They've stopped thinking about tomorrow

By Frank Salvato
web posted February 14, 2005

If you ever needed proof that the Democrats were playing
obstructionist partisan politics you need look no further then their
leadership, both past and present. While Senator Harry Reid and
Representative Nancy Pelosi extol the evils of personalizing
Social Security some troubling words have been found in the
history books and the news files that should paint their faces a
pristine shade of crimson, and it's not because they just got back
from Alabama.

Recently, Reid, the Senate Minority Leader, made a statement
that rang ominously through the halls of Capitol Hill. When asked
about the president's suggestion that those in the American
workforce under the age of 55 be allowed to invest a percentage
of their Social Security payroll deduction in personalized
retirement savings accounts -- it is our money after all -- Reid,
steely eyed and resolute said that the president should forget
about it. He stated firmly and with conviction, "It isn't going to
happen." (
http://www.pipelinenews.org/index.cfm?page=
pipenews1.1.24.05.htm)

That's a very different tune from the one he was singing in 1999.

During an interview on Fox News Sunday in February of that
year, Reid said, "Most of us have no problem with taking a small
amount of the Social Security proceeds and putting it into the
private sector."

So, has the financial landscape changed so dramatically between
1999 and 2005 that what was then a grand idea is now the most
irresponsible idea ever floated by a sitting president? Hardly. It is
more likely that the Democratic strategy for the 2006 mid-term
elections is to keep those infected with the "hate-Bush" mentality
-- a symptom of which is an affinity for not researching the facts
further than Dan Rather's crack production staff -- stoked to a
fevered pitch. When dealing with such a fickle group it is easy to
present half-truths, weighted facts and with the prowess of a
deranged dominatrix, playing on constituents' emotions with flat-
out obstructionism.

Nancy Pelosi was reminiscent of Muhammad Ali recently with
her bobbing and weaving when asked about specific Democratic
alternatives to the president's suggestions (
http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/02
0805/020805_reforms.html). On ABC ‘s This Week with
George Stephanopoulos, Pelosi again whined about a moot point
pretending that it was a real issue. This time it was about having a
"seat at the negotiating table." Of course, this just shows that her
comments are carefully scripted. In his State of the Union
speech, President Bush said of his efforts to reform Social
Security, "I will work with members of Congress to find the most
effective combination of reforms. I will listen to anyone who has
a good idea to offer." How Pelosi equates that to not having "a
seat at the negotiating table" is beyond the rational mind. Frankly,
it lends to the suspicion that the Democrats won't sit "at the
negotiating table" under any circumstances.

A recent report in The Hill suggested that Congressional
Democrats have decided against introducing any alternatives at
all to the president's Social Security plan, opting instead to
continue on their obstructionist course. One senior Democratic
aide is quoted as saying, "Coming out with details of what we
would do is irrelevant. Why take the criticism without the result?"
Because it's your job! Ray Charles, God rest his soul, could see
that Democratic obstructionist politics, championed by Pelosi
and Reid, are trumping the good of the people.

The simple fact of the matter is that Democrats don't want to see
our government move forward. They are happy with the status
quo. It pleases them that we have become a dependent country,
feeding out of the trough of entitlement. A dependent voter must
rely on the government for their own wellbeing thus making the
right candidate for the job the one who creates the most social
programs. The key word here is "social" as in socialist. A nation
dependent on its government for its wellbeing is tantamount to a
socialist nation and that, alarmingly, seems to be the goal of the
Democratic Party. The last thing today's Democratic leaders
want is a self-sufficient, informed voter base, because such a
base would value self-reliance, civic responsibility and a
decreased need for government entitlement programs. Barring
pork barrel spending, entitlement programs are how Democrats
justify their existence.

Franklin Roosevelt's vision of Social Security differed greatly
from what Congress enacted in 1935 and what Democrats want
to maintain today. Roosevelt's plan called for three provisions: 1)
a system of old age pensions, 2) a system of mandatory old age
annuities (what we now know as Social Security) and 3) a
system of voluntary old age annuities (what President Bush is
proposing as personal savings accounts). Of the third step
Roosevelt said, "It is proposed that the Federal Government
assume one-half of the cost of the old-age pension plan, which
ought ultimately to be supplanted by self-supporting annuity plans
(emphasis added)." Roosevelt's original one-half the cost is quite
a bit more extensive than the 4 percent personalization that
President Bush is proposing.

After President Bush's State of the Union Address (
http://www.gop.com/News/Read.aspx?ID=5118), Pelosi, Reid
and the "Entitlement Democrats" stood at the FDR at his
memorial, behind his statue and tried to sell the American people
the product of misinformation; partisan propaganda. They said
President Bush and the Republicans were doing great injury to
FDR's program. In reality, when familiarized with the facts, it is
the Democrats who are trying to destroy the whole of a program
originally crafted to establish self-sufficient Americans and
eliminate reliance on government. The cross the obstructionist
Democrats have to bear is that they do so purely for political
gain. The question is, do they care?

Frank Salvato is a political media consultant and managing editor
for TheRant.us. His pieces are regularly featured in
Townhall.com. He has appeared on The O'Reilly Factor and
numerous radio shows. His pieces have been recognized by the
Japan Center for Conflict Prevention and are periodically
featured in The Washington Times as well as other national and
international publications. He can be contacted at
oped@therant.us Copyright © 2005 Frank Salvato

Enter Stage Right -- http://www.enterstageright.com