Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Where Are the Democrats?
Washington Post ^ | June 22, 2005 | Masthead Editorial

Posted on 06/22/2005 2:13:45 PM PDT by RWR8189

THE DEMOCRATS are positively giddy over their success in foiling President Bush's Social Security plan. As a political matter, perhaps they have reason to cheer: Polls show Americans dubious about his proposed changes, and the president appears suddenly open to solutions that do not include his signature personal accounts. Yesterday he blessed a plan by Sen. Robert F. Bennett (R-Utah) to introduce a Social Security bill that tackles solvency and does not offer personal accounts. (He'll do that in a separate measure.) But after the confetti settles, Democrats need to ask themselves: Now what? Having beaten back private accounts, as it appears they have, is it enough to keep sticking their fingers in their ears while saying "no"?

Certainly Republicans, with their reckless tax cuts and blithe dismissal of deficits, cannot claim the high ground of responsibility. But Democrats have yet to lay any claim to it either, given their resolute negativity on Social Security reform. The only Democratic proposal on the table, from Rep. Robert Wexler of Florida, is a lopsided measure that would address Social Security solvency solely by raising taxes. Responsible proposals from Democratic economists that would blend benefit cuts and tax increases have gotten nowhere with Democratic lawmakers.

Mr. Bush, by contrast, has deviated from no-new-taxes orthodoxy to the extent of signaling a willingness to increase the payroll tax ceiling. And he took the political risk -- a risk Democrats gleefully exploited -- of endorsing a progressive indexing proposal with benefit cuts. That's a route that, in a less partisan climate, many Democrats would have endorsed

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: democrats; reform; socialsecurity; ssreform
Misunderestimation is something George Bush's opponents should be loathe to do.

It may take until after 2006, but I think in the end, Bush will be victorious on private accounts.

1 posted on 06/22/2005 2:13:45 PM PDT by RWR8189
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

I hope so. What the Democrats offer is more of the same: more and more Americans with only one option -- suckling off the teat of big government. How 1960s.


2 posted on 06/22/2005 2:19:15 PM PDT by My2Cents
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

What puzzles me is... What is the point of taking political flak for cutting benefits just to prolong the program as is? If there is no reform of the system, why prolong it? And why should we as the party of reform spend political capital to do the Democrats dirty work?


3 posted on 06/22/2005 2:22:16 PM PDT by Betaille ("Within the covers of the Bible are all the answers for all the problems men face." -Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

Misunderestimation, and waiting on the Strategery to kick in prior to a nice helping of Schardenfreude.


4 posted on 06/22/2005 2:22:21 PM PDT by spokeshave (Strategery + Schardenfreude = Stratenschardenfreudery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189
Why can Public employees opt out of the Social Security System? Part of the SS eventual failure would be for all employees to contribute to the System, including Public employees.

The proposed privatization is opposed because it is RISKY yet Public employees are allowed to join private plans and they are not RISKY, pure logic.

The only good thing about the Social Security we now have is that Kofi Annan is not running it.

5 posted on 06/22/2005 2:25:25 PM PDT by BIGZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

6 posted on 06/22/2005 2:28:20 PM PDT by pookie18 (Clinton Happens...as does Dr. Demento Dean & Benedick Durbin!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189
"reckless tax cuts"

The tax cuts that have massively increased the revenue to the Feds, you mean?

The Warshington Compost has never heard of Arthur Laffer 30 years on.

7 posted on 06/22/2005 2:30:43 PM PDT by Uncle Miltie (Linguine Spined Republican Senators Will Lose Their Majority!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Betaille
"What is the point of taking political flak for cutting benefits just to prolong the program as is?"

We could propose a benefits increase and a tax cut simultaneously, and put SS out of its misery sooner. At least our Grandchildren wouldn't be burdened, then.

8 posted on 06/22/2005 2:32:39 PM PDT by Uncle Miltie (Linguine Spined Republican Senators Will Lose Their Majority!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189
The only rational explanation for Americans being against private accounts is they've succumbed to the constant lies fed to them by the Media-Democratic-Socialst Party Complex
9 posted on 06/22/2005 2:36:01 PM PDT by Jim W N
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brad Cloven

"We could propose a benefits increase and a tax cut simultaneously, and put SS out of its misery sooner."

Exactly my point! The Dems are the ones who want the system as is, and yet they're criticizing the Republicans for any attempt to save it. They're having it both ways.

The only way to push them to the bargaining table is to threaten the system in a politically popular way, such as cutting payroll taxes. When the Dems don't want to do that we can be like "oh... well then what's your proposal?"


10 posted on 06/22/2005 2:36:17 PM PDT by Betaille ("Within the covers of the Bible are all the answers for all the problems men face." -Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Jim 0216

"The only rational explanation for Americans being against private accounts is they've succumbed to the constant lies fed to them by the Media-Democratic-Socialst Party Complex"

Yep. People generally fear change, and many are not intelligent enough or simply don't have the time to examine the realities of social security. So it's easy to demagogue the issue. That's why I think we should play demagogue to force the Dems to the table.


11 posted on 06/22/2005 2:38:09 PM PDT by Betaille ("Within the covers of the Bible are all the answers for all the problems men face." -Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189
The Donkeys celebrate yet another very early fake victory against President Bush, and as usual when the dust settles and the ballte is over President Bush would have crushed them as he have done so many times in the last 4 1/2 years.
12 posted on 06/22/2005 2:44:11 PM PDT by jveritas (The Left cannot win a national election ever again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Betaille

That's their name - the DEMOgogue-bureauCRATS


13 posted on 06/22/2005 4:13:26 PM PDT by Jim W N
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

As someone on FR said,why do dead people vote democRAT


14 posted on 06/22/2005 6:57:29 PM PDT by G-Man 1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson