[Posted 03/04 06:01 PM]

Senators John Thune and Orrin Hatch will introduce a Constitutional Amendment to give Congress power to outlaw desecration of the American Flag.

From Thune’s office:

“Given the strong bipartisan support for this issue in Congress and throughout the nation, I am hopeful we can enact this important Amendment. I am introducing this Amendment so those who have bravely defended our nation in the past – and those defending it today – can have the flag protected.”

[Posted 03/04 02:41 PM]

Business Week has a great story on the AARP and their lack of impartiality in opposing Social Security reform. Along with close ties to many Democratic groups, the AARP has a number of financial investments that create a conflict of interest in its claimed impartiality in opposing reform. For example:

The AARP is selling mutual funds, far riskier than anything proposed for Social Security. They also endorse and co-brand health insurance plans, financial services and travel plans sold to members.

Many of the funds and insurance policies AARP offers are less reliable than what seniors could get on their own.

[Posted 03/04 11:44 AM]

The economy added 262,000 jobs in February. The unexpectedly high numbers have the stock market on a bounce today. The Washington Post makes note of this in their “more headlines” section under the lead stories, the New York Times runs an AP version in their business section, the Los Angeles Times has zero coverage on their front page and USA today makes it their top headline under its two lead stories (Lebanon and Martha Stewart). It is currently the top story over at the Wall Street Journal.

[Posted 03/04 10:33 AM]

A good source tells me that “60 Minutes” is planning to run another hit piece on Tom DeLay this Sunday. This is not the first such piece from “60 Minutes” and CBS will once again spotlight Ronnie Earle, the Democrat District Attorney from Travis County, Texas.

I have been told that after two years and his fourth grand jury coming to a close this month, Earle has never once attempted to contact DeLay regarding the investigation.

This might be an appropriate time to remind readers of Earle’s record:

Since the 2002 elections, Earle has been on a personal jihad to indict individuals who were involved in statewide redistricting and successful Republican elections. However, throughout his career, Earle has taken out political vendettas on both Democrats and Republicans.

In 1993, Earle made the first of three attacks on Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison. His last attempt was thrown out of court on the first day.

Early has also directly coordinated with journalists, such as Dave McNeely of the Austin American Statesman, to produce stories critical of GOP lawmakers.

Earle’s website continues to highlight a 2000 fundraiser with Ben Barnes and Dan Rather’s daughter. Barnes, of course, was used in the infamous “60 Minutes” show last September that attempted to discredit President Bush’s National Guard record, and led to the downfall of Rather and several high-ranking CBS officials. In 2001, Rather himself headlined an event for Travis county Democrats, including Earle.

[Posted 03/04 09:00 AM]

A new State House News poll shows Hillary Clinton would “trounce” John Kerry, 51 to 33 percent, among Massachusetts voters in a potential 2008 Democratic presidential primary.

State GOP Chair Timothy O'Brien said, "It's an electability problem that John Kerry has. If he's losing by 18 points in his home state, it's an indication of problems with any future aspirations."

Kerry press secretary Setti Warren countered, "If he were driven by polls, John Kerry wouldn't have gotten out of bed before the Iowa caucuses and Bill Weld would be the junior senator from Massachusetts."

[Posted 03/04 08:41 AM]

Backing up on the White House promise to provide “political cover” for those who support his Social Security reform plan, President Bush is schedule to appear today at events for GOP Reps. Mike Ferguson of New Jersey and Chris Chocola of Indiana. Democrat opponents opposed to reform are challenging both.

[Posted 03/04 08:32 AM]

The New York Times chronicles President Bush’s efforts to reassure supporters that his Social Security reform push is not in any danger. Attempting to turn the tables, the President declared, "Ultimately, I think politicians need to be worried about not being a part of the solution."

[Posted 03/04 08:23 AM]

As many readers have noted, on yesterday's CNN "Inside Politics" Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid referred to Alan Greenspan as "one of the biggest political hacks we have here in Washington,"

[Posted 03/04 08:18 AM]

The Washington Post headlines, “Frist Revises Social Security Remarks, Urges Prompt Action.” The story notes Frist, “had ruffled feathers at the White House and elsewhere by telling reporters” reform might stall till next year.

What the WP fails to note is their reporter Mike Allen was the sole recipient of this comment. The Buzz was quick to argue Frist appeared quoted out of context. Sure enough, the White House and Frist were quick to clarify.

