Unlikely Allies

November 10, 1999

It is not often that the Cato Institute finds itself on the same side of the Social Security debate as Henry J. Aaron, who opposes privatization and favors maintaining the current system through tax increases, benefit cuts and government investment in the stock market. Nevertheless, Aaron's commentary in Monday's Washington Post highlighted one point of bipartisan agreement: "The truth is that the budget debate has nothing to do with Social Security." Aaron points out that: "The budget debate is about spending in agencies other than Social Security and revenues other than Social Security taxes. Despite two years of more or less serious debate on Social Security reform, that subject is off the congressional agenda. Whatever Congress decides regarding spending of other agencies, revenues flowing into and outlays flowing from the Social Security trust fund will be virtually the same.

"So why are both parties going around talking trash to the public, saying that they are hell-bent not to 'raid' the Social Security trust fund? The reason is that each party is trying to shed political liabilities. Republicans want to stop being regarded as the party that can't be trusted with Social Security. Democrats want to avoid barbs that they are the party of 'tax and spend.'"

We may disagree with Aaron on solutions, but we agree that it is well past time to end what he terms the "degrading performance" going on in Congress and the Presidency and get on to real reform.

2001 Index | 2000 Index | 1999 Index | 1998 Index