It looks like Washington Democrats are going to follow a tired, familiar, and, unfortunately, often effective script.

This is what Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told a crowd rounded up in Washington yesterday:

“Let’s worry about Social Security when it’s a problem. Today it’s not a problem.”

Where to begin? First, let’s tackle Reid’s logic. Waiting for something to become a problem is the wrong way to govern one’s life, much less a country. How about, “Let’s worry about your circulatory system when you are having a heart attack. Today you are not having a heart attack.” I wonder if Reid would say we should not worry about climate change yet.

Second, Reid’s facts are wrong. There IS a problem with Social Security – now. The system is already paying out more in benefits than it takes in, and that’s before this year’s cuts in FICA taxes enacted by President Obama and Congress last year. Reid is arguing that Social Security’s trust fund won’t run dry for decades, and that would be true if there actually was a trust fund. The truth is, that fund is completely empty because Congress has been raiding it to pay for other programs all these years. It’s just a bunch of IOUs from the rest of the government, which is completely broke.

So now we get to watch as Democrats, stung by last year’s defeats, try to scare seniors and kick this can down the road another couple of decades. Will it work? It has in the past.

You can hear Reid’s remarks here in this report on NPR.

Arkansas’ newly elected senator, John Boozman, made his maiden speech – his first one, in other words – on the Senate floor today.

In it, he identifies the national debt as the greatest threat facing Americans today.

He said, “We cannot continue to add billions to our already staggering national debt. This year alone, the federal government will spend $3.7 trillion while only collecting $2.2 trillion. It doesn’t take an advanced math degree to understand that 3 is greater than 2.

“The average American family doesn’t have the luxury to spend beyond its means. Their government shouldn’t, and doesn’t, either. ”

Right on. Unfortunately, here is the eye doctor’s primary prescription – a balanced budget amendment.

“The only way will we get a handle on this situation is to reform the manner in which we budget and allocate federal dollars. It’s time we put mechanisms in place to stop the government from spending beyond its means.

“This is why one of the first bills I signed my name onto after taking the oath of office was Senator Richard Shelby’s balanced budget amendment. Senator Shelby has been a champion on this front for a number of years, introducing this bill every session of Congress since 1987. Imagine what the country would look like if it had passed when he first proposed it. Now, more than ever, it is an idea that’s time has come and I look forward to working with the Senator from Alabama to get some sort of spending cap like a balanced budget amendment passed.

“This is a catalyst for change. It holds us to spending limits and forces changes in the manner in which taxpayer money is allocated.”

No, it doesn’t. It just means Congress would have to work harder to find ways around the law to keep spending money the country doesn’t have.

The only way to address what Sen. Boozman calls the country’s greatest threat is for Congress to spend less in areas where it doesn’t want to spend less – Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and the military. That’s where the money is.

Sen. Boozman did not address those issues, but that’s OK for now. At least he has correctly identified the problem. Now let’s encourage him to work on the solutions.

Here is his speech.

Senator Pryor again mentioned the “S” word – “sacrifice,” this time in a conference call with reporters. Here is the story.

That’s twice in recent days he has been telling Americans what they need to hear – that balancing the budget will be painful, that we can’t have our cake and eat it too.

Here’s the other.

I wrote an extra column for Arkansas News Bureau Sunday. Jason Tolbert, who usually has that space, is busy with his day job as a CPA and needed a break. My column praised Mark Pryor for telling the Little Rock Rotary Club that something has to be done about Social Security and Medicare. Here it is.

It takes political courage to mention Social Security and Medicare because the issue is so easily demagogued and misunderstood. Two readers emailed me: one accusing me of wanting to “get rid” of Social Security, the other from a senior citizen who (correctly) pointed out that he has paid payroll taxes all of his life and (incorrectly) that other areas, such as congressional salaries, are where the real cuts need to be made. That’s pennies. You have to cut Social Security and Medicare – not for current recipients, but for future ones like me – because that is where the money is. According to the Debt Commission, ALL projected tax revenues will cover only Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and interest on the national debt by 2025.

That means you have to cut everything else completely, including national defense and highway construction, in order to balance the budget. Or we could raise taxes far higher than they are now. Or we could just keep borrowing from China until it takes us over.

The other choice is to have a mature conversation about Social Security and Medicare and then come up with a responsible plan.