Posted on 11/13/2007 11:58:53 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
The best specific Social Security reform proposal by a 2008 presidential candidate comes from Republican Fred Thompson — by default. That's because the plan the former Tennessee senator released last week is the only specific Social Security proposal from any of the White House hopefuls. While the other candidates apparently are wary about going beyond generalities — and some not even that far — on this thorny issue, the next Oval Office occupant won't be able to responsibly duck the tough choices required to save Social Security.
President Bush repeatedly tried — and failed — to implement such reform through proposals that included partial, voluntary privatization of the system. Mr. Thompson similarly supports optional private savings accounts. His plan also would ultimately lower the program's costs by indexing benefits to inflation rather than wages.
Both major elements of Mr. Thompson's plan — eventual benefit reductions and partial privatization — are drawing considerable criticism from those who insist on maintaining the Social Security status quo. Yet staying the Social Security course is financially untenable over the long term due to the mass influx, over the next two decades, of 80 million aging Baby Boomer beneficiaries. That means presidential candidates who don't like Mr. Thompson's plan should present alternatives of their own.
As the presidential contender told our reporter Tuesday after speaking at The Citadel: "What do you do with an unsustainable situation that you want to save? You promote changes and try to bring people along and you do it as early as you can in order to make the transition and adjustment as easy as possible. The longer we wait, the more difficult it is."
Unfortunately, New York Sen. Hillary Clinton warned her fellow Democratic White House hopefuls during an Oct. 30 debate that "for us to act like Social Security is in crisis is a Republican trap." But the most dangerous trap for Social Security's future would be for federal elected officials — including the next president — to keep neglecting their duty to deal with indisputable long-term fiscal challenges that do represent a looming crisis.
At least Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., while less specific than Mr. Thompson, acknowledges that hard calls must be made. He advocates scrapping the cap on the Social Security payroll tax, which now stops at an income of $97,500, and pledges that as president he would keep an open mind on the issue — though he rejects any privatization element. Sen. Obama said on NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday: "I will listen to all arguments and the best options, finding out what is it going to take to close that gap."
What it is going to take to save Social Security — and Medicare — is bold presidential leadership that facilitates comprehensive overhauls of those massive entitlement programs. The American people should demand that presidential candidates explain how they intend to solve these lurking problems.
Go Fred Go!
did he propose this plan while he was Senator?
Oops, you found something better than what I had on that.
he didn’t just vote for someone else’s plan or talked about the idea. He led on this issue and that is something I was looking for.
My solution to Social (in)Security is simple. I will gladly, no, GLEEFULLY give the Federal Gubmint every dime I've paid into this ponzi scheme if they would just let me out! I would even agree to invest 20% of my earnings into my own, self managed retirement account, so long as there are no restrictions as to what I can invest those funds in and no taxes on either the initial funds invested or the earnings they produce. In other words, Federal Gubmint, get the hell out of my life!
Fredipedia: The Definitive Fred Thompson Reference
WARNING: If you wish to join, be aware that this ping list is EXTREMELY active.
So much for the naysayers that suggest Fred “did nothing” in the Senate or that he’s a “Johnny Come Lately” on fiscal issues. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Bump!
Well it was certainly a good find on your part. Thanks!
The difference between Fred’s solution and Obama’s “lifting the cap” solution is that math is on Fred’s side.
Several studies have shown that lifting the cap cannot solve the problem. Reducing the benefit calc from wage inflation to price inflation can.
It will hurt me personally since I plan to retire early and won’t benefit from the private accounts portion, but it is the right thing to do for the country.
I was one of those naysayers...I was considering voting for Hunter because my impression was fred was only getting national attention because he was an actor who just said and voted for the right things in a conservative state (like Al Gore)
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.