[Posted 03/03 04:40 PM]

In a release, that reads:

"This President and this Congress are facing this challenge and the challenge is to fix Social Security. ... We need to do it this year. Not next year, but this year."

[Posted 03/03 04:11 PM]

Heading into today’s Subcommittee on International Terrorism and Nonproliferation meeting, Congressman Ed Royce joined others in marking up HRes. 101. The markup urges the EU to add Hezbollah to its list of terror groups.

The rest of the meeting concerned Algeria’s ongoing struggle against terrorism. Algeria’s history of combating threats is a long one as it unfortunately now struggles to contain the minority element in its society promoting fundamentalist Islamic law.

Congressman Royce had this to add:

"U.S. authorities are rightly concerned about Algeria and its region. Some speak of the Sahara Desert as the 'New Afghanistan,' where militants operate freely.”

“A more democratic Algeria with a better human rights record is a stronger Algeria, one more capable of checking terrorism. Algeria has made democratic progress. Last year's presidential election, while having shortcomings, was Algeria's best ever.”

[Posted 03/03 03:55 PM]

At today's White House press briefing, Scott McClellan confirmed my earlier speculation that yesterday's Washington Post story had taken Bill Frist out of context. Mike Allen had reported Frist saying reform would not happen this year. When asked, McClellan responded:

"Let's be fair.  I think it was -- he was selectively
quoted.  And he feels he was taken out of context, obviously."

[Posted 03/03 03:18 PM]

The Winston Group has issued a response to the DC memo:

“Reading the Democracy Corps ’ (DC) latest screed which used the word ‘crash’ five times in the first six paragraphs to refer to Bush’s Social Security proposal, I wondered if this was a new Democrat strategy to attract the elusive NASCAR dads. Then I realized it was just the same old, same old -- the Democracy Corps back on the attack with the kind of overheated hyperbole that didn’t work last November and has put the Democrat Party in the minority position they find themselves in today.”

On the shifting poll numbers:

“For decades, Democrats have enjoyed a huge advantage on the Social Security issue. To see Bush ahead in these categories is a political shift of historic proportions.”

The Winston Group notes as the Buzz has that even if the reformers trail in some polling statistics, the public is taking note that Democrats are now presenting ideas of their own. Could it be the Democrats who are actually the ones on a decreasing timeline?

“If the Democrats want to survive, it’s time to build a raft. That takes ideas.”

[Posted 03/03 03:10 PM]

There is growing buzz today over the new Democracy Corps strategy memo from Stan Greenberg and James Carville. The headline reads, “President Bush's Social Security proposal is crashing against the wall of the public's deep doubts.”

But reading the full 18-page memo reveals a frank assessment of where the battle lies:

“Some will focus on the faltering support for Bush’s Social Security proposal, but we are more struck by his survival as somebody who at least has a purpose and ideas, even if wrong-headed. In the bi-partisan poll for NPR, the Democrats bested Bush on only one Social Security related item, watching out for the interest of current retirees, though only by 6 points (46 to 40 percent). The president prevailed on all other comparisons, including offering the right kind of ideas and trust to make the right kind of changes.”

Their analysis doesn’t seem far separated from optimistic Republicans. Reformists may still be trailing in the polls, but they are winning the public’s trust to move forward:

“Bottom line, Republicans are winning the battle of seriousness, even as they lose the specifics of the Social Security battle.”

And on the current Democrat response:

“To say there is no problem, simply puts the Democrats out of the conversation for the great majority of the country that want political leaders to secure this very important government retirement program. Voters are looking for reform, change and new ideas, but Democrats seem stuck in concrete.”

[Posted 03/03 10:44 AM]

Ankle Biting Pundits has a good breakdown analysis of problems with today’s NYT/CBS poll on Social Security. For starters, it samples Democrats by nearly 10 percent over Republicans.

[Posted 03/03 10:37 AM]

Listened in on a conference call with Steve Forbes this morning. The magazine editor and former presidential candidate had many positive things to say about President Bush’s Social Security reform push. The call was arranged by Progress for America, who says they plan to spend $20 million in support of Bush’s reform.

Forbes opened by noting, “Social Security is a system in crisis.” He confessed that the push has not gotten off to the best start and that voters, especially the elderly, need to know the true parameters, “Their benefits are secure, as they are for anyone currently in the system or going to join it over the next five or ten years. This is about younger people.”

He gave much praise to Bush for making Social Security reform his first domestic priority after re-election; “For once we are dealing with a problem before it becomes an active crisis.”

