As Sestak and Toomey twist and turn, two 'hot' topics turn out to be duds

U.S. REP. Joe Sestak and former U.S. Rep. Pat Toomey spend much of their time on the campaign trail launching salvos across the ideological divide in the race for U.S. Senate.

But two issues that have received attention - the idea of allowing people to put Social Security money into private accounts and the practice of "earmarking" money in the federal budget for local projects - could be political duds.

Consider the proposed "privatization" of Social Security.

Toomey last month claimed that he never supported that, although there is ample evidence that he supported President George W. Bush's plan in 2005 to allow people to invest Social Security money in personal retirement accounts not controlled by the government.

Called on his claim, Toomey said that "privatization" is a misleading and inaccurate term.

Sestak and his political allies have been raising this proposal as a serious threat to the retirement incomes of the country's senior citizens. So, is it?

Bush's call for privatization flopped even though the GOP controlled both houses of Congress.

The Club for Growth, a conservative powerhouse led by Toomey until last year, called again Tuesday for Social Security privatization, proclaiming: "Fiscal conservatives should embrace it."

But the "Pledge for America," a political platform released Wednesday by U.S. House Republicans, doesn't touch the subject.

Toomey on Friday ducked a question on whether that decision disappointed him, calling the pledge "a good first step."

"I'm glad the guys in the House have come up with a plan," Toomey added. "But I haven't had a chance to study it."

Sestak says that the Club for Growth and other conservative groups have purged moderate Republicans while funding candidates like Toomey, all with an eye toward privatization.

"Why? Because they want the billions of dollars in management fees that would happen up on Wall Street for Congressman Toomey's friends," Sestak said.

And what about earmarks?

Sestak made quite a show about posting on the Internet the earmarks he requests in the federal budget, along with his voluntary policy to accept no campaign contributions from companies in his district that asked for earmarks. The Inquirer in July found that Sestak had violated his own policy on earmarks.

Toomey pounced, claiming that Sestak lacks the "fiscal discipline" to be a senator. He turned up the heat earlier this month when the Allentown Morning Call reported that Sestak submitted a request for an earmark in the name of a nonprofit corporation even though the money would be shared with a for-profit company, in violation of new U.S. House rules.

But that left Toomey, long a critic of the earmark process, open to claims of hypocrisy when it was reported that he had sought $12 million in earmarks for companies in his old district around Allentown during his two terms in office.

"He's being disingenuous at best in backing away from positions," Sestak said of Toomey, adding that he was not surprised that Republicans left the earmark issue off their agenda.

Toomey didn't want to talk Friday about why Republicans decided to leave earmark reform out of their Pledge for America, returning instead to his standard talking points on creating job growth in the private sector while reducing federal spending.