Full Version: The Controversy Over Social Security Reform
The intent of this thread is NOT to debate the need for reform of the Social Security System. There's already a very good thread about this:
Social Security: Time For Change?
I'm just wondering if the controversy about this issue will prove to be damaging for the Republican Party, which is currently in control of the Executive and Legislative branches of the government.
Poll: Seniors Key to Slip in Bush Rating
Apparently some Republican politicians are concerned about this.
Bush Tries to Allay Social Security Fears
To be debated: Will the fight over Social Security reform hurt the Republican Party?
Social Security: Time For Change?
I'm just wondering if the controversy about this issue will prove to be damaging for the Republican Party, which is currently in control of the Executive and Legislative branches of the government.
Poll: Seniors Key to Slip in Bush Rating
QUOTE
The public's confidence in President Bush's job performance and the nation's direction has slipped in the opening weeks of his second term, particularly among people 50 and older, according to an Associated Press poll.
QUOTE
Older Americans, especially those 65 and above, were most responsible for the declining confidence and approval numbers. Middle-aged people between 30 and 50 were about evenly split on Bush's job performance.
Apparently some Republican politicians are concerned about this.
Bush Tries to Allay Social Security Fears
QUOTE
President Bush, on a trip to promote his Social Security overhaul, tried on Thursday to calm restive Republicans who fear the political consequences of supporting his idea for personal retirement accounts.
To be debated: Will the fight over Social Security reform hurt the Republican Party?
To be debated: Will the fight over Social Security reform hurt the Republican Party?
This is going to depend a lot on how forthcoming the administration is about the real costs involved, and in their being able to prove that the current spate of seniors, 55 and over, will not see a reduction in their benefits, or an increase in their taxes.
That's going to be a tough sell, though, considering that this administration has not exactly been completely honest about the cost of other programs, or fully funded programs they have championed previously.
The latest to come to mind is the Medicare prescription drug program. They had to wheel, deal, cajole, push and pull people along to get this bill passed. They had to promise that it wouldn't cost any more than $400 billion for the first decade, just to get enough Republicans on board to get it passed, after a hugely extended time to vote on the measure. A month after passage, of course, they revised their cost estimate up to $530 billion, and now we find out it may actually cost anywhere from $730 billion on up to $1.2 trillion. Add in the fact that the program isn't as helpful as promised for the price, and you can see why a lot of folks are understandably sceptical.
If the Social Security reforms do get passed, and it turns out to be as big of a boondogle as the drug benefit program has turned out to be, then yes, it will hurt the Republicans badly, I think. Unfortunately, once again, we may not find out how bad the reforms will hurt some people, or how much it's really going to cost, until it's already passed, and in operation.
This is going to depend a lot on how forthcoming the administration is about the real costs involved, and in their being able to prove that the current spate of seniors, 55 and over, will not see a reduction in their benefits, or an increase in their taxes.
That's going to be a tough sell, though, considering that this administration has not exactly been completely honest about the cost of other programs, or fully funded programs they have championed previously.
The latest to come to mind is the Medicare prescription drug program. They had to wheel, deal, cajole, push and pull people along to get this bill passed. They had to promise that it wouldn't cost any more than $400 billion for the first decade, just to get enough Republicans on board to get it passed, after a hugely extended time to vote on the measure. A month after passage, of course, they revised their cost estimate up to $530 billion, and now we find out it may actually cost anywhere from $730 billion on up to $1.2 trillion. Add in the fact that the program isn't as helpful as promised for the price, and you can see why a lot of folks are understandably sceptical.
If the Social Security reforms do get passed, and it turns out to be as big of a boondogle as the drug benefit program has turned out to be, then yes, it will hurt the Republicans badly, I think. Unfortunately, once again, we may not find out how bad the reforms will hurt some people, or how much it's really going to cost, until it's already passed, and in operation.
QUOTE(NiteGuy @ Feb 11 2005, 08:08 AM)
To be debated: Will the fight over Social Security reform hurt the Republican Party?
This is going to depend a lot on how forthcoming the administration is about the real costs involved, and in their being able to prove that the current spate of seniors, 55 and over, will not see a reduction in their benefits, or an increase in their taxes.
That's going to be a tough sell, though, considering that this administration has not exactly been completely honest about the cost of other programs, or fully funded programs they have championed previously.
The latest to come to mind is the Medicare prescription drug program. They had to wheel, deal, cajole, push and pull people along to get this bill passed. They had to promise that it wouldn't cost any more than $400 billion for the first decade, just to get enough Republicans on board to get it passed, after a hugely extended time to vote on the measure. A month after passage, of course, they revised their cost estimate up to $530 billion, and now we find out it may actually cost anywhere from $730 billion on up to $1.2 trillion. Add in the fact that the program isn't as helpful as promised for the price, and you can see why a lot of folks are understandably sceptical.
If the Social Security reforms do get passed, and it turns out to be as big of a boondogle as the drug benefit program has turned out to be, then yes, it will hurt the Republicans badly, I think. Unfortunately, once again, we may not find out how bad the reforms will hurt some people, or how much it's really going to cost, until it's already passed, and in operation.
