Thomasson - A Race to See Who Can Bury Their Head Deepest
July 28, 2016 at 4:25 p.m.
By Dan K. Thomasson-
The rush to see who can bury his head deepest in the political sand pile is never more frantic than when an election year is fast approaching. Failing to do so can bring down on one’s cranium the collective wrath of millions of aging citizens. Never mind how much damage not acting ultimately will do to national solvency.
Whether one believes in the resilience of a Social Security trust fund (as a majority of the Congress apparently does, or at least conveniently pays lip service to) or that the giant program’s bottom is about to fall out (as a few do), nothing will be done to slow the growth of the program’s cost. The trust fund has lent billions to the government; if it is repaid, it is estimated it would be solvent until 2036. However, current payroll taxes don’t cover promised benefits because of economic turmoil and baby boom demographics.
Realizing as we do that the gray lobby is right up there with the gun nuts when it comes to political clout, that perhaps some slight changes in the 1930s model might be acceptable to slow the growth and salve the irritation to the Treasury in these hard times. Perhaps that means testing or, if that is too onerous, an adjustment to the eligibility age to take into account increased longevity. Down with Bismarck and up with President Barack Obama? That might be OK if the president had shown one ounce of courage when it comes to dealing with the problems.
No one expected the current keeper of the flame to call Social Security a Ponzi scheme, as presidential hopeful Rick Perry did, or to pick up George W. Bush’s proposal to privatize some of it by permitting a market approach. But some of us believed Obama at least might acknowledge that there are ways of fixing it without tearing it down.
But even that gesture toward common sense – a rare commodity on the Hill and in the White House these days – has been rejected under the onslaught of AARP and its regiments of old folks, whose voting performance leaves no doubt who is in charge when it comes to sacred institutions. No less an influence than Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has made that clear, pulling his head above ground briefly to reaffirm his faith in the trust fund, which he said had years to go before it sleeps. That’s said with apologies to Robert Frost. For the benefit of some member of Congress who might read this, Frost was a poet.
Meanwhile, the program will require, according to news reports, an extra $267 billion to pay mandatory benefits. Oh, well. A billion here and a billion there (or should that now be a trillion?) and pretty soon we’re talking about real money.
The so-called supercommittee – charged with coming up with a solution to the debt crisis under a Thanksgiving deadline of huge mandatory budget cuts – mainly from the Pentagon – apparently has taken entitlements off the table. Perhaps that is good; it will prepare the country for the days when, because of Medicare/Medicaid and Social Security, we won’t be able to afford a national defense. That day isn’t all that far off.
The Democrats certainly don’t want to fiddle with what has historically been one of their great campaign strategies – to scare the hell out of the oldsters by accusing the Republicans of plotting to abolish Social Security. Don’t fall for that. The Republicans don’t want any part of the fixing Social Security debate either. Well, one still may: former Sen. Alan Simpson, R-Wyo., who co-chaired the blue ribbon panel appointed by Obama to come up with a debt/budget solution. Simpson and his fellow chairman, Democrat Erskine Bowles, have never stopped advocating reforming entitlements as a necessary step toward returning the nation to economic soundness.
But then the president jerked his own head out of the sand long enough to ignore Bowles’ and Simpson’s recommendations altogether, leaving the two to twist slowly in the geriatric wind.[[In-content Ad]]
Latest News
E-Editions
The rush to see who can bury his head deepest in the political sand pile is never more frantic than when an election year is fast approaching. Failing to do so can bring down on one’s cranium the collective wrath of millions of aging citizens. Never mind how much damage not acting ultimately will do to national solvency.
Whether one believes in the resilience of a Social Security trust fund (as a majority of the Congress apparently does, or at least conveniently pays lip service to) or that the giant program’s bottom is about to fall out (as a few do), nothing will be done to slow the growth of the program’s cost. The trust fund has lent billions to the government; if it is repaid, it is estimated it would be solvent until 2036. However, current payroll taxes don’t cover promised benefits because of economic turmoil and baby boom demographics.
Realizing as we do that the gray lobby is right up there with the gun nuts when it comes to political clout, that perhaps some slight changes in the 1930s model might be acceptable to slow the growth and salve the irritation to the Treasury in these hard times. Perhaps that means testing or, if that is too onerous, an adjustment to the eligibility age to take into account increased longevity. Down with Bismarck and up with President Barack Obama? That might be OK if the president had shown one ounce of courage when it comes to dealing with the problems.
No one expected the current keeper of the flame to call Social Security a Ponzi scheme, as presidential hopeful Rick Perry did, or to pick up George W. Bush’s proposal to privatize some of it by permitting a market approach. But some of us believed Obama at least might acknowledge that there are ways of fixing it without tearing it down.
But even that gesture toward common sense – a rare commodity on the Hill and in the White House these days – has been rejected under the onslaught of AARP and its regiments of old folks, whose voting performance leaves no doubt who is in charge when it comes to sacred institutions. No less an influence than Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has made that clear, pulling his head above ground briefly to reaffirm his faith in the trust fund, which he said had years to go before it sleeps. That’s said with apologies to Robert Frost. For the benefit of some member of Congress who might read this, Frost was a poet.
Meanwhile, the program will require, according to news reports, an extra $267 billion to pay mandatory benefits. Oh, well. A billion here and a billion there (or should that now be a trillion?) and pretty soon we’re talking about real money.
The so-called supercommittee – charged with coming up with a solution to the debt crisis under a Thanksgiving deadline of huge mandatory budget cuts – mainly from the Pentagon – apparently has taken entitlements off the table. Perhaps that is good; it will prepare the country for the days when, because of Medicare/Medicaid and Social Security, we won’t be able to afford a national defense. That day isn’t all that far off.
The Democrats certainly don’t want to fiddle with what has historically been one of their great campaign strategies – to scare the hell out of the oldsters by accusing the Republicans of plotting to abolish Social Security. Don’t fall for that. The Republicans don’t want any part of the fixing Social Security debate either. Well, one still may: former Sen. Alan Simpson, R-Wyo., who co-chaired the blue ribbon panel appointed by Obama to come up with a debt/budget solution. Simpson and his fellow chairman, Democrat Erskine Bowles, have never stopped advocating reforming entitlements as a necessary step toward returning the nation to economic soundness.
But then the president jerked his own head out of the sand long enough to ignore Bowles’ and Simpson’s recommendations altogether, leaving the two to twist slowly in the geriatric wind.[[In-content Ad]]
Have a news tip? Email [email protected] or Call/Text 360-922-3092