6. Isn't a Bipartisan Solution Good for Both Parties?

["Steven H. Johnson" <info@sscommonsense.org>]

6.  Isn't a Bipartisan Solution Good for Both Parties?  

Imagine a Two-Track Savings Strategy in force.  It combines 
personal accounts with a strong Trust Fund.  It protects 
benefits, holds the line on the payroll tax, achieves lasting 
solvency, avoids permanent subsidies, deals successfully with 
risk, and improves the rate of return on Social Security 
contributions.  In other words, it saves Social Security.

K.  Doesn't a Two-Track Savings Strategy give each party an 
effective message?

Wouldn't this be a sensible message for Republicans to take 
back to their core constituency?  

"You wanted private accounts?  We got the Democrats to agree 
to private accounts.  Moreover, we've got private accounts as a 
way of protecting the nation from the risks that would otherwise 
accompany a Trust Fund investment strategy.  We've protected 
retiree benefits.  We've held the line on the payroll tax.  
We've assured lasting solvency.  We've avoided a permanent 
federal subsidy.  We've used the strengths of our strategy to 
cancel out the weaknesses of the Democrats' strategy.  We've
substantially improved the rate of return on your Social 
Security taxes, compared with what it would have been."

Isn't that a pretty attractive message for the Republican base?

And wouldn't this be a sensible message for Democrats to take 
back to their core constituency? 

"You wanted to avoid the risks that go with private accounts?  
We got the Republicans to agree to a strong Trust Fund, in order 
to overcome the risks of a private account system.  You wanted 
to preserve Social Security's progressivity?  We've preserved 
progressivity.  You wanted to protect current law benefits?  
We've protected benefits.  We've assured long-term solvency.  
We've held the line on the payroll tax.  The program is now on 
a more durable and solid foundation than it's ever been.  FDR's 
legacy has been preserved, protected, and extended, in ways that 
FDR himself would have applauded.  We've used the strengths of 
the Democratic Party's strategy to cancel out the weaknesses of 
the Republicans' strategy."  

Isn't that a pretty attractive message for the Democratic base?

And to the independents, wouldn't it be good if each party could 
say...  

"Our party took the initiative.  We identified the responsible 
solution.  Then we went to the other party, and together, we 
worked out a well-rounded two-track strategy that saves Social 
Security and that truly meets the needs of the American people."

Wouldn't it be great if the pro-personal account legislators 
were in a position to say that?

Wouldn't it be great if the pro-Trust Fund legislators were in 
a position to say that?

And so - my final question.  

L.  Isn't it time?  Isn't it time for a truly bipartisan, 
low-risk strategy, for a strategy that truly prepares Social 
Security for the 2008-2033 retiree onslaught?  Isn't it?  So that
the savings and investment task can begin, NOW?

Thanks to everyone for taking this issue so seriously.  
The ancient fable of the ant and the grasshopper is truly on point:  
the more Social Security saves now, the stronger it is later.

-Steve Johnson