Yes Virginia, SS can be cut - Ian Welsh

[Jim Sagle]

After quoting some other bloggers' opinion that the Dems won't DARE cut Social Security because it's just TOO DAMN POPULAR, Ian explains:

No. It doesn’t work like that. The bailouts passed with more opposition even than SS cuts. If both parties agree on something, it is irrelevant what the public thinks because DLC-style Dems won’t lose their seats over it if it’s bipartisan. Furthermore, even if they do lose their seats, they are willing to lose their seats in order to do the bidding of their large donors since if they don’t do that bidding, they not only stand a good chance of losing their seats due to a funding cut off, but once they’re out of office, they won’t be taken care of.

Public opinion is not relevant to the overall direction of what Village elites do. It DOES NOT MATTER. Calls about the bailout ran 100:1 to 1200:1 against, they passed it anyway. Village elites are generally unified in their preferences for policy, and when they are, all you’re arguing is fairly trivial details, not the essence of the policy. The question about SS in the Villagers minds is not whether it should be cut, but how.

That’s not to say it’s hopeless. The last attempt to cut SS failed, after all. But there wasn’t a Democratic president pushing for it that time. Obama has proven very adept at arm-twisting Democrats. The real question, however, is if Republicans will cooperate. Cutting SS is something they want, but the tax cuts and pork they can offer if they get back Congress and the Presidency may outweigh that and the Tea Party types are generally folks who need SS badly.

We’ll see. But I wouldn’t be complacent on this. At all.

Nor would I.