-
The White House dislikes the word "privatization,'' which it sees as a misleading and imprecise way to describe Mr. Bush's ideas for Social Security. Democrats insist that the term is accurate.
E-mail messages circulated within AARP in recent weeks indicated that the group would avoid the word whenever possible.
One message, by an editor of an AARP magazine, says, "There is a new forbidden word at AARP: Social Security privatization.''
Another e-mail message, by a manager of its Web site, says, "The term 'privatization' is stricken from our vocabulary forever.''
David M. Certner, the organization's director of federal affairs, said "privatization'' had no fixed meaning or definition. To some people, he said, it means "getting rid of the entire program'' - a goal not favored by the White House.
All this is just bullshit. While there is no plan on the table because there isn't actually any way to pay for it, Bush's not-plan would allow "volunteer" private accounts. You're free to not do it, but then you're just throwing tax money into a system which no longer has a guaranteed benefit payout. Some choice.
And, along those lines, write public@nytimes.com and ask the New York Times to stop referring to this as "Bush's plan." Right now there is no plan, just a stump speech. A plan would be an actual detailed policy proposal. Currently it's just an "idea."