This is going to depend a lot on how forthcoming the administration is about the real costs involved, and in their being able to prove that the current spate of seniors, 55 and over, will not see a reduction in their benefits, or an increase in their taxes.
That's going to be a tough sell, though, considering that this administration has not exactly been completely honest about the cost of other programs, or fully funded programs they have championed previously.
The latest to come to mind is the Medicare prescription drug program. They had to wheel, deal, cajole, push and pull people along to get this bill passed. They had to promise that it wouldn't cost any more than $400 billion for the first decade, just to get enough Republicans on board to get it passed, after a hugely extended time to vote on the measure. A month after passage, of course, they revised their cost estimate up to $530 billion, and now we find out it may actually cost anywhere from $730 billion on up to $1.2 trillion. Add in the fact that the program isn't as helpful as promised for the price, and you can see why a lot of folks are understandably sceptical.
If the Social Security reforms do get passed, and it turns out to be as big of a boondogle as the drug benefit program has turned out to be, then yes, it will hurt the Republicans badly, I think. Unfortunately, once again, we may not find out how bad the reforms will hurt some people, or how much it's really going to cost, until it's already passed, and in operation.
Niteguy,
This very line of reasoning could also be used to support the SS Reform effort, though (spiraling costs which drown the system, indicating the need for reform). As to current senior's benefits, it will be a war of perception. The reality is that no, their benefits won't be cut...but scare tactics have been very successful in previous attempts at reform. I do agree with you that they need to be very upfront with the costs/benefits of whatever they propose. It won't be Democrats that they need to do this for...but Republicans. There are enough disgruntled fiscal conservatives already...that group could revolt en masse if they see another large government entitlement coming out of whatever is proposed. The Libertarian party could see a big increase in membership.
However, the issue can also go badly for Democrats if the public is convinced of the need for reform, and sees the Democratic party as impeding that. So, this will be a very interesting issue to follow politically. I think both sides see it as a wedge issue, and it could go either way, depending on who does the better job of getting their message out.
QUOTE
This very line of reasoning could also be used to support the SS Reform effort, though (spiraling costs which drown the system, indicating the need for reform). As to current senior's benefits, it will be a war of perception. The reality is that no, their benefits won't be cut...but scare tactics have been very successful in previous attempts at reform. I do agree with you that they need to be very upfront with the costs/benefits of whatever they propose. It won't be Democrats that they need to do this for...but Republicans. There are enough disgruntled fiscal conservatives already...that group could revolt en masse if they see another large government entitlement coming out of whatever is proposed. The Libertarian party could see a big increase in membership.
However, the issue can also go badly for Democrats if the public is convinced of the need for reform, and sees the Democratic party as impeding that. So, this will be a very interesting issue to follow politically. I think both sides see it as a wedge issue, and it could go either way, depending on who does the better job of getting their message out.
However, the issue can also go badly for Democrats if the public is convinced of the need for reform, and sees the Democratic party as impeding that. So, this will be a very interesting issue to follow politically. I think both sides see it as a wedge issue, and it could go either way, depending on who does the better job of getting their message out.
The one thing Bush gets credit for is making the country debate on possible solutions for solving the problems SS represent in the long-term. Also, Bush did say he is open to other options. This give members of both parties an unique opportunity to figure out a solution.
Now, I do agree the Democrats have to stop complaining about Bush's SS reform proposal. I disgree with the President's plan as much as anyone, however I believe they should come up with an alternaitve plan to promote. Otherwise, they are acting like cranky children. The SS debate is probably the one issue where both sides of the political parties can quash the partisan rhetoric and really work together for a solution.
QUOTE(cgorham @ Feb 11 2005, 11:38 AM)
The SS debate is probably the one issue where both sides of the political parties can quash the partisan rhetoric and really work together for a solution.
Absolutely! This is a bell weather issue for me. I don't care where the solution comes from...and will get very upset with any of my representatives who prefer political posturing to actually solving the problem. There is no reason why this can't be worked out in a bipartisan fashion. In fact, I think it MUST be worked out that way. If the two sides can't work together on this...then they just can't work together at all. To me, that will mean I need to vote for different representatives, as this problem is far beyond petty partisan bickering.
QUOTE
Will the fight over Social Security reform hurt the Republican Party?
If the Republicans were to push for a plan that is unreasonable and can be easily shown to be an oncoming disaster--Of course they could be hurt by it.
Will they?
If the Dems can come up with and alternative idea that is sound and fiscally responsible and the Republicans were to refuse to at least debate the idea--They would get hurt
If the costs of this idea of Bush's continue to resemble a future problem--Now being illustrated by the disaster of a prescription plan--They could get hurt.
If the Democrats continure to just hammer at Bush with nothing to add o the debate--No the republicans can sidestep and won't get hurt.
QUOTE
The SS debate is probably the one issue where both sides of the political parties can quash the partisan rhetoric and really work together for a solution.
Cgorham/Hobbes If this actually happens and real sound plan were formulated and adopted I will start going to church with a newfound faith--for the endtimes are indeed here.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.