Social Security a problem, not crisis, lawmaker says

[TacticalPeek]

Bonds News

UPDATE 1-Social Security a problem, not crisis-lawmaker
Sun Jan 23, 2005 04:04 PM ET

By Adam Entous

WASHINGTON, Jan 23 (Reuters) -

...

"I think 'problem' really is what we're dealing with," House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Thomas told NBC's "Meet the Press," when asked if he agreed with the assessment of President George W. Bush and other top administration officials that the system was in "crisis."

In a sign of trouble for Bush in the Senate, moderate Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine questioned his proposals and strategy.

While she said she does not object to personal savings accounts "per se," Snowe told CNN: "I'm certainly not going to support diverting $2 trillion from Social Security into creating personal savings accounts."

A member of the Finance Committee, which will craft any Social Security legislation in the Senate, Snowe complained that the "public discussion thus far, without a specific proposal, has created and enhanced a lot of confusion and fear among seniors."


more
http://www.reuters.com/financeNewsArticle.jhtml?type=bondsNews&storyID=7402500

-----------


Real cold feet? Or deceptive tactic?

[Parche]

1. social insecurity

SS Terra alert

[PA Democrat]

2. "If it ain't broke...doesn't mean it ain't a threat"

[McKenzie]

3. a tactic methinks, one designed to spread fear and alarm

people are much more malleable if the basic necessities of life are at risk. Classic way to bend the people to the will of the power elite. People are much less likely to rebel if they are worried about basic survival.

Thank goodness at least one Repug is speaking up about the issue. I'm not hopeful that many others will though.

"If life were a thing that money could buy, the poor could not live, and the rich would never die". Sums it up in twenty words. BTW, I've Anglified that statement; it's an epitath on a 17th century tombstone in one of the great Scottish cathedrals.

[SharonAnn]

4. It's also in the son "All My Sorrows"

"The rich would live, and the poor would die, all my sorrows, soon be over.

[dweller]

5. .

dp

[Coastie for Truth]

6. Bush has had a Neo-Con, Libertarian Thing about FDR

since he was in prep school.

While Bush was at Harvard Business School he wrote a term paper criticizing FDR and the new deal, especially Social Security. During the campaign the Harvard Business School term paper made it to a few web sites and blogs -- but nobody paid attention.

He put a CATO Institute character in charge of "Policy" at the Social Security Administration.

So his agenda was clear.

The crisis is wholly manufactured - like the "linkage" between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, or Iraq's role in 9-11, or Saddam's WMD's. His style is to create an artificial crisis and go ahead to "solve" it.

Although this time every economist to the left of N. Gregory Manikew and Steve Forbes (another piece of work) is blasting him.

He's even lost Congressman Bill Thomas (the most conservative member of Congress from California) and former Commerce Secretary Pete Peterson.

Al Franken has had Pete Peterson and Norm Orenstein on fairly regularly. Their thoughts are that privatization will be an "add-on" and not a "replacement" for Social Security. They both see a "Low Income IRA" funded by a refundable tax credit--

There's subtle "fairness" argument for refundable tax credits. Since higher income taxpayers get a deduction - and therefore reduce their taxes - by contributing to an IRA or a 401(k) - a "refundable tax credit" serves to "level the playing field" for a "Low Income IRA"

Peterson and Orenstein seem to be arguing that at some point "in the out years" as people adjust to the combination of

(1) The low income IRA
(2) "Defined contribution" pensions - smaller then the "defined benefit" pensions of yesteryears.
(3) Lower social security payments (but only after the "low income IRA" becomes part of our collective psyches)

Social security can be reduced to a "floor" as (they both argue) FDR "originally intended."

I have also heard Robert Reich make the point that this is a "face saving" way for Bush to back down or "compromise." Yeah? Bush never admits to a mistake.

But, the GOP is deserting Bush on this one --

[Straight Shooter]

8. bush never admits to a "mistake." They're called "miscalculations" now.

I swear, I'm seeing that word "miscalculation" more and more often in reference to the backpedaling of the White House squatters.

[PA Democrat]

9. Bush was echoing what he learned at home

His dad and his grandfather Prescott Bush hated FDR and everything associated with him.

[AliciaKeyedUp]

7. Since when does government worry decades in advance?

It seems so odd.

[papau]

10. it is sad to see Thomas begging for Dems to give him a way out of Bush's

mess - :-) But the short comment is that "Suggest changes or suggest substitutions" is not going to happen. The GOP can't get it past the House so they want a Senate vote first - and nothing that diverts payroll tax will fly in the Senate.

Add on payroll voluntary contributions with limited investment option accounts may be possible if structured like the Federal workers savings plan.

As to a "fix" that might pass, they GOP need cover because there is no problem - but the Lieberman types might get a few Dems to add cover tp an increase in the retirement age for full benefits moving from Reagan's 67 to 68, while the wage base cap moves from 05's 90,000 to 120,000.

I suspect the Dems will bend over and let the GOP get out from under this (and thus have GOP claimimg victory) via a bill that combines add-on accounts with a wage cap increase, but I still do not understand why they would do that.



>http://www.reuters.com/financeNewsArticle.jhtml?type=bondsNews&storyID=7402500

[aikido15]

11. If the dems let this one...

get past them and don't put a dead stop to Bush's attack on the last social safety net we have left in America then I propose we :nuke:
the entire lot of them!

[w4rma]

13. This issue is a litmus test being a Democrat.

Any politician who grabs this third rail WILL get fried, and that includes DLC potential sell-outs. No distinction on this issue. This issue is *the* litmus test for being a Democrat.

[FreeStateDemocrat]

15. SS is a cornerstone of the Democratic Party so circle the wagons.

If they cannot uncompromisingly support Social Security they cannot support the central doctrine of the Democratic Party and should not wear the name.

[antigop]

12. Why won't Bush armwrestle GOP senators to pass it?

>>The GOP can't get it past the House so they want a Senate vote first - and nothing that diverts payroll tax will fly in the Senate.
>>

Why won't it fly in the Senate? (I hope you are right.)

[papau]

14. The 60 vote rule means you need 5 Dems - plus a few GOP will not

come on Bush's little wagon.