Sag,
The turn about would be fair play if he vetoed this considering the grief they gave him for just considering SSI reform. What is even juicer is the fact his proposal was not all that different than Clinton's, Ergo Clinton's was a transfer of 5% and Bush's was 4% but under GWB's you had choice of the same funds that the Congress has in their 403(b)'s. What Clinton wanted to do with his RDDB mindset was to pick the fund for you, ergo an S & P 500 type of fund and eliminate you ability to choose.
Granted a really good option that no one talked about was having people take an asset allocation test to give them an idea what mix was good for them. If I am not mistaken, the methodology behind these test is based on the Nobel Prize winning work of the likes of Mankowitz, Tobin, and Sharpe (Read the book: "The search for Alpha").
GWB could couch it as this is not real reform and get a lot of mileage out of it. It would be sweat to see the firestorm that this would create.
GWB could couch it as this is not real reform and get a lot of mileage out of it. It would be sweat to see the firestorm that this would create.
That would be effective. An alternate theory as to why the administration isn't flatly rejecting payroll tax increases is 1:they want to control the debate about where those tax increases would go (individual savings accounts) or 2:they simply want the Democrats on record as calling for the largest tax increase in history so they can beat them over the head with it in 2008. I hope it's the second strategery myself.