DLC: Pledge Campaign a Failure

December 12, 2002

Will Marshall, president of the Progressive Policy Institute and member of the Democratic Leadership Council, recently wrote a scathing analysis of Democratic attempts to vilify proponents of personal accounts. Writes Marshall,

"Nothing better epitomized the hackneyed and reactive character of the Democrats' 2002 midterm campaign than 'The Pledge.'… Like camp meeting converts swearing off demon rum, nearly every Democratic candidate for Congress dutifully took the Pledge. They vowed to never, ever allow working Americans to divert some portion of their Social Security payroll taxes into personal retirement accounts. In leftish circles, this goes by the name of 'privatization' and is regarded as the ultimate political thought crime."

Marshall was unimpressed by the efforts of the Campaign for America's Future, "a union-backed organization that is to Social Security and Medicare what the Inquisition was to medieval Christiandom… Their goal is simple: to preserve Social Security and Medicare as nearly as possible in their original 1935 and 1965 incarnations. And with the Pledge they encouraged Democrats to make this profoundly conservative, even reactionary, stance the centerpiece of their midterm election campaign… Don't believe all the post-election blather about Democrats losing because they had no message. In fact, party leaders could not have been more consistent or coherent, declaring over and over again that the election would be 'a referendum on Social Security.' Egged on by pollsters and consultants, Democrats lambasted their GOP opponents for scheming to privatize the system."

Marshall argues that "Democrats' determinedly 'gray' message seems not to have swayed seniors. According to a post-election poll by Greenburg/Quinlan/Rosner Research, Republican candidates won voters over age 60 by five points (51 percent to 46 percent). And so the 2002 midterm went down as the fourth straight election in which Democratic promises to 'protect' Social Security and Medicare failed to wrest back control of Congress from the GOP."

All of this, Marshall says, points to a series of miscalculations by the Democratic party: "First, as these numbers show, older voters have interests beyond their retirement checks and prescription drugs, and they probably resent being pandered to by politicians who assume their outlook is essentially selfish."

"Second, public views on Social Security increasingly diverge by age. Generally speaking, voters under 50 have doubts about the system's future and are attracted to personal accounts as a way of taking greater control of their retirement security. Older voters are more skeptical of personal accounts and indeed any change that looks like an attempt to change the system's rules just as they're about to retire. This split explains why candidate George Bush, who made personal savings accounts a key campaign pledge in 2000, could step on the proverbial 'third rail of American politics' and not get electrocuted."

Marshall concludes, "What's crucial now is that Democrats stop reflexively opposing virtually every serious option for entitlement reform that's put on the table. Instead of a lemming-like rush to placate pressure groups by signing pledges that sanctify the status quo, the party needs to regain its old habit of independent thought and bold policy innovation."

2005 Index | 2004 Index
2003 Index | 2002 Index | 2001 Index
2000 Index | 1999 Index | 1998 Index