Johnson Campaign Launches New TV and Radio Ad: Money Spent
[Oshkosh, WI] Oshkosh manufacturer and Republican nominee for U.S. Senate Ron Johnson’s campaign launched new television and radio ads today, titled “Money Spent.” The ads, both running statewide, feature Ron Johnson who explains to voters that America’s social security surplus funds have been spent by Senator Feingold and others in Washington and are now gone.
“Senator Feingold is part of the spending problem in Washington, not the solution,” said Republican nominee for U.S. Senate Ron Johnson. “Social Security is important to all Americans and the surpluses realized over the past 18 years have been squandered. I’ll protect the benefits of those retired and near retirement, and work hard with members of all parties to resolve the challenges this crucial program will undergo in years ahead.”
Watch the TV ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3851bhySuNU
Listen to the radio ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OakJeSIUz0Q
Script:
“Money Spent – TV”
RON JOHNSON: Guess what’s coming in Russ Feingold’s negative campaign?
He’s gonna tell you I said Washington treats Social Security like a ponzi scheme.
You know what? I did say that…because it’s true.
Russ Feingold and politicians from both parties raided the Social Security Trust Fund of trillions and left seniors an IOU. They spent the money, it’s gone.
I’ll fight to keep every nickel of Social Security for retirees and I’ll respect you enough to tell you the truth.
“Money Spent – Radio”
RON JOHNSON: I’m Ron Johnson. I approved this message.
Hi folks, it’s me again, Ron Johnson.
I promised I’d be a different kind of candidate, so today I’m doing something really different.
I’m going to tell you what Senator Feingold and his allies’ next attack against me will be.
They’re going to tell you I said Washington politicians have run Social Security like a Ponzi scheme.
I did say that, and it’s true.
During his eighteen years in the Senate, Russ Feingold, and politicians from both parties have raided 2 trillion dollars from the Social Security trust fund.
They spent your savings. The money is gone. And what did we get? Bigger government, wasteful spending, and an IOU.
As your Senator, I will honor the promises made to seniors, work hard to preserve Social Security for future generations, and begin to rein in the size and scope of the federal government.
I’m Ron Johnson, running for Senate, and I approve this message.
ANNCR: Paid for by Ron Johnson for Senate Inc.
AD FACTS:
TV: 30 secs
| Johnson | BACK-UP |
| RON: (OC) ““Guess what’s coming up next in Russ Feingold’s negative campaign?” | |
| He’s gonna tell you I said Washington treats Social Security like a ponzi scheme. Know what? I did say that…because it’s true. | Ron Johnson Described Social Security As A “Ponzi Scheme.” GONYEA: “And Feingold is painting Ron Johnson as too extreme for Wisconsin. He cites Johnson’s courting of Tea Party voters, Johnson’s description of Social Security as a Ponzi scheme.” (NPR’s “All Things Considered,” 7/12/10) |
| Russ Feingold and politicians of both parties raided the Social Security Trust Fund – of Trillions – and left seniors an IOU. They spent the money, it’s gone. | Since Joining the Senate in 1993, Russ Feingold Has Seen the Social Security Trust Fund Raided by $2.2 Trillion For Other Spending. (Source, Social Security Administration, http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/STATS/table4a3.html, Accessed August 14, 2010)
The AP: “$2.5 Trillion In IOUs From The Federal Government, Payable To The Social Security Administration.” “The retirement nest egg of an entire generation is stashed away in this small town along the Ohio River: $2.5 trillion in IOUs from the federal government, payable to the Social Security Administration. . . . . This year, for the first time since the 1980s, when Congress last overhauled Social Security, the retirement program is projected to pay out more in benefits than it collects in taxes — nearly $29 billion more.” (Stephen Ohlemacher, “Social Security To Start Cashing Uncle Sam’s IOUs,” The Associated Press, 3/14/10)
