Today, FactCheck.org — a website run by UPenn’s Annenberg Public Policy Center — lambastes critics of President Bush’s Social Security privatization scheme for suggesting that his plan would be a “windfall” for Wall Street. They base their criticism entirely on new data about the administrative costs of Federal Thrift Savings Plans, which they claim are the model for the Bush proposal.
I guess they missed this article in today’s Washington Post:
Bush’s proposed accounts differ substantially from the 19-year-old TSP [Thrift Savings Plan]. Moreover, they would be much more difficult to run than the TSP and have far higher administrative costs than the president and his supporters let on, some experts say.
“It’s not really like TSP at all,” said James Sauber, chairman of the Employee Thrift Advisory Council, a 15-member panel of representatives from federal labor and managerial organizations.
The White House acknowledges that there are many differences between the TSP and the proposed accounts, and that Bush’s system would be more expensive to run.