"What's the point of loudly pushing a proposal you're going to lose? What's behind it all?
UPDATE: Turns out Ed Kilgore is wondering the same thing. His hunch is that it's a bait-and-switch: Democrats will end up loudly saying that private accounts are great, but only in addition to Social Security, not instead of it. So in the end, Bush will "compromise" and sign a bill that leaves Social Security alone but creates big tax-sheltered savings accounts ideally suited for tax avoidance by high earners.
Could be, I suppose. It sounds a little too clever even for the Karl Roves of the world, but I guess you never know. Something to keep an eye out for, anyway."
From yours truly, on September 17 last year, regarding what Bush will ultimately propose for Social Security:
"My guess is Bush will eventually just offer tax deductions for larger IRAs. By his standards that's not bad, it's only skewed towards the moderately wealthy that currently fully fund their IRAs. By responsible standards, however, it stinks."
Boy, I'm smart. That's why I'm allowed to have a blog.
P.S. Pretty good chance someone got there before me, even. I'll be sure not to try and find out if that's the case.