Washington Post - ...Bush warned that Democratic lawmakers may suffer politically if they continue to oppose his plan without offering alternatives. Americans are beginning to agree that Social Security needs revisions to safeguard its long-term stability, he said, adding: "In my judgment, ultimately, I think politicians need to be worried about not being a part of the solution."
Democratic senators, however, were drafting a letter to Bush last night saying that so long as private accounts are "on the table, we believe it will be impossible to establish the kind of cooperative, bipartisan process we need to truly address" the program's problems. An unequivocal rejection of private accounts, the letter said, "would eliminate a serious obstacle to the kind of bipartisan process that Democrats are seeking," but it did not signal what concessions, if any, Democrats might make in return. The letter was signed by 42 out of 44 Democrats, plus Sen. James M. Jeffords (I-Vt.).
I think Bush is right in that Democrats are going to be hurt unless they begin addressing the fact that Social Security has problems and needs to be fixed sooner rather than later. What I don't understand is this staunch opposition to private accounts.
Since when is given citizens more control over their money a problem?
Its one thing for them to say that they don't like the way Bush's plan structures the accounts or that they'd rather grant citizens more control over their money in a different manner, but for them to tell the President that under no circumstances will they support any move toward personal control of Social Security money is quite telling. Either they're using this line of reasoning to stall any progress on the issue until it can be done in a situation where they'll get credit for it or they're simply opposed to the idea of people controlling their own money.
Or maybe its both.