Decisions, decisions …

Freshman Rep. Dave Reichert (R) of Washington state was either the first or second member of the Conscience Caucus. (That, bear in mind, was when the getting was good. You could get in just for expressing reservations about the president’s plan.) And tonight in the district he’s holding a townhall meeting on private accounts.

Reichert says he’s undecided about the president’s plan. But according to a February 9th piece in Roll Call says he “was the only Member in a targeted race to formally support the creation of private accounts.”

So it might be interesting to ask the congressman just what it was that made him go all wobbly on privatization.

When does this become more than a joke?

The U.S. Secret Service on Monday said it was investigating the claims of three people who said they were removed from President Bush’s town hall meeting on Social Security last week after being singled out because of a bumper sticker on their car.

The three said they had obtained tickets through the office of Rep. Bob Beauprez, R-Colo., had passed through security and were preparing to take their seats when they were approached by what they thought was a Secret Service agent who asked them to leave.

Reports like this have become commonplace <$NoAd$> on the Bamboozlepalooza Tour. And, remember, despite the obvious political campaign content, this roadshow is paid for entirely with taxpayer dollars. That fact must make these sorts of ideological litmus tests a no-no.

When astroturf bamboozlers don’t do their advance work …

Even temperatures nearing 70 degrees Monday didn’t stop more than 80 people from gathering at the Iowa City Public Library to oppose Social Security reform proposals.

Rep. Jim Leach, R-Iowa, hosted a community meeting for about two hours, with discussion primarily focused on fixing Social Security, although there were also questions about the Iraq war and the growing federal deficit.

…

“There is so little reality about the bill,” said Ann Bovbjerg of Iowa City. “The most insulting is saying, ‘you’ll be OK (seniors), it’s the younger generation who won’t be.’ Who are these younger people? They are your kids and my kids.”

No one in attendance voiced support for the proposals that have been introduced by the president.

Note of thanks to <$NoAd$> TPM Reader BG.

More information on those folks in Colorado who got booted from a Bamboozlepalooza event because of a bumper sticker on their car. It seems the planners of these taxpayer-funded events hire rent-a-cops, dress them up to look like Secret Service agents and then have them boot people who don’t seem Bush-true.

See this post from Kos for more details.

Ahhh … A thing of beauty, the first signs of the intra-phase-out-camp free-fire zone.

Club for Growth loads up again and starts firing away at Sen. Lindsey Graham (R) of South Carolina for having the temerity to raise the possibility of raising the payroll tax cap to fund phase-out.

This press release out from Le Club bashes Graham for considering raising taxes rather than being a principled conservative and just borrowing the money.

March 31st is the day. In cities around the country, folks will be protesting Charles Schwab and Wachovia, the two big financial services firms still propping up the White House’s pro-phase-out front groups. Click here to find out more.

A little while back I mentioned that a few days before I got married I was on a debate panel with Cato’s Michael Tanner and Times columnist Paul Krugman debating Social Security privatization. It doesn’t include video of the whole debate; but this video on the Democracy Now website has each of our opening statements: Tanner, Krugman, Marshall, in that order.

A bit earlier today I mentioned that freshman Rep. Dave Reichert (R) of Washington state was holding a ‘forum’ on Social Security this evening, moderated by James Vesely, The Seattle Times’ editorial page editor.

The participants, reports the paper, were …

Rob Nichols, assistant secretary for public affairs at the U.S. Treasury Department and previously an aide to former Reichert’s predecessor, Republican Jennifer Dunn; Paul Guppy, research director at the Washington Policy Center, a Seattle think tank; and Sally Canfield, assistant to House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill.

Now, when I first saw this article this afternoon, it wasn’t hard to see that this wasn’t the most balanced panel, given that it includes one flack for Treasury Secretary Snow and another for Denny Hastert. But I didn’t get into it <$Ad$> because I didn’t know anything about Paul Guppy and the Washington Policy Center.

It seems, though, the benefit of the doubt I afforded them was entirely undeserved. TPM Reader DF points out that on their website the Washington Policy Center proudly quotes Jack Kemp calling them “the Heritage Foundation of the Northwest.” So I think we can say with some confidence that Reichert’s panel didn’t include the full diversity of views on the future of Social Security.

