Entitled to specific answers
The best specific Social Security reform proposal by a 2008 presidential candidate comes from Republican Fred Thompson — by default. That's because the plan the former Tennessee senator released last week is the only specific Social Security proposal from any of the White House hopefuls. While the other candidates apparently are wary about going beyond generalities — and some not even that far — on this thorny issue, the next Oval Office occupant won't be able to responsibly duck the tough choices required to save Social Security.
President Bush repeatedly tried — and failed — to implement such reform through proposals that included partial, voluntary privatization of the system. Mr. Thompson similarly supports optional private savings accounts. His plan also would ultimately lower the program's costs by indexing benefits to inflation rather than wages.
Both major elements of Mr. Thompson's plan — eventual benefit reductions and partial privatization — are drawing considerable criticism from those who insist on maintaining the Social Security status quo. Yet staying the Social Security course is financially untenable over the long term due to the mass influx, over the next two decades, of 80 million aging Baby Boomer beneficiaries. That means presidential candidates who don't like Mr. Thompson's plan should present alternatives of their own.
As the presidential contender told our reporter Tuesday after speaking at The Citadel: "What do you do with an unsustainable situation that you want to save? You promote changes and try to bring people along and you do it as early as you can in order to make the transition and adjustment as easy as possible. The longer we wait, the more difficult it is."
Unfortunately, New York Sen. Hillary Clinton warned her fellow Democratic White House hopefuls during an Oct. 30 debate that "for us to act like Social Security is in crisis is a Republican trap." But the most dangerous trap for Social Security's future would be for federal elected officials — including the next president — to keep neglecting their duty to deal with indisputable long-term fiscal challenges that do represent a looming crisis.
At least Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., while less specific than Mr. Thompson, acknowledges that hard calls must be made. He advocates scrapping the cap on the Social Security payroll tax, which now stops at an income of $97,500, and pledges that as president he would keep an open mind on the issue — though he rejects any privatization element. Sen. Obama said on NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday: "I will listen to all arguments and the best options, finding out what is it going to take to close that gap."
What it is going to take to save Social Security — and Medicare — is bold presidential leadership that facilitates comprehensive overhauls of those massive entitlement programs. The American people should demand that presidential candidates explain how they intend to solve these lurking problems.
E-mail this story 
Printer-friendly version
Notice about comments:
The Post and Courier is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. The Post and Courier does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our Web site.
Full terms and conditions can be read here.
Comments
This article has 0 comment(s)
