Does not speak well to his character, or lack thereof. He will finish third and seriously need to reassess his electoral prospects in this state after yet another loss.
.
On the other hand, Barney has said the single most progressive thing I’ve ever heard a statewide DE candidate say. As reported in the News Journal:
It is such a progressive sentiment that it sounds out of place for Barney or any Delaware politician. And it also happens to be the right thing to do.
But that statement alone probably got him crossed off a lot of establishment Christmas card lists.
As for LBR, I’d expect her to line up with Hillary’s plan, which expands Social Security only for select populations.
Fair enough, Puck. But it’s not progressive to lie about your fellow Democrat’s plans either.
So barney has everyone talking about the issue he wants to talk about…
I have not taken sides in this race, but I am tired of candidates promising to protect Social Security and Medicare, and promising to raise payouts without saying how they would pay for that. Sean has stated clearly that he would pay by removing income caps and requiring those who make the most to pay the most.
“Barney said lawmakers should do something unprecedented and fund the program directly through regular corporate and income tax money, in addition to expanding its dedicated source of payroll taxes to incomes over $118,500.”
That’s enough to make me seriously consider him. If he had simply said, “Raise the cap to $250,000 and make ALL income taxable.” I’d be a full blown convert.
Jason,
We don’t know how much Barney wants to raise the cap. Maybe he doesn’t want to raise it to $250,000.
For all we know, he wants to raise the cap from $118,500 to $125,000.
Good that Lisa called him out on this one, but I don’t expect an admission of error from him.
This post says Bryan and Lisa have explained their positions Mitch.
From Townsend’s plan, embedded in Delaware Dem’s original post:
“Eliminating the payroll cap, so that the wealthiest Americans – those who also are more likely to have robust individual retirement savings – are paying proportionally more into the program. With the tremendous economic inequality now rampant in America, and with pensions no longer poised to be as strong and sustainable as they were before, the current payroll cap is outdated. The lion’s share of new economic wealth is flowing to the top wage earners, outside the reach of the payroll tax. By asking the wealthiest to pay more meaningfully into Social Security, we would extend Social Security’s solvency for up to 75 years and strengthen this imperative support for seniors.”
Thanks. I missed that. Perhaps because eliminating the payroll cap entirely seems a little pie in the sky.
but Barney’s plan is realistic?
Who knows what’s realistic? Last year you’d have been hard pressed to find any Democrat running for office even bringing up the idea of raising the cap. Now we have two… maybe three (where’s LBR?) competing proposals?
Anything is possible.
I was reacting to what is being said in the paid advertising. As well as I know Brian (and I have known him since before he ran for the state senate) and the impressions I am getting from interacting with Lisa, I truly believe that all three are progressive and Delaware will be well served if any of there three is elected.
The only false claim here is that Sean Barney’s message is false. In a public forum, all the candidates were asked directly to respond to Barney’s plan on Social Security. Lisa Blunt Rochester said she “has concerns” about Barney’s plan. In the statement above, it’s noteworthy that she still doesn’t state whether she actually agrees to his plan. Bryan Townsend said he “would not go that far.” According to recent media reports, he is actually critical of the plan.
These are all good candidates. I’m actually glad to see some information that helps to distinguish their positions on the issues.
Interesting. I remember at the PDD forum Sean Barney opposed eliminating the payroll cap. Happy to see he joined Townsend.
Love it. Who is more into raising the cap? This is the good kind of fight.
I understand that Bryan Townsend is the endorsed candidate here. But, if you’re interested in fostering an informed public discourse on the matter, you might present all the information for the readers of this blog.
For example, it would be helpful to see the context. Often, candidates include sources in the footnotes on their mail pieces. It’s curious that you chose to display only a small cropped image from the mail piece in question.
Also, you posted Bryan Townsend’s plan. But, you didn’t post Sean Barney’s plan: http://www.seanbarneyforcongress.com/issues/
Likewise, here is the link to Lisa Blunt Rochester’s plan: https://lisabluntrochester.com/issues/social-securitymedicare
I like what I see from all of them, but there are some notable differences here. It’s worthwhile to read the plans yourself.
Also, hashbrown, that is a total and complete fiction. It didn’t happen and it’s not accurate.
Bryan and Lisa are taking high road but Barney has overpromised again and is slamming them for not being the same kind of candidate. Sad to see Barney do this but hopefully this is the last we see of him in a Delaware campaign. I was at a fundraiser where Bryan talked about the PDD forum and how he was last to answer the question. He said all the other candidates were picking a random number and he had said he just thought we should start by eliminating the cap and see what that does to help. So sounds like Barney has joined Bryan at least on that part but there’s other things that are different. I like Lisa’s statement too, Barney should apologize.
