Social Security seen as puzzling priority. Other concerns more pressing, some say

Author: Paul Barton

Published: March 20, 2005

The budget deficit is at a record level. So are trade deficits. Energy prices are going through the roof. Health-care costs, including those for Medicaid and Medicare, are busting budgets. The dollar is experiencing a loss of confidence overseas.

In the midst of all this, President Bush and his surrogates are trying to visit 60 cities in 60 days to hawk his plans for restructuring Social Security. Debate about Social Security still reigns supreme in Washington, as well.

But a growing number of policy analysts and Democrats, including some in the Arkansas congressional delegation, are questioning whether Social Security should be getting this much attention.

As Congress begins a twoweek recess, members are wondering what their constituents will most want to discuss.

Even Rep. John Boozman, the lone Republican in the Arkansas delegation, agrees that restructuring Social Security is not the nation's most pressing problem right now. "It's not our most acute, by any means."

But, Boozman said, government officials were elected to handle more than one problem at a time, and there is no reason not to deal with Social Security, even in the midst of raging energy and health-care costs and transportation needs.

Bush remains convinced that Social Security "must be addressed today" for many reasons, not the least of which is the declining number of workers who will be paying into the system as the retirement of the baby boomers begins in 2008, according to White House spokesman Allen Abney.

"There will be a dramatic increase in the number of retirees who will be living longer," said Abney, adding that cash deficits in the system could appear as early as 2018.

"Social Security is a pay-asyou-go system that leaves workers with IOUs, not personal accounts," he said.

Referring to a just-passed Senate resolution that calls Social Security "a vital national priority," Abney said, "Members of both parties now recognize the problems facing Social Security."

Business groups see Bush as having his priorities right.

A Social Security fix is a must, said Michael Baroody, executive vice president of the National Association of Manufacturers.

"The last thing we need is the certainty of increased [Social Security] payroll taxes," he said. Social Security must be "solved by fundamental modernization."

Others, however, see the Social Security debate as getting in the way of things that need fixing a lot faster.

"We can only do one or two things at a time ... in terms of our political system. When the president says, `Let's do Social Security,' it means not focusing on other things that could be priorities," said John Rother, lobbyist for AARP, formerly the American Association of Retired Persons.

"It's a huge distraction," said an analyst at a prominent state government lobbying organization, who spoke on background. "The crises that are in front of us are the federal deficit, the trade deficit, Medicare and Medicaid and 45 million uninsured people."

DEFINING PRIORITIES Democrats in Congress increasingly feel the same way.

When Alan Greenspan, chairman of the Federal Reserve, urged Congress last week to get moving on Social Security, he came under blistering questioning from Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., about why he wasn't talking about the nation's health-care problems in the same tone.

Arkansas' Sen. Blanche Lincoln, who sits on the Senate Special Committee on Aging with Wyden, told Greenspan that Social Security "is part of the puzzle" - but only a part.

The nation's budget problems and health-care costs "are much more immediate. I think people realize that," she said in an interview.

Despite all the publicity the Bush administration has generated about Social Security, Democrats remind that the system is projected to remain solvent until at least 2040 or 2042. Medicare, on the other hand, could be bankrupt in a decade.

"Oh, goodness, no," Arkansas' Rep. Marion Berry said when asked if Social Security was the nation's most pressing domestic issue.

"The most pressing and absolutely urgent need we have in this country ... is we have too many people in this country that don't have health care at all."

Said Rep. Vic Snyder: "I'm glad he is talking about retirement programs. I just wish he would put forth a better plan than what he has presented."

Arkansas' Sen. Mark Pryor had a slightly different take.

"I'm glad the president has listed Social Security as his No. 1 domestic priority," he said.

Why?

Because it is "very fixable," Pryor said, "and is a good test run for us [in terms of fixing other problems]."

HOW URGENT IS IT?

Even though he doesn't think it's the nation's No. 1 problem, Arkansas' Rep. Mike Ross is planning a series of town-hall meetings on Social Security during the recess. "I've got people coming up to me at church, at the restaurant, at the gas station, saying, `Please don't let the president mess with my Social Security.'"

For that reason, Ross said, "I have an obligation" to present constituents with "an objective view" of where the program stands and what's under consideration.

"No one is going to miss their Social Security check next month, next year or even in the next decade," Ross said.

Public-opinion experts say Bush has already succeeded in making Americans think more about Social Security. Whether they think it is the nation's most pressing issue is less clear.

"The urgency is a little more ambiguous," Frank Newport, editor of the Gallup Poll, said in a interview.

Early last fall, Newport said, Americans were ranking health care as a far more pressing problem, but that was before Bush began his Social Security campaign. "Clearly, [Social Security] has zoomed up," he said.

Still, the Gallup editor said, "I think the public is aware that it doesn't have to be done this year."

BEHIND THE PUSH Some political analysts wonder about Bush's motives.

"I am a little stumped as to why he [Bush] is so hellbent to tackle Social Security," said John Hibbing, congressional scholar at the University of Nebraska.

But Stephen Wayne, government professor at Georgetown University, said it's clear what Bush is doing and why he's doing it.

"The president is committed to these [Social Security] changes. They fit the long-range picture he has of an ownership society," Wayne said. "He is eager to move on it."

The 60-day, 60-city tour, he added, is designed to buck up Republicans who heard complaints about the president's Social Security plans during their last recess in February.

But Wayne, like others, doubts whether it's the nation's biggest problem.

"The cost of health care is accelerating in excess of the rate of inflation," he said. "I think that is a lot more pertinent issue to a lot more people."

Thomas Alan Schwartz, political historian at Vanderbilt University, said recent polls showing uneasiness with Bush's Social Security plans illustrate that it might be the Third Rail of American politics, after all. "The president is seeing something of that," he said.

But Bush gets credit for what he is doing from a surprising source, a policy analyst at a liberal think tank.

Eugene Steuerle, domesticpolicy expert at the Urban Institute, said health care "is the bigger problem" but that Bush is right to focus on Social Security at the same time.

"Social Security is one leg of the budget problem," he said. "It many ways, it makes a lot of sense. It is a lot easier to resolve [than the others]."

But he added, "You ought to be working on all of them."