March
23, 2005
Bush Should Talk Up Social Security Protections for Poor
By Mort
Kondracke
The White
House is convinced that President Bush has made progress in selling
his Social Security reforms, but to win the fight he's going to
have to be more specific about his ideas for keeping the system
solvent.
Besides selling
personal savings accounts, Bush needs to reassure workers - and
win over some Democrats - by showing that any benefit cuts he
has in mind would hit the rich and protect the poor.
The White
House does seem to favor so-called "progressive indexing"
of Social Security benefits. Bush ought to start making that part
of his regular stump speech. Because of his campaigning, recent
polls show that the public now understands that Social Security
has serious long-term problems.
The latest
Washington Post/ABC News poll showed that 71 percent of respondents
believe that Social Security faces "a crisis down the road."
Majorities
favor allowing younger workers to establish private accounts -
the essence of Bush's plan. Last week's Gallup poll put support
for personal accounts at 58 percent.
But support
falls off sharply - to the delight of Bush's opponents - when
voters learn that their guaranteed benefits might be cut and that
the government would have to borrow to finance private accounts.
Putting the
word "Bush" in a poll question also drags down support.
The Post poll showed that only 37 percent support "Bush's
proposals."
Various polls
also show that seniors, the group most opposed to his plan, are
unaware that their benefits would be unaffected by his plan. Younger
workers are not aware that it's voluntary.
In the meantime,
Democrats and their allied groups are trying to kill his plan
by heightening any and all doubts about it and by charging that
Republicans have a long-term plan to "privatize" Social
Security and "wreck" the popular program. So what can
Bush do to win this fight? While Congress is on a two-week break,
he's on a "seniors reassurance tour" along with his
mother, Barbara Bush, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and others.
The key messages
are that his plans will have no effect whatever on people born
before 1950 and that he supports Franklin Delano Roosevelt's vision
of a government-guaranteed social insurance program.
In April,
Bush is to begin focusing on younger workers to show them - rather,
remind them - how much more private accounts invested in stocks
and bonds can earn as compared with current returns on their Social
Security taxes.
I think it
would help Bush's case enormously if he picked out specific individuals
in his audiences and in Congress and showed how much better off
they'd be if they had been able to invest in private accounts
10, 20 or 30 years ago.
It ought
to be technologically possible for the administration, too, to
create a Web site that voters could go to and calculate how much
they'd earn in private accounts as compared with the 1.8 percent
average annual return on Social Security.
But for any
such calculations to make any sense, the administration also has
to start talking about the benefit reductions it envisions to
achieve long-term solvency for Social Security.
Personal
accounts are a device designed to allow workers to make up for
losses in guaranteed benefits. How big those cuts will be is a
vital part of the Social Security argument that's so far not been
addressed.
Bush has
referred to the ideas of Democratic investment banker Bob Pozen,
who favors "progressive indexing" whereby rich people's
benefits would be pegged to the cost of living instead of wage
rates, thus rising more slowly, while poor people's benefits would
be tied to wages and be protected.
Democrats
still object that Pozen's plan begins to blend wage and price
indexing at incomes of $25,000 or $30,000 a year and they argue
that if indexing had been imposed 20 years ago, the average Social
Security benefit would now be $550 a month instead of $1,000.
Administration
officials are talking about ways to make benefit reductions even
more progressive than Pozen's plan, by adjusting so-called "bend
points" so that the rich actually get smaller benefits than
they would under indexing.
Legislatively,
the administration currently is following a "let a thousand
flowers bloom" strategy, inviting all ideas to be put on
the table and vowing to work on a bipartisan basis to find a solution.
Bipartisanship and flexibility poll well.
To come to
terms, the administration anticipates that action will start in
the Senate Finance Committee and that Bush officials will participate
in drafting a plan designed to win 60 votes in the Senate.
Various officials
claim they've talked to Democrats who are willing to deal with
the administration, even on personal accounts, if Bush can change
the political climate in his favor to give them "air cover"
to split from Democratic leaders.
Even though
a "Senate-first" strategy is what the administration
is looking toward, Ways and Means Chairman Bill Thomas (R-Calif.)
thinks he can draft a plan - which is likely to be highly complex,
mixing tax policy with Social Security - that can attract 60 votes
in the Senate.
Administration
officials say they think they have time to maneuver, anticipating
votes in the Senate late this summer or early fall.
And they
think Democrats will buckle on private accounts. "Are Democrats
going to cut themselves off from the future?" one Bush aide
asked. "Out of misplaced ideology, are they really going
to say to younger workers, the 401(k) types, the Silicon Valley
types, the social libertarians and the MTV types, 'Screw you!'?
It's fine if they want to."
It could
come out that way. But first Bush has to assure the 401(k) generation
that it won't lose money backing his plan. And for that to happen,
he's got to say more about what his plan is.
Mort
Kondracke is the Executive Editor of Roll Call.
Send
This Article to a Friend