SOON AFTER CHRISTMAS in 1996, Republican representative Bill Archer of Texas met privately with President Clinton in the White House. Clinton had just been reelected. Archer, the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee and an advocate of scrapping the federal income tax, was eager to enlist the president in the battle for tax reform. But Clinton had something else on his mind: reform of Social Security. He brought up the subject, saying he wanted to fix Social Security “for all time.” Archer was surprised, given the political difficulty of the task. Clinton was adamant: He’d make the “tough decisions.” He’d “get out in front” and give Republicans political cover on the issue.
What ensued was a three-year saga of talk and negotiation between two very different men. Clinton is a showhorse, self-absorbed and politically nimble, Archer a workhorse, low-key but ideologically driven. Their relationship tells a lot about them, both soon to retire. Next January 20, the president leaves after eight years in the White House, and Archer departs after 30 years in the House, the last six as Ways and Means chief. On Social Security, Clinton’s performance was characteristic of his presidential style: He talked a good game but took no chances. Archer, too, lived up to his reputation. He risked a backlash among GOP leaders by engaging Clinton one-on-one. A conservative but not particularly partisan Republican, he was willing to leapfrog the system in the fight to reform entitlements and the tax code.
Despite the Clinton-Archer meeting, nothing happened for most of 1997. Archer worked on his own proposal for reforming Social Security, which he later co-sponsored with GOP representative Clay Shaw of Florida. It would create private investment accounts, but not use Social Security revenues to fund them. It differs from the plan proposed by George W. Bush and, in fact, is closer in some ways to what Clinton and Vice President Al Gore favor. The president and Archer met again in the Oval Office in December 1997, a year after their first talk. That session was devoted to tax reform, and Archer got the impression the president might support replacing the income tax with a national sales tax. Clinton made only a fleeting reference to Social Security. The next year, 1998, would be “Social Security year,” he told Archer.
The new year brought Archer another surprise. He got a bill through the House to create a special commission to devise a Social Security reform plan. The measure faltered in the Senate, however, because the president opposed it. Instead, Clinton called for a “national dialogue” on Social Security that would culminate with a White House conference late in 1998. At the conference, held across the street from the White House, Clinton made sure Archer sat next to him. Afterwards, Clinton and Archer walked side by side back to the White House. The president said Social Security reform had to be “done” in the first six or eight months of 1999 — before the 2000 presidential race began. And, Clinton noted, the “earnings of the private sector” must be part of any reform plan. “I thought, gosh, now the White House is going to send us a proposal,” says Archer.
It didn’t. All along, Archer had been conferring with White House aides, including chief of staff John Podesta and economic adviser Gene Sperling. In July, he talked to the president again. By then, the president had been impeached but had escaped conviction. Archer told him about his own Social Security plan. Clinton said he didn’t know why the Democrats “don’t embrace it.” Archer should get Charles Rangel of New York, the ranking Democrat on Ways and Means, and House minority leader Dick Gephardt on board. Then, according to Archer, Clinton said the White House “would get out front” and promote the bill.
Encouraged, Archer got in contact with Rangel and Gephardt — and encountered the Clinton Catch. Both men told Archer they had to check with the White House before joining with Archer on Social Security reform. But the White House wouldn’t publicly back a reform measure unless Rangel and Gephardt stepped out on their own. Clinton would act if they broke the ice, which they wouldn’t. Clinton, of course, had to know they wouldn’t. In the end, a White House official told Archer that Clinton’s inaction was necessitated by a “division” among Democrats on Capitol Hill.
That’s not the end of the story. Last August, Archer went to the White House for the signing of a bill expanding trade with Africa. Clinton treated him like a trusted ally, praising Archer for doing “his part” to get Social Security reform. If only the White House had been able to get congressional backing, Clinton said, he’d have been able “to take the lead.”
There’s an epilogue. In September, Archer went to the White House for the signing of the bill giving China permanent normal trade status with the United States. As Archer walked by Clinton, the president grabbed his sleeve. “If they had left us alone,” the president said, “you and I could have saved Social Security.”
Had he acted, Clinton might have given himself a real legacy as well. Now, all he has are things Republicans forced on him: a balanced budget, serious welfare reform, impeachment. Archer, who will be sorely missed in Washington, leaves a legacy he can be proud of. He was an important player in reducing the capital gains tax rate in 1978 and passing President Reagan’s tax cut in 1981. In the 1990s, he was a critical force in shaping welfare reform and producing, in 1997, the first tax cut in 16 years. This year, he pushed through repeal of the marriage penalty and inheritance tax (vetoed by Clinton). Both, in one form or another, are poised for enactment in 2001. And Archer has teed up Social Security reform as the top priority for the new Congress. No thanks to Clinton.
Fred Barnes is executive editor of THE WEEKLY STANDARD.
