We've been through this three times before with the "new democrats" wanting to fix entitlements. There were two tax hikes for Social Security in last fifteen years. Each time, they said Social Security was fixed. Under their breath, they claim it will hold up for 75 years. Well, it's only been 15 years and the tax rate is over 15%. When they say they want to fix entitlements, they end up raising taxes. The path of least resistance is anyone other than the elderly voting bloc. And when there is a surplus of revenues, they expand the SSI program where people collect benefits for "disabilities".
Clinton does not fit the moderate level on the political scale. In about every case, such as Welfare Reform, Tax Reform, Balanced Budgets, etc., he is opposed to the construct. When he sees that the public is solidly behind the movement, he switches positions, and tries to coopt the platform. He realizes that like it or not these reform movements are going to be implemented with or without him. He jumps on board and tries to move the legislation to the left. When unable to do so, he tries to sabotage it after passage. He tried to undo Welfare Reform after passage with the Executive Order.
When it comes to lithmus test issues for the core constituents of each party, the leaders rarely stray. Without the funding from these PACs, they can't get enough funding to attract the swing votes in the middle. |
