Kuhl turnaround on Social Security privatization — 180 degrees or a full 360?
Call it what you will: Kuhl has changed his mind, flip-flopped, was for it before he was against it — “it” here meaning Social Security privatization. You may recall that Kuhl was an early supporter of Rep. Jim McCrery’s (R-La.) bill which would have partially privatized Social Security (Kuhl waffled on it somewhat a bit later). Tonight, during a debate, however, when asked if he would support such a bill now, Mr. Kuhl answered without hestitation “No.”
Unlike some people at the White House, I think it’s fine to change your mind. There’s just one problem: I don’t think Kuhl is telling the truth here. If we are to judge him by the company he keeps, it should be noted that McCrery, after backing away from privatization, has now come out in favor of reintroducing it after the November elections. It’s also worth noting that McCrery has given the Kuhl campaign $10,000. And here’s what House Majority Leader John Bohner (who spoke at a fundraiser for Kuhl not long ago) said about privatizing Social Security:
Q: Where does Social Security reform stand?
A: I just met with Congressman [Frank R. Wolf, Virginia Republican], a few minutes ago with his SAFE Commission [formed to fix the entitlement programs]. In 1990 when I first ran for Congress, I talked about the need to reform these big entitlement programs because the sooner we began the process, the easier it would be to make the necessary changes so that these programs were sustainable for the long term. … If I’m around in a leadership role come January, we’re going to get serious about this.
Well said.
[...] So said Randy Kuhl at the debate in Bath the other night. Randy has a long and tortured history with Social Security privatization, which we detail here. [...]
[...] Come late 2006, and, whoops! There’s an election. And turns out, folks are generally against privatization.ÂÂ So you get denials and promises, regardless of any rumblings about picking up privatization in 2007. [...]