RE: Bipartisan Consensus

[National Dialogue Moderator <moderator>]

Let me quote from the April 29 edition of the Bureau of National Affairs
(BNA):

"The Archer-Shaw plan may be cloaked in the rhetoric of reform, but a
closer look reveals a risky scheme that would end Social Security and put
millions of American seniors in jeopardy."  U.S. Representative Rosa
DeLauro (D-CT), Assistant to the Democratic Leader.

These sort of comments coming from a member of the Democrat leadership in
the U.S. House of Representatives do nothing to help achieve the
bipartisan consensus necessary to save Social Security for future
generations.  As I have said previously, the President should be praised
for moving the debate forward.  Chairman Archer and Representative Shaw
should also be praised for moving the discussion forward in a positive
direction by offering a credible plan that honestly addresses Social
Security's long-term solvency problem.

Despite the partisan broadsides launched yesterday, lets look at some of
the areas of consensus between the Archer/Shaw plan and the President's
plan.  Both suggest taking advantage of the private markets to address
Social Security's long-term solvency.  Both plans envision eliminating the
Social Security earnings limit as well as addressing the problems faced by
women, who by virtue of their work history, often receive less in benefits
than men.  Both plans avoid increasing the payroll tax or decreasing
benefits.  Both plans agree to the idea of providing a guaranteed minimum
benefit that is no less than would be received under the current system.

There are going to be honest policy disagreements as the debate moves
forward.  For example, there is an honest disagreement on whether or not
we should make the federal government the largest single investor in the
private markets.  Partisan sideswipes that poison the well will do nothing
to help resolve these legitimate policy differences between competing
Social Security plans.

Rep. Kenny Hulshof