His main points of criticism came in regard to proposals to raise the income tax cap for Social Security and the possibility of add-on accounts instead of personal accounts, “Raising taxes is not the answer because it will hurt the economy. … The president’s plan will help the economy. Add-ons are not a solution. We already have them in the form of IRA’s and 401k’s. The key here is to deal with the system itself.”

[Posted 03/03 10:28 AM]

Charles Grassley says the Senate should focus on Social Security’s solvency before pursuing reform. However, Grassely said he still intends to get a reform bill on the floor this year,

“But maybe we ought to focus on solvency, and bring people to the table just over what do you do for solvency for the next 75 years,”

Grassley said the reaction he received from town hall meetings last week showed more education is needed, ‘That's a major stumbling block to doing anything on this,’ he said.”

[Posted 03/03 10:00 AM]

Bob Novak writes in his new column that President Bush is telling close associates he made a “whopper” of a mistake in pushing for personal accounts without talking about saving the safety net for seniors first.

There is more on the aftermath of last week’s Social Security town hall meetings and Novak’s claim that more senators are privately warming up to Lindsey Graham’s plan. Novak also discusses the same point a GOP insider told me yesterday – that some are pushing for a House bill that would pass, followed by defeat in the Senate as a way to nationalize 2006 elections.

[Posted 03/03 08:29 AM]

ADL National Director Abraham Foxman has issued the following statement:

“It is hideous, outrageous and offensive for Senator Byrd to suggest that the Republican Party's tactics could in any way resemble those of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party.”

“The Senator shows a profound lack of understanding as to who Hitler was and what he and his regime represented.”

“Senator Byrd must repudiate his remarks immediately and apologize to the American people for showing such disrespect for this country's democratic process.”

[Posted 03/03 08:19 AM]

Newsweek’s White House correspondents Holly Bailey and Richard Wolffe have a good column on President Bush’s Social Security push. Though it doesn’t paint a rosy picture, most of the details line-up with what we’ve been hearing. There’s also the news that Karl Rove personally briefed business and financial-industry lobbyists on the administration’s Social Security game plan last week.

[Posted 03/03 08:06 AM]

The Washington Post also reports on the White House’s plan to escalate its efforts on Social Security. President Bush and VP Cheney have 60 events planned for the next 60 days.
This mostly positive story might be partial payback after yesterday’s Mike Allen WP story claiming Bill Frist had all but given up on passing Social Security reform this year. More and more, it’s looking like Frist’s comments were taken out of context.

[Posted 03/03 07:57 AM]

By comparison, the Washington Post waits only until paragraph four to mention Grenspan’s endorsement and devotes an entire story to his Social Security comments.

[Posted 03/03 07:51 AM]

In its only coverage of Alan Greenspan’s House testimony yesterday, the New York Times today focuses almost entirely on his criticism of budget deficits. However, they do mention his support for the president’s Social Security reform – on paragraph 26, in one sentence.

[Posted 03/03 07:43 AM]

The New York Times leads with its new poll, declaring President Bush is “out of step” with the country on key issues. The main focus is Social Security, but the evidence is underwhelming:

“On Social Security 51 percent said permitting individuals to invest part of their Social Security taxes in private accounts, the centerpiece of Mr. Bush's plan, was a bad idea, even as a majority said they agreed with Mr. Bush that the program would become insolvent near the middle of the century if nothing was done.”

[Posted 03/02 03:38 PM]

A Republican insider has more information for Beltway Buzz readers on how fellow conservatives stand on the Social Security debate:

“Harry Reid is speaking very confidently about how he won’t allow any Democrats to support a cloture vote on Social Security. We need five votes and right now we don’t have any, other than maybe Ben Nelson.”

“Some Republicans are looking at this fight and thinking that even if we can’t get a bill passed this year, we could nationalize this debate and take it to the voters in 2006. But the only way that’s going to happen is if five Democrats vote to end the filibuster and then vote against the bill. That’s not going to happen.”

“In theory it could work like the tax increase vote in ’93. But the House is being more skittish on this than the Senate, which is very unusual. They are letting the Senate go first.”

“The talk is that we should now be focusing on passing smaller issues instead of this. And with the way this debate has gone, tax reform is dead too.”

[Posted 03/02 02:53 PM]

A Republican source on the Hill tells me Social Security reform is not looking nearly as dire as the MSM would have you believe:

“I don’t think so. Democrats are selling the mainstream media on the idea that there was a negative response from voters at the town hall meetings. And while the meetings weren’t necessarily a slam dunk, they went a lot better than the papers are reporting.”

