The Democrats’ Power Sweep

As Vince Lombardi’s Green Bay Packers demonstrated in the 1960s, it is not necessary to surprise your opponents if you can run them over. Opposing defenses knew that the “Power Sweep” was coming, but with Forrest Gregg sealing the outside, guards Jerry Kramer and Fuzzy Thurston pulling around the corner, and the elusive Paul Hornung running with the football, the Packers proved that skillful execution more than compensates for predictability.

Congressional Democrats have learned this lesson well and plan to emulate Lombardi’s Packers in the 2002 mid-term elections. They have a “Power Sweep” of their own in Social Security demagoguery and hope it can propel them to a sweeping victory this November. Like the Giants, Browns, and Chiefs the Packers dispatched, the Republicans know what is coming, but don’t seem equipped to stop it.

Much of this can be attributed to a crisis of confidence. In 2000, candidate George W. Bush campaigned on a plan to allow younger workers to invest a portion of their payroll taxes in private accounts. Given the demographic problem posed by the baby boomer generation and declining birth rates, this proposal may be the only way to keep the program solvent without dramatic tax increases, benefit cuts, or both. But more important from a political perspective, private accounts also seem to sit well with voters. A recent FOX News/Opinion Dynamics poll found that 66 percent of Americans favor personal retirement accounts (PRAs), including 58 percent of registered Democrats.

Yet Republicans remain unwilling to capitalize on such findings. Instead, they have engaged in vapid debates about semantics. In the May 4th and 11th issues of National Journal, Reps. Robert Matsui (D-Calif.) and Bill Thomas (R-Calif.) debated whether it is appropriate to use the word “privatization” to describe PRA-based reform of Social Security. While polls demonstrate that voters favor the substance of Social Security reform, they are vehemently opposed to the word “privatization.”

While the enlightened public official would view this as a voter education problem and seek to inform, Democrats see the public’s cognitive dissonance as an invitation for exploitation. Rather than debate the merits of the Republican reform proposals, or offer suggestions for how best to address the inevitable collapse of the current system’s finances, the Democrats blast “privatization” as a break in “our contract with the American people,” which will lead to “cuts in benefits.”

Democrats have been speaking in unison on the issue and have criticized Republicans for “a budget that raided $1.8 billion from the Social Security trust fund” and a plan that “could leave families with nothing for retirement.” Such baseless attacks have become sport for some Democrats. Last month, Republicans found a misdirected e-mail message from the office of Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) that contained the line, “Talk about scaring seniors — this may be a little over the top. But it is sooo fun to bash Republicans.”

It’s effective, too. In response to such attacks, Republicans have all but abandoned reform. When asked if the Republican Party would be running on Social Security, National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Tom Davis (R-Va.) said: “Not on your life. We’re staying away from that.”

Instead of diffusing the issue, Davis inadvertently opened another line of attack for Democrats. House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) attributes Republican silence on reform to their “secret plan” to cut Social Security benefits after the 2002 elections. Rep. Martin Frost (D- Texas) told The New York Times that Democrats will not allow Republicans to “walk away from privatization. They’ve been pushing it for years now and all of a sudden they want to disavow it.”

As part of this strategy, House Democrats are circulating a discharge petition to force leadership to bring Social Security reform legislation to the House floor. “The American people should be reminded that Republicans strongly support privatization; that’s their position,” Gephardt told reporters. “Democrats believe that Republicans should have the courage of their convictions and hold this debate before this November.”

Ironically, the party that purportedly favors private accounts is doing everything in its power to prevent such legislation from reaching the House floor. If this is the Republicans’ answer to the Democrats’ “Power Sweep,” they could be in for a rout this November. Social Security reform based on personal accounts is not only necessary, but also politically popular. Unfortunately, it seems that Republicans are so used to getting run over on this issue that the best strategy they can come up with is to run and hide.