Personal Accounts Tank in Polls, GOP Says (social security reform)

Yahoo News/AP ^ | March 8, 2005 | DAVID ESPO

[FairOpinion]

WASHINGTON - The heart of President Bush (news - web sites)'s plan for Social Security (news - web sites), allowing younger workers to create personal accounts in exchange for a lower guaranteed government benefit, is among the least popular elements with the public, Republican pollsters told House GOP leaders Tuesday.

The pollsters also stressed the political stakes involved in pursuing Bush's plan to overhaul the Depression-era program, according to a memo circulated at a session in the Capitol.

Older voters consider a candidate's views on Social Security to be "as important, or in some cases, more important than issues like the war, health care and education," they wrote.

Reporting on the results of 14 focus groups held last month in scattered locations, the memo said Bush has been successful in raising awareness of Social Security's financial situation. It also credited the administration with having done a "very good job" of emphasizing that current and near retirees would not be affected by his plan.

At the same time, the public "knows little or nothing about the details and specifics" of Bush's proposal for individual accounts, "and a good bit of what they think they know is incorrect," it said.

The focus groups, as well as earlier nationwide polling, were paid for by the National Republican Congressional Committee, the campaign arm of the House GOP. The Associated Press obtained a copy of the memo.

Unlike a poll that may survey hundreds of people, a focus group involves a moderator leading a discussion. The participants are chosen for different characteristics such as age, gender and voting behavior.

According to the memo, Americans of all age groups "were most resistant to proposals that involved cutting or reducing benefits or raising Social Security payroll taxes.

"When forced to choose a course of action, a majority ... chose raising the age of early retirement, and there was also support for further reducing starting benefits for early retirement."

Despite the general resistance to higher taxes, there is very strong support for exposing higher levels of income to the existing levy, the pollsters wrote.

Asked what they liked least, 31 percent of the participants in the sessions mentioned that the government would be responsible for keeping track of the accounts. Another 24 percent "least liked the fact that workers would be required to accept a lower traditional benefit in return for participation," a key element of Bush's plan.

The findings surfaced on the eve of a House Ways and Means Committee hearing into Social Security's finances and as the administration pushes ahead with an aggressive campaign to raise public support for changes.

At the same time, some Republicans have begun to step forward with variations on Bush's theme, in hopes of beginning a process that can coax Democrats into negotiations.

Congressional Democrats have so far maintained nearly unanimous opposition to the president's plan, accusing Bush of seeking to privatize the program and pay for it by cutting benefits.

The president asked Congress in his State of the Union address to overhaul the program, saying he wanted a bill that both made it permanently solvent and included personal accounts.

Under the president's approach, Social Security would remain unchanged for retirees and workers age 55 and over.

Younger workers would have the option of investing a portion of their payroll taxes on their own and would receive a lower guaranteed government benefit when they retire. Supporters of the plan argue that earnings on the investments would make up the difference.

Republican officials briefed by White House aides have said even younger Americans who decide not to establish a private account would receive a lower government guaranteed benefit.

[k2blader]

I'm not sure people understand those details?

I think this is a more base reaction: fear and uncertainty in general about "messing with SS," due largely to the bleatings of the MSM.

[Arkie2]

They can serve a purpose if they reveal gaps in knowledge and allow strategists to refocus their message or show politicians how to frame the debate. As used in this report though they've been treated as though they represent large scale opposition to the policy proposal. Bad reporting.

[PGalt]

And if you die before you wake, your money's THEIRS...THE SOCIALISTS to take.

[Kuksool]

Rep. Chris Chocola of the IN-02 held a townhall meeting on social security reform. He was "Freeped" by extreme lefties. The IN-02 is a swing district with 15% seniors. He might have trouble in 2006 if the RATS continue their "Kill Grandma" theme.

[Torie]

Of course. But there is no real interior line of defense for Bush based on the merits and the numbers. Thus there isn't much prospect that he will turn it around.

[nj26]

I hope I don't offend anybody with this comment, but it's always been my experience that some people become increasingly fearful as they get elderly, and develop irrational fears.

Time and time again, the Dems utilize this tendency to create a culture of fear among the elderly whenever reform is proposed. I am just waiting for the photo op rally in which some poor 80 year old grandmother is convinced to block a door, stand in front of a moving vehicle, or some other stunt to beg some cold-hearted conservative politician to spare her from having to eat cat food.

[elmer fudd]

The problem with SS reform is that in the short term it will cost big bucks. As long as we insist that we are going to continue to pay out benefits at their current rate for anyone 55 or older, we will have to continue to pay money in at our current rate, PLUS whatever money is needed to fund the new accounts and we'll have to do so for quite awhile.

