GOP should not compromise on Social Security reform

Re "GOP Seeking a Deal on Accounts" (Washington Post, Page 1, 2/27/05) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A56464-2005Feb26.html Senator Graham's proposal guaranteeing that "low-income beneficiaries will do better under a new program than the existing system" is a perfect example of how compromises in legislation tend to get us the worst of both worlds rather than the best. It's a promise which can't be made without exacerbating the system's problems. There are many reasons to reform Social Security not simply the obvious economic aspects. For example, the current system masks the true size of the government's deficit spending while preventing low income people from building up savings, effectively keeping poor people poor. President Bush is, thankfully, an ideologue on this issue, truly believing that retirement savings are not what Social Security was intended to be and not a legitimate role for government. With luck, the Republicans will stick to their principles and not compromise on one of the most important government reforms for generations.
  • Remay1
    Comment from: Remay1
    02/27/05 @ 11:26:13 pm

    Unfortunately, based on the example of the Milquetoast republicans who are only too willing to cave on just about any issue, such as the confirmation battle for Bush's judge nominees, I wouldn't hold my breath that they will grow a spine for this issue. As soon as the AARP says "boo" they will run screaming for the hills, and today's younger workers will be condemned to tossing their hard-earned money down the same Ponzi scheme rathole I spent 40 years tossing my money down. It's really hard to measure the depth of the cowardice of these "public servants." They've demonstrated they really don't care about the financial well being of their constituents. They care only about getting re-elected.