Plenty of people, not least the ones affiliated with the Romney campaign, are insisting that Rick Perry rendered himself all but unelectable last night by repeating his harsh view of Social Security, which he called a “Ponzi scheme” and “a monstrous lie” to young Americans. I’m not so sure.
It’s true that Perry’s depiction of Social Security as a slow-motion train wreck that won’t be able pay benefits to today’s young people isn’t really accurate (the system is solvent until 2037 after which time modest revenue increases or benefit cuts will be required). But as a political proposition, American’s don’t really understand that. Poll after poll shows that many, or even most, younger Americans are convinced they’ll get little or nothing from the system; that in effect they expect to be left holding the bag for… a big Ponzi scheme. (To wit: “As far as I’m concerned, Social Security does not exist for me.”) So on its face, Perry’s diagnosis is not politically lethal. It’s actually what a large number of Americans believe.
The question voters will ask is what Perry intends to do about it. National Review‘s Ramesh Ponnuru is, I think, right to say that “conservatives are not going to succeed in reforming Social Security if the public believes the effort reflects hostility to the program.” Most of the people who think Social Security is in trouble want to save it, not scrap it. But Perry can now propose a plan to do that, one that will move him much closer to the center than he may now appear. Perry may be misleading on the facts, but he’s not DOA on the politics.