That's the premise of a new working paper by political scientist Benjamin Page who finds the public's policy preferences about Social Security are generally quite stable and consistent, and form coherent patterns that reflect basic American beliefs and values.
His analysis, based on scores of opinion surveys from recent years, provides some guidelines for policymakers about what's popular, what policies have no chance of public support, and what they can do about all this.
The "extraordinarily broad support for the Social Security system" has varied little for decades, Page points out. Yet, for many years Americans have been far from sanguine about the program's future and believe that major changes are needed to guarantee its future financial stability. They also draw clear lines about how notto effect those changes:
"Benefit cuts of any sort will be a very hard sell," says Page. This applies to direct across-the-board cuts in benefit levels, as well as less direct cuts that would slow down cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) or extend the retirement age. All but two of 18 surveys during the past two decades have found majorities opposed to extending the retirement age.
"The idea of wholesale privatizing‹or making the Social Security system voluntary‹is very unpopular and not politically feasible," says Page. "This idea would probably sink any major political figure who openly espoused it, just as it damaged Barry Goldwater in 1964. The only privatization proposals that seem politically feasible are those that involve partial privatization and compulsory participation."
Substantial majorities, up to 69%, also oppose investing some Social Security trust funds in the stock market, reflecting a general distrust of government, Page said. He thinks this option might garner more support if means are built in to insulate investment decisions from political influences.
"One of the most popular of all social security reform proposals is to reduce the benefits of wealthy or well-to-do Americans," says Page, either by increasing taxes or imposing new taxes on their benefits. Though raising payroll taxes for everyone else is highly unpopular, he detects some willingness to use general tax revenues to help shore up Social Security‹if it is clear the money would be used for that purpose. Page thinks the public fears that government officials might mismanage, waste, or redirect the funds. Some surveys show support for individual retirement accounts‹until risks and administrative costs are mentioned.
"So what's a poor policymaker to do?" asks Page. He suggests they avoid less popular options, especially benefit cuts, and focus instead on alternatives such as raising caps on income subject to payroll taxes, or investing in equities.
They should also explore public opinion more fully about these measures, especially the merits of individually managed vs. government-managed equity investments. "The public is perfectly capable of accepting painful policy prescriptions so long as they are no more painful than necessary and so long as the necessity for accepting them is made clear by those whom citizens trust," Page concludes.
"Is Social Security Reform Ready for the American Public?" may be ordered from IPR's publications department for $5.00 or downloaded from our web site at www.northwestern.edu/IPR/publications.