On Friday, I got a Barney mailer that featured the candidate holding an assault rifle. Mrs. Geek saw it from across the room and said “Oh my god, what is that?!?” It is unusual for me to receive pictures of people holding assault rifles (I’m not a Republican). Believe it or not, it was a gun control piece.
Personally, I think it was a terrible, mixed message lit piece. Maybe trying to shock? Maybe trying to get some pro-gun Dem votes (for people that don’t read)? Dunno.
I got that mailer too. With his progressive position on assault rifles and Social Security, I may have to reevaluate Barney at some point.
But it’s not progressive to lie about your fellow Democrat’s plans either.
Frankly, I don’t see where the lie is. Barney’s plan pretty clearly not just calls for the COLA increases and lifting the cap on payroll taxes (then it says scrap the cap, so am not sure if this is lifting or eliminating) to pay for it. But the other thing Barney’s plan does is come out in support of implementing the idea of Social Security Plan B. That’s the $11,800 in raised benefits for people getting SS that he references in the ad above. As I read it, Barney *is* the only candidate who is calling for an expansion of benefits beyond fixing COLAs. Perhaps he should have said that he is the only candidate talking about a plan to actually expand Social Security benefits. But a candidate talking about Social Security B is pretty huge and is awfully progressive.
Would it happen? Probably not. And I expect that raising the payroll tax cap has just as much likelihood to pass. But as a Townsend supporter, I applaud Barney for putting the idea of Social Security B into the mix.
While eliminating or raising the cap provides much needed funding, no one proposes touching the true 1%. How much would Trump pay if caps are eliminated? My guess is zero. Probably about the same as he pays now. Why? he has no job. He doesn’t receive ordinary income. Not only is it taxed at the capital gains rate. Carried interest and other capital gains are not subject to FICA or Medicare taxation. When you live off passive income from investments you kinda are the 1%.
So before addressing SS and Medicare shortfalls, and especially before addressing any expansion, how about addressing the obscene distinction between capital gains and ordinary income. Stated another way, how about focusing on the 1%?
Per today’s DE Public Media article:
In a statement, Townsend blasted Barney, saying he was “…[distorting] his opponents’ records, while taking credit for accomplishments that weren’t his.”
I received a mailer from Senator Townsend this week calling him “a stalwart champion of issues critical to Delaware’s women” – then it listed a handful of bills (that other legislators actually sponsored). Townsend was one of many who voted in favor of their passage. I’d argue that calling him a champion of women’s issues, then using legislation sponsored by other legislators as the examples of his work on these issues looks a lot like taking credit for accomplishments that weren’t really his.
Perhaps El Som or one of Townsend’s other supporters knows which women’s issues he’s personally taken the lead on and the status of any of those efforts? If none exist, I think a fairer representation is to call him an ally or supporter of women’s issues, but a stalwart champion is def an exaggeration in my book.
Regardless, it appears we have some pot vs. kettle action happening with the guys in Dem primary for congress. At this stage of that race, it’s a colossal waste time to call out your opponent for padding their embellished resume, especially when you’ve essentially done just the same.
Townsend gets a NO vote! If you sponsor a bill, to get Illegals a license, forget it!!!
Does the word Illegal mean anything?
I’m not a Trump supporter; we have 2 of the worst “Presidential” candidates and I put that in quotes, because both ARE NOT very Presidential this election year.
huge difference Heath. Barney’s claiming credit for every piece of legislation democrats like, even if he wasn’t there. Legislators have called out his b.s. Townsend’s different, he’s saying he’s a champion for efforts where his name’s actually listed on bills. And I know he spoke up about pay gap for women at press conference a couple years ago b/c I shook his hand after and thanked him for being one of the few men who was admitting it’s a real problem. He’s a champ for those issues. Doesn’t matter if his name is listed before or after other legislator names.
Barney continues to mislead on minimum wage. He claims that he worked with Markell and leaders of both sides to pass minimum wage. Markell had a real good bill emasculated in the Senate by promising that he would sign it, then turned around and got Pete Schwartzkopf to bury it in the House. Only after an eight-month delay and a public outcry was the bill finally released from Bryon Short’s Business Lapdog Committee. $8 bleeping 25 an hour.
His taking credit for that pathetic excuse for a minimum wage increase tells me all I need to know about Barney. He’s counting on people not knowing how he and his boss destroyed what initially was a good minimum wage bill.
