Social Security doubts grow

WASHINGTON – President Bush’s Social Security proposals stirred fresh political worries Thursday among Republicans and brought calls from some lawmakers to abandon the president’s central idea: letting people divert part of their payroll taxes to private retirement accounts.

“I’ve talked to some of my colleagues and they’re panic-stricken,” said Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla., who said he welcomes a serious debate over the sweeping changes Bush outlined in his State of the Union address Wednesday.

“Politically speaking, right now it’s probably not doable,” said Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., citing lack of Democratic support.

Two House Republicans with years of expertise on Social Security offered an alternate plan, saying the Bush proposal is too politically risky. They suggested bolstering the program with money from general revenues rather than the payroll tax.

“I think politically it’s the most salable. It’s not going to scare anybody,” said Florida Rep. Clay Shaw, who for six years was chairman of the House Ways and Means subcommittee on Social Security. “It does preserve Social Security as it is today. If we’re going to attract some Democrats, that’s the way to go.”

The subcommittee’s current chairman, GOP Rep. James McCrery of Louisiana, said taking money out of the existing Social Security system for private accounts gives a powerful argument to the plan’s opponents, including the 35-million member AARP.

“The AARP and the Democrats think if you divert some money from the trust fund,” the existing program will be undermined, McCrery said. “That is true on its face. It does decrease the level of the trust fund. Politically, that’s going to be a very strong tool that (opponents) can use to defeat a plan.”

“There are a lot of unanswered questions and until I have the answers to them, I am still in the ‘withholding judgment’ category,” said Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite, R-Fla. Her Gulf Coast district is home to about 250,000 Social Security beneficiaries, the most in any single House district.

Bush wants to let workers divert up to two-thirds of their Social Security taxes into private accounts that could invest in stocks and bonds. At the same time, the guaranteed benefit would be cut, though by how much is not clear.

Many Democrats favor personal accounts, but want them in addition to benefits paid by Social Security.

Some Senate Republicans also have doubts. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said Thursday there is no consensus for action now and said she has not made up her own mind. “We should take this year to study the issue and come up with solutions,” she said.

GOP Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine, a member of the Senate Finance Committee that will handle the Social Security legislation, has said she opposes diverting the program’s taxes to pay for personal accounts.

Bush took his campaign for Social Security changes on the road Thursday, traveling to states represented by Democratic senators the White House hopes to pressure into backing his plan.

At least one of those Democrats, Sen. Max Baucus of Montana, said he opposed diverting payroll taxes into the personal accounts.

The idea “would be extremely difficult for the Senate to swallow, almost impossible,” Baucus said in an interview Thursday.

McCrery and Shaw said in separate interviews that, like Bush, they want to create personal accounts. But they said they favor paying for them with general revenue, which probably would mean borrowing the money.

In that case, they said, taxes collected for Social Security would be left alone to pay for traditional program benefits.

Shaw said he planned to reintroduce legislation on this plan.

Sen. Rick Santorum, the No. 3 Republican in the Senate, acknowledged the dissent but said it should diminish as members of Congress learn more.

“We have a lot of work to do, not just among the American people, but in our own caucus,” said Santorum, R-Pa.

Rep. Jack Kingston, R-Ga., who serves in the House leadership, appeared less worried. He said he left a GOP retreat last week convinced members were “enthusiastic about taking on a challenge and giving it a good honest effort.”

On Thursday, Democratic senators sent a letter to Bush saying they fear the plan will increase the national debt.

Five Senate Democrats spoke at the memorial to President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who signed Social Security into law in 1935.

“We are here by FDR’s statue because we believe that Social Security is the greatest government program of the 20th century,” said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. “We ought to keep it, not gut it.”