Ms. magazine  -- more than a magazine a movement

SIGN UP FOR MS. DIGEST, JOBS, NEWS AND ALERTS

FEMINIST WIRE NEWSBRIEFS

ABOUT
SEE CURRENT ISSUE
SHOP MS. STORE
MS. IN THE CLASSROOM
FEMINIST DAILY WIRE
FEMINIST RESOURCES
PRESS
JOBS AT MS.
READ BACK ISSUES
CONTACT
RSS (XML)
 
feminist wire | daily newsbriefs

February-09-05

Women's Organizations Speak Out Against Privatization of Social Security

The National Council of Women's Organizations (NCWO) urged President Bush to listen to women's concerns about privatizing social security in a press conference held yesterday. The NCWO, representing over 200 women’s organizations with over 10 million members, including the Feminist Majority, opposes the privatization of Social Security and is concerned that Social Security’s features such as survivors’ and disability benefits are being ignored in the current debate.

Women’s groups argue that privatization will put many of Social Security’s most women-friendly features at risk. “Because women rely on Social Security more and benefit from its special protections for women, women have more at risk from Social Security privatization,” said Heidi Hartmann, president of the Institute for Women’s Policy Research and co-chair of the NCWO Task Force on Social Security.

"President Bush’s support for individual accounts carved out of Social Security jeopardizes the guarantee of lifetime, inflation-adjusted benefits that Social Security now provides," said Martha Burk, Ph.D., Chair of NCWO. "The American public does not want benefit cuts and massive deficits in exchange for private accounts that may not yield higher returns in retirement."

Kim Gandy, National Organization for Women president, said, “If you’re a woman, you’re being asked to take your money out of a system that offers guaranteed retirement, disability and survivor benefits, and move it into a privatized system that will discriminate against you in the amount it pays out because you are female.. Women weren’t born Democrat, Republican or yesterday.”

“All workers will face cuts in guaranteed benefits and most will not have that income made up by an individual account,” added Hartmann. “Social Security provides women with life insurance, disability income, and spousal benefits and all of these will be at risk if privatizers have their way.”

JOIN the Feminist Majority

Media Resources: National Organization for Women Social Security Press Briefing 2/8/05, NCWO press release 2/8/05


© Feminist Majority Foundation, publisher of Ms. magazine

If you liked this story, consider making a tax-deductible donation to support Ms. magazine.

 

 

Send to a Friend
Their
Your
Comments
(optional)


More Feminist News

9/12/2014 Violence Against Women Act Turns 20 - Saturday will be the 20th Anniversary of the groundbreaking federal Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). Passed in 1994, VAWA was the first piece of federal legislation to specifically address domestic violence and sexual assault as crimes and to provide federal funding to improve local response to violence against women, including training and resources for law enforcement and judges. President Barack Obama on Tuesday issued a proclamation commemorating the VAWA anniversary. . . .
 
9/12/2014 Indiana Woman Charged With Feticide For Premature Delivery - An Indiana woman has been charged with feticide after she delivered prematurely and sought hospital treatment. Purvi Patel, 33, sought help at an emergency room for vaginal bleeding where it was discovered that she had delivered prematurely at home. . . .
 
9/11/2014 Missouri Legislators Pass 72-Hour Abortion Waiting Period Law - Missouri legislators voted late last night to triple the state's current 24-hour waiting period to 72 hours, with no exceptions for rape or incest. Governor Jay Nixon previously vetoed the bill in July, calling it "extreme and disrespectful." Missouri's House voted 117-44 to override the veto, and then the Senate used a procedural move to stop a Democratic filibuster of the bill and vote 23-7 to complete the veto override Wednesday. "The only purpose of a 72-hour waiting period is to attempt to punish, shame, and demean women who have arrived at a personal decision that politicians happen to disagree with," said the president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights in a statement. . . .