Bad Faith on Social Security

February 10, 2007
Editorial
Bad Faith on Social Security
In 2005, President Bush puthis political capital where his mouth was, and lost. He went all-out toconvince Congress and the American people that privatizing SocialSecurity would be good and necessary. It’s neither — and his plan wasjustifiably and soundly rejected. This year, with his political capitalon empty, Mr. Bush is talking about a bipartisan effort to reformSocial Security. But his actions suggest that he has no intention ofmaking any serious compromises.
In his new budget, Mr. Bush allocates $29.3 billion to establishprivate accounts in 2012, totaling $637 billion through 2017. Thatsuggests that either Mr. Bush still hasn’t figured out that privateaccounts are a political nonstarter, or he’s hoping to use them as abargaining chip in future negotiations. Either way, that attitudevirtually ensures that Social Security reform will stall in thisCongress, just as it did when the Republicans were in charge.
Mr. Bush is proving similarly tone-deaf when it comes to choosing members for the Social Security board of trustees.
There are six trustees, four of them administration officials andtwo outsiders. The job of the two outsiders — nominated by thepresident and confirmed by the Senate — is to represent the public’sinterest in decisions about the program. Last year Mr. Bush nominatedthe same two men who had served in his first term. That violated therationale for having public trustees, which is to bring freshperspectives. So Congress refused to consider the nominees, but Mr.Bush appointed them for another year while Congress was in recess. Hehas now renominated them for new four-year terms.
Mr. Bush won’t get his way. But he is alienating Congress andcreating delays that will make it harder for the next two publictrustees — whoever they are — to participate fully. Given all that,it’s not surprising if the public and Congress decide that Mr. Bush isnot to be trusted on Social Security.