Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SATURDAY, October 29, 1994 TAG: 9410310039
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: C-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: DWAYNE YANCEY STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
That was Monday.
Not until Thursday, though, did the Robb campaign finally begin to push Social Security as an issue in the U.S. Senate race.
Now, it appears that Robb has decided to make Social Security one of his major themes in the campaign's closing days. He was busy pushing it Friday during stops in Bristol, Wise, Bluefield and Roanoke, all communities with a disproportionate share of elderly voters. Under North's proposal, the Democratic incumbent said, many old folks would "not be able to live in dignity."
Historically, any suggestion that Social Security be made voluntary has been lethal to its proponent.
"It is a completely defensible policy option, if it's structured the right way," said University of Virginia political analyst Larry Sabato. "But politically, it's poison."
"Social Security is a sacrosanct contract, and you don't play around with that," agreed Doug Bailey, a former Republican consultant who now publishes The Hotline, a political newsletter in Washington.
Democrats clearly are delighted that North is willing to try. "I was talking to a group of retirees in Winchester today, and they are hot," said Del. Richard Cranwell of Roanoke County. "I think it's incited all the retirees. It's also evidence of how unprepared Oliver North is to serve in the United States Senate. Here's a man who gets a little bit of rope from his handlers, and he probably hung himself."
It's the latter point that gives the issue its greatest potential in the campaign's final week, Bailey said. "This stands out because it is a substantive issue, different from the 'liar, liar' charges and countercharges, and it goes to a weakness North has, that he may not be up to a lot of the issues he has to deal with. It is a pretty shocking thing to most people, to suggest that Social Security might become voluntary."
The Social Security issue also may have the potential to do something no other issue has done - shake North's apparently unshakable base. "A lot of his supporters would be appalled by this," Bailey said.
However, some political analysts believe - and many Republicans fervently hope - that Robb's four-day delay in responding could blunt his efforts to use Social Security as a way to depict North's voluntary concept as extremist.
"It either gets portrayed unfairly, or it gets drowned out," said state Republican Party Chairman Pat McSweeney. He's counting on the latter, as each day brings a new barrage of competing commercials, surrogates, revelations, claims and counterclaims.
"All of these stories take away from the other messages," Bailey agreed. "It means people may get confused, and it means no message may get through. A problem for the Robb campaign over the next 10 days is 'what issue do we want to home in on?' Is this the issue, or one of a maximum of two?"
Whatever happens, the Social Security flap reveals much about the two campaigns - and perhaps their respective candidates.
North's utterance on Monday that he'd like to see Social Security become voluntary for "the next generation" was clearly one of the spontaneous comments his campaign staff has so dearly sought to avoid.
In recent weeks, North's staff has sharply curtailed his publicly announced appearances. On some days, there's just one. On others, none at all. Monday's lone event was at the Berkshire Health Care Center, a Vinton nursing home, which North used as the backdrop to accuse Robb of having "done the unconscionable, voting to punish seniors like these."
It was supposed to be the photo opportunity to complement a new round of North ads, on both television and radio, that declared, "Chuck Robb wants to break the Social Security contract with seniors." His evidence: Robb voted for a deficit-reduction package that raised taxes on couples on Social Security who make more than $32,000 a year. And Robb has said he'd be willing to consider capping some entitlements to reduce the deficit even more.
But when asked what he'd do to maintain the long-term solvency of the system as the baby-boom generation edges toward retirement, North began talking - at some length - about his desire to see the system become voluntary.
That would constitute a fundamental shift in the way Social Security works: It's not like a bank account, in which retirees draw out money they've paid in. Instead, the system is based on one generation paying to support another.
In 1945, there were 45 workers paying in for each beneficiary. But baby-boom demographics changed all that. Today, there are 3.2 workers being taxed for each person drawing a check, and the ratio is still dropping. The Cato Institute, a free-market Washington think tank, projects that most workers under age 40 will lose money on Social Security. "Young people don't stand a chance of getting anything out of the system," McSweeney said. "It's become a fraudulent program."
That's prompted some conservative thinkers to propose that the nation switch to a new system, in which the government simply mandates that all workers save a certain amount for their own retirement - although the trick is what to do about retirees in the meantime.
However, North's comments on a voluntary program appeared to contradict his previous position, published in the Richmond Times-Dispatch on Oct. 9. Asked then if he'd agree to allow workers to opt out of Social Security if they showed they had their own retirement program, North said no. "I do not trust the federal government to start messing with the Social Security program, even with good intentions," North said then in a written statement.
Why the difference? "It's easy," Sabato said. "That was written by an aide." North aides this week had their own explanation: North's comments on making Social Security voluntary have been overblown. "He's just explaining he'd be willing to look at other things way down the line," spokesman Dan McLagan said.
The Robb campaign, meanwhile, waited nearly as long, in campaign terms, to decide to exploit the issue. Campaign advisers held two inconclusive meetings on the subject this week. Not until a third did they decide to act.
"That is genuinely perplexing," said Mary Washington College political analyst Mark Rozell. "This is the kind of issue that should make a candidate start salivating and not hesitate for a minute. My question is, what did they need to ponder? ... But I've been surprised throughout this campaign by how long it's taken the Robb campaign to respond to opportunities that have arisen."
Republicans concede they wish North hadn't said what he said, even if they agree with him. "I'm sure the consultants said 'oh gosh, you shouldn't have said that,'" McSweeney said. "When you're explaining something this late in the campaign, you're losing."
But some wonder whether the concept of voluntary Social Security will prove to be a less volatile issue this time.
"Two years ago, we couldn't even discuss it," said Andrew Weinstein, a spokesman for Lead or Leave, a Washington-based advocacy group for the twentysomething generation. "But the whole focus on the deficit has really drawn attention to the fact that it's not pork-barrel spending that is the problem, but that entitlements are out of whack."
He says the way Social Security plays in Virginia's Senate race could set the tone for future national debate on the issue.
Keywords:
POLITICS
by CNB