Sunday, March 13, 2005
No means no.
Josh Marshall has an excellent piece on Democratic strategy about Social Security reform. Basically, he doesn't think the Democrats should be putting an alternative plan on the table right now; they have nothing to gain from so doing at this point. As long as the President's plan is vague and unpopular, the smart move is to simply oppose it, and explain why. Money quote:
|
Another reason it makes no sense is that it buys into the essential dishonesty of the president's political argument -- namely, that we're now debating how to 'save' Social Security: He has a plan. So the Dems should have one too.
But, as we've argued repeatedly here, that's not what we're debating. As press commentary has belatedly but increasingly awakened to, what we're now debating is whether to keep Social Security or to replace it with private accounts.
I think this is dead on the money, and I think that if the Democrats can successfully frame the debate on these terms, this will be a big winner for them in 2006.
Read the whole thing.
|
