Two men who are not worried about their retirements. (Larry Downing/REUTERS)
"No Labels" sounds a lot like Third Way when it comes to Social Security. Apparently no one in either organization can read a poll. The American Prospect's Ben Adler catches them in the act of "ignoring the public on Social Security."
Last week, No Labels -- a supposedly nonpartisan group that seems to exist to promote Alan Simpson's austerity agenda -- blasted Democratic Senate Leader Harry Reid for refusing to join in the deficit hysteria. "Senator Reid's position is out of step with the majority of [the] country when it comes to our financial woes. Most Americans want bipartisan action that goes to the heart of the fiscal crisis," said Lisa Borders, a No Labels' "founding leader." (Apparently, the organization's effort to avoid labels includes job titles.)
What is the supposed evidence that most Americans want cuts in Social Security, one of the most popular and successful domestic programs in the history of the federal government? A Washington Post/ABC poll that shows 81 percent of Americans "see the country's Social Security system as headed for a crisis, and most think a major overhaul is in order." This argument -- that Americans think there's a crisis, so there must be one, and action must be taken -- would be hilariously moronic were it not so lamentably powerful. Pardon me for questioning the wisdom of Americans -- a majority of whom cannot name two members of the Supreme Court or find Iraq on a map -- but the relevant question for policy-makers should not be whether we believe Social Security is headed for a crisis but whether it actually is. Ideologues masquerading as nonpartisan truth tellers have been telling the public for years that Social Security won't be able to meet its obligations, and now that they've convinced Americans, the ideologues have turned around and cited that public belief as evidence that the program must be cut.
Adler continues to lay out the the actual facts of the total non-crisis in Social Security, but I want to back up a bit. Even in that WaPo poll Borders cites, there's no majority support for cutting Social Security. Only 32% of respondents think benefits should be cut. The solution they most support for their conviction that Social Security is in crisis (which it's not) is lifting the payroll tax cap on earnings above $107,000. They're behind that idea with a 53% majority.
Adler's spot on:
Let the Republicans meet the Democrats halfway by agreeing to tax increases and cuts in defense spending, and then maybe Obama and Reid will get behind some reasonable adjustments to entitlement spending that they can sell to their party. But to expect Democrats to agree to make their painful concessions without a compromise deal in place is to ask them to trade away Social Security benefits for further tax cuts for the rich. There are already people doing that: They're called Republicans.
They're apparently also called No Labels and Third Way. Why all the Very Serious People seem to want to elevate and emulate this guy is beyond me.