In 2005, President Bush put forth to Congress a plan that would partially privatize Social Security. It would allow individuals to invest a small amount of their payroll tax in stocks in private firms.
Congress failed to act on Bush's Social Security reform proposal. The debate around Social Security reform demonstrates very well some of the issues in the policy process. One issue that the Social Security reform addresses is that of whether those opposing it used the tactic of agenda denial or of issue containment to stop President Bush's proposal. Since Social Security was on the formal agenda when Bush offered his proposal to Congress, the opponents use issue containment to halt his proposal.
To understand the argument of the use of issue containment, there are certain terms in the policy process that need to be addressed. Inside and outside actors participated in stopping Bush's proposal. Inside actors are those people that are part of government and can directly influence policy. They include the president, members of Congress, and the courts. Outside actors can influence the policy process, but are not part of the government themselves. They include interest groups, think tanks, the media, research groups, and the public. Both actors play a key role in policy building.
To determine whether the failure of President Bush's Social Security reform was due to agenda denial or issue containment, one must comprehend both terms, as well as understanding the different types of agendas. The formal agenda is the agenda of inside actors. Its issues are on the legislative docket. The public agenda is the agenda of outside actors. There is public salience of the issues and media coverage. Agenda denial occurs when an issue has some salience and is on an agenda, but it is not voted on and usually goes beyond adoption in the policy setting process.
There are a few different types of agenda denials. They are as follows: deny the problem, the problem is not appropriate foe government action, there may be social consequences of government action, there is a non-governmental solution, delay the problem with further studies, and the resources may need to be diverted elsewhere.
Issue containment results because agenda denial does not work. It usually occurs during implementation. It is when one group, the expanders, tries to get support for a certain problem and solution so that the solution can get passed through Congress. The expanders are also known as the proponents for the solution. Containers, also known as the opposing group, try to contain the issue so that it is not brought to vote and passed.
The containers are in the status quo, which is the group that holds the power because it is hard to changes existing conditions. They also have the most resources available to them, making the expander's job much more difficult. There are two main types of containers: the public official and the group that is adversely affected by a change in the policy. There are also three types of containment strategies. The first is low cost strategies which include refusal to see and admit to a problem. The second is medium cost strategies. It is when the containers attack the opposing groups and the issue itself. Third are high cost strategies which are when containers use electoral, legal, or economic threats.
Regarding the Social Security debate, there are a few main actors. The inside actors are the President and his administration who want to expand the issue. President Bush and his administration are the main expanders because Bush made Social Security reform one of his main goals when he entered office. The congressional democrats who want to contain the issue. Outside actors include interest groups such as Americans for Tax Reform, Center for American Progress, the National Women's Law Center, and many more. Some of these groups are trying to expand the issue, while some are trying to contain it.
Opponents of Social Security reform are now in the issue containment stage. It is not an agenda denial anymore for multiple reasons. Contains are not denying that a problem exists. They realize that at some point, some changes are going to have to be made to social security. Containers also realize that Social Security reform needs government action. Social Security is a government program, so of course it requires some sort of governmental action.
While some containers, like the Democrats in Congress, may be afraid of societal backlash, it does not change the fact the Social Security will run out in the near future. The members of Congress are only concerned with backlash because of reelection goals. Agenda denial usually occurs in the legislative arena. Containers will try not to make the issue public. In issue containment, containers must appeal to the public and try to convince them that the change in policy would be bad for them. Since agenda denial did not work to contain the issue of Social Security form, those opposing it moved to issue containment.
