The upcoming GOP assault on Social Security
Trump prepares to follow in George W. Bush’s footsteps … again.
🌎 Public Notice is made possible by paid subscribers. If you aren’t one, please click the button below to sign up and support our independent journalism. 🌎
During his 2016 campaign, Donald Trump aimed nearly as much rhetorical ire at the Bush family as he did at Hillary Clinton. He assured working class voters his presidency would mark a sharp break with past GOP policies.
Yet Trump’s first — and only — major legislative achievement was to follow in the footsteps of George W. Bush’s first term by enacting massive tax cuts for the richest Americans. That gift to the wealthy proved to be a fiscal disaster for the nation and a political disaster for Trump and his party, ushering in a series of electoral losses for the GOP beginning with the 2018 midterms.
Now, as Trump plans his second term in the White House, he’s preparing to follow Bush’s example once again. He and his billionaire cronies are making increasingly strong signals that he’ll begin his second term by attacking Social Security (and potentially Medicare), this time mirroring a political disaster that Bush brought upon the GOP during his second term.
It is difficult to imagine a more politically foolhardy target than Social Security and Medicare. Yet, for decades, GOP politicians have been as tempted to attack these extraordinarily popular and successful elements of the social safety net as moths are to fly into flames. The “populist” Republicans of the Trump era are no different — a reality that portends great risk to Americans, but also huge political opportunities for Democrats.
The long history of GOP attacks on Social Security
From the outset, FDR’s enactment of a US version of Social Security — derived from similar, but often broader, safety net programs implemented in Western Europe — was vigorously opposed by GOP leaders, who (for good reason) feared it would create a permanent foundation of support for government “interference” in the economy. In order to undo the legacy of FDR’s New Deal, GOP leaders recognized they would ultimately have to launch a successful attack on Social Security.
The fact that Social Security successfully addressed what had appeared to be the permanent scourge of poverty among the elderly only deepened the ire of many in the GOP, given that it increased support for Democrats. The next several Republican presidents — including Eisenhower and his vice president, Richard Nixon — believed that GOP efforts to attack the nation’s core entitlement programs, which under LBJ grew to include the hugely successful Medicare program, would be politically suicidal.
A note from Aaron: Working with brilliant contributors like David takes resources. If you aren’t already a paid subscriber, please sign up to support our work.
These “establishment” Republicans were, however, reviled by many on the right of their party, including followers of Barry Goldwater. They refused to give up their dream of vanquishing Social Security, and with it the purportedly evil federal government institutions that had grown since the 1930s. Indeed, soon after being elected in 1980, former Goldwater sidekick Ronald Reagan — who had once famously called for Social Security to be made “voluntary” — implemented the first of what would prove to be habitual GOP attacks on Social Security.
In 1981, Reagan proposed dramatic cuts to Social Security, claiming that he was trying to “save” the program. His proposal faced immediate backlash, particularly from retired and soon to be retired voters who formed a key portion of the his coalition. The president beat a hasty retreat, as did congressional Republicans, who soon realized they would pay a high political price if they joined Reagan in gutting the program.
Reagan did succeed in enacting far more modest, but still substantial, cutbacks in Social Security with the support of Democrats — under the cover of a commission led by the then highly respected Alan Greenspan — based on the proposition they were “bolstering” it. This gave rise to an enduring view among many on the right that they could dupe Democrats to join them in cutting holes in the social safety net in the guise of trying to save it — a premise some “good government” types regrettably encouraged.
George W. Bush, like Trump, focused his first term economic program on fiscally unsound tax cuts for the rich. But after winning reelection, Bush began his second term with a declaration that he had obtained “political capital.” He chose to spend it with another attack upon Social Security.
In 2005, Bush announced his support for a “privatization” scheme inspired by the “voluntary” Social Security proposal favored by Goldwater and the young Reagan. He then embarked on a full-fledged campaign in support of his effort to gut Social Security, giving speech after speech in which he declared that the nation should be prepared to make “tough” decisions.
Bush likely expected that a substantial number of “fiscally moderate” Democrats would support his program, or at least parts of it. But Democrats had learned their lesson from past GOP assaults on Social Security and overwhelmingly resisted Bush’s proposal.
Bush’s plan flamed out even more spectacularly than had Reagan’s 1981 initiative. The debacle paved the way for W’s political unraveling, beginning with huge Democratic victories in the 2006 midterms and the victory of Barack Obama two years later.
Nonetheless, the desire to undermine Social Security remained powerful among GOP leaders. For example, during a debate with Joe Biden, Mitt Romney’s then running mate Paul Ryan registered his emphatic support for Social Security “privatization,” asserting that Bush’s deeply unpopular plan should have been implemented.
“Everything is on the table”
During all three of his presidential campaigns, Trump distanced himself from efforts to gut Social Security — sort of. As with so many topics, however, he has not been particularly concerned with consistency.
In March of this year, Trump let slip on CNBC that he just might be convinced to go after the social safety net, stating, “There is a lot you can do in terms of entitlements in terms of cutting.” He then went on a marginally coherent “weave,” thereby managing to avoid addressing the implications of his statement. But his remark now appears to have been extraordinarily significant. (Watch below.)
Soon after winning the election, Trump tasked Elon Musk, Vivek Ramaswamy, and their pseudo government agency titled “DOGE” (after a crypto currency that had been started as a joke) with cutting as much as $2 trillion of annual spending from the federal budget. Ramaswamy initially appeared to deny that Social Security would be touched, asserting that “program integrity” would be DOGE’s sole focus, and adding that changes in benefits would be a matter for Congress to decide. Yet, for two reasons, there was far less to that assurance than meets to eye.