Anon- you actually just made my point for me. How wonderful that Townsend spoke at a press conference on the issue of pay equity several years ago. But what did he actually do to address this issue? He waited until his female colleagues in the House and Senate put forth actual legislation to address the issue, asking after the bills were crafted to be listed as a co-sponsor and then voting for the bills when they were debated on the floor. That is not a champion for women’s issues. That is at best a supporter or an ally – stalwart champions for an issue are the change makers, the ones out in front leading the charge. The mailer exaggerated his role in championing women’s issues.
Heath, it was a press conference for the pay equity bill or right around the same time on the issue. My point is that Townsend signed on the bill when other men didn’t and he spoke up loudly in support of it when almost no other men did. I’ll call that a champion who was supportive of the issue and of his women colleagues as main sponsors and of all women. That’s a champion to me.
Only a cynical politician would brag about helping to turn a $10.10 minimum wage bill with a COLA increase into an $8.25 minimum wage bill with NO COLA increase.
That is what Sean Barney is REALLY taking credit for. Helping Jack Markell to cut the legs out from under a good minimum wage bill. We, of course, didn’t know at the time that Barney helped to do this, but we knew the game the Governor was playing:
http://delawareliberal.net//2013/05/14/general-assembly-post-game-wrap-uppre-game-show-tues-may-14-2013/
This, my friends, is what Barney is taking credit for. I think it disqualifies him from claiming to be someone who will ‘get things done’ for the working poor.
The irony is, had Barney not falsely bragged about ‘getting results’ on minimum wage, we wouldn’t have known how he helped to gut a good bill.
For the record, there were two pay equity bills this session, HB 3 and HB 314. 12 men co-sponsored HB 3 and 9 men were co-sponsors for HB 314.
The Senate debate for HB 314 was one for the books. Senator Blevins, Senator Henry, Senator Poore, and especially Senator Peterson advocated fiercely for the bill’s passage, responding to every ridiculous argument that the Senate Republicans put forth in opposition. I was listening to this debate on my computer at home and I know some of the men in the Senate Democratic Caucus made comments during the debate, Senator Marshall, Senator McDowell, and Senator Sokola come to mind. FYI – Senator Townsend wasn’t among those who “spoke up loudly” during that debate, not to my recollection anyway.
Again, this is about exaggerating his role as being a champion for women’s issues. If Barney should be called out taking credit for the work of others, then it’s only fair that Townsend is held to that standard as well.
Barney is being called out for his role in cutting the legs out from under a good minimum wage bill and substituting a piss-poor bill in its stead. He has a lot of nerve pretending to champion his role in minimum wage. His role was to help weaken it and try to bury it.
El Som- I absolutely agree. And when other candidates exaggerate their role in getting something done or they take credit for things they did not do, we should call them out as well. Townsend’s piece was obviously his response to the support that Rochester is receiving from Emily’s List. He could have easily made the case that he is supportive of women’s issues without trying to take credit for things he did not do.
Talk about a narrow minded definition of leadership, to base your argument on whether Townsend spoke on the floor once. That’s the problem in politics. People focus on words not actions.
I’ll focus on Townsend’s many actions in challenging the system and pushing for all kinds of equality and making lots of progress and the action of Karen Peterson and Patti Blevins (and I think Nicole Poore) and a lot of other women I respect who have endorsed Townsend.
“He waited until his female colleagues in the House and Senate put forth actual legislation to address the issue, asking after the bills were crafted to be listed as a co-sponsor and then voting for the bills when they were debated on the floor.”
So you think it would have helped Townsend with women to take the lead instead of a woman taking the lead? Seriously? Wouldn’t that be mangeslating?
Bragging about a bill you co-sponsored is standard procedure for politicians running for office. Look at this molehill! From the right perspective, it’s just as big as that mountain over there!
His attempt to pander to women by proclaiming to be the “stalwart champion” for their issues was somewhat offensive and completely transparent. It came across almost as if he thinks he is a better advocate for women than women could ever be for themselves. His mailer would have been more effective if he didn’t exaggerate what he’s done with regard to the issues many women find important.
I love it when an obvious troll for a candidate doubles as a media critic.
Bryan has been a stalwart on women’s issues in Dover. He actually has a record on these matters, you know, sponsoring and voting on legislation.
Barney claims in his ad that he ‘got things done’ and he points to his role in gutting a minimum wage bill. Do you really think that the two are equivalent? If you go back and read our endorsement of Bryan Townsend, you will note that we did not write anything negative about the other two major candidates. Were we to rewrite it now, I’d hope we would point out how Barney has shown his true colors. I now think he’s revealed himself as the phony that he is.
El Som- I love how you twist my advocating for candidates to be treated the same when they exaggerate what they’ve accomplished or they take credit for the work of others is obviously because I’m a troll for Barney. Seriously? Too funny.