Sweeping Social Security under the carpet

Via Josh Marshall we find this fascinating Washington Times article, House urged to take lead on Social Security.

Conservative House Republicans, beset with growing distrust of the Senate, are urging the House leadership to jump ahead of the Senate on Social Security reform and pass a bill based on large personal retirement accounts and no tax increases or cuts in benefits.
They also want House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert and House Majority Tom DeLay to say publicly that any bill sent over from the Senate that doesn't meet all these requirements will not be taken up in the House.
"It is imperative now that the House pass a Social Security reform that reflects Republican principles," said Indiana Rep. Mike Pence, who leads a group of about 100 conservative House Republicans. "It's not imperative that we do something. It is imperative that Congress does the right thing, at least in one chamber."

The House Republicans know their plan is doomed but.....

.....Mr. McHenry argued that the House "has bold conservative leadership, and it's time for us to use it."
"We can't wait for the Senate to mess this up," he said.
Mr. DeLay yesterday that he agrees with his fellow conservatives.
Mr. Hastert has publicly endorsed a Republican bill by New Hampshire Sen. John E. Sununu and Wisconsin Rep. Paul D. Ryan that would allow about half of the 12.4 percent Social Security payroll tax to go into a worker's personal account. Workers could pick from a list of approved investment funds managed by firms regulated by the government.
Some Senate conservatives privately agree with their House counterparts that the Social Security debate has swirled out of control and that the situation is now playing into the hands of Democrats, who adamantly oppose partial privatization of Social Security. These conservatives say the only way to save the situation is for the House to pass a private-accounts bill and let the Democrats take the blame for blocking Senate passage.

These people really are out of touch, let the Democrats take the blame for blocking legislation a majority of the American people don't want? The political logic of that escapes me.
Josh says:

This would be a smart and gutsy strategy if phase-out were popular. But since every public poll available seems to show that it's not popular at all, it's not immediately clear why letting the Democrats stop this unpopular bill in the senate would necessarily be a bad thing for them. Indeed, common sense would suggest that stopping an unpopular piece of legislation would be something they'd be happy to do.

For what it's worth, I doubt very much that it would currently be possible to get a phase-out bill through the House at all. But in purely political terms I have little doubt that the Democrats would love to see them try.

I agree, bring it on.