Like many of you, I cringe at some of the BS stances the DLC takes on many issues at the heart of the Democratic Party. Though, I was happy to see the Democratic Leadership Council has decided NOT to support Bush's personal-risk accounts and the destruction of Social Security.
LA TIMES - Centrist Democrats to Oppose Bush's Social Security Privatization
Two groups of prominent Democratic centrists plan to oppose the centerpiece of President Bush's proposal to restructure Social Security, potentially dimming the administration's hope of building bipartisan support for its top domestic priority.
The Democratic Leadership Council, the party's leading centrist organization, and Third Way, a new group working with moderate Senate Democrats, expect to issue statements soon opposing Bush's proposal to divert part of the Social Security payroll tax into accounts that individuals could invest in the stock market, officials at the groups said.
The opposition is significant because both groups have aggressively argued that Democrats should not flatly resist changes in Social Security. Also, in the past, the DLC's think tank has backed the sort of private investment accounts Bush is promoting.
After hearing Rendell and other confused moderate Democrats swaying in the wind over Social Security, it's good to see the moderates' fink tank engaging with the heart of the party on Social Security - an issue where unity is crucial. Now we need Lieberman and Bayh (ughh..) to cut the smack and denounce Bush's Social Insecurity:
So far, most congressional Democratic moderates have not preemptively rejected Bush's call for private accounts. For instance, in recent interviews Democratic Sens. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, Evan Bayh of Indiana and Tom Carper of Delaware refused to rule out the idea.
"For now, we should leave things on the table and have a debate about them," said Carper.
Still, many of the centrists are signaling that they might support private accounts only with conditions Republicans likely would find difficult to accept. Bayh said he would consider a private account plan only if it could "maintain the safety net, maintain progressivity [in benefits] and protect the taxpayers [from more debt]."
Looks as though the DLC is coming out with their own plan, which is what Clinton has proposed in the past (no surprise) and is definitely much better - supplementing the program, rather than destroying it.
Instead, most Democrats have echoed former President Clinton in endorsing "add-on" investment accounts that would provide workers government subsidies to invest for retirement, but not divert -- or carve out -- existing payroll tax revenue.
That's the alternative the DLC and the Third Way group are likely to propose in their coming statements. The idea has almost no support among Republicans, who argue it does not address Social Security's long-term funding problems and instead creates an expensive new entitlement in the form of subsidized retirement savings.
Remember to keep tabs on Krugman and the NY Times - which have had, and are planning, more great articles and Op/Eds on the Social Security travesty.