How do you save Social Security? It's not rocket science.

A bipartisan group released its plan for how to attack four of the nation's thorniest problems. It's yet another example of how solutions are plentiful; the political mandate to fix things is what's missing. 

Michael Bonfigli /The Christian Science Monitor/File
Then-Sen. Joseph Lieberman (center r.) attends a Monitor Breakfast in Washington in 2011. He is now a co-chair of No Labels.

The presidential campaign thus far seems to be heaped with broadsides and broad promises. When policy does enter in, it’s often not fleshed out or bipartisan in appeal: Build a wall. Healthcare like Denmark. 

Seeing an opportunity in America’s political polarization and gridlock, the nonpartisan group “No Labels” on Thursday sought to offer a dramatically different vision – one where Americans could actually find some measure of agreement.

The group’s “policy playbook” for the next president lists four national goals – and how to reach them – that have been poll-tested for broad support among American voters. Nearly 80 members of Congress from both parties and both houses back the goals. 

The ambitious aim is to get the next president to commit as well, and to bring both the president (or members of the administration's incoming team) together with lawmakers in December to talk through the goals and discuss how to implement them. 

The challenge is obvious. The partisan tides in Washington are pulling in different directions. Bipartisan comity often involves compromise – a dirty word among many partisans – and can work against parties playing up their distinction in election season. House Speaker Paul Ryan (R) of Wisconsin is working on his own five-point agenda, which is aimed at pointing out the contrasts between Republicans and Democrats to give Republicans something to run on in this fall's elections.

Beyond the No Labels agenda, its playbook offers a glimpse of an often-overlooked aspect of Washington politics: The solution to some of the country's most-pressing problems is not rocket science. From No Labels to think tanks to congressional blue-ribbon panels, practical bipartisan solutions are plentiful. What is lacking is the desire, as American voters behave in more partisan ways and special interests protect their agendas.     

But former Sen. Joe Lieberman (D) of Connecticut, co-chair of No Labels along with former Gov. Jon Huntsman (R) of Utah, also says that this election is a reflection of broad public disdain of Washington and party politics. Someone has to try to break the present political mold, he said.

“If we don’t try, we’ll never know,” he said. “This requires leadership.” 

The goals unveiled on Thursday: creating 25 million new jobs; securing Social Security and Medicare for the next 75 years; balancing the federal budget, and making America energy secure. 

The playbook offers ways to achieve these goals. Social Security, for instance, could be saved without raising the retirement age by raising the annual limit on earnings that are subject to the payroll tax, by employers and employees agreeing to pay 1 percent more in payroll taxes, by slowing the growth of future benefits for the top 20 percent of beneficiaries, and by reforming Social Security disability payments. 

All of these ideas found broad support among the electorate, according to No Labels.

The solutions try to steer clear of highly partisan issues, such as climate change, by focusing instead on areas of common ground, such as energy conservation. But details in the playbook still hit partisan tripwires. 

A payroll tax increase for Social Security, for instance, would meet stiff resistance from the no-new-taxes crowd. Big Pharma would not like the federal government negotiating drug prices for Medicare recipients. President Obama firmly resisted raising the federal gas tax to help pay for infrastructure spending, even while he supported a special “infrastructure bank” that relies on public-private partnerships for funding.

These ideas are hardly groundbreaking. Many of them have already been chewed over by the Washington set. No Labels hopes they can get airborne this time because they are backed by the No Labels “problem solvers caucus” in Congress. That caucus has a low profile. White it has helped to pass a few smaller bills, such as the so-called Medicare “doc fix” last year, it is still finding its way.

Said Governor Huntsman: “Things work by caucuses, and caucuses are driven by the numbers and if you’ve got enough people who are part of your caucus, you stand a pretty good chance of being able to get your priorities through.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to How do you save Social Security? It's not rocket science.
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today