And what the criticism that many members are not educated enough on the issue to sway skeptical voters?

“We need to do a better job of preparing members not just to ask questions but to be able to answer them. The AARP tactics (planting questions at meetings) may actually help our cause when we get people at these meetings who aren’t happy with a lot of thing the AARP has been doing. This is going to be hard but not impossible.”

I asked the source about the growing story these past two days that reform is on a dwindling deadline and may be pushed back indefinitely.

“The goal is to send a bill to the president that he can sign this year. Deadlines are helpful in the sense that they provide a sense of urgency, but there is no concrete deadline of three weeks, 60 days, or anything like that.”

Finally, what about talk from some circles about settling for add-on accounts and payroll cap increases?

“That’s really premature to talk about add-ons as a final solution. If there were a silver bullet that everyone could agree on we would have done it already. There is a lot of apprehension to caps. Hastert and DeLay have already said it’s not going to happen.”

[Posted 03/02 02:40 PM]

Just finished a conference call with the liberal group Americans United to Protect Social Security. AUPSS has teamed with the AFSCME, AFL-CIO, Campaign for America’s Future and others, to raise money/activism to defeat Social Security reform.

The group’s first big event is planned for this Friday to coincide with President Bush’s visit to New Jersey. They have teamed with New Jersey Citizen Action to coordinate a protest of the president’s appearance. Spokesman Brad Woodhouse, who referred to the president’s plan as a “scheme” half a dozen times during the call, noted the group plans to raise between $25 and $50 million to block reform. The foundation of their efforts will be to follow members who support reform, planting protestors at their events. “We’ll be tracking them like a bird dog to a quail.” Woodhouse said.

Appearing at the Bush protest will be NJ Democrat Congressman Frank Pallone, members of the state NAACP and various liberal activists.

[Posted 03/02 01:21 PM]

When it comes to being a fiscal conservative, Arnold smokes the competition. That’s according to the Cato Institute, who published their rankings of the nation’s governors in relation to fiscal restraint. Arnold comes in at number one, edging out former Governor Craig Benson of New Hampshire. You can read the full Cato results here.

Schwarzenegger is personally tackling three significant issues: restructuring the public employee pension system, changing job protection standards for teachers and redrawing California’s voting districts. Despite criticism from both sides of the aisle, his courage is not going unnoticed. Today, he literally climbed into his Humvee seeking signature support for his initiatives. Some are even comparing his use of celebrity status to enact reform to that of Teddy Roosevelt.

[Posted 03/02 12:56 PM]

Just a reminder, more judiciary nomination hearings scheduled for tomorrow. They start at 2pm and are scheduled to feature:

- Terrence W. Boyle, of North Carolina, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Fourth Circuit.

- James C. Dever III, of North Carolina, to be United States District Judge for the Eastern District of North Carolina.

- Robert J. Conrad, Jr., of North Carolina, to be United States District Judge for the Western District of North Carolina.

[Posted 03/02 12:50 PM]

In today’s testimony before the House Committee on the Budget, Alan Greenspan made several statements that can only be viewed as good news to Social Security reform advocates. First, regarding the main Democrat line that there is no problem with Social Security, Greenspan said Congress could:

“either choose to do something in advance, which will ameliorate the problem, but not completely eliminate it, or wait until the problem is right on you, in which the solutions are going to be very painful.”

And when it comes to personal accounts as a solution, Greenspan had this to say:

“In my view, a retirement system with a significant personal accounts component would provide a more credible means of ensuring that the program actually adds to overall saving and, in turn, boosts the nation's capital stock. The reason is that money allocated to the personal accounts would no longer be available to fund other government activities.”

[Posted 03/02 12:12 PM]

I spoke with a Republican insider today to get a detailed and honest assessment of where the Social Security reform push stands right now. In short, “We’re in serious trouble,” the source said.

Reform proponents feel the White House went in backwards on this effort, first talking about the solution when they should have lead with the problem. This is the sentiment I have been hearing from other sources close to the debate as well.

Meanwhile, the message from the Democrats has been simple: “Social Security is not broken and the Republicans want to take your money away and give it to Wall Street.” Conversely, the reform message has been convoluted in moving from solution talk to explaining the problems facing Social Security.

As with judicial nominees, Republicans will need to peel off five Democrats to end the guaranteed filibuster. Unlike judicial nominees, where the count stands between 57-58, not one Democrat has committed to supporting reform.

