From Beth Hahn, president, American Homeowners Grassroots Alliance:
We are disappointed with some of the quotes attributed to leading Democrats in your Feb. 23 article “Dems face a dilemma with AARP.” There are certainly consumer advocacy organizations that were created for the purpose of advocating the views of those who share conservative Republican views in some cases and liberal Democratic views in other cases. Even though such groups clearly represent only a subset of their population categories, they have every right to advocate the views of their members.

There are other broad-based consumer advocacy organizations that were created for the purpose of representing the collective best interests of a politically diverse membership in a nonpartisan manner. Both AARP and the American Homeowners Grassroots Alliance fit in the latter category.

We believe it is wrong for some legislators to expect that any consumer advocacy organization that seeks to represent a broad-based and politically diverse membership would always support either political party’s legislative agenda. Their mission is not to be a party support organization but to represent the best interests of their members.

We believe that AARP was doing just that in supporting Republicans on a Medicare bill that will pump billions of dollars into programs that will reduce medicare costs for millions of retirees. Judging from the well documented healthy opposition/skepticism among seniors for President Bush’s personal accounts proposal to date, AARP is again representing the best interests of its members.

Any broad-based consumer advocacy organization cannot please all of its members all of the time. There will be times that relatively small percentages of liberal or conservative die-hard members will be alternatively angry or overjoyed depending on the position the organization supports. That comes with the territory. As long as the organization is representing the best interests of the greatest number of members, it is doing the right thing.

Admittedly, some consumer advocacy organization decisions are also tactical. There are questions like whether an organization is better off supporting the deal offered today or waiting for a better deal (which may or may not ever materialize) in the future. The answers are subjective, and legislators should not read into the calculus that the answers have much if anything to do with political affiliation.

Legislators should not view any broad-based consumer advocacy organization’s support for the other party’s legislation as heresy in one case, nor should they regard agreement on the next issue as a sign that the organization is returning to the fold. Because of their political diversity, truly broad-based consumer advocacy groups cannot and should not be expected to be party-support organizations.

Working to ensure that your party’s positions are consistently in the best interest of the members of any consumer advocacy organization and recognizing that they also must make tactical decisions is the key to mutual respect and good working relationships.
Washington, D.C.

Not too late

From Joan Cummins:
I enjoyed Hans Nichols’s Feb. 23 article regarding Social Security reforms and the AARP (“Dems face a dilemma with AARP”). But I have difficulty understanding AARP’s opposition to reform, especially since it will not affect those 55 years old and over. Are we to wait until it is too late?

Alan Greenspan has confirmed that the system is broken and needs to be fixed. Now it appears that Rock the Vote has joined forces with AARP to put reform to bed ... strange bedfellows, don’t you think? Please try to tell Americans that AARP is not liberal-leaning. I don’t think Rock the Vote would join forces with a conservative institution.

Perhaps those in Congress should better put their time and effort toward trying to reach a solution and compromise in working with the president in formulating a reform of the system instead of proposing a frivolous investigation into how Jeff Gannon got a White House press pass.

Social Security faces extinction unless Congress takes action. The Democrats have put the fear of God into the hearts of the elderly each election period, but it doesn’t merit fixing?

Perhaps if Congress were forced to rely on the same system as most Americans, instead of its golden-fleece retirement system, we would see quick action and cooperation on Social Security reform.
Troy, Mich.