Social Security reform must be bipartisan

I don't know Joe Lieberman, the Democratic senator from Connecticut, but I've been intrigued by him ever since his abortive run for the vice presidency in 2000.

I somehow could never connect with his senior running mate for the presidency, Al Gore. Gore was clearly immensely knowledgeable about the workings of government and could be quite amusing in small, private circles. But ideology aside, he seemed stiffly programmed and hectoring on the campaign platform.

By contrast Lieberman, although no comic cut-up, came across as warmer and more personable, the kind of fellow you could take to a basketball game confident that he wouldn't lecture you all night.

A successful presidential candidate not only has to have sound policies, but it helps if you like him, and I couldn't help feeling that if Lieberman, the centrist with cross-party appeal, had been the presidential candidate and Gore the vice presidential, the ticket might have been more dangerous for President Bush.

Unlike some other unsuccessful candidates who find it difficult to adjust after defeat, Lieberman returned comfortably to the Senate where he's been happily doing the people's business.

Now his centrism is causing him problems with his own Democratic Party. As if his support of the war in Iraq were not enough, he is working with President Bush to reform Social Security. This, in the eyes of some fellow-Democrats, is political treachery.

It is a very short-sighted position.

Let's get some facts right about this Social Security situation.

Social Security is not in crisis. It is, however, a serious problem. Today's elderly are not at risk under the present system. But 30 years from now, the proportion of older Americans will be substantially larger than it is today vis-a-vis younger Americans. This is an actuarial fact, not surmise or speculation.

When today's younger generation reaches retirement age, if the present Social Security system is not enhanced, the benefits they receive will have to be reduced, because the money in the pot will not be sufficient to pay them out at today's levels.

We could do nothing today and leave the next generation to its fate. That is hardly an honorable position. In fact, it is unconscionable.