Both Ernst & Young support privatizing Social Security, deregulating Wall Street at the expense of consumers

INDIANAPOLIS — After Congressman Todd Young gave a “nervous” and flailing debate performance Tuesday night he filled mostly by repeating the “same lines” over and over, it’s no surprise he brought in U.S. Senator Joni Ernst to help him on the campaign trail. But unfortunately for Congressman Young, Sen. Ernst’s appearance only highlights how Congressman Young has long voted to help the Wall Street banks while putting Hoosiers and their retirement security at risk.

Congressman Young, who went so far as to call Social Security a “Ponzi” scheme, has voted multiple times against protecting Social Security from privatization. Sen. Ernst herself has talked about privatizing social security as “one solution” to reforming the program, and even suggested replacing Social Security for younger workers with personal savings accounts that could be “tied to the market.”

What’s the problem with the Ernst & Young plan? It leaves Hoosiers’ hard-earned retirement savings vulnerable to the ups and downs of the Stock Market, while serving as a “windfall” for Wall Street who could reap billions in management fees.

But that’s not all they ways the Ernst & Young plan would help Wall Street at the expense of Hoosier families. Both Congressman Young and Senator Ernst have voted to weaken the Dodd/Frank Wall Street reform bill—the toughest regulations on Wall Street in decades that Evan Bayh helped pass into law. If not for people like Evan Bayh who stood up to Wall Street to protect consumers, the Wells Fargo scheme that defrauded millions of customers may never have been uncovered.

“The Ernst & Young plan is great for Wall Street, but it’s harmful for Hoosier families and leaves generations of Hoosiers’ retirement funds at risk,” said Drew Anderson, communications director. “Whether he’s voting to weaken the key Wall Street regulations put in place after the financial crisis, keep tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas, or risk Hoosier’s retirement savings on Wall Street, Congressman Young consistently prioritizes the big banks and the special interests over Hoosier families.”

BACKGROUND:

YOUNG VOTED SEVEN TIMES TO REPEAL PORTIONS OF DODD-FRANK

Congressman Todd Young Voted At Least Seven Times To Repeal Portions Of Dodd-Frank. [House Vote 142, 3/25/15; House Vote 141, 3/25/15; House Vote 177, 4/10/14; House Vote 88, 3/21/13; House Vote 247,5/10/12; House Vote 151, 3/16/12; [House Vote 277, 4/15/11]

YOUNG VOTED AGAINST PROTECTING SOCIAL SECURITY FROM PRIVATIZATION…

2012: Young Voted Against The FY 2013 Democratic Budget, Which Stated That Social Security Privatization Should Be Rejected.. [House Vote 150, 3/29/12; House Budget Committee Democrats, 4/15/11]

2012: Young Voted Against Stating That Congress Should Not Privatize Social Security. [Congressional Quarterly, 3/21/12; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 112]

2011: Young Voted To Oppose Preventing The Privatization Of Social Security. [House Vote 276, 4/15/11; Congressional Record, 4/15/11]

2011: Young Effectively Voted Against Stating That Any Social Security Overhaul Should Reject Privatization. [Congressional Quarterly, 4/6/11; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 34

…WHICH COULD ALLOW WALL STREET TO REAP BILLIONS IN FEES AS SOCIAL SECURITY WAS FUNNELED INTO PRIVATE ACCOUNTS

Wall Street Firms Could Reap Billions In Management Fees If Social Security Taxes Were Funneled Into Private Accounts. [Los Angeles Times, 1/18/05]

Privatizing Social Security Could Be A Windfall For Wall Street, Generating Billions In Fees. [NBC News,12/28/04]

###