Perry’s scorn for Social Security won’t be issue in GOP primary
In his 2010 book “Fed Up,”, Texas Gov. Rick Perry didn’t hold back in expressing his scorn for Social Security and Medicare.
Social Security, he wrote, is a “Ponzi scheme,” “a crumbling monument to the failure of the New Deal” created “at the expense of respect for the Constitution and limited government.”
It’s going to be fascinating to see how that language plays out politically. In a recent CNN poll, 64 percent of Americans said they oppose making “major changes in Social Security and Medicare” as a means of addressing the debt problem, while only 35 percent supported the idea. Those numbers suggest that Perry’s statements could become a serious problem in a general election.
(A Wall Street Journal/NBC poll released in March produced similar numbers. Only 18 percent said Medicare cuts were necessary to “significantly reduce” the deficit, while 54 percent said they were not. Just 22 percent said cuts to Social Security were needed, while 49 percent said they weren’t.)
At first glance, you might think that Perry’s position would be a liability in the GOP primary as well. According to the CNN poll, only 42 percent of GOP voters say they would support major changes in Social Security and Medicare, while a large majority of 57 percent reject the idea.
Theoretically, that should open up a two-pronged attack against Perry for somebody like Mitt Romney. By defending Medicare and Social Security against major cuts, Romney could align with a majority within his own party. It would also allow him to make the case that Perry’s extreme position might cost him the general election against Barack Obama.
But Romney hasn’t taken that course, and I don’t think he ever will. Here’s why.
It gets down to the difference between music and lyrics. Lyrics provide the words, but the music is what makes people get up and dance. It’s true in entertainment, and it’s true in politics as well.
If Romney criticizes Perry for taking an extreme view on Social Security and Medicare, he’d be getting the lyrics politically right. However, the music that GOP primary voters would hear is there goes RINO Romney, defending government entitlement programs. It is not a tenable position. It would be like standing in front of the GOP convention and singing “My Country T’is of Thee” to a hiphop beat.
It’s the music that matters.
– Jay Bookman
UPDATE: I should also point out that in the CNN poll, 80 percent of those identifying themselves as tea-party supporters say they support major cuts in domestic programs as a way to cut the deficit.
However, only 47 percent of tea-party supporters back major cuts in Social Security and Medicare; 52 percent oppose it.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
426 comments Add your comment
Joe Mama
August 26th, 2011
12:49 pm
Steve — “Seems an Amendment requiring all Goverment personnel to use SS & Medicare would get the dumbazzes in Washington to correct the flaws in both.”
Sounds fine to me.
md
August 26th, 2011
12:51 pm
“When you say “the cap on the other,” are you suggesting that there should be no upper limit on benefits?”
Thats why the cap is currently there…………..on both ends.
I don’t care for taxing folks just on the basis of income………too many choose not to participate for that to be a viable alternative………….
Not So Casual Observer
August 26th, 2011
12:51 pm
J Mama,
SS is not like either term or whole life since those are a decision each individual makes with regard to a policy. SS is forced upon you by the Government, taken from you at the threat of a prison term for non-compliance.
Currently an individual pays tax on the $ deducted for SS and then, if he/she happens to be an intelligent and successful provider for their future, the benefits are also taxed.
The original promise was the benfits would never be taxed – another Democrat lie, now abetted by the Republicans.
The motive for SS was a means to take money from the public to finance WWII and defray the costs of the depression with the expectation only a small benefit would ever be paid.
The only arguments for maintaing the current SS and Medicare systems are POLITICAL not intellectual. The gray hairs revolt at the mention of curtailing benefits or increasing the retirement age (mostly at the urging of one of more socialist groups in Washington – the AARP) while the young people (on whom the systems depend) see little chance of a return on their “investment”.
The lack of leadership on the part of Congress (Reid & Boehner) and the White House (Obama) is astounding. None of these rascals have the cahones to do the proper thing for fear of losing their jobs and thus falling off the government gravy train.
The first major steps to balancing the budget are to eliminate earmarks, eliminate attaching spending amendments to bills that are not associated with the legislation (money for the Murtha airport attached to a Defense Bill) and to forever ban any federal government employee from becoming a lobbyist.
Also, as an example of the earmark fraud, the Republican Congressman from Mississippi who earmarked $15-30 Million for research at 2 universities and then received $20,000+/- from each of the faculty in the two departments receiving the grants. None of the professors had been contributors prior to the earmarks.
Eliminating teh Congressional corruption would be a very big step toward balancing the budget.
Bosch
August 26th, 2011
1:01 pm
“Well, Bosch, have you finished demeaning your older family members? ”
Dusty,
When I read something like that, I know we have a merciful God, otherwise you would be dead from choking on those words.
williebkind
August 26th, 2011
1:02 pm
“Eliminating the Congressional corruption would be a very big step toward balancing the budget.”
Yes, it would and that would encourage congress to do the work the tax payers pay them to do.
No federal emplyee can be a lobbyst is a super move toward lesser spending.
Jimmy62
August 26th, 2011
1:06 pm
Here’s an SS solution. If you guys really think that you get back what you pay in, then you should have no problem with allowing anyone who doesn’t like SS to opt out. I will gladly sacrifice the payroll taxes I have already paid in return for not having to pay another cent to SS for the rest of my life.
But you won’t allow that because if there was an actual choice then SS wouldn’t last another year.
Real American
August 26th, 2011
1:07 pm
It does not matter low self esteem rep white lower class are still going to vote for him even though their parents, grand ma are on medicare , these tea party idiots could care less as long as he take shots at the President and 3 time college droup out Sean Hannity tell them how bade President Obama is they are still going to vote against their interest.
I can not wait till Perry, Rommey line against up the President, both of these hypocrites records with be exposed and real Americans who care about their country not the color of a man skin will vote for the obvious.
rightwingextreme
August 26th, 2011
1:08 pm
A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to separate investors, not from any actual profit earned by the organization, but from their own money or money paid by subsequent investors. The Ponzi scheme usually entices new investors by offering returns other investments cannot guarantee, in the form of short-term returns that are either abnormally high or unusually consistent
Jimmy62
August 26th, 2011
1:09 pm
Real American: No one with your grammar skills has any right to call anyone else an idiot.
Disgusted
August 26th, 2011
1:13 pm
Seems an Amendment requiring all Goverment personnel to use SS & Medicare would get the dumbazzes in Washington to correct the flaws in both.
All government personnel hired full-time since 1986 are required to be part of SS and Medicare, dumbazz. Only members of Congress who have the power to exempt themselves and those government personnel hired before 1986 and electing to stay on the old system are exempt. Try reading and research. They’re good for you.
Joe the Plutocrat (and Travis Bickle)
August 26th, 2011
1:19 pm
getalife; “you talkin’ to me?” so, how do you explain the recessions during the Nixon, Bush 41 and the end of the Bush/admins? I don’t know if we had a recession in the early 80’s (Reagan), but it sure felt like on. anyway, since you such a savvy and prescient investor, you’ve hedge on it; which means you’ll benefit (like old man Potter did in “It’s a Wonderful Life”).
Grits, you do realize that in citing Josef Stalin, you are kinda barking the “Socialist” mantra, which means that the the US (capitalism) “rots from within” as opposed to in response to the forces of Nature. seriously, you need to drop the talking points and think outside the box
Joe
August 26th, 2011
1:20 pm
What are some idea’s Obama and the dems have put up Bookman? Anyone with a brain realizes that the path we are going down is not sustainable. You and your ilk are purely using this as a political issue to scare seniors. It’s not going to work as long as it can be presented to the people so they can understand the scope of the problem.
Joe Mama
August 26th, 2011
1:41 pm
Inattentive Observer — “SS is not like either term or whole life since those are a decision each individual makes with regard to a policy. SS is forced upon you by the Government, taken from you at the threat of a prison term for non-compliance.”
I can see that there’s no point in any further engagement with you. I’ll simply conclude by saying that you’re quite wrong and by wishing you good day, sir or madam.
Adam
August 26th, 2011
1:43 pm
Final results:
Anti-Obama posts = 12
Individual anti-Obama posters = 10
Anti-Bush posts = 6
Individual anti-Bush posters = 4
Posts meant to skew the results = 6
New since Page 7 results:
RGB @ 12:01p – Obamageddon…. tehnically this one would skew the results since it’s not actually an anti-Obama post so much as a snark at something else.
getalife @ 12:09p – anti-Bush
getalife @ 12:13p – anti-Bush
Donna P. @ 12:32 – anti-Obama
John Lewis @ 12:33p – counting as “post meant to skew the results” due to overhyperbole
Joe @ 1:20p – Makes me feel like I should start tallying “Where’s your plan?” However, I am not counting this one for any of the current tally. Doesn’t seem anti-Obama enough.
Not counting this thread anymore. And for the record, Uncle Jed, I’m doing this out of a pure motivation to make the point that Bush is not bashed as much as Obama is on these threads. No money is involved.
