In light of a certain Democratic fillibuster, it would be impossible for the Republicans to "ram it through" both houses.

Bush/Rove will do anything to get their way. Don't forget, they are on orders from God. The fact that an overwhelming majority of Americans are against them on SS is meaningless.

What's the downside for the White House? If it works, fine; if it doesn't, blame Congress. I'm sure they would trade a possible democratic house of Congress for killing SS.

If this is true, then it tells me that some Republicans/Bush are playing the game of politics as though they know 2006 and 2008 is of no importance. Now, why would that be?

Well, as his own family says, Bush refuses to be defeated in anything he does.

If they ram it through, each Rethuglican who signs onto it is signing their political death warrant. The Democrats will take back both houses in '06 and '08 will be a bloodbath for the Rethugs as well.

Maybe somebody attended one too many of his own "town meetings." I can't figure out where else one would get the idea that this move would work.

But it will have been rammed thru, and, it will demonstrate the invincibility of bush, so don't doubt for a second it's true.

Whether it is or not is irrelevent. This is what they've done on EVERYTHING they have done, from war to tax cuts to locking up United States of America Citizens in contraindication of our Bill of Rights and the Constitution. This is no different.

They don't care about 2006, or 2008. They got years to fix those "problems," and they've got those effing machines.

Look at ANWR. Look at the Snowmobiles in Yellowstone. We thought we had them beat on that one too, judges ruled against them and beat them down bad on it, yet they got what they wanted anyway. They're above the law, they are the law, so what else would you expect.

Until we drive a stake through their empty heart chambers, pour garlic and silver in the hole, in the full light of a summer day in Death Valley, this will continue to be how things work.

Duckman, you are right and the sooner Americans start sharpening those stakes, the better. How much more abuse can these hyprocrites/liars/killers dish out before people see the light?

I'm sure they would trade a possible democratic house of Congress for killing SS.

Actually, passing this law would NOT give them the death of SS. It'll take some time for the new program to become effective. During that time, Dems can run on a promise to re-enact traditional Social Security. That will be a very, very effective campaign promise.

Once the new program actually started, it would be really tough to go back. But that lag time would see the biggest swing in congressional representation in a long time. And it would give us time to stop the bleeding.

By all means, Bushco, ram this sucker through.

Here's what I don't get--the willingness I read on all the webs and in all the comments to sacrifice Social Security so the Dems can get more seats. We have to protect Social Security even if it means losing seats, just as we do civil rights or any other thing. I do not like gambling with something this important, even if the odds are on our side. Not every fucking thing is just another tool in our arsenal to get to power.

I don't know Matt, the damage they could do would be really hard to undo.

Here's what I don't get--the willingness I read on all the webs and in all the comments to sacrifice Social Security so the Dems can get more seats.

Hey, it's not us who wants to sacrifice Social Security. If the GOP wants to resort to unethical parliamentary stunts over the summer to evade a filibuster, it's on them. But I see no reason why we shouldn't use their shenanigans in the next year's campaigns.

I don't know Matt, the damage they could do would be really hard to undo.

What damage? Look, until there's real, live money in those new accounts, it won't be any problem rolling back the law. And even once there is, Dems could say: "We'll pay out the current cash value of the accounts that exist when the owners reach retirement age. Now we're going back to the old way, so that our kids have a secure future."

So I figure there would be at least a two year window in which to undo the damage.

In light of a certain Democratic fillibuster - you sure filibuster will still be in place?

Like in war, all grand plans go out the window once the shooting starts. BushCo may plan to roll something through Congress over the next 7 months or so, but in the meantime...

(1) Gas prices will hit $3 a gallon and folks will be screaming (especially independent truckers and airline employees)
(2) The housing bubble will at least deflate, if not burst, resulting in a big loss of capital, which could trigger a new recession. Already, T-bill yield curves are inverted, and inverted yield curves almost always precede a recession.
(3) Something could happen in foreign affairs (I hope not) like North Korea testing more missiles or China making noise about Taiwan, or India-Pakistan nuke face-off II, or genocide in Africa that finally reaches the TV news, or God knows what else.
(4) The exchange rate between dollars and euros could get so bad that Japan could start to unload its $700B worth of Treasuries for euro-bonds, which would trigger both recession and double-digit inflation.
(5) Something happens in Iran that excites the neocons to scream for invasion.

Or what else...you guys get the picture. If the administration keeps yapping about Social Security while people are losing jobs (and I mean not just in some industries, but broadly, so that the unemployment rate passes 6% and heads for 7% or more), it sets the stage for a realigning election.

Great post, Yuval.

--Greg

This is what I worry about (cross-posted at There Is No Crisis):

The White House and privateers may be thinking they can pull an "Iraq War" on this issue, on the theory that it's easier to ask for forgiveness than ask for permission.

Specifically, the thinking might be along these lines: ram something for privatization through, and then assume that, in 2006, everyone will assume "what's done is done". It seems to me that it would be easier for Democrats to scare people about what the Republicans WILL do than to ask voters to enact revenge for what they HAVE done, and privateers might be thinking the same thing.

Democrats need to be prepared, in my opinion, to sell a specific plan to undo anything the Republicans might do in the way of privatizing Social Security. We need to be prepared to campaign on "restoring" Social Security, and stopping the extremists from doing even more damage.

Down with the theves trying to steal America's future. Realligning election is right. 75 years ago it took a great depression to dispel the myth of the 'mass elete.' Remember reading about the roaring 20's stock market? I'm not saying that a depression like event is not possible givin the twin defiects but if they really try to destroy Social Security when even the target age group in their 20's and 30's isn't buying the lie then reallignment it will be.

During my childhood the adults understood that the Republicans were the party of the rich. I guess that some lessons are forgotten through time and must be re-learned the hard way.

No Bush Social Security bill will pass. It is mathematically impossible. You have 45 Democrats opposed, plus likely Chafee, Snowe, Collins, and probably other Republicans. Even if Ben "Turncoat" Nelson decides to jump ship, it's still dead. With such substantial public opposition, this bill (yet to be written) has no chance of passage. Bush's cronies are just saying this to try to scare Democrats. Trying to ram a bill through would give the Democrats a good chance of winning back Congress.

Riprather, the youth of America does not know that years ago the Republicans were known as the Party of the rich. I, however, haven't forgotten it, as I was raised in a good Christian Democratic family (with the exception of my Grandmother, who would have voted for Hitler if he had been a Republican LOL).

My best guess is that Bush will find a way to get SS privatized, if he can. The mere fact that he has talked nothing else for months, and continues to do so, tells me that he is not going to rollover on this one issue. Evidently, he is willing to sell his own Party down the river just to say he won. His arrogance has no limits as we already know. There is something terribly wrong with a man who refuses to accept defeat or learn from his mistakes.

Judith,

Bush is a president for the history books. He's determined to be the anti-FDR. Well, FDR was loved by the nation he led, Bush will likely get his wish and be the anti-FDR.

If they play fast with the Senate rules in order to go nuclear so they can shove private accounts down the collective throat of a nation that plainly doesn't want it, the Democrats will be in power so long that the next non-Democrat president won't be called a Republican.

Riprather, well I hope Bush lives long enough to read what history will have to say about him.

If SS passes, I will be in the street, literally and figuratively. I can only hope for mass protest against Bush, day in and day out, until he is driven out of office.

Judith,

I'll pray for you.

Someday people will read right wing bloggers and be puzzeled as to how anyone could fall for-er-think like that.