Why Are Democrats Losing the Social Security Issue?

[dajoki]

RJ Eskow's blog
Why Are Democrats Losing the Social Security Issue?
by RJ Eskow | August 19, 2010 - 10:08am
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/node/30822

The Republican Party's attempt to privatize Social Security under George W. Bush was wildly unpopular. At least one Republican Congressional candidate is openly calling for Social Security cuts, and Rep. Paul Ryan's widely-publicized "Roadmap for the Future" includes both privatization and benefit cuts. With all these GOP threats to a popular program, why do polls show that the Democratic Party's advantage on this issue has collapsed?

Here's one reason: Voters want to know that their leaders won't cut Social Security benefits, and not enough Democrats have promised they won't. Some, including the president, are avoiding the issue or changing the subject. Democrats clearly think that Social Security is a winning issue for them, but polls suggest that voters aren't likely to be swayed by declarations that oppose privatization but are vague on benefits.

A recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll tells the story of the Democrats' declining fortunes in Social Security. People who were polled this month only gave Democrats a four-point advantage over Republicans (30%-26%) on the issue of "dealing with Social Security." That's down from the 28-point advantage (48%-20%) they enjoyed in October 2006. Meanwhile, recent polls showed that 68% of people responding oppose cutting Social Security and Medicare to pay for the deficit, including 60% of Republicans.

Voters looking for a clear statement on benefits from the Democratic leadership aren't getting them yet. Instead, Democratic leaders insist on fighting a battle that's not being waged right now: privatization. While Republicans probably would revive this issue if they had the White House and majorities in both Houses, that's not on the table right now. On the battle that is being fought, benefit cuts, statements from the president and other party leaders have been conspicuously silent. As this Greenberg poll shows, politicians that support Social Security cuts will face strong voter backlash.

President Obama's weekly address, on the 75th anniversary of Social Security's creation, was entitled "Honoring Social Security, Not Privatizing It." The address was directed at the issue that's not on the table right now -- privatization -- and offered no assurances for voters on the subject of benefit cuts. And observers won't be reassured by the president's comment that he was "encouraged by the reports of serious bipartisan work being done on this and other issues in the fiscal commission that I set up several months ago." The Democratic and Republican co-chairs of that commission both have a history of advocating benefit cuts, as does economist and commission member Alice Rivlin.

The President chose to cap his remark with the same FDR quote Nancy Pelosi used for the the occasion of Social Security's birthday: That it should provide "some measure of protection to the average citizen and to his family against poverty-stricken old age." That quote doesn't reassure voters that Democrats will protect their benefits. It suggests, in fact, that "some measure" against poverty is all they intend to provide. That's disturbing, since Social Security keeps 20 million Americans out of poverty. It's also a selective use of FDR's words. In the same speech, Roosevelt went on to say: "This law, too, represents a cornerstone in a structure which is being built but is by no means complete ... It is, in short, a law that will take care of human needs and at the same time provide the United States an economic structure of vastly greater soundness."

Speaker Pelosi understands the need to take a more unequivocal stand against cutting Social Security benefits than that quote provides. That's why she, along with twelve other Congressional candidates, have taken the pledge to protect Social Security from both privatization and benefit cuts. The Campaign for America's Future will be tracking all candidates to see who's signed the pledge and is offering an online petition to defend Social Security for citizens to sign.

"Today," said President Roosevelt at the birth of Social Security, "a hope of many years' standing is in large part fulfilled." That hope must now be defended from those who would cut or dismantle it. If Democrats want the job, and the political majority that will enable them to do it, they're going to have to be clear about their intentions.

[Nikki Stone1]

1. Obama will be able to put through what George Bush could not

The usual constituencies have been silenced.

[SammyWinstonJack]

2. Yep! How sad is that?

[Better Believe It]

4. Privatization is dead. It's about Social Security cuts.

[kenny blankenship]

20. Once the ball gets rolling, however...

who knows where it may roll to next?

[DJ13]

5. Same thing we saw with Clinton on NAFTA and deregulation

Its like the Republicans frame the issues then wait for the Democrats to enact them.

[bobbolink]

8. "Republicans frame the issues then wait for the Democrats to enact them."

I admire people who can express it so well.

:applause:

[DJ13]

11. Stop it, Im blushing!

:blush:

:hi:

[bobbolink]

15. Good. Then my job here is done. ^_^

Seriously, I strongly believe in recognizing the strengths of others.

I hope you can take it with grace. ^_^

I can write, but I don't do bumperstickers or titles, so I appreciate those who can and do.

