The Third Way think tank's plan for Social Security is what Dems are using.

Yesterday, the organization Third Way released a plan outlining several Social Security reform proposals meant to ensure the program's solvency over the next 75 years. The plan, called Saving Social Security, makes several fundamental changes to the program and cuts $2 in benefits for every $1 it increases taxes. The authors of the plan describe it as "savings-led" and say that by approaching Social Security reform in a progressive way, it's possible to come up with "a solvency plan that would make Franklin Roosevelt proud".

The plan also calls for creating optional private retirement accounts for those in the workforce and under 30; it dedicates $8 billion per year to these accounts, with funds being raised by an increase in the Estate Tax.

....In an op-ed in Politico, the authors of the plan - Jim Kessler and David Kendall - explain the reasoning behind some of their proposals and offer very interesting insight, particularly in regards to the widely-held view that any Social Security reform that touches benefits is completely unacceptable. They also make several interesting observations about the idea of Social Security reform that is solely revenue-based. If you look at Social Security in isolation, maintaining its solvency through only increased revenue is theoretically possible. However, that view is unrealistic; Social Security needs to be viewed in the context of all federal government priorities. Viewed in this light, is maintaining the current level of promised Social Security benefits the very best use of increased taxes? You can only raise so much additional revenue, and funneling all of it into Social Security hinders the government’s ability to adequately fund other important priorities. This is why the authors maintain that Social Security reform must alter the trajectory of the program’s growth rather than simply financing it, and why the plan makes $2 in benefit cuts for every $1 it raises in revenue. As Mr. Kessler and Mr. Kendall state in their op-ed:

"It would be reckless to allow Social Security to take up the entire pool of what is potentially available to deal with the retirement of the baby boom generation...Social Security is one of the greatest liberal achievements. But many groups on the left have drawn a line in the sand that could doom it or set the nation on a course to fiscal ruins. Putting the weight of his Nobel Prize in economics behind this anti-reform coalition, New York Times columnist and Princeton professor Paul Krugman calls the Social Security crisis "invented" by "Social Security attackers" using "bad-faith accounting". Americans can be thankful that progressives such as Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Robert Greenstein of the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities have weighed in behind other serious approaches that include benefit cuts."

The time has come to reinvent Social Security based on a "cut and privatize" approach that will be fair to all age groups. This reinvention should be based on three principles:

Start immediately to lower boomers' expectations of the returns they will get and encourage them to increase private savings.

Separate out the welfare portion of Social Security and pay out poverty benefits to today's--and tomorrow's--needy seniors from general government revenues.

Idea #3 is to lower the Social Security payroll to 10% (where the heck was it in 1995...isn't it 6.2 now?) and "give workers the option of putting their money into private pension programs that offer far higher returns and sounder prospects than today's Social Security system."