“One Bond Is Worth A Little More Than $15.1 Billion And Another Is Valued At Just Under $10.7 Billion. In All, The Agency Has About $2.5 Trillion In Bonds, All Backed By The Full Faith And Credit Of The U.S. Government.” (Stephen Ohlemacher, “Social Security To Start Cashing Uncle Sam’s IOUs,” The Associated Press, 3/14/10) “For More Than Two Decades, Regardless Of Which Political Party Was In Power, Congress Has Been Accused Of Raiding The Social Security Trust Funds To Pay For Other Programs, Masking The Size Of The Budget Deficit.” (Stephen Ohlemacher, “Social Security To Start Cashing Uncle Sam’s IOUs,” The Associated Press, 3/14/10) Feingold Voted Against Setting Aside an Estimated $157 Billion Surplus Over the Next Five Years For The Social Security Program. (S. Con. Res. 86, CQ Vote #84, Adopted 57-41: R: 54-0, D: 3-41, April 2, 1998, Feingold Voted Nay)
Feingold Voted Against Protecting Senior Social Security In 2008, Feingold Voted Against A “DeMint, R-S.C., Amendment No. 4328 That Would Allow An Adjustment To The Resolution If The Finance Committee Reports Legislation That Would Bar Congress From Borrowing From The Social Security Trust Fund To Finance Other Government Programs. The Change Would Have To Be Deficit Neutral.” (S. Con Res. 70, CQ Vote #65, Rejected by a vote of 41-57: R 40-8; D 1-47; I 0-2, 3/13/08, Feingold Voted Nay) In 2007, Feingold Voted Against A “DeMint, R-S.C., Amendment No. 489 That Would Establish A Reserve Fund To Allow The Finance Committee To Report Legislation That Would Bar Congress From Borrowing From The Social Security Trust Fund To Finance Other Government Programs.” (S. Con. Res. 21, CQ Vote #89, Rejected 45-52: R 44-4; D 1-46; I 0-2, 3/22/07, Feingold Voted Nay) In 2006, Feingold Voted Against A “DeMint, R-S.C., Amendment No. 3087 That Would Create A Reserve Fund To Adjust The Budget And Pay For The Impact Of Any Legislation That Would Bar Congress From Borrowing From The Social Security Trust Fund To Finance Other Government Programs.” (S. Con. Res. 83, CQ Vote #68, Rejected 46-53: R 46-8; D 0-44; I 0-1, 3/16/06, Feingold Voted Nay) In 1999, Feingold Voted Against A Motion That Social Security Surpluses Be Used To Ensure Social Security Solvency. “Motion to invoke cloture (thus limiting debate) on the bill to reserve all of the Social Security surplus to be used only to guarantee the solvency of the Social Security and Medicare system.” (H.R. 1259, CQ Vote #170: R 55-0; D 0-44, 6/16/99, Feingold Voted Nay) In 1999, Feingold Voted Against Setting Broad Revenue Targets That Would Reserve Social Security Surpluses To Shore Up The Program. “Adoption of the conference report on the concurrent resolution to set broad spending and revenue targets for the next 10 years. The report would reserve Social Security surpluses to shore up the program, call for $777.9 billion in tax reductions over 10 years, recommend increases in defense and education spending and reduce federal debt.” (H. Con. Res., CQ Vote #86, Adopted 54-44: R 54-0; D 0-44, 4/15/99, Feingold Voted Nay) In 1999, Feingold Voted Against A Budget Resolution That Called For Putting Social Security Surpluses Off Limits For Other Uses. “Adoption of the concurrent resolution to adopt a five-year budget plan that calls for tax cuts beginning in fiscal 2000 and increased spending for defense, education and agriculture. The resolution would put the Social Security surplus off limits for other uses, but would reply on anticipated non-Social Security surpluses for tax cuts of $800 billion over ten years.” (H. Con. Res. 68, CQ Vote #81: Adopted by a vote of 55-44: R 54-0; D 1-44, 3/25/99, Feingold Voted Nay) In 1998, Feingold Voted Against An Amendment That Expressed The Sense Of The Senate to Protect Social Security. “Gregg, R-N.H., amendment