Not that I'm against SS reform. It's just that since SS is Ponzi scheme, someone will end up getting screwed no matter what.

[BJungNan]

Yea, that's how I voted. I like the idea of the government managing my retirement. That way I can make sure I will get it. Otherwise I might just spend it and I am not very smart at the stock market. And I have not really seen any plan yet but that is ok 'cause I know whatever plan it is I will not like it.

[hatfieldmccoy]

I work for a national polling company. I can tell you that the interviews I do concerning social security indicate to me there is some serious work to do on getting people to think in terms of taxes as their money. I rarely get a respondent that thinks they should be able to take their a portion of their money (payroll taxes) and put it a private account. The questions are scrupulously politically neutral.

[Racehorse]

But there is no real interior line of defense for Bush based on the merits and the numbers. Thus there isn't much prospect that he will turn it around.

You're right, I think.  Bush and team need to start talking first about program solvency, and then tout individual investment accounts.  Listening to the Whitehouse team, they come off as if they are trying to sell a half-baked, half-formed and incredible vague flicker of a plan.  The first question most people want to know is, how are you going to save the program?  Bush has failed to deliver the answer.

Thanks to a fellow poster, I've pretty signed on to support Congressman Paul Ryan's ideas.

[John Lenin]

Sooner or later. Truth sucks, doesn't it ?

[Soul Seeker]

I have had it.

STOP TALKING ABOUT THE POLLS! The Polls were either rigged or wrong in the last election. Yet here we are, the same people that flew into fits of hysteria about those polls are taking this polling as gospel. Further how can any CONSERVATIVE praise Bush one instant for the refreshing practice of doing what is right Vs. polls, but than act like CLINTON and refuse to do anything if the poll doesn't register the way you'd like?

I'll tell you what I think is the problem. It is ATTITUDE. Spineless wimps in Congress and House that refuse to do what is right. Comfortable with the status Quo. And, some spineless members in the grassroots ready to cave at slightest possibility we might have to work to win something of value rather than have it fall in our lap.

If the people that built the foundation of the conservative movement had that as their philosophy 40 years ago, we wouldn't be where we are today.

Get on the phone, contact your representatives, get your friends to contact representatives. Tell these people to get off their butts and do what they were elected to do regardless of what the polls suggest and you'll have their back. If not, tell them to start looking for new jobs.

[Sun Soldier]

Weaning a baby is difficult... the security and sustinance of the nipple is hard to give up but you have to ignore the crying and spoon feed your child. That's the challenge. My question is what is the plan for weaning America off of Social Security. Children will eat when mom denies them the nipple and offers a spoon. Is the government going to be the mother here? Will Americans be forced to invest or will they have the option of buying beer with that extra money? Given the option, most will by beer, cable, new TV, etc., and then end up being a "burden to society" when they're too old to work. So, where can I read about this plan?

[Kuksool]

I fear Bush may have given the RATS an unintentional PR victory. If the RATS win on social security, it would emboldened them to spread other lies such as the return of the Draft, minority voting rights repealed, and rising gas prices are GOP funbdraising schemes.

[Let's Roll]

I can't believe the GOP has done such a poor job of explaining this. Private retirement plans - 401ks etc. are extremely popular - those polled either don't understand or only the loony left were polled.

[Soul Seeker]

IMO, the poll with the greatest weight was ELECTION DAY.

Seems people here and in D.C. think these phone polls are more reliable than our actual ballots. I've about reached my limit. I'm tired of polls. I'm tired of excuses. I'm tired of campaigns.

They were elected on the president's agenda. This is part of the President's agenda. Time for the Reps to put up or retire. Let's start seeing those judges go through. Let's start seeing tax reform. let's start seeing private accounts. Let's see them actually Lead.

[PGalt]

Socialist Security is economic abortion, especially of elderly Americans.

[E=MC²]

Well, frankly, I don't think any solution will be sufficient because of the demographics...it really doesn't matter how much money or how little money people have to retire on if there isn't enough people to do the WORK required to support society. Does it matter if you have a million dollars to spend if there is nothing to spend it on??? (Think post WWI Germany and its devastating inflation.) My wife works at a nursing home and they already have shortages of CNA's and LPN's even though they offer good wages; multiply the residents of nursing homes by a factor of two or three and simultaneously divide the pool of workers by a factor of two and imagine the results.

[al_again]

I understand this perfectly - politics wins out over the good of the country.

I'm very pleased with what Bush is doing his 2nd term. However, he shouldn't be surprised with the results. He pushed through the Rx drug benefit for political gain only - why should he expect anything different from congress?

[Torie]

Yep. Demographics = cuts. There is no way out from that, unless you want to tax workers to death, and tempt them to do a King Lear and cause their parents to assume an early room temperature.