THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Thursday, October 10, 1996 TAG: 9610100006
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A14 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Opinion
SOURCE: By PAUL TSONGAS
LENGTH: 69 lines
Entitlements. The very word strikes fear in the hearts of presidential candidates. It produces symptoms generally diagnosed as byproducts of complete-denial syndrome. Despite the horrific consequences of runaway entitlements that loom over the horizon, both Bill Clinton and Bob Dole have decided not to talk about it and to give each other a free pass on this critical issue.
Why? Both camps have calculated that raising the matter of entitlements carries unacceptable political risks. Put less delicately, what's good for America is not good for our candidates.
What's different here from virtually every other volatile campaign issue is the lack of serious disagreement over the facts. And that stems from the demographic realities already in place: more older people living longer and fewer working young people to finance their retirements. Entitlements were sound when American life expectancy was 61 years and 15 workers were supporting each beneficiary. All that has changed as life expectancy reaches the upper 70s and the worker-to-retiree ratio hovers at slightly more than 3 to 1.
The bottom line? Entitlements are beginning to crowd everything else in the budget. It's all a matter of unavoidable demographics. The budgetary options of the next president are going to be marginal unless our largest entitlement programs, including Social Security and Medicare, are put on a sustainable path. Avoidance may be good for Clinton and Dole the candidates, but it will be toxic to either as president.
Everyone who has had an audience with President Clinton to educate him on the dangers of runaway entitlements has come away astonished at how well he understands the issue. The early thinking - ``If only he knew'' - has given way to wondering why he doesn't act. And despite a hopeful beginning on the deficit, he hasn't acted on entitlements.
He hasn't acted because the ``Medi-scare'' strategy has resurrected the Democrats. Thanks in part to the Republicans' tin ear in calling for a $270 billion cut in the growth of Medicare programs while pushing tax breaks for the wealthy, the Democrats have been pulled out of the swamp. Having been thrown a political lifeline, the Democrats have taken full advantage and are riding the wave of resurrection. To now acknowledge the need to reform entitlements would be to render their most-effective weapon meaningless.
Bob Dole, on the other hand, truly baffles me. I served with Bob Dole. I like him a great deal. I admired his courage and his old-fashioned ``what's good for America'' approach. But who is this new Bob Dole? The Bob Dole who has avoided entitlements? The Bob Dole who has thrown off the mantle of Deficit Hawk?
The new Bob Dole wants to compete with Bill Clinton by opening up an even bigger candy store: a 15 percent cut in income-tax rates, and, oh yes, we can still balance the budget, have more defense spending and keep funding the entitlement programs America wants. It's truly awful. And very painful to watch.
Bob Dole said he wanted ``one last mission.'' Dealing honestly with entitlements would have done that. It would have highlighted his character and courage. It would have given young people a solid reason to vote for him. It was the natural last mission. Instead, he opted for the candy store.
What now? The demographic realities won't change. So after the election, look for some initiative such as another presidential commission. But there is no mandate for action, because no one campaigned for reform. This should have been the year to lay the foundation of fundamental reform. It didn't happen. As a result, America, and especially our young, are more vulnerable today than they need to be. MEMO: Etta A. Nelson is a Virginia Beach resident.Former U.S. Sen. Paul
Tsongas is co-chairman of the Concord Coalition, a bipartisan
grass-roots organization seeking to eliminate federal budget deficits. by CNB