that would express the sense of the Senate that Congress and the president should: ‘save Social Security first’ and then return any remaining budgetary surpluses to U.S. taxpayers; work together to balance the budget without counting Social Security trust fund surpluses; and enact bipartisan legislation to ensure the financial security of the Social Security system.” (S. 2260, CQ Vote #221, Adopted 55-45: R 55-0; D 0-45, 7/22/98, Feingold Voted Nay) Feingold Voted At Least Four Times Against Cloture On Efforts To Create A Social Security Lockbox. (S. 557, CQ Vote #211: Rejected 52-43: R 51-1; D 0-42; I 1-0, 7/16/99, Feingold Voted Nay; S. 557, CQ Vote #166: Rejected 53-46: R 53-1; D 0-45, 6/15/99, Feingold Voted Nay; S. 557, CQ Vote #96: Rejected 49-44: R 49-1; D 0-43, 4/30/99, Feingold Voted Nay; S. 557, CQ Vote #90: Rejected 54-45: R 54-1; D 0-44, 4/22/99, Feingold Voted Nay) |
| I’ll fight to keep every nickel of Social Security for retirees. And I’ll respect you enough to tell you the truth. I’m Ron Johnson and I approved this message.” |
Radio: 60 secs
| Johnson | BACK-UP |
| RON: “Hi folks, it’s me again, Ron Johnson. I promised I’d be a different kind of candidate, so today I’m doing something really different. I’m going to tell you what Senator Feingold and his allies’ next attack against me will be. | |
| They’re going to tell you I said Washington politicians have run Social Security like a Ponzi scheme. I did say that, and it’s true. | Ron Johnson Described Social Security As A “Ponzi Scheme.” GONYEA: “And Feingold is painting Ron Johnson as too extreme for Wisconsin. He cites Johnson’s courting of Tea Party voters, Johnson’s description of Social Security as a Ponzi scheme.” (NPR’s “All Things Considered,” 7/12/10) |
| During his eighteen years in the Senate, Russ Feingold, and politicians from both parties have raided 2 trillion dollars from the Social Security trust fund. | Since Joining the Senate in 1993, Russ Feingold Has Seen the Social Security Trust Fund Raided by $2.2 Trillion For Other Spending. (Source, Social Security Administration, http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/STATS/table4a3.html, Accessed August 14, 2010) |
| They spent your savings. The money is gone. And what did we get? Bigger government, wasteful spending, and an IOU. | The AP: “$2.5 Trillion In IOUs From The Federal Government, Payable To The Social Security Administration.” “The retirement nest egg of an entire generation is stashed away in this small town along the Ohio River: $2.5 trillion in IOUs from the federal government, payable to the Social Security Administration. . . . . This year, for the first time since the 1980s, when Congress last overhauled Social Security, the retirement program is projected to pay out more in benefits than it collects in taxes — nearly $29 billion more.” (Stephen Ohlemacher, “Social Security To Start Cashing Uncle Sam’s IOUs,” The Associated Press, 3/14/10)
“One Bond Is Worth A Little More Than $15.1 Billion And Another Is Valued At Just Under $10.7 Billion. In All, The Agency Has About $2.5 Trillion In Bonds, All Backed By The Full Faith And Credit Of The U.S. Government.” (Stephen Ohlemacher, “Social Security To Start Cashing Uncle Sam’s IOUs,” The Associated Press, 3/14/10) “For More Than Two Decades, Regardless Of Which Political Party Was In Power, Congress Has Been Accused Of Raiding The Social Security Trust Funds To Pay For Other Programs, Masking The Size Of The Budget Deficit.” (Stephen Ohlemacher, “Social Security To Start Cashing Uncle Sam’s IOUs,” The Associated Press, 3/14/10) Feingold Voted Against Setting Aside an Estimated $157 Billion Surplus Over the Next Five Years For The Social Security Program. (S. Con. Res. 86, CQ Vote #84, Adopted 57-41: R: 54-0, D: 3-41, April 2, 1998, Feingold Voted Nay)
