What were the differences between Bush and Gore on social security and
how do these differences reflect the different views republicans and
democrats have about the role of government? can you give me some
examples and be specific?

Hello.

Here are two excellent articles on this exact subject:

"Two seniors programs show how Bush and Gore differ," Los Angeles
Times, hosted by CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/05/09/latimes.socsec/

"Bush, Gore clash over Social Security proposals," from Minnesota Daily
http://www.mndaily.com/daily/2000/10/23/news/new3/


--------------------------------------------------------
The differences between Bush and Gore on Social Security
--------------------------------------------------------

As outlined in the articles, the key differences on Social Security
were as follows:


(1) Difference on whether to use the projected federal budget surplus
to fund Social Security.

Vice President Gore wanted to use the projected federal budget surplus
to fortify the Social Security Trust Fund (or "lockbox").

Then-Governor Bush wanted to use the projected federal budget surplus
as the basis for a large tax cut.


source:
"In a race where differences between Democrat Al Gore and Republican
George W. Bush are blurring on issues such as crime and education,
their argument over Social Security and Medicare is emerging as one of
the key contrasts between them.
... the vice president asserts that the burgeoning federal surplus
will allow Washington to stabilize both programs for decades without
major changes. Indeed, Gore contends that enough money will be
available to expand both programs with new benefits.
...Bush, meanwhile, would not set aside nearly as much funding for
Social Security and Medicare as Gore--largely because the Texas
governor is proposing a tax cut he estimates would cost $1.3 trillion
over the next decade."
source:
"Two seniors programs show how Bush and Gore differ," Los Angeles
Times, hosted by CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/05/09/latimes.socsec/



(2) Difference on whether to redesign Social Security and allow
partial "privatization" of Social Security account.

Gore was opposed to making any major structural changes in the Social
Security system.

Bush proposed to make a major structural change to Social Security.
Specifically, Bush advocated allowing individuals to put a portion of
their Social Security in private investment accounts.

source:

'Without offering details, Bush repeatedly has said he wants to allow
workers to divert part of their payroll tax--probably around two
percentage points of the 12.4% workers and employers now pay in Social
Security taxes--into private accounts they could invest themselves.
Advocates say that would give workers a more secure retirement by
allowing them to benefit from the stock market's growth over time.
...
Most Democrats still fiercely oppose the personal account idea, none
more so than Gore, who derides it as "stock market roulette." One
objection is that private accounts could drain money from retirees in
administrative costs to brokers. The larger complaint is that retirees
could be left short of funds if their investments go bad; in effect,
critics like Gore say, the plan shifts risk from government to
individuals.
  In an interview, Gore warned that, alternately, the government could
face a vast and unpredictable fiscal risk if it agrees to offset
losses for workers who make bad investments. "I'm all for policies
that work with the market instead of against it; I'm all for
public-private synergy," Gore said. "But I honestly think that to a
great extent Social Security is the exception that proves the rule.'
source:
"Two seniors programs show how Bush and Gore differ," Los Angeles
Times, hosted by CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/05/09/latimes.socsec/



------------------------------------------------------------------
How differences reflect different views of Republicans & Democrats
------------------------------------------------------------------

Bush's idea of having personal investment accounts reflected the
Republican view that individuals should make their own investment
decisions and that the role of government should be reduced.  Gore's
opposition to this idea reflected the Democratic view that the
government's role of having complete control over a program like
Social Security is appropriate.

Bush's idea of using the projected federal budget surplus as the basis
for across-the-board tax cuts reflected the Republican view that the
government's role isn't to hold on to a surplus but rather to return
it in the form of tax cuts.  Gore's idea of taking money from federal
budget surplus and putting it in a "lockbox" for Social Security
reflected the Democratic view that the government's role is to use
resources to safeguard programs such as Social Security rather than
fund across-the-board tax cuts.


   "Gore reflects a widespread Democratic view that the government's
improved fiscal position will allow it to absorb rising costs without
significantly cutting benefits or redesigning either program. "We are
not in a situation where we are required by desperation to make
structural changes," said Urban Institute senior fellow Marilyn Moon,
who served until recently as a Social Security trustee.
    Bush's position, in contrast, exemplifies the consensus
conservative view--shared even by many centrist Democrats--that the
rising costs of these programs will overwhelm the federal budget and
ultimately demand large benefit reductions if changes are not made
now."
source:
"Two seniors programs show how Bush and Gore differ," Los Angeles
Times, hosted by CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/05/09/latimes.socsec/



---------------
search terms:
"social security", bush, gore, lockbox, accounts, 2000, surplus

I hope this helps.