SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
From: LindyBill6/22/2005 12:23:10 PM
  Read Replies (1) of 793772
 
DREAM DEFERRED
David Frum's Diary

Both the WSJ front page and the WashPo edit page are treating President Bush's apparent greenlighting of Sen. Robert Bennett's Social Security plan as an admission of defeat in the struggle over private accounts. Bennett's plan omits accounts entirely and focuses instead on restoring the program's solvency by restraining the growth in future benefits.

Is this Appomattox for Social Security reform? Not quite - but it's a warning of the rising probability of defeat - and a signal that now may be the time for Republicans to scout a path of safe retreat, just in case.

I'm impressed by how little harm the party has suffered from its bold advocacy. Yes, the president's numbers are down in the 40s. But time was when telling the truth about Social Security was a career-killer, not a poll-depresser. Partly this is due to some shrewd tactics at the White House. By never presenting a bill, but only general concepts, the White House slowed action - but also presented a smaller target to anti-reform forces. And it left open a graceful exit: the president can keep talking about reform, even as Congress drops the suggest and moves on to other things.

If President Bush does lose on Social Security, will that mean he was wrong to try? Well let's put it this way: If presidents only tried ideas that were so uncontroversial that they were sure to pass, the past three decades of conservative free-market reform would never have got started. This time around, we may have failed to change Social Security. But we've changed the debate - and that's at least half a success."
frum.nationalreview.com
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News