I'm sure this has been pointed out countless times, but I'd still like to share the following paragraph from my most recent Social Security Statement.
Now, really, this isn't all that bad. At least it doesn't mention private accounts, or personal keep the gummit outta my bidness accounts, or whatever they're called these days. But it does rely on the basic assumption that the system is in crisis and that if we don't make big changes, all will be lost. Of course, this is simply not the case. Some reforms are needed, but they could be very small and phased in over time. The situation is not nearly as grave as this message makes it out to be. If people believe it's this serious, they'll sign on for the plan that sounds good, even though they don't understand it.
The ironic part of this whole thing is the statement that we must enact reforms in order to "save" Social Security. The Bush administration is not interested in saving Social Security; they want to dismantle it. As Joe Biden (D - DE) said on Meet the Press yesterday, "No matter how you cut it, this real debate on personal accounts is about the legitimacy of Social Security; it's not about the solvency of Social Security."
Social Security, if supported, will be solvent, as it has been for generations. The only real grave danger the system faces is Bush's so-called reform.
As for that reform, it's been met with widespread skepticism even among many Republicans and other conservatives, but that's not going to stop the GOP, no sir. If the public isn't interested in their plan, well they'll just see about that.
The GOP strategists stressed that the six-week goal is not a hard deadline for a political breakthrough, but they said the public's tepid view of Social Security change cannot be allowed to continue indefinitely. The directive raises the possibility that Republicans will have to reconsider whether legislation can be passed this year, as Bush wants.
Polls show widespread skepticism of Bush's proposal for creating individual Social Security investment accounts for younger workers, and Democratic lawmakers have voiced nearly uniform opposition. The Washington Post reported over the weekend that some allies of the president are focused on possible split-the-difference deals that would significantly scale back Bush's proposal, yet enable him to claim an incremental victory.
The Treasury Department yesterday announced the formation of a Social Security "war room" and the hiring of three full-time employees to help coordinate and refine the administration's message on the issue. The war room, which the administration is calling the Social Security Information Center, will track lawmakers' remarks to their local news outlets, to help the White House detect signs of Republican concern or Democratic compromise.
My favorite line: "...the public's tepid view of Social Security change cannot be allowed to continue indefinitely."
I'm also totally psyched that I'm now paying for several people to have the full-time job of ramming this down my throat whether I like it or not.
White House officials say they need to "educate the public" about the real problems facing Social Security. What they really mean is de-educate. They don't want you to understand, they just want you to be afraid.
