I Beg to Differ (SS Reformers Should Stick to Their Guns)

Posted by: Good Samaritan
on April 04, 2005 @ 03:27 PM EST

Audi Partem Alteram exhorts:

Let’s have the courage to admit that the broad outlines of reform that have been suggested so far don’t have traction with the public, and remove the voices of reform advocates from the bleating chorus of the politically tone-deaf.

I'm a supporter of carve-out private accounts: am I one of the "politically tone-deaf" he's talking about? Well, I don't see the evidence that carve-out private accounts lack public support. Even in the poll that Audi Partem Alteram links to, private accounts enjoy plurality support, 44% in favor to 40% opposed-- down from substantial majority support earlier, but still fairly strong. And other polls disagree: a recent WaPo poll shows support for private accounts higher than ever, at 56%. I've pointed out before that pollsters Zogby and Rasmussen reject the negative spin the press puts on public opinion. (More here.)

One thing we must bear in mind when interpreting polls is that pasting together pieces of what the public says it wants doesn't necessarily add up to feasible policy. MORE...

The public doesn't want benefit cuts. It doesn't want a higher retirement age. It doesn't want tax hikes. And people are nervous about carve-out accounts. Well, sorry folks, those are the options. We can't mark "None of the above."

In a democracy, leadership means being one step ahead of the people. It means putting together a feasible overall policy, rooted in what you believe, even if some aspects of it may be unpopular, then defending your action and looking for vindication afterwards. However, once a feasible, comprehensive modernization plan, based on sound principles, is on the table-- and the best plan would probably include all of the unpopular features I mentioned-- then I could forgive legislators for looking to yes-or-no public opinion polls as a guide. No such proposal now exists, and as a result, what a lot of polls end up reporting is that people prefer pie-in-the-sky to reality.

The accounting aspect of Social Security reform is fiendishly complex and I doubt that more than 10% of voters will ever have more than the dimmest understanding of it. (Economists call that "rational ignorance.") But the bottom line is simple enough: we need to put Social Security in a lockbox where it's safe from politicians; and that means taking the key to the lockbox away from politicians, and giving it to the people.

E-mail this entry to a friend.

[Previous entry: "Hitchens on John Paul II"] [Next entry: "Morning Blend -- Tuesday, April 5, 2005"]