Support has also been lacking from the private sector. Small business owners are very upset about talk concerning an increase in the Social Security payroll tax cap. Larger businesses are not as concerned, but any kind of split in the business community is cancerous for reform.

There is a feeling amongst skeptics now that as with Medicare, the White House will “trade anything” to get a reform bill, including tax caps. It is going to be virtually impossible to get any Democrat senators on board without such a compromise.

[Posted 03/02 09:33 AM]

As a reader notes regarding Byrd's Nazi comment:

"When a Klansman calls you a Nazi, does he mean that as a compliment?"

[Posted 03/02 08:39 AM]

Here is RNC Chair Ken Mehlman’s response to Robert Byrd’s comparison of Republican strategy to that of Hitler yesterday on the Senate floor:

“Senator Byrd’s invocation of Hitler’s Germany in discussing the duty of U.S. Senators to advise and provide consent on judicial nominees is reprehensible and beyond the pale. While members of the Senate are free to agree and disagree on the issues, this poisonous rhetoric only serves to illustrate the desperation and weakness of Senator Byrd’s position.”

Byrd made the comparison when describing any possible attempt to end filibusters on judicial nominees. For those of you who didn’t catch it, here is his full comment:

“Hitler never abandoned the cloak of legality. he never abandoned the cloak of legality. he recognized the enormous psychological, value of having the law on his side.”

[Posted 03/02 08:31 AM]

The Los Angeles Times focuses its national story on Salazar’s move, noting how it surprised those on both sides of the aisle. In his letter to President Bush Salazar says withdrawing Myers and the six other re-submitted nominees:

“would be a recognition that the Congress and the president must work on those matters where we can find common purpose," including "historic deficits, healthcare, transportation and the war on terrorism."

Again, the Times notes Salazar was one of 13 state attorney generals who less than a year ago urged for Myers to be confirmed.

Specter said he still believes Joe Biden and Ben Nelson are on board for ending the filibuster on Myers.

[Posted 03/02 08:21 AM]

The New York Times uses some strong and accurate language in its coverage of the Myers hearing yesterday, describing the strategy of Democrats as “partisan breakdown” and their treatment of Myers as “pummeling” and “assailing.” Like the Washington Post, the NYT observes the 58 count towards breaking the filibuster may be an overestimate with the apparent loss of Colorado Senator Ken Salazar, who less than a year ago urged confirmation for Myers.

[Posted 03/02 08:10 AM]

The Washington Post recaps yesterday’s judiciary hearing for William Myers. For those following the story, there aren’t any real new details here. However, Charles Schumer, who Arlen Specter for whatever reason thought at one time might vote to end the filibuster, is clearly not going to be supportive. I recommend following this link if only to see the picture that accompanies it encapsulating Schumer’s smug demeanor and Specter’s frustration during yesterday’s hearing.

[Posted 03/02 07:58 AM]

The Washington Post reports Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist has decided a vote on Social Security reform may not come until next year and even then may not feature personal accounts:

"In terms of whether it will be a week, a month, six months or a year, as to when we bring something to the floor, it's just too early," Frist said.

However, the story also notes Frist is reluctant to put off the vote until next year, when members of the House and some in the Senate will be gearing up for re-election.

[Posted 03/01 05:00 PM]

Another reader writes in with some observations from Byrd’s floor speech today:

“1) Byrd made no attempt to claim that killing nominations via filibusters is part of Senate tradition.”

“2) He made no claim that ruling such filibusters out of order by majority vote was against the rules or unprecedented.”

“3) His exposition on minority rights relied entirely on examples of legislative filibusters – which would not be effected by the Constitutional Option.”

[Posted 03/01 04:46 PM]

A senior Senate staffer writes in to note the following on Senator Robert Byrd’s opposition to ending filibusters on judicial nominees:

“Sen. Robert Byrd took to the Senate floor today railed against what he called the ‘nuclear option’, but has previously spoken in defense of what is really just a constitutional option. But I think he said it best before when he explained that a majority has the right to make its own rules:”

‘This Congress is not obliged to be bound by the dead hand of the past … The first Senate, which met in 1789, approved 19 rules by a majority vote. Those rules have been changed from time to time … So the Members of the Senate who met in 1789 and approved that first body of rules did not for one moment think, or believe, or pretend, that all succeeding Senates would be bound by that Senate … It would be just as reasonable to say that one Congress can pass a law providing that all future laws have to be passed by two-thirds vote. Any Member of this body knows that the next Congress would not heed that law and would proceed to change it and would vote repeal of it by majority vote.’

