TURNING OFF THE 'THIRD RAIL'

New York Post ^ | November 6, 2004 | MICHAEL TANNER

[OESY]

...The third rail has been losing its juice for years. Bush came out in favor of individual accounts during his race in 2000. And, in the 2002 congressional elections, in every race where Social Security was a major issue, candidates favoring reform won.

In fact, those results are simply a reflection of the strong and continued public support for reforming Social Security. A recent poll for the Annenberg Public Policy Center found that 56 percent favor letting workers invest some of their Social Security contributions in the stock market, compared to only 36 percent opposed. Another survey by Rasmussen Reports found 52 percent support for allowing workers to invest their Social Security payroll taxes in personal retirement accounts, with 30 percent opposed. Support jumps to 63 percent when participation in private accounts is made optional.

The Democratic leaders in Congress, who have ardently opposed Social Security reform, now face a choice. Will they engage in a thoughtful debate over Social Security's problems and possible solutions, or will they cling to the status quo and the failed scare tactics of the past.

For Republicans, they must now decide whether they meant what they said when they promised to fix Social Security. The GOP congressional leadership remains timid. Old habits are hard to break.

Fortunately, President Bush says he's willing to spend his political capital in pursuit of a higher goal. He may turn off the third rail once and for all.

[OESY]

Michael Tanner is director of the Cato Institute's Project on Social Security Choice (socialsecurity.org).

[Piquaboy]

The rats will do everything they can to prevent our fixing of Social Security. Then they would not have anything to scare us old geezers about every election. Even though it did not work for them this time, they just never learn.

[sierrahome]

Nothing has furthered the Democrats ability to get America on the Gravy Train like Social Security in its present form.

[GraceCoolidge]

Sometimes I think that Social Security reform is destined to failure because of the Democrat scare tactics and those "Americans" who would bankrupt the country if it put a few more dollars in their wallet. At times, I think I oppose the reform myself, simply because I think it is going to be necessary to let the whole system collapse, then rebuild. When Kerry pledged not only to leave it as is, but to add 55 year olds to Medicare, I thought good, give away everything to everyone, then when it completely collapses we can build something better. Adding the 55 year olds really infuriated me. Oh, those poor people who want to retire but don't have health insurance! Well, too bad... if you want to retire early, how about you plan for it??? I hope Pres. Bush succeeds but I get so angry at these naysayers that sometimes the inevitable collapse of the sytem seems to me the only way it will ever be fixed.

[upchuck]

I'd put Medicare in that same category.

[Smartaleck]

First things first.

LBJ and the Dems took SS out of the separate budget category and dumped the money into the "general funds."

Why? LBJ didn't have the bucks to fund the Nam war so he covered this deficit by adding SS monies to the general funds.

If SS is to survive, it must be moved back to where it was originally and allowed to stand on it's own as a self funding entity and the money not used to fund other aspects of gov't..

This is a major part of the whole "smoke and mirrors" process that deceives the public. The Republican's are just as bad as the Democrats on this as it allows them to also disguise where the "peoples" money is being used. IMHO

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

If SS is to survive, it must be moved back to where it was originally and allowed to stand on it's own as a self funding entity and the money not used to fund other aspects of gov't..

Agreed. But you must realize that this will happen right after the repeal of the 16th Amendment and right before Hell freezes over.

The Pols (Repub or Dem) will never allow this source of funds to be taken from their grasp.

[ServesURight]

Then Bush should just let people voluntarily opt out of SS. I'll gladly forfeit the $40K some dollars I put into SS, since I won't see that money anyway.

In the meantime, I'm planning my retirement as if SS and Medicare doesn't exist.

[Smartaleck]

"The Pols (Repub or Dem) will never allow this source of funds to be taken from their grasp."

It's not in their self interest to do so, but if enough people raise hell, at the least it sould be discussed.

[AlaskaErik]

In the meantime, I'm planning my retirement as if SS and Medicare doesn't exist.

Same here. SS is not a factor in my retirement planning. If I get something back, fine; if I don't, I've already planned for it.

[texastoo]

Sometimes I think that Social Security reform is destined to failure because of the Democrat scare tactics and those "Americans" who would bankrupt the country if it put a few more dollars in their wallet.

It looks like President Bush will be the main person responsible for breaking social security. His Social Security Administrator, Jo Anne Barhart, signed a totalization agreement with Mexico June 29. All illegal aliens from Mexico will be eligible for social security. They will only have to work 18 months or one and a half years to be eligible for SS. Even their dependants who have never set foot in the US will get a monthly check. The good news for Mexicans is that they can claim 10 to 15 or more dependants as there is no way of verifying the number of dependants.