What might have been

With Social Security reform nearly dead, it’s time to look back with perfect hindsight and see what could have been done differently. From USA Today: “Bush's plan dies quietly, leaving lessons for next time”

The failure of Bush's plan no doubt delights Democrats. In the past five years, they've been routed on issues ranging from tax cuts to Medicare. They never unified behind their own plan to bail out Social Security, nor did they have much incentive to do so. Merely killing Bush's protected their interests.

For the American people, though, there is less reason for cheer. All the problems that existed before the president's proposal still exist. However flawed his solution, he deserves credit for taking on the basic problem: Without reforms, Social Security will start running a deficit in 2017 and be unable to meet its obligations by 2041, according to the latest estimates from its trustees.

USA Today suggests that next time reform should start with 1.) a real bipartisan commission, 2.) a focus on solvency over personal accounts and 3.) “laying the groundwork honestly.” I’ll agree that President Bush was high-handed in his reform plan and unprepared for the pushback by the Democrats and their allies in the AARP. But I take exception at the “lay the groundwork honestly” bite. Bush laid out all the immutable facts about the “guaranteed” benefit, as clearly outlined by the Social Security trustees. In response, the Democrats offered nothing but criticism and absolutely no alternative to what even they admit is an expanding and unavoidable problem.

But then setting an agenda has never been part of the Democrats’ agenda. Here’s an article in the Economist, excerpted on Red State, about the institutional drift of the Democratic party:

Can anyone name a single exciting Democratic idea for dealing with poverty? Or crime? Or reforming the public sector? Or winning the Kulturkampf with Islamic extremism? In fact, can anyone name a single exciting Democratic idea, full stop? The Democrats have squandered their years in opposition railing against the Republicans rather than recharging their intellectual batteries. They may be winning a few political battles of late—largely because of Republican incompetence. But they are losing the vision wars.

In the ideological battle, the Democrats are largely unarmed.