--U.S. Sen. Robert Byrd, Jan. 15, 1979

“In fact, Sen. Byrd led the charge to establish new Senate precedents in 1977, 1979, 1980, and 1987 - including a number of precedents that were designed specifically to stop filibusters and other delay tactics that were previously authorized under Senate rules or prior precedents,”

[Posted 03/01 02:34 PM]

Democratic strategist Donna Brazile has an op-ed in today’s Roll Call (subscription required) that should have Ken Mehlman smiling:

This weekend, I found myself sharing the stage in Atlanta with many of the icons of the modern civil rights movement ... This year ... we found ourselves discussing new players in the dialogue -- blacks who lean Republican.”

Brazile goes on to cite Mehlman and the RNC’s outreach efforts. She adds that in order for the Democrats to maintain their traditional majorities in black support, they will have to respond to Mehlman’s outreach and not take black votes for granted. Brazile goes on to say:

“Among Democrats, Mehlman's efforts should be cause for alarm. Clearly, this is going to be one heck of a political season if Mehlman continues to take his case to black audiences around the country and does more than pay lip service to his audience's needs.”

[Posted 03/01 02:00 PM]

The Free Enterprise Fund today released a memo on Social Security signed by its chief economist Larry Hunter. It is quite frank and sober in its assessment of the reform push so far:

“One hates to admit it but, so far, the Bush Administration has made a hash of its campaign to allow workers to invest part of their payroll tax contributions in real private assets through personal retirement accounts.”

The memo stresses the president must be stronger in his approach to selling reform, reflecting the methods used by Ronald Reagan and Jack Kemp. If the president does not take a stronger path, the memo warns:

“Either, personal accounts will be lost altogether to a coalition of emboldened liberals and timid conservatives with an eye to the next election; or the White House will concede so much to the liberals in a desperate grasp for a legacy on Social Security that the result will be counterproductive, especially if it involves a tax increase that damages the economy, puts the Republican congressional majority at risk next year and revives Democratic presidential hopes in 2008.”

[Posted 03/01 11:16 AM]

Roll Call reports this morning (subscription required) that as MSM outlets assert in near unison the failures of last week’s town hall meetings regarding Social Security reform, Republican members themselves are telling a different story.

Generations Together and Progress for America, two private-sector groups advocating reform, have compiled memos documenting their work and are distributing them to members. From the Roll Call piece:

“’While some of the national media coverage has portrayed a one-sided, anti-reform recess, our experience on the ground tells a very different story,’ asserts the Generations Together memo, which was given to Senate and House Republican leaders as well as to key White House officials, including Karl Rove and Social Security svengali Barry Jackson.”

The Generations Together memo seems to line-up with the feedback I have been receiving from members of Congress and those close to the debate. And this includes individuals who are not 100 percent on board with the White House.

[Posted 03/01 10:34 AM]

A few notes from this morning’s White House gaggle (the gaggle is the off-camera/on the record morning press conference with WH Press Secretary Scott McClellan):

Most of the questions directed at McClellan this morning concerned the directive reportedly issued by Osama bin Laden to Abu Musab Zarqawi, leader of the main terrorist group operating inside Iraq. Bin Laden has reportedly ordered Zarqawi to attempt to attack targets inside the United States. McClellan was not able to, or refused to answer most questions on this subject. He did note that some of the press coverage of it has been inaccurate.

McClellan was also asked about the handover of tapes made by Doug Wead of then-governor Bush. McClellan was asked if the White House planned to destroy the tapes or maintain them for posterity. Needless to say, McClellan seemed somewhat annoyed with the question and did not offer a direct answer.

Finally, McClellan was asked if President Bush had received a copy of former Press Secretary Ari Fleischer’s new memoir, “Taking Heat.” McClellan said that he had personally delivered a copy of the book to the president.

If the tone of the gaggle continues at today's on camera press conference, look for the large number of bin Laden questions to continue.

[Posted 03/01 08:09 AM]

The Coalition for a Fair Judiciary today called for a vote out of committee on William Myers. Their release notes that Myers was first nominated to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on May 15, 2003 and had a Judiciary Committee hearing on February 5, 2004.

CFJ President Kay Daly:

“It has been 654 days since William Myers was nominated to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The average length of time from nomination to confirmation used to be 87 days. It is time to stop talking about this nomination and vote on it. What’s left to ask this nominee – his favorite color?”

