Former Democratic Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke mused about cutting Social Security benefits in 2012. This week, he claimed a sort of evolution, saying he’s become a lot smarter and he’s against cuts now.
.@daveweigel asked @BetoORourke about his 2012 support for means testing for entitlements. He said he’s listened, “become a lot smarter,” and now wants to lift Social Security’s cap on taxable income instead.@KFILE story: https://t.co/E0ovbVRNp5
O’Rourke’s comment today: pic.twitter.com/PdE7taFnVi
— Eric Bradner (@ericbradner) March 20, 2019
Here’s the problem with convenient political evolutions — they are not like scientific evolution, which tends to go one way. Politicians flip back and forth. President Obama campaigned against cutting Social Security, then came out for cutting it, then later came out for expanding it after an expansive campaign against his cuts (full disclosure: I was involved in that campaign).
What would a President Beto O’Rourke do? It’s anyone’s guess. But the political calculations of a Democratic primary race where a democratic socialist is leading the field is a little bit different than say, if O’Rourke had to negotiate budget deals with Kentucky Republican Senator Mitch McConnell.