First, it has always been the case that Congress will have to vote in favor of any proposal to gut entitlement programs. That is because Social Security and Medicare comprise “mandatory” spending, which is compelled by statute. And secondly, as a matter of financial fact, the kind of drastic austerity measures that Trump’s cronies are proposing will necessarily involve massive cuts to Social Security, Medicare, or both.
That is because approximately 60 percent of the federal budget is composed of mandatory spending, while 10 percent is devoted to debt service. Of the remaining 30 percent, half is defense spending, leaving only 15 percent that comprises the entirety of non-defense, discretionary spending.
Far from ballooning, non-defense discretionary spending has declined in recent decades as a percentage of the nation’s gross domestic product, and now stands at its lowest point as a percentage of GDP in modern history. So by declaring an intention to cut trillions from the federal budget, Trump’s acolytes have already proposed huge Social Security cuts, even as they’ve sort of denied doing so.
As they have been in the past, the GOP majority in Congress is likely to be enthusiastically supportive of an attack on Social Security — at least until the inevitable backlash hits them. Sen. John Cornyn recently reflected his caucus’s eagerness to return to the scene of past GOP debacles. Transparently echoing Bush’s promise to make the “tough” decision to gut Social Security, Cornyn promised to make the “hard decisions” required to cut one or two trillion dollars from the budget. (Watch below.)
Other GOP legislators and leaders have been even more forthright about having Social Security in their sights.
For example, Rep. Mark Alford said DOGE will provide the GOP with the opportunity to start denying full benefits to more workers who retire before 67, declaring, “we can move that retirement age back a little bit.” New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu, who the press often turns to for supposed “straight talk” about his party, echoed Paul Ryan in declaring, “George W. Bush was absolutely right, and he’s been proven right time and time again. You have to move that retirement age. That’s just so obvious …”
And, after a recent meeting in the Capitol with Musk, Ramaswamy, and their fellow DOGE cronies, Rep. Ralph Norman declared that “nothing is sacrosanct” and everything is “on the table,” including Social Security and Medicare. (Watch below.)
In sum, Trump’s purportedly remade “populist” GOP is giving every indication of being poised to make another run at the nation’s most popular government programs. Yet even before Trump and his party embark on this foolish mission, the political costs of past failed GOP attacks on Social Security are evident.
One of Reagan’s enduring political successes was in enticing older voters — who had once been a key segment of the Democrats’ post-New Deal coalition — to vote Republican in ever greater numbers. Voters over 55 remain a key part of the GOP base. But, in recent years, more voters 65 and older have been voting Democratic. In November, about half of them voted for Kamala Harris, despite Trump’s overall appeal to older voters.
While few things are certain in politics, another Republican assault on Social Security is all but bound to fail. Indeed, one can readily predict that Trump, who despite his strongman demeanor fears nothing more than being pilloried by members of his base, will retreat from such an effort faster than Reagan did in 1981.
“Fool me — you can’t get fooled again”
With all of the red flags that are flying, and the GOP’s decades-long history of failure, the obvious question is: why does the the party remain so attracted to attacking Social Security and Medicare?
The answer, as always, is grounded in the very popularity and extraordinary success of the programs. Trump and his cronies are as singularly devoted to gutting citizens’ support for governmental institutions as Reagan was, although for different reasons.
While Reaganites like Paul Ryan had a philosophical opposition to “big government,” Trump exhibits no such ideological views. During his first term, Trump showed himself eager to use governmental power to achieve his own ends, including to benefit himself and his donors monetarily.
Trump’s assault on the “Deep State” has always been motivated by a desire to free himself from oversight, not from a desire to “shrink” the government. After all, Trump is promising to unilaterally impose what amounts to a form of nationwide martial law to effectuate his mass deportation ambitions.
Along similar lines, Musk — who profits hugely from government spending, including as the CEO of SpaceX — seems more interested in freeing himself from regulatory oversight than actually diminishing the size of government. But Trump’s motives in calling for huge budget cuts, and Musk’s for that matter, likely won’t matter all that much at the end of the day. They have started the snowball of Social Security “reform” rolling down the hill — just like Reagan and Bush before them — and it will, with near inevitability, both grow and accelerate as it descends.
Sooner rather than later, Trump seems likely to emulate George W. Bush — a former president he mocks with glee — by proposing cuts to Social Security and possibly Medicare too. His proposal will be met by much enthusiasm from GOP legislators and wealthy donors. But then the backlash will arrive, and the massive snowball Trump and his cronies sent down the hill will run them over.
It is, however, up to Democrats to carefully prepare for what comes next, and — when the opportunity presents itself — to do everything they can to maximize the backlash and ensure Republicans once again pay the highest possible price for attacking a cornerstone of post-New Deal America. This will not be a time for compromise, or for sober-minded “good government” types to express agreement with the need for “reform.”
If Democrats play their cards right, the defeat of yet another GOP assault on key elements of the safety net for older Americans could be the beginning of a broader collapse of the Trump effort to “remake government” to serve his authoritarian ambitions.
That’s it for today
We’ll be back with more tomorrow. If you appreciate today’s newsletter, please support us by signing up. Paid subscribers make PN possible.
Thanks for reading.
This is the stuff of Marching like the South Koreans did and saying "HELL NO!" The youth must be made to understand how important it is.
Got it. Make the rich richer. Make everyone else poorer. Rinse and repeat. Complain about those who won't submit. How about mass deportations starting with the MuskRat? Trump's family history is pretty squishy. Deport him too.
The hard question is where? It's hard to imagine anyone really wants them. Sounds like a three-hour cruise is the only option.