Social Insecurity

There's a lot of talk about Bush's plan to demolish (did I say demolish? I meant privatize.) Social Security lately. (Did I say privatize? I meant set up private -- no, make that personal -- accounts.) I'm sorry -- all the new terms the Bushies run up the flagpole when their old ones crash and burn are getting me dizzy.

I have neither the time nor the expertise to write about it more than passingly here. But I can point you in the direction of people doing some very vital work on the issue.

First, there's Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo. He's makin' a list, and checkin' it twice, of all the Democratic legistlators who are waffling and making noises about supporting the President's plan. (He calls 'em the Fainthearted Faction.) Then there are the surprisingly numerous Republican lawmakers who are peculiarly unwilling to commit to his plan, some of whom have already stated that they oppose it. (He calls 'em the Conscience Caucus. You'll call them delicious.) So from that end, he's covering the political maneuverings about the plan. But he's also doing yeoman's work in explaining Social Security, what it's there for, the extent of its problems, and the levels of deception the Bushies are using to sell America on the fact that: Social Security is IN A CRISIS and their privitization plan will solve the problems (even though they've actually said that the switchover wouldn't make things better one bit). A few of his more recent posts have dealt with the increasing evidence that Bush is laying the groundwork on defaulting on the Social Security Trust Fund -- despite that being a violation of his oath of office. Good stuff, believe me.

Also doing a great job at explaining this complicated stuff is Paul Krugman of the New York Times. He's an economist, but he really seems to know what he's talking about anyway.

Give 'em both a look.

Rob