Having read a fascinating book, "Man of the House", by former Speaker Tip O'Neill with William Novak (1987), I have a different opinion of the rhyme(s) and reason(s) for the destruction of Social Security. Other human service programs targeted for gutting by the republicans are also mentioned.
As some diaries have stated, specifically or implied, it appears that the republican party is attempting to destroy the work of FDR and the New Deal. With all respect to the writers, I disagree with this assumption, and would like to offer a theory of my own.
First, aside from Social Security, some of other programs the republicans desire to gut are: Medicaire, Medicaid, and (some or all of) HUD. Others on the chopping block include aid for schools and colleges, mass transit and the environment. (This list is not intended to be all-inclusive.)
All have one common characteristic: they were signed by Lyndon Johnson, as part of his "war on poverty", specifically the Economic Opportunity Act. Other legislation signed by LBJ included increased social security and an increases minimum wage. Another of LBJ's legislative triumphs was the
Voting Rights Act, which was effectively voided during the last Presidential election. (That's
my opinion.)
Something else has been at the back of my mind: LBJ was a Democrat from Texas. Is it possible that one of the Bush family had some sort of long ago disagreement/run-in with LBJ in local politics that appeared to be resolved? And is the gutting of the "War on Poverty" revenge? (No matter who gets hurt in the process.)
As stated in "Man of the House", "If it hadn't been for Vietnam, Johnson could have gone down in history as another Roosevelt." (p.206)
I realize that this is a rather unsual theory and it is purely speculative. In closing, a quote from Sam Rayburn is appropriate: "We're (the Democratic party) in the minority now. But, we're still going to be helpful and constructive. Any jackass can kick over a barn door. It takes a carpenter to build one." (p. 4)