REPUBLICAN RANDY FORBES won a Democratic House seat in Virginia in a special election on June 19, even though he failed to gain a mandate on the issue that mattered most nationally in the race, Social Security reform. Instead, Democrats came away from Forbes’s 52-48 victory over Louise Lucas encouraged to attack Republicans vigorously in 2002 if they embrace President Bush’s partial privatization idea for Social Security or anything like it. And Republicans were left arguing over whether the Democratic strategy might work. In Washington, the GOP debate is between Karl Rove, Bush’s chief political adviser, and Tom Davis, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee. They’ve disagreed for months about the Social Security issue, Rove insisting that Bush’s initiative won’t hurt Republican candidates, Davis worried it may cause the GOP to lose the House next year. After a chat following Forbes’s victory, they disagree as much as ever. The important thing, in Rove’s view, is that Forbes was zinged in three different Democratic TV ads for backing Bush’s plan, but won anyway. The district in southeast Virginia was “tailor made” for attacks on Social Security, Rove says. A centrist Democrat, Norm Sisisky, held the seat for 18 years until his death in March, but it’s essentially a swing district. President Clinton won it twice, Bush squeaked by last year. The electorate is disproportionately old, and most of the elderly are the sort of middle- and low-income folks likely to be leery of tinkering with the Social Security system. And the campaign was short, giving Forbes less time to answer charges that he’d put Social Security benefits at risk. “The longer you talk about Social Security,” says Rove, “the better off you are.” In the end, Forbes’s victory was not just proof the Social Security offensive “didn’t work.” Rove also believes the outcome shows it’s politically safe for Bush to propose legislation reforming Social Security later this year. Davis is skeptical. He thinks Forbes dodged a bullet in the special election, and other Republicans might not be so lucky in 2002. Forbes had a relatively weak opponent, a black state senator who had difficulty discussing national issues. Yet when Democratic ads on Social Security aired, Forbes dropped 10 percentage points among seniors and 11 among “near seniors” over 55 years old. Mark Nevins of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee said Lucas came from a dozen points down to a few points behind by emphasizing Social Security. When spots defending Lucas’s record on taxes and crime replaced Social Security ads, Forbes regained the ground he’d lost among seniors, at least white seniors. Davis’s conclusion: A better Democratic candidate could have made more headway on Social Security. “We won round one,” he says, “but there are many rounds to go.” It’s notable that Forbes rarely mentioned his support for partial privatization during the campaign, while Democrats dwelled on the subject. They suggested in their TV ads that Forbes favors full privatization with all Social Security funds invested in the stock market. These ads forced Forbes to put a response spot on television. Its message was that Forbes would never cut anyone’s Social Security benefits. He did not mention partial privatization or Bush in his ad. Nonetheless, Rove insists the Bush plan remains popular, consistently getting majority support in national polls. Both he and Bush believe the old adage about Social Security—it’s the “third rail of American politics, touch it and you die”—is obsolete. Younger voters, especially, fear the system is so shaky that it won’t finance their retirement. Bush outlined his idea for using Social Security funds for “personal retirement accounts” during the campaign last year. As president, he’s appointed a commission to flesh out the plan. The commission’s report is expected late this summer. As things now stand, Bush would seek congressional approval of partial privatization in 2002. This timetable makes sense for Bush, but Davis and other congressional Republicans aren’t sure it works for them. Most support Bush’s bold and overdue reform plan. But 20 of the GOP’s Senate seats and all 222 of its House seats are at stake in the 2002 election. Even before the Virginia race, Democratic strategists said preserving Social Security in its current form would be the centerpiece of their campaigns next year. They were heartened by a CBS/New York Times poll last week that found “the public’s anxiety about the future of Social Security” at its highest point in 20 years. Of course this worry could cut in Bush’s favor, prompting support for his plan as the solution to the potential insolvency of the Social Security system. In any event, if Republicans on Capitol Hill balk, it will be hard for Bush to pursue Social Security reform in 2002. Forbes probably won’t have to worry one way or the other. His biggest problem in the special election was the black vote. Thirty-seven percent of the district’s voters are black. But their turnout was so large they made up nearly 40 percent of the electorate. And 97 percent of the black vote went for Lucas (Forbes won 87 percent of the white vote). In one predominantly black precinct, Forbes lost 1,446 to 8. Next month, however, the Virginia legislature will reapportion the state’s 11 congressional districts. A sizable chunk of the black Democratic vote is certain to be shifted to another district, probably to Democrat Bobby Scott’s. This will give Forbes a safe seat—safe enough even to hold forth about bringing change to Social Security. Fred Barnes is executive editor of The Weekly Standard.
