Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Solvency Trap - President Bush calls the Democrats' bluff on Social Security.
OPNION JOURNAL.COM ^ | MAY 2, 2005 | Editors

Posted on 05/01/2005 9:26:33 PM PDT by CHARLITE

Give President Bush credit for tenacity. Facing nearly total Democratic opposition and low poll numbers, he nonetheless raised the ante on Social Security last week. The President embraced "progressive indexing" of benefits, in the hope of breaking up the political logjam.

As a policy matter, this at least challenges Democrats to honor their own principles. For months they've been saying they really do want to do something about Social Security "solvency," which means shoring up its inevitable financing shortfall. By adjusting the formula for future benefits based on income, Mr. Bush has now embraced the "fairness" claims that Democrats say they hold dear. So are they serious or not?

On first response, not. Democrats immediately opposed Mr. Bush's proposal--the brainchild of Democratic financier Robert Pozen--as "big benefit cuts." AARP lobbyist John Rother proved his organization's lack of sincerity by calling it "an unnecessary and unfair benefit cut on the middle class."

Sigh. As Daniel Patrick Moynihan and other Democrats once acknowledged, current policy increases real, inflation-adjusted benefits over time. That's because benefits are tied to growth in wages, rather than to increases in prices (which rise somewhat more slowly).

(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: aarp; bush; democrats; obstructionistdems; opposition; pressconference; reform; socialsecurity; solvency

1 posted on 05/01/2005 9:26:40 PM PDT by CHARLITE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: CHARLITE

The Dems are afraid of losing thier Private Slush fund!! They have taken our taxes and spent them on their Socialist programs. Bush now threatens to reduce the amount of that slush fund. Personal accounts would eliminate their control on this tremendous amount of cash!


2 posted on 05/01/2005 9:33:01 PM PDT by 26lemoncharlie (Defend the US CONSTITUTION - Locked and Loaded)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CHARLITE

Unfortunately this bluff involves embracing socialistic principles.


3 posted on 05/01/2005 9:48:49 PM PDT by Honestfreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Honestfreedom

A move toward privatization is better than the status quo.


4 posted on 05/01/2005 10:07:00 PM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Honestfreedom

privatization = socialism

It's best to leave it in government hands as a complete redistributive program to prevent the socialism you fear from taking place.


5 posted on 05/01/2005 10:12:30 PM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Honestfreedom
Unfortunately this bluff involves embracing socialistic principles.

The President sure did meet the Dems on their level. Yet they rebuff him, proving that they do not want to do anything about the problem Bush is addressing which would give the GOP credit.

The party of "no."

Their bluff was called and called hard.


6 posted on 05/01/2005 10:30:28 PM PDT by rdb3 (To the world, you're one person. To one person, you may be the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: rdb3

Yes but he keeps doing this. We have the education bill, the prescription drug bill. We have these expensive socialist programs that we got from him calling their bluffs. He wins his political battles but we lose our freedom.


7 posted on 05/01/2005 10:38:19 PM PDT by Honestfreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Honestfreedom
He wins his political battles but we lose our freedom.

Let's not be a drama queen.

As it stands on Social Security, only words are proposed. Nothing is being debated in Congress concerning it.

It's early in this ball game. It can take a number of turns. But nothing can be said about it that is permanent, yet.


8 posted on 05/01/2005 10:41:02 PM PDT by rdb3 (To the world, you're one person. To one person, you may be the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: CHARLITE

Social Security is one giant Ponzi Scheme.

As the base of the pyramid gets smaller, with fewer paying in, and the top gets bigger, with more receiving benefits, the entire pyramid collapses.

Thank you, Mr President for giving the country a reality check. Shame on the Dems for wearing blinders and waiting for this catastrophy to happen


9 posted on 05/01/2005 10:46:16 PM PDT by Cincinna (BEWARE HILLARY and her HINO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CHARLITE
What they should "do" FIRST involves makes no changes in the taxes or the benefits. Put the present value of future liabilities on the budget as current expense, thus making SS accounting match the legal requirements for every allegedly similar pension plan. There would be a huge one time paper deficit to catch up and future deficits for every extra benefit Congress votes, but there would be no real cost for the accounting change. This was being spent already, just not being counted. So what if this gives W the largest deficit on paper in history; WE know it really is FDR, etc.'s deficit and the public will too.

Sell the accounting change like fixing the House Bank scandal. John Q. Public can well understand it if there are no other changes to confuse him. Once the accounting is fixed THEN come forward with private accounts. Once the accounting is fixed they'll look great over any time period and the NO plan of the Democrats will look as pathetic as it is.

10 posted on 05/01/2005 10:53:34 PM PDT by JohnBovenmyer (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Republican Wildcat
privatization = socialism

Wherever did that come from?

11 posted on 05/01/2005 10:59:11 PM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: okie01
Another prominent endorsement for Bush's proposal:


12 posted on 05/02/2005 12:48:40 AM PDT by ambrose (....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ancient_geezer
ping

excellent editorial

13 posted on 05/02/2005 10:22:59 AM PDT by groanup (http://fairtax.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: kabar

ping


14 posted on 05/02/2005 10:35:06 AM PDT by groanup (http://fairtax.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: 26lemoncharlie
Bush now threatens to reduce the amount of that slush fund.

That is the key issue. Bush is going to make them show their hand. In the end, Bush is proposing a humongous tax cut.

15 posted on 05/02/2005 10:40:04 AM PDT by IamConservative (To worry is to misuse your imagination.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 26lemoncharlie
The Dems are afraid of losing thier Private Slush fund!! They have taken our taxes and spent them on their Socialist programs...

That's ridiculous, IMO.

First of all, the GOP is alos guilty of tapping the fund.

Dems are so used to being "anti-Bush" and obstructionist, he could have stated the sky was blue and they would have disagreed.

They are upset that he vocalized the idea of tiering before they did. He is stealing their idea of penalizing the wealthy.

16 posted on 05/02/2005 10:48:16 AM PDT by DCPatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DCPatriot

Thank you for that correction.


17 posted on 05/02/2005 1:15:13 PM PDT by 26lemoncharlie (Defend the US CONSTITUTION - Locked and Loaded)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: DCPatriot

Thank you for that correction.


18 posted on 05/02/2005 1:15:19 PM PDT by 26lemoncharlie (Defend the US CONSTITUTION - Locked and Loaded)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: CHARLITE

Since FDR was the "father" of Social Security, the Rats feel that they are the only ones who have the right to do anything about it. If Bill Clinton had proposed the exact same thing, they would have voted for the reform unanimously. But they can't let Republicans get the credit, because they consider Social Security "their baby."


19 posted on 05/02/2005 1:18:49 PM PDT by dfwgator (Minutemen: Just doing the jobs that American politicians won't do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DCPatriot

It's like the joke, if President Bush could walk on water, the Rats would scream, "see, he can't swim."


20 posted on 05/02/2005 1:20:06 PM PDT by dfwgator (Minutemen: Just doing the jobs that American politicians won't do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson