Opinions, Context & Ideas from the TPM Editors TPM Editor's Blog

There was so much

There was so much bamboozling going on tonight in that press conference that it was easy to miss one essential contradiction in the president's argument. You don't have to worry about private accounts, he said, because if you want you can fill your account with US Treasury bonds which have no risk at all. They're backed by the full faith and credit of the US government. But he says that the very same Treasury notes, when they're in the Trust Fund, are just worthless IOUs.

Are they really that

Are they really that stupid <$NoAd$> or they getting paid? Headline on an AP story running at CBSNews.com: "Bush Smiles At The Little Guy."

The article begins ...

President Bush put a populist face on his Social Security plan by urging Congress to tilt the system to benefit low-income retirees of the future as part of a plan to shore up the program's finances.

At a prime-time news conference Thursday night, Mr. Bush said he envisioned a plan under which all future retirees could "count on a benefit equal to or higher than today's seniors," a formula that left open the possibility that guaranteed benefits for middle and upper income seniors could be cut in later years to bring Social Security's finances into balance.

So that's smiling on the little guy, a plan that promises huge benefits cuts for everyone in the middle class. And that formula? Apparently the author of the piece doesn't get that the president meant a benefit equal to or higher in straight numerical terms. Freezing benefits in today's dollars amounts to huge benefit cuts in itself. How would you like to be making what people made for doing your job in 1960?

Late Update: A couple readers have written in to say that what the president was referring to was so-called 'progressive indexing' and that this does not call for freezing benefits at their current nominal dollar levels. True. But what I'm pointing to is where the president is setting what you might call his line of guarantee -- the line he's saying no one will fall below. And, as I note above, where he's setting that line already amounts to a massive cut in benefits that only grows with time.

What did I miss

What did I miss? The president offered no specifics at all. He still says some portion of Social Security must be phased out and replaced with private accounts. And just as it has been since the beginning of Bamboozlepalooza, pretty much everything he said was meant to deceive his listeners.

Start with his three principles from the beginning of the news conference. The first two principles used coded language which translates into massive Social Security benefit cuts for the entire middle class. I bet it didn't sound like that when he said it, did it? His plan would turn Social Security -- the sheet anchor of the American middle class -- into old age welfare.

Principle number three was just the same old demand for private accounts dandied up in different clothes

Basically, from this president, it's phase-out today, phase-out tomorrow, phase-out forever.

Beside that, I heard a lot of whining about politics and how everyone isn't nice to him.

Which makes me think about the conceit which started President Bush off on this titanic effort: his belief and repeated claim that Social Security wasn't the third rail of American politics any longer. No more current in rail; lost its juice. He'd grabbed it a couple times and he'd come out just fine, he always said.

Folks weren't stuck in old-fashioned ways of thinking anymore and wouldn't punish politicians who tried to upend Social Security or phase it out and replace it with private accounts. Plenty of Washington's worthies act as though this 'third rail' phraseology is a challenge to politicians' courage, a symbol of benighted public opinion that won't let right-thinking statemen do what needs to be done.

But why shouldn't the public punish politicians who try to scam them into phasing out the most popular and successful government program in American history? It doesn't occur to these folks that some people think that this amounts to a vast hoodwink on the middle class. And those who try to pull something like that deserve every ounce of political payback they get.

However that may be, it turns out it's still the third rail, as it should be.

I'll tell you, back when we designed the anti-privatization T-Shirt we've been selling and giving away for the last few months, the first version of the shirt was entirely different. On the front it had a cartoon character guy grabbing on to the rail and getting fried out of his mind. And that over a caption that read "Feel The Juice!" with all the appropriate squiggly electricty lines around the words.

On the back it said, "Social Security: The Third Rail of American Politics Since 1936."

Subtle? No. But I can't say that bothered me.

I decided against it because it underplayed just how difficult it was going to be to turn back the push for privatization. It took too much for granted.

But tonight, watching the president complain about the rough shake he and his folks are getting, and having heard the same whining from congressional Republicans all day, that line kept popping back into my head as the best response: Feel The Juice! They deserve every bit.

Filibuster against Frist hits

Filibuster against Frist hits the AP Wire.

Late Update: See their webcam here. The cam doesn't seem to be streaming at the moment. But soon enough I assume they'll get the live feed back up and running.

Duce Duce From The

Duce! Duce!

From The Hill: "Reps. Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) and John Sweeney (R-N.Y.) have been meeting with 30 House Republicans over the past few weeks to coordinate a more aggressive strategy to defend Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas), according to a Republican source familiar with the meetings."

Lest anyone forget, both Feeney and Sweeney had high-profile roles in the Florida 2000 travesty.

Husband and wife physics

Husband and wife physics team take up TPM faculty challenge to filibuster Frist, win glory and t-shirt!

According to our informants on the scene, this afternoon Edward Witten and Chiara Nappi approached filibuster organizers conducting their filibuster against Frist and informed them they were ready to take up the TPM challenge.

Photographs of their stints filibustering have been posted here.

By our interpretation of the faculty challenge rules, Witten and Chiara are entitled to two t-shirts. But apparently they only require one.

So two remain! Who will get them?

Late Update: We're told it's now started raining at the scene of the filibuster. So they're battening down the hatches. But the filibuster continues.