About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

USA Today editorial suggested Bush's Social Security plan would have defused "underfunding time bomb"

August 14, 2007 6:46 pm ET
image

SUMMARY: In an editorial, USA Today suggested that President Bush's proposal to "partially privatize Social Security" would have addressed the program's "underfunding time bomb, set to detonate in about a decade." But as Media Matters for America has repeatedly noted, even the administration has acknowledged that its plan for private Social Security accounts -- on their own -- will do nothing to address the "time bomb."

12 Comments

In an August 14 editorial, USA Today falsely suggested that President Bush's proposal to "partially privatize Social Security" would have addressed the program's "underfunding time bomb, set to detonate in about a decade." The editorial was commenting on the "divisive legacy" of White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove, who had announced the day before that he will leave the White House on August 31. According to the editorial, "Democrats demonized" Bush's proposal, "and congressional Republicans, smelling a loser, never even offered a major bill. So the Social Security underfunding time bomb, set to detonate in about a decade, continues to tick." But as Media Matters for America has repeatedly noted (here, here, here, and here), even the administration has acknowledged that its plan for private Social Security accounts -- on its own -- will do nothing to address "the Social Security underfunding time bomb."

From a February 2, 2005, White House background briefing:

QUESTION: If I could follow up on a couple of questions that have already been asked -- can you give us a second 10-year estimate on the revenue effect? Can you tell us how you would pay for that, in the first 10 years' revenue loss? And am I right in assuming that in the way you describe this, because it's a wash in terms of the net effect on Social Security from the accounts by themselves, that it would be fair to describe this as having -- the personal accounts by themselves as having no effect whatsoever on the solvency issue?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: On the second point, that's a fair inference.

As Media Matters has documented, Bush proposed allowing workers to divert up to 4 percent of wages (about one-third of their payroll taxes) into a private account, removing it from the money available to pay Social Security benefits for current retirees. This diversion would create a large gap between revenue and the funds necessary to cover the government's obligation to current Social Security recipients. This gap would continue until the death of all recipients born before 1950, who, the administration said, would see no change and "receive their full benefits." Vice President Dick Cheney has acknowledged that the cost of covering this shortfall would be in the trillions of dollars.

From the August 14 USA Today editorial titled "Architect of Bush's victories leaves divisive legacy":

The self-taught college dropout stunned Democrats and achieved legendary status among Republicans by engineering George W. Bush's election in 2000 and re-election four years later. In between, Rove helped manage the first off-year election gains in both the House and the Senate by a presidential party since 1934, when Franklin D. Roosevelt's Democrats did the same.

Rove often boasted that his real goal was to leverage electoral success into an enduring Republican dominance that would last long after Bush had left office -- much as FDR's New Deal and the advent of Social Security changed American politics and ushered in decades of almost unbroken Democratic control of Congress.

But electoral brilliance is only the ticket of admission to Washington, where leadership and legislating are what count. There, Rove's legacy is far less glittering. Unlike political consultants who fade away after the election, Rove played a dominating role in Bush's domestic policy efforts. The same slashing, divisive tactics that Rove perfected in winning elections came to characterize Bush's legislative efforts, to far lesser effect.

After a single big, bipartisan success at overhauling education policy with the No Child Left Behind law, Bush tacked hard toward his base and largely abandoned his campaign promise to be a "uniter." Rove's brand of hardball enraged Democrats and helped sharpen the minority party's instinct to confront the Republican president. That might have been inevitable; what wasn't was the way Rove's lack of deference also alienated congressional Republicans.

This came back to bite when Rove tried to sell the administration's big second-term initiative, to partially privatize Social Security. He cast it not as an end itself but as a tool for building the GOP majority. Democrats demonized the plan, and congressional Republicans, smelling a loser, never even offered a major bill. So the Social Security underfunding time bomb, set to detonate in about a decade, continues to tick.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by CaseySpring (August 14, 2007 6:48 pm ET)
         

      Bushs social security plan was a time bomb.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by bittermarv (August 14, 2007 8:45 pm ET)
           

        More like a string of firecrackers, set to go off randomly.  And if you happened to get caught in a downturn when you retired, tough noogies.

        On the other hand, all those investment brokers who would have had a piece of all those nice fees for managing those "private accounts" probably think Bush's plan was Da Bomb.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by eweston8542983 (August 14, 2007 7:19 pm ET)
         

      With a short fuse.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by snoopy (August 14, 2007 8:44 pm ET)
         

      The lending issue was the pin.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by HuntingtonBeachLefty (August 15, 2007 3:08 am ET)
           

        And I want to work in the long term effects as the debtonator, but I'm punned out.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by eweston8542983 (August 15, 2007 9:42 am ET)
         

      Tough it out HBL, all our disturbed posters are accounting their limbs and it won't add up without youse.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by wolf kotenberg (August 15, 2007 1:31 pm ET)
         

      Social Security is funded by american workers paying taxes on their income. Not by chinese workers busting their a$$ for their fatherland.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by mybrotherskeeper (August 15, 2007 2:31 pm ET)
         

      I am hoping this get is a fluke. Hasn't the editorial page of USA Today been good lately?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Jim Nauseam (August 15, 2007 2:51 pm ET)
         

      If you raise the top rate of social security payments from $90,000 (where its been for almost 15 years) to $100,000, guess what?  S.S. would be solvent until around 2147 (according to one estimate).  There is no crisis, just a long overdue adjustment.  Next?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Jim Nauseam (August 15, 2007 3:52 pm ET)
         

      Sorry, 2047.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Pithaughn (August 15, 2007 6:15 pm ET)
           

        Darn, that 2147 was sure looking good. Adjustments are in order. I had an employer once who was worth many millions of dollars (one of her ex's was the Lynch in Merrill Lynch). She would often point out  how much medicaid paid for her prescriptions and doctor visits. Her rationale was that "we" paid in for so many years and now "we" deserve to get some back. I guess Americans have no idea how these social welfare programs started, as a way to keep people from dying of starvation. I am totally with the conservatives when they harp on the culture of entitlement in this country. I don't think FDR imagined the SS checks would go to payments on $250k motorhomes.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by redking75687 (August 16, 2007 4:31 pm ET)
           

        By 2047, the Baby Boomers would all be gone. Crisis over. Bush never mentions this in his speeches. I think it's just plain low to go after the only thing a lot of little old grannies live on. It's all my mom has and here he wants to steal it. Just like Enron, robbing them gray-haired old ladies and laughing about it. No wonder he partied with Kenny and the lads. he's their kind of people.

        Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.