[Posted 03/01 08:00 AM]

Halfway into its own story on Social Security, the Los Angeles Times picks up on the ticking clock theme as well:

“A senior Senate GOP aide said the initiative could be in trouble if it fails to pick up some steam after Congress returns from its next recess in early April. ‘After that recess, if things haven't started to jell, I wouldn't say it's over, but you've got to start seeing some movement by the end of June,’ the aide said”

[Posted 03/01 07:52 AM]

The New York Times follows the same theme as the Washington Post this morning in reporting that time could be running out to sell Social Security reform. Its story focuses on comments made by Iowa Senator Charles Grassley. When asked if President Bush is making progress, Grassley said, "It's too doggone early … Maybe in another two or three weeks I would like to see some movement" in the opinion polls "or you might have some question about the president succeeding."

[Posted 03/01 07:42 AM]

The Washington Post reports today that the White House and Social Security reform advocates have given lawmakers six weeks to change public perception on individual accounts. In conjunction, the Treasury Department yesterday announced the creation of a Social Security “war room” to track statements made by members of Congress in both parties and to coordinate education efforts.

[Posted 02/28 05:21 PM]

Florida Congressman Clay Shaw called in to the Beltway Buzz this afternoon to discuss his plan for Social Security reform. Under Shaw’s plan, no Social Security taxes would be diverted into personal accounts. However, a percentage of the general fund would be placed into personal accounts, to create an “add-on” in addition to Social Security benefits.

When I asked Shaw how the White House has responded to his proposal he said, “They haven’t asked me to back off or to change my position. But they haven’t adopted it either.”

When asked the difference between financing personal accounts through Social Security taxes versus the general fund, Shaw said, “It doesn’t make that much difference. My plan is one that might be able to get some support from Democrats who haven’t closed the door on personal accounts.”

Conservatives who are cautious of Shaw’s plan are wary that it would result in a much smaller percentage of taxes going into personal accounts combined with a large increase of the cap in taxable income. When I asked Shaw about this, he said a tax cap increase isn’t necessary, “Under my plan, they don’t have to do that right now.”

Another large story in the media regards Republican’s fear of a backlash from voters if they support reform. White House officials have suggested President Bush could provide “political cover” for those members through his own reform campaign. Shaw notes he’s already been promoting reform for several years, “I’ve been working on this for six years. I’ve had my neck out there for the last three elections. I don’t need any cover. All members have to do is explain it to seniors.”

Shaw believes most of the negative feedback results from a lack of knowledge on the part of reform advocates. “Many of them really don’t understand how it works. I’ve seen members on the stump getting hit over the head because they can’t answer questions about how their plan would work. You need to learn exactly how the Social Security system works before you can call people into a room to listen.”

Even though he hails from a district with one of the highest percentages of senior voters, Shaw says he has been getting a positive reaction to his ideas, “I’m feeling good about it. I went to a town hall meeting the other day where everyone in the room was older than I was. There were probably more Democrats than Republicans in the room. But I got good feedback. The key is to know your game and to stay on offense.”

[Posted 02/28 04:02 PM]

From a source close to the Social Security debate:

“The Democrats are leaning heavily in favor of announcing support for add on accounts, like those proposed in the Shaw bill. That way they can acknowledge 1. The power of the markets, 2. It’s your money, and 3.) Ownership and inheritability. They can also claim it accomplishes all those things without foisting debt onto the Social Security system. This is silly, of course, because we already have add-on accounts called IRA’s and 401K’s for which we don’t need the governments help."

"But this is a huge problem for the Republicans because they have almost negotiated themselves into such a tight corner that this might be the only solution left. Conservatives, as you point out, are very frustrated about this. I can promise you many conservative groups will pull out of the coalition should we end up with a bill that hikes the wage cap and only provides for small accounts.”

President Bush has been able to claim success with compromise bills in the past: campaign finance reform, Medicare and the Homeland Security bill. Growing evidence indicates triangulation will not be successful on Social Security reform. Conservatives will rightly view the add-on/raised tax cap plan as a tax increase. Meanwhile, Democrats are not bending on personal accounts. Would the better route, both in the short term and long, be for the White House to spend its political capital on fundamental reform proposals that fiscal conservatives and free market proponents can agree on?

[Posted 02/28 12:14 PM]

The Cato Institute adds its own critique to yesterday’s Washington Post Social Security story. As Cato notes, the Washington Post’s polling shows a majority support personal savings accounts. However, yesterday’s WP revealed “widespread skepticism” from respondents.

