Clay Shaw’s “free lunch” compromise

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

Over the weekend David Broder, dean of Beltway insider-ism, unveiled his grand compromise plan for Social Security in the Washington Post. The details are a bit cryptic, but basically, Rep. Clay Shaw (R-FL) wants to borrow $3.7 trillion, have individuals invest it in the stock market, and earn such high rewards that a) they can give most of the money back so as to the government to bring the program into long-term balance, and b) hopefully keep an extra chunk of change for themselves.

No cuts, no tax hikes, no pain, it’s perfect! Except for all the borrowing. Ah, the borrowing… It’s worth explaining why all that borrowing is so horrendous. Right now, of course, the federal deficit is very large, and foreign central banks are already getting a bit full from munching on dollars to pay for it. So issuing $3.7 trillion in new debt could have a catastrophic effect on the bond markets. Economists like Brad Setser find that scenario quite plausible indeed.

But more to the point, the assumption undergirding all this borrowing money for Social Security is that eventually we can bring the program into long-term balance, fund the program’s future obligations, and happily repay that debt later on. But that, too, ignores the price of borrowing now. So long as our debt doesn’t grow any faster than the economy grows, it’s fairly manageable. But at a certain point, when the deficit grows to a certain size, those borrowing costs start compounding and the national debt accelerates faster than the economy grows. Last week, Max Sawicky of the Economic Policy Institute released an important paper (PDF) showing that this is already likely to be the case under the existing Bush budget—the national debt will be 130 percent of GDP in 2055. Under this little Armageddon scenario, of course, Congress of the future will go into full panic mode and all Social Security benefits will be at risk of massive, massive cuts.

Clay Shaw’s compromise plan only hastens Armageddon. There are no free lunches here, and pretending that we can get around benefit cuts or tax hikes merely by borrowing our problems away is, to be blunt, insane. Otherwise, why not borrow $10 trillion today, put it in the stock market, and use the returns to pay for health care, defense, apple pies, sports cars for everyone? But of course we don’t propose that, and David Broder should no better.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend