Since leaving the
Clinton administration Gene Sperling's
new full-time job seems to be whacking the Bush White House with Op-Eds in major national dailies. But, hey, more power to him!
This one today in the New York Times is right on point in thrashing the president's irresponsible evasion on Social Security. The insight of this very original argument is to point out that no matter where you are on the Social Security reform question (progressive, traditionalist, privatizer, etc.) you still can't support the Bush budget plan.
Simple. Every honest approach to the Social Security reform issue will require substantial infusions of general revenue funds (i.e., money beside that which we get from payroll taxes) to make reform work.
Since the Bush tax cut bill more or less wipes out the surpluses with tax cuts (as Bush himself proudly proclaims) there's simply nothing left for reform.