Crazy talk

When this president assures

“If the Republican Party cannot get some grip of the actual world we live in, and from it generalize and actively promote a program that means something to masses of people—why, somebody else will. There will be nothing to argue. The voters will simply vote Republicans into singularity. The Republican Party will become like one of those dark little shops which apparently never sell anything. If, for any reason, you go in, you find, at the back, an old man, fingering for his own pleasure some oddments of cloth. Nobody wants to buy them, which is fine because the old man is not really interested in selling. He just likes to hold and to feel.” —Whittaker Chambers, 1958

DURING the controversies of the 1960s, during riots and war, the president at the time — a Texan named Lyndon Johnson — said he felt like a jackass caught in a hailstorm: “I can’t run, I can’t hide and I can’t make it stop.”

As much as many of us would like, we can’t run or hide from the continuous nonsense coming out of Washington these days, and we can’t make it stop, either. Most days the crazy talk comes from a Twitter account inside the White House. But not always.

When we first heard, early last week, that there was talk of further limiting the amount that folks could sock away in their 401(k) accounts, just so the government could rack in more money from We the People, we thought it might have been the ranting of some academic holed up at a think tank somewhere, where reality comes and goes with the latest theory. But no, this talk had been coming out of Washington, and apparently from some of our elected representatives. The leaks about such a plan have been so numerous that the president decided to weigh in.

Word around the campfire is that the Republicans need to offset some tax cuts in their budget to get around certain Senate rules for passage. So somebody had the bright idea to limit 401(k) contributions to $2,400 annually. Currently, workers can put away $18,000 a year in pre-tax savings, and those over 50 can sock away $24,000 a year. The suggested cut, a drastic cut, down to 10 percent of that figure sounded . . . crazy. And had Democrats sounding like the reasonable ones on tax reform for a change.

Then the president was heard from. On Twitter, of course:

“There will be NO change to your 401(k),” he posted.

Which sounds great, to have a president reassure the country this way. That is, if we could be certain that he won’t change his mind in the next hour. Or half-hour. Apparently this president’s mind can be changed, on the most important of matters, by the last person he talks to.

Let’s hope his gut tells him what most in the middle class would: Such a roll-back in the 401(k) rules would lead the Republican Party to singularity.

FOR YEARS — for many years — working class folks have been counting on their contributions to their 401(k) or IRA plans. Because fewer and fewer companies have been offering pensions. It took less than a generation, but it now appears as though pensions will be a rarity outside government jobs, and 401(k)s will keep many people comfortable, or at least economically stable, in retirement. Many 401(k) managers offer websites that allow workers to estimate how much they need to save depending on how much they’ll need in retirement. And for years they’ve socked back what they think is the proper amount. To limit them to $2,400 a year now would be to pull the rug out from under all their future plans.

Here’s our considered editorial opinion on that $2,400 limit: Let’s not.

Maybe the best way to be reassured by all this talk of significantly cutting 401(k) contributions can be summed up thusly: If the Republican Party were to dare, it would become the minority party in Washington in a hurry. And Democrats have proven educable over the years.