February 9, 2007
HIS ALLIES UNDERSTAND LEAST OF ALL:
Bush's Dangerous Budget Experiment (David Shribman, 2/08/07, Real Clear Politics)
[I]t is President Bush's challenge to his political allies on the right and his most creative effort at calling the bluff of his political rivals on the left. In this budget he sets forth hundreds of spending targets, but the one that really matters is his effort to cut the growth of federal entitlements by forcing Democrats to confront their own core beliefs.By proposing to expand means tests to more federal programs, the president is embarking on a dangerous experiment -- dangerous for him because the outcry will be so great, and dangerous to the Democrats because they are on record for putting a heavier financial burden on the rich but still recoil from cutting entitlement programs. [...]
Cutting federal entitlements on wealthier Americans applies the Democratic ethos -- the notion that those of different economic fortune should have different economic burdens -- to the most protected, beloved and untouchable corners of the federal budget. Fair's fair, and consistent is consistent.
This is a presidential challenge for the ages, all the more so for its subtlety -- and lack of exposure in just about every media outlet except the ever-vigilant Financial Times, which isn't even an American newspaper. What Mr. Bush is doing is taking the values his opponents cherish most and seeking to apply them to the federal entitlement programs that Americans of all income groups cherish the most.
Mr. Shribman has been one of the few pundits with a firm grasp on how revolutionary a figure George W. Bush is pretty nearly from jump street. We long ago gave up on the Stupid Party understanding what its leader is doing--they don't get subtlety. Posted by Orrin Judd at February 9, 2007 12:25 PM
Means test away, but don't insult my intelligence by having me calculate the Social Security and Medicare tax separately on my tax return. Just roll them into the general tax.
Posted by: Rick T. at February 9, 2007 2:46 PMSeems to me there is already a sort of means test in place in that a portion of SS Benefits is taxed at the filer's tax rate beyond a certain level of adjusted goss income.
Posted by: jdkelly at February 9, 2007 5:17 PMWhy should those people ever get the benefit?
Posted by: oj at February 9, 2007 7:15 PMoj/ Which people are those?
Posted by: erp at February 9, 2007 8:07 PMWe who make so much that some isn't taxed for SS.
Posted by: oj at February 9, 2007 8:39 PMTwo reasons: In the first place, social security had been sold as, and is still believed by most Americans to be, an insurance and not a transfer payment.
Another reason is that many, many people have made their plans with the present regime in consideration. There is an element of justice in maintaining situations which have been so relied on. The concept of estoppel expresses this value.
Kirk--Russel Kirk and other conservative thinkers wrote on this. It is part of the conservative principla that if it it is not necessary to change, it is necessary not to change.
Posted by: Lou Gots at February 11, 2007 2:35 PM