In any case, this raises what I guess we might (with some puffery) call a methodological question for TPM. Reichert was one of the first members of the Conscience Caucus — largely because in those early days all it took to get in was to express something short of clear support for the president’s plan. And I’ve been reluctant to revisit earlier admissions on the basis of our evolving standards of conscience.

Clearly, though, Rep. Reichert is a first-class bamboozler because here he is still claiming that he hasn’t made a decision on privatization and yet he puts together a panel where the participants range from think-tank supporters of phase-out to paid phase-out-onians from Treasury and the Speaker’s office.

It’s also true that the Conscience Caucus list doesn’t fully capture the direction of the debate right now — seeing as the great majority of Republican members of Congress express at least some bogus open-mindedness about the president’s plan to keep on the right side of their constituents.

The real issue today is that fairly long list of Republican members of Congress who are managing (with their talking points in hand from party central) to dodge taking any position at all on the most important and contentious political question of the day: Social Security and whether or not to phase it out.

If that’s not bad enough, you’ve got a bunch of them — like Rep. Heather Wilson — trying to trick their constituents into thinking they’re against phase-out when actually they seem to be for it.

So we’re going to put together a list of the top ten Social Security switch-hitters in Congress — the ones who have put in the true bravura performances in their quest to keep their constituents entirely in the dark about where they stand on this issue. And unlike the Caucus and Faction lists, this one will have a limited membership and have members ranked in order of political ambidexterity and policy bi-positionality. Certainly, Rep. Heather Wilson (R) or New Mexico is first on the list. And Reichert is probably on their too.

But who else? We’re taking nominations.

Count Chocola thought his past would never catch up with him.

But he didn’t count on TPM Reader BB!

A month ago we put out <$NoAd$> word that there was a bounty of a brand new ‘Privatize This’ TPM Shirt for that intrepid supporter of Social Security who could find us the original paper copy of the October 8th, 2000 Elkhart Truth in which Rep. Chris Chocola (R) of Indiana not only proclaimed his support for President Bush’s privatization plan but insisted that that still wasn’t enough to slake his thirst for private accounts.

“Bush’s plan of individual investment of 2 percent of the money is a start,” crowed the Count. “Eventually, I’d like to see the entire system privatized.”

As we’ve now chronicled in what is likely painful detail, Rep. Chocola has since denied ever supporting any sort of privatization, let alone the total privatization he longed for in 2000. He has even gone so far as to demand that ads which use the quote above be removed from the airwaves.

In any case, like a treasured bootleg of Dylan touring with the Hawks in 1966 or an early blue movie of some rising starlet, everyone knows the goods are out there. And yet actually getting your hands on a copy is no mean proposition. But thanks to BB, we’ve got a copy of the original, a small portion of which you can see for yourself on the right.

“Emotions run high at Social Security forum,” says the headline in the King County Journal. Here’s their article on Rep. Dave Reichert’s <$NoAd$>townhall meeting last night back in the district …

Dave Reichert came to the people Tuesday night to talk about Social Security, and they talked back.

Reichert, three months into 8th District in Congress, held a town hall-style meeting at Bellevue High School in which the 300-strong crowd demonstrated the strength of their opinions, at times shouting over Reichert or the other people sharing the stage with him.

The event was structured as a question-and-answer session, but with the audience’s questions submitted in writing, to be asked by moderator Jim Vesely, editorial page editor of the Seattle Times.

A three-member panel then debated the answers, with Reichert occasionally chiming in.

The audience clearly disagreed with the panelists on their endorsement — which Reichert shares — of a part of President Bush’s plan to introduce privately managed investment accounts as part of a Social Security reform program.

As it happens, at least three of those three hundred were TPM Readers who sent in detailed reports of all the bamboozling that took place. One nice moment, according the Journal article, came when an audience member asked about raising the payroll tax cap. Paul Guppy, the think tank ‘winger and former Ernie Istook staffer on the panel, whom we discussed last night, responded: “You could raise the cap to $1 million if you want to, I don’t think it would help.” So you can see what a straight shooter he must be.

We’ll try to bring you more on this train wreck later in the day.