Feingold Voted Against Protecting Senior Social Security In 2008, Feingold Voted Against A “DeMint, R-S.C., Amendment No. 4328 That Would Allow An Adjustment To The Resolution If The Finance Committee Reports Legislation That Would Bar Congress From Borrowing From The Social Security Trust Fund To Finance Other Government Programs. The Change Would Have To Be Deficit Neutral.” (S. Con Res. 70, CQ Vote #65, Rejected by a vote of 41-57: R 40-8; D 1-47; I 0-2, 3/13/08, Feingold Voted Nay) In 2007, Feingold Voted Against A “DeMint, R-S.C., Amendment No. 489 That Would Establish A Reserve Fund To Allow The Finance Committee To Report Legislation That Would Bar Congress From Borrowing From The Social Security Trust Fund To Finance Other Government Programs.” (S. Con. Res. 21, CQ Vote #89, Rejected 45-52: R 44-4; D 1-46; I 0-2, 3/22/07, Feingold Voted Nay) In 2006, Feingold Voted Against A “DeMint, R-S.C., Amendment No. 3087 That Would Create A Reserve Fund To Adjust The Budget And Pay For The Impact Of Any Legislation That Would Bar Congress From Borrowing From The Social Security Trust Fund To Finance Other Government Programs.” (S. Con. Res. 83, CQ Vote #68, Rejected 46-53: R 46-8; D 0-44; I 0-1, 3/16/06, Feingold Voted Nay) In 1999, Feingold Voted Against A Motion That Social Security Surpluses Be Used To Ensure Social Security Solvency. “Motion to invoke cloture (thus limiting debate) on the bill to reserve all of the Social Security surplus to be used only to guarantee the solvency of the Social Security and Medicare system.” (H.R. 1259, CQ Vote #170: R 55-0; D 0-44, 6/16/99, Feingold Voted Nay) In 1999, Feingold Voted Against Setting Broad Revenue Targets That Would Reserve Social Security Surpluses To Shore Up The Program. “Adoption of the conference report on the concurrent resolution to set broad spending and revenue targets for the next 10 years. The report would reserve Social Security surpluses to shore up the program, call for $777.9 billion in tax reductions over 10 years, recommend increases in defense and education spending and reduce federal debt.” (H. Con. Res., CQ Vote #86, Adopted 54-44: R 54-0; D 0-44, 4/15/99, Feingold Voted Nay) In 1999, Feingold Voted Against A Budget Resolution That Called For Putting Social Security Surpluses Off Limits For Other Uses. “Adoption of the concurrent resolution to adopt a five-year budget plan that calls for tax cuts beginning in fiscal 2000 and increased spending for defense, education and agriculture. The resolution would put the Social Security surplus off limits for other uses, but would reply on anticipated non-Social Security surpluses for tax cuts of $800 billion over ten years.” (H. Con. Res. 68, CQ Vote #81: Adopted by a vote of 55-44: R 54-0; D 1-44, 3/25/99, Feingold Voted Nay) In 1998, Feingold Voted Against An Amendment That Expressed The Sense Of The Senate to Protect Social Security. “Gregg, R-N.H., amendment that would express the sense of the Senate that Congress and the president should: ‘save Social Security first’ and then return any remaining budgetary surpluses to U.S. taxpayers; work together to balance the budget without counting Social Security trust fund surpluses; and enact bipartisan legislation to ensure the financial security of the Social Security system.” (S. 2260, CQ Vote #221, Adopted 55-45: R 55-0; D 0-45, 7/22/98, Feingold Voted Nay) Feingold Voted At Least Four Times Against Cloture On Efforts To Create A Social Security Lockbox. (S. 557, CQ Vote #211: Rejected 52-43: R 51-1; D 0-42; I 1-0, 7/16/99, Feingold Voted Nay; S. 557, CQ Vote #166: Rejected 53-46: R 53-1; D 0-45, 6/15/99, Feingold Voted Nay; S. 557, CQ Vote #96: Rejected 49-44: R 49-1; D 0-43, 4/30/99, Feingold Voted Nay; S. 557, CQ Vote #90: Rejected 54-45: R 54-1; D 0-44, 4/22/99, Feingold Voted Nay) |
| As your Senator, I will honor the promises made to seniors, work hard to preserve Social Security for future generations, and begin to reign in the size and scope of the federal government. I’m Ron Johnson, running for Senate, and I approve this message. ANNCR: Paid for by Ron Johnson for Senate Inc. |
