海角大神

Is Rick Perry changing his position on Social Security? It sounded as if he might be doing just that at Monday鈥檚 CNN/Tea Party Express debate in Tampa, Fla.

In the past the Texas governor has called the huge federal retirement program a 鈥淧onzi scheme鈥� and a 鈥渕onstrous lie.鈥� But he didn鈥檛 use such inflammatory language on Monday night. Instead, he echoed the structure of an he鈥檇 published in that day鈥檚 USA Today.

First, he reassured seniors and those close to retirement that he鈥檚 not in favor of changing current benefits.

鈥淪lam dunk, guaranteed, that program is going to be there鈥� for such individuals, Governor Perry told the audience of tea party adherents.

Then he said he would tell younger workers the truth: The system is broken and needs to be reformed.

He concluded 鈥渨e鈥檙e going to fix it,鈥� without offering any specific policy prescriptions other than a national conversation on the subject.

Pretty much every politician in Washington, Republican or Democrat, could have said the same thing, challenger Mitt Romney pointed out.

鈥淲hat he just said, I think most people agree with,鈥� said Mr. Romney following Perry鈥檚 Social Security answer.

Romney then hammered at the issue, bringing up passages from Perry鈥檚 recent book, 鈥淔ed Up!鈥� in which the Texas governor questions whether Social Security is constitutional and urges that it be taken away from the federal government and given back to the states.

Perry would not get drawn into that fight. 鈥淲e ought to have a conversation with...." he said at one point.

Romney interrupted him. 鈥淲e鈥檙e having that right now, governor ... we鈥檙e running for president,鈥� he said.

So why has Perry changed his tone? Just last week, in the Reagan library debate, he used the 鈥渕onstrous lie鈥� line. Now he鈥檚 sounding like a panelist in a Brookings Institution seminar titled, 鈥淲hither Entitlements?鈥�

We鈥檒l tell you why: His advisers convinced him that the poll numbers on what he was doing were against him. Just because it is conventional wisdom doesn鈥檛 mean it鈥檚 wrong. If you鈥檙e a politician with national aspirations, you really don鈥檛 want to step on Social Security鈥檚 cape.

In a Pew Research survey from July, 87 percent of respondents agreed with the statement, 鈥淥ver the years, Social Security has been good for the country.鈥� Eighty-seven percent! That鈥檚 as close to unanimous as you get in the polling game. Given that, maybe it鈥檚 not a good idea in terms of electability to question whether that program should exist.

In his Monday article, Perry added that 鈥淎mericans deserve a frank and honest discussion of the dire financial challenges facing the nearly 80-year old program.鈥�

That statement is unexceptional, and unsurprising to most voters, who already know the program is in trouble. In that same , 77 percent of respondents said that the state of the program鈥檚 finances is 鈥渙nly fair/poor.鈥�

In fact, many younger voters are cynical about their chances of collecting benefits. A 2010 found that 60 percent of non-retirees believe that Social Security will not be able to pay them a benefit when they retire.

At the same time, found that 78 percent of non-retirees believe that Social Security will be at least a minor source of income for them after they stop working. Over a third 鈥� 34 percent 鈥� say it will be a major source of retirement cash. That last measure has gone up in recent years, perhaps due to the effect the Great Recession has had on 401(k) programs and other nest eggs.

鈥淎mericans thus appear to be in a bind, perceiving an increased need for Social Security while at the same time being less sure it will be there when they need it,鈥� wrote Gallup poll editor Frank Newport last year.

Thus Social Security may be both an opportunity and a danger for the eventual Republican presidential nominee. They might need to thread a needle: suggest ways to reform Social Security, without calling into question the overall structure of an institution most Americans support.