Social Security Goals May Clash (with other GOP goals)

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-social11jan11,1,1484605.story?ctrack=1&cset=true
Social Security Goals May Clash
The president is likely to propose reductions in the growth of benefits along with his personal account plan. Such a package could draw fire.
By Ronald Brownstein
Times Staff Writer

January 11, 2005

WASHINGTON — In restructuring Social Security, President Bush has not one goal, but two.

And as the debate begins over transforming the giant public pension program for the elderly, one of the critical questions facing the White House is whether the two goals will complement or undermine each other.

So far, most of the attention has focused on the president's push to divert part of the Social Security payroll tax into private accounts that individuals could invest in stocks or bonds — a plan Bush is expected to promote today.

But White House officials signal that he's also likely to propose reductions in the growth of Social Security benefits meant to close the imbalance between the system's long-term revenue and obligations. <snip>

Increasingly, it appears Bush also could face the opposite risk: that the personal accounts could erode support for the benefit reductions.<snip>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64196-2005Jan10.html?sub=AR

In GOP, Resistance On Social Security
Bush Plan Raises Fear of Voter Anger
By Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, January 11, 2005; Page A01


Many Republicans are expressing reservations about the political wisdom of President Bush's vision for restructuring Social Security, as the White House today intensifies its campaign to restructure the entitlement program for the retired and disabled.

Bush, who relishes challenging the conventional wisdoms of Washington, has privately counseled Republicans that partially privatizing Social Security will be a boon for the GOP and has urged skeptics to hold fire until he builds a public case for change. But several influential Republicans are warning that Bush's plan could backfire on the party in next year's elections, especially if the plan includes cuts in benefits.

Most alarming to White House officials, some congressional Republicans are panning the president's plan -- even before it is unveiled. "Why stir up a political hornet's nest . . . when there is no urgency?" said Rep. Rob Simmons (Conn.), who represents a competitive district. "When does the program go belly up? 2042. I will be dead by then."

Simmons said there is no way he will support Bush's idea of allowing younger Americans to divert some of their payroll taxes into private accounts, especially when there are more pressing needs, such as shoring up Medicare and providing armor to U.S. troops in Iraq.

Rep. Jack Kingston (Ga.), a member of the GOP leadership, said 15 to 20 House Republicans agree with Simmons, although others say the number is closer to 40. "Just convincing our guys not to be timid is going to be a big struggle," he said. "It's going to take a lot of convincing," which he said can be done.<snip>

of it now? So they can segue into attacking the idea of "defined benefits" and how that is a passé concept? Looks like one of Brownstein's slimier pieces.

pension plans.

"the giant public pension program" is a poor phrase with poorly chosed words to use as it must be read as

The Giant insurance program....for defined benefit pensions - BUT

that article on PBGC rates http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/11/business/11pension.html is not the above article!



If an early edition of the above used "the giant public pension program" - they have cleaned it up now!

:-)