What the Post leaves out of their story is that their polling asked several questions that put reform into a negative context, such as "people could lose some retirement savings under the plan" and "the plan would entail large new costs for the federal government."

In Cato’s own January poll conducted via Zogby, 55 percent of seniors initially opposed individual accounts. However, opposition was reduced to 45 percent when respondents 65 and over were informed that their benefits would not be touched or altered.

[Posted 02/28 11:21 AM]

Move-On held a telephone conference with reporters today to announce their latest plan to combat the White House: cartoons.

Tapping into the strategy that proved so “successful” in last year’s elections – celebrity endorsements – actor John Cusack and cartoonist Aaron McGruder announce the “Bush in 30 years” animation contest. Little doubt Karl Rove is shaking in his boots.

[Posted 02/28 10:37 AM]

Yesterday’s Washington Post story on Social Security presented a fairly dire outlook on President Bush’s push for reform. Are Republican members of Congress already looking for an exit strategy? Free Enterprise Fund President and NR contributor Steve Moore tells Beltway Buzz the push is still “early in the game” and reformers are far from giving up. “Bush is not throwing in the towel. He is committed to getting this done. They are going to keep fighting.”

However, some of the talk in GOP circles about reducing the percentage of income set aside for personal accounts may be the result of excessive compromise talk from the White House. Many conservatives are “miffed” at Bush for his comments on increasing the payroll tax cap. As Moore noted, “It has been a bad few weeks for privatization.” While the Democrats seem to have their “heels dug in,” the White House continues to give ground; unintentionally creating a “new starting point” in the debate each time they signal compromise.

As Moore states, Republican lawmakers might be better off sticking to their guns on personal accounts rather than being so quick to offer compromise. This aligns with the feedback I’ve been receiving. Even when the public has reservations about reform, they prefer a consistent, confident message to one that seems all too malleable. And even if this seems to slow down the process at first glance, it may be a better long-term strategy. Revealing the Democrats as obstructionists has paid dividends before.

[Posted 02/28 09:30 AM]

USA Next is taking its anti-AARP campaign to the next level. Here are some of their points, from a memo released today:

- AARP has never worked to eliminate the double tax on Social Security
benefits

- AARP has regularly opposed eliminating the death tax and cuts in the
capital gains tax

- AARP opposed the marriage amendment in Ohio last year

- AARP has supported gun control measures such as the Brady Bill

[Posted 02/28 08:30 AM]

The Washington Post says the White House is inching toward supporting the European plan of offering incentives to Iran in exchange for a commitment to curb its nuclear program. One of the incentives may include membership in the World Trade Organization. A senior admin. official added, "The meetings in Europe were really good, not just atmospherics. We are past the point of grousing about the process or each other and we're now grappling with the issues: how to stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon and how to deal with its behavior."

[Posted 02/28 08:21 AM]

Newsweek chronicles AARP’s efforts to fight Social Security reform. In addition, it discusses the efforts of USA Next to target AARP’s multi-faceted agenda. USA Next now plans to target AARP on gun control. USA Next CEO Charlie Jarvis, "We're going to make sure their members know their positions on everything,"

[Posted 02/28 08:13 AM]

The Los Angeles Times has an informative piece this morning regarding the GOP’s focus on African-Americans in selling Social Security reform. There is large support for personal accounts from blacks and several new black conservative groups will be making the case. In addition, Ken Mehlman speaks at Howard University tonight.

[Posted 02/28 08:04 AM]

Democrats on Social Security:

Joseph Biden: "I am ready, willing, and able to listen to anything the president has to put on the table about the issue of how he is going to deal with the solvency of Social Security." ("Meet The Press,")

Jon Corzine: "We're not against solving the problem that john and I both acknowledge exists in Social Security. All Democrats do." ("Face The Nation,")

Republicans, on adding personal accounts on top of the current system:

Rick Santorum: “It doesn't solve the problem of making sure that younger workers have an opportunity to get the benefits that they are promised but Social Security under the current structure can't deliver. And adding more taxes, which is what an outside account would be would simply be either a voluntary or forced tax increase to put that money aside.” (“Meet the Press,”)

John Sununu: “just to create accounts outside of Social Security is like giving people an IRA or a 401(k), which is something they already have.” (“Face the Nation,”)

And John McCain, on talk Bush may have to scale back his proposal: “I hope not … It's a good thing to do. Interest compounds. And I think it's an important thing that we should continue to support.” (“Fox News Sunday,”)