How to pretend that Bush’s plan doesn’t cut benefits relative to current law in three short paragraphs:

Democrats immediately opposed Mr. Bush’s proposal–the brainchild of Democratic financier Robert Pozen–as “big benefit cuts.” AARP lobbyist John Rother proved his organization’s lack of sincerity by calling it “an unnecessary and unfair benefit cut on the middle class.”

Sigh. As Daniel Patrick Moynihan and other Democrats once acknowledged, current policy increases real, inflation-adjusted benefits over time. That’s because benefits are tied to growth in wages, rather than to increases in prices (which rise somewhat more slowly). Though Democrats invoke FDR, this wasn’t his idea; guaranteed annual increases were introduced in 1972 as politicians of both parties competed for elderly votes. Reversing this blunder would still protect all seniors from inflation and also go a long way toward addressing Social Security’s financing shortfall.

But Mr. Bush is going further and proposing to keep wage-indexing for the bottom 30% of all workers, which means their benefits will actually increase by about 40% by the time they retire. Other workers would see more of their benefits price-indexed on a gradual basis as their income rose.