Social Security, A Diversion? Part II

About a week ago we had a post on a post from the Commonsense Desk where he wondered "if the Social Security debate is a classic misdirection play". Two articles in the LA Times today made me revisit that thought. The first, Opposition Hardens Against Bush's Social Security Plans discusses how Democrats are united and are ready to fight to the end. The Democrats new found spirit combined with an incredible lack of enthusiasm on the part of many Republicans would seem to make Bush's Social Security "reform" unlikely. So why would they put so much on the line? Is it indeed a diversionary tactic, a "misdirection play"? Here is where the second LA Times article, Bush Agenda Is Ambitious Politically come in. This article points out that the policy of the Bush administration is an attempt to neuter the Democratic party for at least a generation and Social Security is only part of it.

As the nation's trial lawyers again funneled tens of millions of dollars to Democrats and their causes in the last election, Republicans were crafting a strategy to choke off that money for future campaigns.

President Bush's agenda for the next four years, much of which he will highlight in his State of the Union address Wednesday night, includes many proposals that would not only change public policy but achieve an ambitious political goal: stripping money and voters from the Democratic Party and cementing Republican dominance for years after he leaves office.

This in a sense is even more important to the Bushites than Social Security not so much because of it's obvious benefit to their wealthy corporate sponsors but because it could dry up a huge source of money for the Democrats.

"If we could succeed in getting some form of tort reform passed -- medical malpractice reform or any of part of that -- it would go a long ways toward ... taking away the muscle, the financial muscle that they have," said Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., who ousted Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle last fall despite a heavy flood of trial lawyer money backing the Democrat.

There are other examples designed to draw voters away from the Democrats like:

The president's faith-based initiative, which encourages government funding for religious social service agencies, and his opposition to legalizing same-sex marriages are popular with socially conservative blacks, who have for decades leaned Democratic but are increasingly viewed as potential GOP voters.

So Social Security is just one piece of the puzzle so is the thought to keep the Democrats focused on Social Security so they will be inattentive when it comes to the other issues? A very real danger, they don't need the entire package now. Something to think about.