President Obama’s 2012 budget proposal does not include any changes to Social Security. It does, however, present six principles for negotiations aimed to “strengthen” the program.
Here are the principles. They are notable both for what they say, and what they don’t:
“The President believes that we should come together now, in bipartisan fashion, to strengthen Social Security for the future,” the budget message says. “He calls on the Congress to follow the example of great leaders in the past – such as Speaker Thomas P. O’Neill Jr. and President Ronald Reagan -- and work in a bipartisan fashion to strengthen Social Security for years to come.”
Here are the six principles:
1. Any reform should strengthen Social Security for future generations and restore long-term solvency.
2. The Administration will oppose any measures that privatize or weaken the Social Security system.
3. While all measures to strengthen solvency should be on the table, the Administration will not accept an approach that slashes benefits for future generations.
4. No current beneficiaries should see their basic benefits reduced.
5. Reform should strengthen retirement security for the most vulnerable, including low-income seniors.
6. Reform should maintain robust disability and survivors’ benefits.
This largely confirms what the Obama administration has said in the past about Social Security. It means:
- Privatization is out. The administration opposes privatization, and considers it off the table. This reinforces what the administration said to Daily Kos three weeks ago, when David Axelrod referred to privatization as a “non-starter” in any potential deal with Republicans on Social Security.
- Raising the retirement age is on the table. Notably absent in this list of principles is any mention of the retirement age. The retirement age was also not mentioned during the portion of the State of the Union address that discussed Social Security. The continued absence of any mention of the retirement age is a very strong indication that changes to the retirement age are indeed on the table.
- No “slashes” to benefits, but possible tweaks. These six principles once again emphasize that President Obama is opposed to “slashes” in benefits. This is the exact same language that the President used in the State of the Union. Notably, “slashes” is a subjective descriptor, which vaguely rules out deep cuts in benefits but does not oppose benefit cuts in general.
Keep in mind that if any deal happens,
it will be worked out in private, without any public campaign:
But despite all the confrontational rhetoric between the two parties about budget priorities, the White House and Republican congressional leaders, in private talks, have agreed on the need to try to reach a bipartisan “grand bargain” over the budget—a sweeping deal that could include entitlements and tax reforms as well as budget reduction. A Senate Republican leadership aide confirmed this, saying, “In fact, for anything to happen, it will require such a White House/congressional leadership bargain.” The preferred idea is that, just as they did late last year on the tax bill, they would reach an agreement and then unveil it to the public.
Furthermore, no deal will be announced unless the Obama administration is behind it. As David Axelrod said to me three weeks ago when I asked him if there was any deal on Social Security President Obama would veto:
I will say this. I don’t think -- there’s not going to be a bipartisan agreement for him to veto. I think if there’s a bipartisan agreement that it’s going to be hammered out around the principles that he articulated last night or it’s probably not going to move forward. Just the nature of the issue.
That’s the landscape for a potential Social Security “deal” over the next two years. To sign up to defend the program, click here and take our Social Security pledge.