Social Security fix tough sell for Bush

[leftchick]

http://www.detnews.com/2004/politics/0412/19/A01-36851.htm

<snip>

WASHINGTON -- If President Bush wants to push his plan to overhaul Social Security through Congress during his second term, he will probably have to do something he rarely did during his first term: get his hands dirty.

To revamp the politically popular retirement program, many allies say, Bush will have to offer detailed proposals to Congress and engage in a broad public campaign to justify the change and its cost. And he will have to ride herd on legislators to ensure they do not veer from his central goal of shoring up Social Security by allowing younger workers to invest some of their payroll taxes in private accounts.

"It's going to take a lot of personal involvement and a lot of political capital," said Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., a leading proponent of private retirement accounts.

That would be a big change in the way Bush deals with Congress. Typically, even on issues as important as last year's Medicare overhaul, Bush has conveyed only broad goals and principles, and left it to Congress' Republican leaders to work out the details. He has weighed in heavily only at the end to get wayward Republicans behind him.

[Massachusetts]

1. Will Somebody PLEASE

introduce Bu$hco to Paul Krugman. Thank You.:think:

[livvy]

9. Amen to that! n/t

[zann725]

12. Yeah Krugman is so concise on that...and FACT-based, which of course...

rules him out as an advisor.

[livvy]

16. He's also so readable... interesting and easy to understand.

I recently bought "The Great Unraveling" and am looking forward to diving into it over the holidays. Have you read it? If so, did you enjoy it?

[Robbien]

2. Will someone please remind the Democrats

that bipartisanship in these times is akin to date rape.

[gnofg]

3. two dirty words

are involved adn detail. Neither is in Bush's dictionary

[zann725]

13. neither is "Open to suggestions."

LOL when I heard that on the news. Since I'm well familiar with the Shrub 180 degree separation from Reality...when Shrub said the other day that he's willing to 'talk about it' with others, and is 'open to suggestions'...my knee jerk reaction was, 'OMG, he's ramming it through Congress soon as they recovene....if not sooner. Hey, maybe durin' Recess, sure?!'

[snippy]

4. Democrats need to focus all of their criticism and attacks on the

republican party and the republicans in Congress rather than on Bush with regard to Bush's plan to change Social Security. Some republicans will not support his plan and they will attempt to distance themselves from Bush on this issue. That will create rifts and animosities within the GOP and decrease the probability of Bush's plan passing. Plus, in 2006 and 2008 we need voters to hold the republican party responsible rather than Bush if there is a backlash over this issue.

[Lefty48197]

5. Can't sell the FIX? He's trying to sell the destruction of social security

that's why he's having such a problem. Only the Republicans have drank the kool aid and decided to buy into all of his bizarre ideas.

[stevebreeze]

8. the word fix can be taken in two ways

as in " I got my car fixed" and "the election was fixed" Bush is more familiar with the second meaning of the word.
:kick:

[zann725]

14. Interesting...and true. You need to pass that on to the Media...

seriously.

[CountAllVotes]

6. it is NOT a "fix"

It is another BIG rip-off! Fight like hell Democrats! Fight!!!

:kick:

[reprobate]

17. Democrats "fight"? Surely you jest.

Perhaps you can suggest one or two issues the democrats fought the repugs over? I have trouble coming up with one myself.

Your mistake is thinking that there are really two parties in DC. I guess you could classify them as the "Majority Party" and the "Me Too" party.

If we expect anyone to protect us from the fascist junta controlling our gov't it certainly won't be dems in washington. It will take a new movement, financed by individuals and not by corporations, taken from the grassroots of what used to be the democrat party.

Remember this: The system has become fatally corrupt. Both dems and repugs are part of the system. Therefor, both dems and repugs are corrupt.

[FreeStateDemocrat]

7. Where the rubber meets the road, no compromise, no surrender

The protection of Social Security will be the critical issue that can propel the Democratic Party in the 2006 and 2008 campaigns. There is about to be an historical effort on the part of the neo-conservatives to begin the dismantling of Social Security. Obviously, this will eventually generate disastrous economic consequence to tens of millions of working class Americans. The conservative Republican’s ability to manage public opinion by cloaking change in innocuous phrases used in influencing the general public’s opinion is well documented. This will be accomplished by a subtle phase by phase erosion of the greatest social program we have that provides end of life security to a large majority of Americans. They can win by having favored access to the mass media and spinning their message with sophisticated marketing techniques and only the Democratic Party can provide a unified rallying counterpoint to mobilize and educate the majority of our citizens who will be adversely impacted. This fight is more important than even the Iraqi War since that war will only be a horrible memory when millions of Americans will still be facing extreme economic hardships as a result of the actions by the present Republican majority in undermining Social Security. It will be necessary to take a page from the successful organizational skills of the NRA and never give an inch or compromise the goal of protecting Social Security. With issues like this the Democratic Party can fashion a majority with Americans voters through protecting their economic future.

[stevebreeze]

10. one great advantage we have is the truth

facts:
SS is NOT in any real danger from "bankruptcy" IN 2018 when the boomer's start retiring in real large numbers SS will have 3.8 TRILLION in assets.
SS will payout more then it has taken in in the year 2042 or according to the CBO 2052. Both these numbers are based on the next several decades having poorer economic conditions then any 20 year period in the US's past. If we grow in productivity, in population, in GDP as fast as we have in the past THERE IS NO SHORTFALL!!

"private accounts" will almost certainly return LESS for a majority of people then the current system. The higher rates of return assumes a stock market that is under valued. Currently the stock market is overvalued(over 20/1 P/E) by historic standards(14/1P/E).The higher rates of return project ignore the billion and billions that Wall Street will skim off the top in fees. SS has an administration cost of 0.6% Chile's administration cost for it's private accounts system exceed 15%.

A fix is not need and the "cure" will be worse then the disease for the vast majority of Americans.

[indypaul]

11. Keep reminding the "sheeple"

that they already have an optional "private plan" in the form
of an IRA where tax-free money can be invested in most any form
they desire. Also, those IOU's that now hold most of the Social
Security surplus just happen to be invested in instruments that
carry the full faith and credit of the United States and are
currently paying rates of interest comparable to other U S
bonds. More than the 1 per-cent return B.S. commonly referred to.
One big question unanswered at this time is, "what happens to
those persons and their dependents who elect private accounts when they die prior to retirement or become disabled?" Since they
are not participating fully in Social Security and have placed
some of their funds at risk. Why should they expect to receive
full benefits under those circumstances?

[zann725]

15. I personally feel that IF private accounts are approved...

that the Draconian Admin. will suddenly say all the funds dried up (sooner than expected)...and will cease all pay-outs to Seniors and Disabled (which the Admin. sees as hand-outs)...since neither of these two categories of people will be paying in the future into the System (and therefore the Admin's future profits). The Elderly and Disabled are therefore useless to them, and in the words of Ebeneezer Scrooge, "Surplus Population." They certainly don't need their votes to win anymore, so...

It is a dark day indeed in American history.

[demigoddess]

18. what they do not realize is that

social security payments put a lot of money into the economy. Seniors pay rent and food with it. and homeless people on the streets don't pay for apartments or homes. Also the relatives do not have to use portions of their income to help the relatives that are retired which probably makes it possible for more of them to put their kids through college which makes a stronger economy. And ripples and ripples.