Democrats and their allies are pulling out all the stops in their efforts to derail President Bush’s plan to make private retirement accounts a part of the Social Security system.
- AARP is not-so-subtly hinting that benefit cuts could be in store for some of its members.
- Unions are reportedly taking this heavy-handed message to investment houses that manage union pension funds: Support Bush’s plan and we’ll pull our pension fund.
- And, of course, the Democrats themselves are in high dudgeon over Bush’s plan. It would destroy the legacy of FDR, they shout. (And they think that’s a criticism!)
Up to now, though, Democrats have not offered an alternative plan to deal with Social Security’s problems. Indeed, many contend that it isn’t going broke at all—despite the Social Security funds trustees' report that in 2017 the fund will start sending out more money than it will get.
That’s how two prominent New Mexico Democrats started a town hall meeting, reported Fox News on a recent “Special Report.” But Sen. Jeff Bingaman and Rep. Tom Udall had forgotten one of the first rules of politics—when issues hit pocketbooks, voters take notice.
The lawmakers were peppered with questions about the solvency of the program. Younger people kept bringing up the burdens they face now with payroll taxes and Social Security’s unlikely future. Faced with these informed questions, the two men were forced to admit that some “future” cuts in benefits would have to be looked at. But they also uttered the dreaded “R” word: revenues. That’s Washington-speak for tax increases.
A “reasonable compromise,” said Udall, would be “cutting benefits way far out, increasing some revenues (and) tweaking the payroll tax.”
Bingaman said the 1983 Social Security rescue plan was responsible, with its combination of benefit cuts and “revenue increases.”
Politicians at the time said the 1983 “fix” would solve the system’s problems for 75 years. Now it’s 22 years later and we have to fix Social Security again. Refusing to learn from history, Democrats (plus a few Republicans) are prepared to repeat it—but after most of the current naysayers are out of office.