Joe Mama
August 26th, 2011
1:44 pm
Jimmy62 — “Here’s an SS solution. If you guys really think that you get back what you pay in, then you should have no problem with allowing anyone who doesn’t like SS to opt out. I will gladly sacrifice the payroll taxes I have already paid in return for not having to pay another cent to SS for the rest of my life. But you won’t allow that because if there was an actual choice then SS wouldn’t last another year.”
I don’t think that’s a “solution” as much as it is your ‘desire’ or ‘intent.’
And as far as “you won’t allow that” goes, I don’t have any say in it. You need to speak to your elected representatives, not an internet message board.
Adam
August 26th, 2011
1:44 pm
Generation$crewed: Do you think it is a good thing that our president has not given a plan on the economy, or hell even a budget for his years in office?
He gave a couple of plans and a budget. Budgets were rejected, and all but one plan has been rejected so far. Especially the ones on paper. Can you guess which plan wasn’t rejected?
Let’s not discuss all about the rejection vs. not, to bring up old talking points about why and so on. The fact is, plans were put down on paper, some in bill form, and most were rejected. So it’s not that he hasn’t ever had a plan, and it’s not that he really needs to keep coming up with plans if all that happens is they get rejected. But I admire the man for continuing to try despite all that.
Jm
August 26th, 2011
1:46 pm
Jay
Actually try this on for size. I’d say people benefitted on a general pro rata basis relative to their normal overall tax burden.
So to adjust, everyones (total) taxes should go up by an equal percentage (of the tax rate) to fix.
So if taxes need to go up 10% to fix, then someone with a 15% tax rate would then pay 16.5%, and someone paying 30% would pay 33%. Fair?
Secondarily, everyones rates should then be lowered in a similar manner as stupid deductions are eliminated, resulting in a flatter fairer more efficient tax system.
jm
August 26th, 2011
1:55 pm
Oh, and I might add, benefits in a multitude of ways need to be tempered (means testing, indexing, raising the retirement age, etc etc)
Disgusted
August 26th, 2011
2:26 pm
Oh, and I might add, benefits in a multitude of ways need to be tempered (means testing, indexing, raising the retirement age, etc etc)
Ain’t it strange how these conservatives want to structure social programs according to wealth, but if you suggest a higher tax rate for wealthy people? Uh, that’s socialism and wealth envy!
Joe Mama
August 26th, 2011
2:49 pm
Disgusted, I have an explanation for you that details the conservative stance on trust and cost, but the automatic bluenose doesn’t like it.
Adam
August 26th, 2011
3:15 pm
Disgusted: As long as the idea leads to what you put in is what you get out, then it’s sort of ok. Until it can be privatized, or it can be changed to charge the poor more than the wealthy, even if the wealthy also benefit.
Cherevah
August 26th, 2011
4:58 pm
“…64 percent of Americans said they oppose making “major changes in Social Security and Medicare” as a means of addressing the debt problem,…”
That’s because most of us want the benefits and we want someone else to pay for it.
As someone said recently, programs like SS and Medicare were supposed to be ‘fee for service’ but Americans would rather they be ‘free for service’.
TruthBe
August 26th, 2011
6:05 pm
Adam, Take a break it was satire. But this economy is truly now Obama’s economy. And you Adam and the rest of the paid bloggers for the DNC know it. Remember President Clinton’s re-election slogan”It’s the economy Stupid”. Well President Obama’s new slogan is ” It’s all my fault now”. the Obama Economy.
gm
August 26th, 2011
7:04 pm
Hey Retards tea party idiots
Now that Irene is comming should we downsize goverment workers that are working around the clock to keep you bigots and idiots safe.
Would you rather have the hypocrite government hater Rick Perry.
God dont like selfish hypocrites like the tea party”’
Rick Perry leaves the 10th Amendment at the altar with anti-gay marriage pledge « Women Born Transsexual
August 28th, 2011
2:06 am
[...] before Rick Perry learned different. He has been doing a lot of learning in recent days, shedding ideas from his book (published in 2010) right and left (mainly left) and outdated opinions (four weeks ago, he was a [...]
Rick Perry: Social Security Is “A Monstrous Lie”
August 29th, 2011
11:57 am
[...] however, there are enough doubts out there about the long-term viability of Social Security that Perry’s statements are unlikely to hurt him, and may actually help him gain support with some … At first glance, you might think that Perry’s position would be a liability in the GOP [...]