Still looking for a Social Security exit strategy

The White House hosted a gathering of Senate Republicans yesterday, and apparently, a couple of lawmakers told the president that they’re moving forward with their own proposals on Social Security — one of which does not include private accounts.

Because the president told lawmakers to proceed with their plans, the AP suggested that there’s been some kind of breakthrough and that Bush is now willing to accept a plan that falls short of privatization. The AP, however, is wrong and the White House position has not changed.

Nevertheless, the Wall Street Journal’s Jackie Calmes had a good piece today on the politics behind the new, competing proposals and fleshed out in more detail how Bush is proceeding with the broader debate.

To break Congress’s impasse on his promise to revamp Social Security, President Bush is encouraging conflicting plans from two Republican senators: One would only make the program solvent through future benefit reductions, and another would only create personal retirement accounts for workers.

At a rare White House luncheon with Republican senators yesterday on a range of subjects, Mr. Bush reiterated his commitment to the twin goals of Social Security solvency and new private accounts, senators said. But with his party divided on the issue — and politically fretful amid Democratic opposition — the president is seizing on proposals that fall short of his own aims just to keep his top domestic priority alive in the Republican-led Senate and House.

Utah Sen. Bob Bennett (R) has a plan whereby the system would use “progressive indexing” to reduce retirees’ benefits. South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint (R), meanwhile, redirects the system’s trust fund — which Republicans have said for months does not exist — into creating private accounts.

But here’s the kicker from the WSJ Calmes:

Bush aides acknowledge that many Republicans in Congress privately view the DeMint bill not as a way to revive the issue, but as “an exit strategy” — believing it can’t pass, but will allow them to put Social Security behind them without having to vote to cut benefits.

Sounds like they’re poised to give up. When Republican leaders are prepared to accept a bad bill they know will lose just to get the darn thing over with, we’re that much closer to seeing them accept defeat on privatization.

This is just more of Bush’s bait-and-switch and schuckin’-n-jivin’. It would be a serious mistake to think Bush and his thugs will give up on this — he’s been looking to undermine and destroy Social Security since at least 1978, and the Rethugs have been at it since even before Social Security initially took effect — and he is extremely untrustworthy in anything he says on this (and almost every other) subject. Dems need to stay on the attack until at least the time they take over the White House or both houses of Congress.

  • We all know BUSH and his cronies. Hell, he took two of them to the woodshed just yesterday!!
    What are they known for? LIES,LIES,LIES

    I don’t think Bush and company will be happy until the United States is full of poor people and a few robber barons.

  • Hell, I want it to go on like this, with the President pushing a deeply unpopular idea, and most republicans (but not enough to pass a bill) for it.

    I want the issue for my candidate in the Congressional Elections. I’m from Texas 21, where the Hill Country is a huge pool of retiree voters. If the status quo remains on SS, John Courage will clean up, especially if we can pin the issue to Lamar Smith like a “Hit Me” sign.

  • Comments are closed.