:hi:

[dajoki]

12. If the Dems...

enact the "catfood commission" results they can say goodbye to majorities in Congress and the Presidency for years to come.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dajoki]

25. ???

You are throwing accusations around, but you do not give reasons.

[Better Believe It]

3. They are losing on this issue because the Democratic Party head, Obama, won't oppose S.S. cuts.

Voters looking for a clear statement on benefits from the Democratic leadership aren't getting them yet. Instead, Democratic leaders insist on fighting a battle that's not being waged right now: privatization. While Republicans probably would revive this issue if they had the White House and majorities in both Houses, that's not on the table right now. On the battle that is being fought, benefit cuts, statements from the president and other party leaders have been conspicuously silent.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

7. +1

[SammyWinstonJack]

9. Repubs playing Democratic Leaders for fools....again.

There's a shocker. :silly:

[n2doc]

6. Because they chose to

Just like with any other issue (War, HCR, Wall Street Reform....). They aren't stupid. They just have other masters than the American People.

[dajoki]

26. Right on...

The American people are way down on the list.

[nashville_brook]

31. amen.

[Steely_Dan]

10. Well...One of the reasons...

is clear (at least to me).

President Obama and his Administration failed to take control of the message and to frame the arguments. They have consistently allowed the RW to paint this administration in wildly unrealistic terms...Like, Obama is a Marxist/Socialist. It is sad that this administration was either unwilling or unable to apply this basic political tool. It is particularly baffling when one considers the huge mandate that Obama had when he entered office.

-P

[Greyhound]

13. K&R, hear hear!

One of the most egregious offenses since he took office. This administration is obsessed with pouring as much $ as possible into the black-hole of wealth at the top, while it grinds the bones of the people at the bottom to dust.

[damntexdem]

14. Because they have not shown that they should be trusted on the issue.

And if the Dems do go along with an attack on Social Security, then I AM done with the Party. And under those circumstances, I would urge all of DU to do likewise.

[gratuitous]

16. I don't know that they're "losing" so much

As it is that the only people who get to go on teevee and write in the paper and get a microphone in a radio studio are people not dependent on social security. The national conversation seems to be driven solely by people who couldn't care less and barely notice if that extra $1,000 or so shows up in their checking account. When you talk to people who are saved from poverty because of it, the support for social security is overwhelming, as is the support for elected officials who see a strong program operating as it was intended to operate.

I wonder how defense expenditures would fare subjected to the scrutiny of peaceniks, hippies and other people not dependent on a massive defense budget to pay for their yachts and second and third homes?

[dajoki]

23. People who are saved from poverty

by Social Security do not get to hold a microphone or go on TV. That is why our Dem leaders should be speaking up on this issue. I have yet to hear any of them say there will be no cuts.

[kenny blankenship]

18. Guys like Obama and Emanuel think the people don't see through this shit

but they are wrong.

[librechik]

19. becasue leadership has surrendered--nay embraced--all the anti--SS propoganda we're swaped with

and gives only lip service to the idea that A SS is not in crisis and B the traditional and best fix is to raise the cap, like we have done many times before without controversy.

[suston96]

21. I don't believe "Democrats are losing the Social Security issue....."

I believe that Democrats are young as a group and generally may have little pressing interest in something that most of them believe won't be around when it comes time for them to collect.

Having said that, as an elderly person on Social Security for 17 years, I am really surprised and grateful to DUers here who have rallied against privatization and the proposed cuts. My only suggestion is to keep up the good work, not just for those of us who would be seriously hurt by any cuts, (we have already lost 2 or 3 Cost of Living adjustments) but for yourselves and your families future financial security.

And for crying out loud, spread the word that if the unemployment rate would drop down to 4 or 5% everywhere, all this Social Security despair would disappear. In other words - tell the Democrats and the Republicans to push for jobs legislation and to push public works job creation that will put almost everyone to work.

The more people working, the greater the income to the social programs - Social Security and Medicare, as well as to the treasury, thereby reducing the deficit.

[jayfish]

22. Because Eliminating The Income Cap Is Never Even Mentioned...

let alone explained by Democrats. If more people understood that someone who earns 1 million dollars pays the same in SS as someone who makes 107 thousand dollars; things might change.

[blindpig]

24. The people in those polls aren't stupid...

just as the 50% who don't vote aren't either, they know when their interests aren't being served.

[MisterP]

27. the phrasing "losing the issue" assumes that they're really for Soc Sec... nt

[dajoki]

28. Great point...

you have to read between the lines to get that and you did a good job of it.

[WVRICK13]

29. Because I Can't Tell The Difference

between Democrats and Republicans anymore. Has the entire country gone insane?

[dajoki]

30. Yes it has n/t