  
|
| |||||||
|
"Scam" ads the norm Trail Mix: Hillary haters spam cyberspace Gunning for the center Democrats make Hillary legit The blundering pundit Don Giuliani Campaign video: |
Silence in the House
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Jan. 11, 2000 | WASHINGTON --
Perhaps the best example of this dilemma is the debate over Social Security reform. While many Republicans support partial privatization plans to help revitalize the Social Security system, they fear that they may not be able to sell that idea to voters. As a result, their legislative plans may well end up on hold this year. After repeating the "Stop the Raid" mantra for nearly a year now in an effort to take full credit for the Social Security lock-box initiative -- which took Social Security dollars off budget for the first time -- most Republicans say the next step is to offer private investment options for building retirement nest eggs.
But top GOP strategists predict that Congress won't make the move in 2000. The reason boils down to a basic lack of confidence in the intelligence of the average American voter. On the surface, private savings options sound like plans to throw out Social Security altogether, even though in truth they are only envisioned as ways to supplement the existing system. Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, who believes in partial privatization, admitted that such efforts could have disastrous repercussions in an election year. "It opens you up for attack from the left," he said. Last spring, the NRCC commissioned a poll, conducted by Linda DiVall of American Viewpoint Inc., which concluded that support for private investing of Social Security dollars into the stock market was shaky at best even though 88 percent of respondents said they favored Social Security reform. Majority Whip Tom DeLay, R-Texas, cited DiVall's poll last year as evidence that "Stop the Raid" was a simpler message to secure senior citizen support. But even though Republicans generally agree that the lock box was just the first step toward fixing Social Security's woes, GOP members and strategists say the poll rules out further reform attempts in this election year. Pollster DiVall and some Democrats agree that privatization is a bad move for the GOP. "To move forward without acknowledgement of this will significantly endanger an already fragile GOP majority," DiVall wrote. "It'll give us the opportunity to hit them," said Steve Elmendorf, chief of staff for Minority Leader Richard Gephardt, D-Mo. "We've always known that [privatization] is what they're for." Nevertheless, some Republicans are determined to go ahead anyway. House Ways and Means Chairman Bill Archer, R-Texas, and Rep. Clay Shaw, R-Fla., plan to promote their joint plan for private investment of Social Security dollars this session —- despite warnings from GOP strategists that the political consequences of trying to sell that message may not be worth the risk. Social Security reform "must rely on the greater earning capacity of the private sector," Archer said. As Archer held court outside the House chamber early in January, touting the benefits of private sector investment, his Democratic counterpart, New York Rep. Charlie Rangel, jumped in to say he was willing to work together and discuss reform possibilities. "Social Security, in my opinion, is something we can do in a bipartisan way," the congressman rasped. "It's my feeling that if the president and both parties agreed, then the American people would be in accord." Furthermore, Rangel is afraid that if the parties don't work together on Social Security they will both lose ground in election 2000. "I'm afraid that the sucking sound you're hearing from Republicans may include us too," he said.
|
|||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|||
More news on 
Next page |