Seventy-five years ago to tomorrow, Social Security was signed into law. Dems are marking that anniversary by going on the offensive.

Democrats plan to mark the 75th anniversary of Social Security on Friday by attacking some Republicans' plans to change the long-standing entitlement program. Democrats will play up some Republicans' calls to privatize part or all of Social Security, which Democrats allege is a cornerstone of the GOP approach to the program. The efforts on Friday will cap off the second of six theme weeks Democrats have maintained as part of their summer recess strategy. The Obama administration and Democratic leaders in Congress are expected to join with outside groups and party committees to go after the GOP.

Toward this end, the DSCC has created a scorecard showing what privatizing Social Security now would mean in the states where candidates and incumbents are running this cycle. It shows how many seniors would lose out:

Arkansas – John Boozman (620,040

Colorado - Ken Buck (663,894)

Florida – Marco Rubio (3,669,375)

Iowa – Chuck Grassley (574,315)

Indiana – Dan Coats (1,157,821)

Kentucky – Rand Paul (870,206)

Louisiana – David Vitter (770,217)

Missouri - Roy Blunt (1,137,581)

Nevada – Sharron Angle (390,553)

North Carolina – Richard Burr (1,698,677)

Ohio – Rob Portman (2,074,384)

Pennsylvania – Pat Toomey (2,530,211)

Wisconsin – Ron Johnson (1,033,096)

With these priceless quotes:

Sharron Angle, who said Social Security is “hard to justify” [KNPR, State of Nevada, 5/19/2010]

Ken Buck, who called Social Security “horrible, bad policy” [Politico, 6/28/10]

Rand Paul and Ron Johnson, who have both likened Social Security to a “Ponzi Scheme” [Washington Monthly, 7/15/2010; Johnson’s speech at the Winnebago County Republicans’ Lincoln Day Dinner, March 21, 2010]

Rob Portman, who said the Bush proposal to invest savings in risky Wall Street accounts was “very sound” [CNBC, Kudlow and Company, 1/3/07]

With Social Security on the Catfood Commission's chopping block, this hard push by Dems is good news. After making this big of a show over protecting and strengthening Social Security from the Republicans, Democrats would decimate their prospects for 2012 and beyond should they backtrack on this commitment. They seem to have some recognition of that, which is the good news. Point of evidence, DCCC Chair Chris Van Hollen has taken raising the retirement age off the table. "

"The consensus position in the caucus is we can preserve the existing structure of Social Security including the retirement age," said the Maryland Democrat. "And that is where we are. Obviously, people have, whenever they talk about the issue, there are different ideas. But it was very clear from the statements that we made as the Democratic caucus on the front steps of the Capitol that we believe that we should not be changing the retirement age."

This is a critical issue for America's future--for all of us. Current Social Security recipients are pretty safe, barring the Congress and White House going insane and passing an immediate privatization plan (you saw how well that worked for Bush). The fight for Social Security now is a fight for a secure retirement for all generations of Americans. It's a fight to make sure Social Security as we know it has a 100th, 125th, and even a 200th anniversary.