There’s a nihilistic attitude that permeates the Republican Party these days, an apparent belief that nothing matters anymore. Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst said it best when speaking to her constituents about Medicaid cuts: “We are all going to die.” They aren’t even trying to hide it anymore.
Ten years ago, when Donald Trump emerged on the political scene as a presidential candidate, he did something a bit different than most other Republicans had done in their campaigns. He promised he would not touch Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. For decades, cutting these programs had been at the core of GOP identity. Instead, he pledged to go after Obamacare and eliminate it immediately. “It will be so easy!” he said. That seemed to appease the small government fanatics on the right, at least temporarily. Many of them had been scalded by the failed attempt to partially privatize Social Security in 2005, and the subsequent financial crisis a few years later had illustrated, in living color, the tremendous risk of putting Americans’ guaranteed retirement into the stock market.
After all, the man who patented and popularized the negative narrative about Social Security and Medicare bankrupting the country was the sainted Ronald Reagan, who built his political career on it.
Trump, though, was still an outlier. At the same time he made his bold promise, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio were frontrunners for the Republican nomination — and both were campaigning on plans to cut benefits and raise the retirement age. Their positions were met with delirious excitement by some members of the Beltway press. After all, the man who patented and popularized the negative narrative about Social Security and Medicare bankrupting the country was the sainted Ronald Reagan, who built his political career on it.
Long before Twitter and TikTok, Reagan was a consummate showman who adroitly used the technology of the mid-1960s to spread the anti-government gospel. In 1964, while he was campaigning for Arizona Sen. Barry Goldwater, the Republican nominee for president, Reagan gave a speech titled “A Time for Choosing,” which was televised and made into a record. In the address, he argued that Social Security was a bad deal for average Americans:
A young man, 21 years of age, working at an average salary — his Social Security contribution would, in the open market, buy him an insurance policy that would guarantee 220 dollars a month at age 65. The government promises 127. He could live it up until he’s 31 and then take out a policy that would pay more than Social Security. Now are we so lacking in business sense that we can’t put this program on a sound basis, so that people who do require those payments will find they can get them when they’re due — that the cupboard isn’t bare?
Reagan’s “young man” would be 82 today, and he would very likely be grateful for the guaranteed income provided by the program. There’s no doubt he would be happy his 21-year-old self hadn’t been tasked with “investing” for his old age, since the boom-and-bust cycles he experienced would have likely forced him to start over more than once.
Despite the success of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, the GOP has never given up on cutting the social safety net — and eliminating it if at all possible. In many ways, that goal has been their basic organizing principle, even though it’s always been extremely unpopular. They’re still doing it too, even though they have now taken up Trump’s tactic of simply lying and assuring people they aren’t doing what they’re doing.
That’s part of the plan too. Back in 1981, Reagan proposed major cuts to Social Security. But he largely abandoned his plans after a sharp backlash. This led the libertarians at the Cato Institute to call for a “Leninist” strategy and be ready to pounce when the opportunity arose.
Want more sharp takes on politics? Sign up for our free newsletter, Standing Room Only, written by Amanda Marcotte, now also a weekly show on YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts.
The institute’s Project on Social Security Privatization aimed to prepare the public to accept the idea of transitioning to private accounts they could invest in the markets. After his reelection in 2004, President George W. Bush declared he would spend his political capital on it. After debuting his plan in the 2005 State of the Union address, he barnstormed the country in support of it — and the idea flamed out like a SpaceX rocket.
Apparently, it’s time to try again. Yes, Republicans staged a full-blown tantrum back in 2023 when President Joe Biden suggested in his State of the Union address that they wanted to cut the program. But nobody believed their denials, since 75% of congressional Republicans had endorsed the cuts the previous summer. (They had even proposed work requirements for seniors.)
That plan didn’t go anywhere. But it does show that, no matter what they say or what their Dear Leader may ordain, the overall goal is not coming off the menu. In fact, they’ve recently hatched another deceptive plan to get the job done. We know this because Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent spilled the beans just the other day.
We need your help to stay independent
One provision of the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” was called “Trump Accounts,” which are new retirement savings accounts for babies that supposedly will be opened with a $1000 contribution from the federal government. At an event hosted by Breitbart News, Bessent suggested the accounts would be so popular that people will demand the government replace Social Security with it. “In a way, it is a backdoor for privatizing Social Security,” he said.
The White House quickly walked back his comments, saying that they have no intention of privatizing Social Security, yadda, yadda yadda. As Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said about Bessent’s little truth bomb, “Between Bessent’s comments and the harm DOGE has already done to the agency, it’s clear Trump was lying all along about protecting Social Security.”
Donald Trump, lying? This should come as no surprise. Promise or no promise, it’s clear the GOP has not changed its goal one bit — and the fight to protect Social Security and the social safety net should remain the essential mission of the Democratic Party.
