Whether tackling climate change, evolution, vaccine safety, or many other issues, scientists often face resistance from those who offer “alternative facts.” How do we live in a world where opinion and fact are indistinguishable—a world where many feel that vaguely held opinions are as valid as evidence-based scientific research? Have you started to smoke?
Part of the answer includes years of efforts by the tobacco industry to deny evidence of tobacco’s harm and the fossil fuel industry to disrupt our understanding of climate change. These campaigns have undermined faith in the idea that large amounts of scientific evidence produce more accurate worldviews than small numbers of dissenting opinions.
But there is another source of these doubts. It is a conservative politician’s attack on the US Social Security program that provides financial security to the elderly. Congressional Republicans have recently threatened deep cuts to Social Security and even privatization. Their ostensible reason is that the federal budget needs to be balanced. Former Republican Finance Committee aide Chris Campbell has declared that “the numbers don’t work” unless Social Security is drastically cut. In fact, Social Security is not a waste of the federal budget. We cover that cost through a dedicated payroll tax.
Why do conservatives keep attacking programs that are successful and pay for themselves? Thanks to their success. Social Security is a functioning “big government”. The result refutes conservative views that the federal program is a costly failure and that the government should leave things to the free market.
Most conservative federal programs were implemented in response to the failure of the free market. In the late 19th century, anti-competitive business practices stifled markets and replaced them with monopolies. In the early 20th century, 1 in 1,000 American workers died on the job. In the 1930s, millions of able-bodied Americans were forced out of their jobs and into the bread line through no fault of their own.
It was not the private sector that solved these problems. It was the government, especially the federal government. The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 was passed to protect competition. The Workers’ Compensation Act ensured that people injured on the job were compensated. Legislation was enacted to limit child labor, expand access to education, and save American capitalism from the brink of collapse during the Great Depression. Unsubstantiated “alternative facts” frequently surfaced in discussions about these programs. They also appeared in later debates over social security.
From the first payment in 1937 until 1974, Social Security was in surplus. Never in more than two consecutive years has a program had to use its own trust fund. However, from 1975 to 1981, the program ran at a loss, and demographics suggested things were going to get worse. In the early 1980s, the Reagan administration proposed cutting entitlements to make the budget look more balanced without raising taxes or cutting military spending. This idea encouraged anti-government ideologues who wanted to abolish social security altogether by giving it to the private sector.
Congressional Republicans passed the baton to the “Blue Ribbon” Commission, headed by liberal and noted economist Alan Greenspan. He claimed (wrongly) that the program had failed irreparably and advocated partial privatization. In reality, Social Security was not bankrupt. Rather, like the system 50 years ago, it required some maintenance, but a modest adjustment to benefits and a small payroll tax hike put the system back on track quickly.
In the mid-2000s, the rebels, backed by business interests, brought the case to court again. But polls showed that the more President George W. Bush talked about privatizing Social Security, the less Americans supported him, so he backed off.
Twenty years later, we find ourselves in a similar situation, but logical discussion is hindered by an ideology that ignores evidence. This is the same sterile dynamic that delays action on the climate crisis. New York State Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan popularized the maxim, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.” Moynihan may have wanted to talk about science, but he said in a discussion over Social Security:
This is an opinion and analysis article and the views expressed by the author are not necessarily those of the author. Scientific American.
