U.S. Newswire

March 5, 2002 Tuesday 8:40 PM

SECTION: National Desk

Gephardt Special Order Statement on Social Security

DATELINE: WASHINGTON, March 5

Following is a Special Order Statement on Social Security by House Democratic Leader Richard A. Gephardt: (As Delivered on the Floor of the House)

"Mr. Speaker: I rise to urge a full and fair debate on Social Security.

"Three months ago, the President's Commission issued a report. It called for sweeping changes to the Social Security system. It called for the creation of private accounts. It called for three plans to meet these goals.

"Then last week, in a speech to the Cato Institute, the Majority leader urged a debate on this issue. He urged us to reform Social Security. He urged us to privatize Social Security. And the President of the United States argued the same in speeches also delivered last week.

"Yet in Congress, Republicans are refusing to have that full and fair debate on their schemes of privatization. Do they have something to hide?

"We hear that soon we are going to get a proposal to send certificates out to seniors, at a cost of $14 million, that tells them if you're over the age of 62, your benefits will never be cut. First question is, what if you're under 62? What should they assume? We're also told that CRS and other agencies have said that there is no legal effect to this document, that it's not anything that anybody can rely on. Jo Anne Barnhart, the Social Security Commissioner, suggests that the plan would drain 'millions of dollars from the administration's fund' and alarm seniors who didn't get their certificates. I couldn't agree with her more.

"The certificate idea is a political exercise that will squander taxpayer time and taxpayer money. It will create confusion. And it's an insult to seniors who have put their faith and trust in Social Security.

"We don't need a secret plan on Social Security. We don't want people to go into the voting booth and elect candidates next fall who say, 'Oh, I'm going to guarantee your Social Security benefits,' and then turn around the day after the election and cut their benefits in some scheme of privatization.

"I am not afraid to stand on this floor and fight for my beliefs.

"And I say to my Republican colleagues in the words of the old hymn: 'Be not afraid.' That hymn says that if you believe in something and you care about it, you ought to go ahead without fear. I want a debate on this issue before the election and not after the election. If Republicans fail to put Social Security on the floor, I intend to mount a discharge petition to bring up the President's Commission's plans so that we can have a full and free debate -- the House of Representatives at its best. I think it's essential.

"Social Security is at the heart of our retirement security system.

"Thanks to Social Security, millions of Americans avoid poverty. They've lived their lives free from fear. People with disabilities and surviving family members have put food on the table because of Social Security. They have roofs over their heads. For 67 years, Social Security has been there for the people of this country when they've needed it.

"My mother is 94 years old. She lives in an independent living facility in St. Louis, and about half of the costs of that facility every month come from her Social Security. You better believe she cares about Social Security. And you better believe I care about Social Security. And you better believe that millions of Americans care about Social Security. And you better believe that there are millions of people out there who care about Social Security and are concerned, and rightly concerned, about secret Republican plans to wait until after the election to put forward plans that will cut their benefits.

"We're not talking about an academic exercise here, we're talking about people's lives and what happens to them every month. We're talking about the biggest changes in the program that the President has proposed in the history of the program. We're talking about a sea change in the way this program works.

"The Republican party has always sought to weaken Social Security. In 1935, they voted against it, in 1964 they wanted to make it 'voluntary,' and in 1994 Rep. Armey appeared on national television admitting that 'I would never have created Social Security.'

"Today, the Republican slogan seems to be: Save Social Security last, not first.

"In today's New York Times, Paul Krugman is dead-on: His argument is that Social Security has 'never been run like a simple pension fund. It's really,' he says, 'a social contract: Each generation pays taxes that support the previous generation's retirement, and expects to receive the same treatment from the next generation.'

Republicans propose 'to allow younger workers to place their payroll taxes in private accounts - in effect, to break this ongoing contract,' in Krugman's words. He says we're left with two options: 'Make room for the trillions diverted into private accounts by slashing the baby boomers' benefits.' Or 'use money from other, (unidentified) sources to replace the diverted funds.'

"The Republican plan makes promises that sound too good to be true because they are too good to be true. According to Krugman, private accounts 'will create a financing crisis, requiring sharp benefit cuts, or large infusions of money from unspecified sources, or both.'

"Republicans say privatization won't cost a dime. The Social Security Actuaries say it will drain $20 trillion from the budget. Republicans say privatization will strengthen people's retirement security. Tell that to employees at Enron: They can't even pay the cost of health care for their kids.

"Republicans say that "40 years of neglect have permanently damaged Social Security's financial health," in the words of Majority Leader Armey. Bob Ball, an expert on the subject, calls this statement flat-out 'untrue.'

"Our challenge is to strengthen Social Security into the future. We need to honor our commitments.We need to strengthen the trust funds. We need to save Social Security first.

"America had a golden opportunity about 15 months ago. Fifteen months ago, we could have passed tax cuts to promote long-term economic growth -- while paying down the national debt and investing in Social Security for Americans everywhere. Republicans rejected our approach.

"Today, the President's budget breaks pledges by both parties. Both parties promised to safeguard the trust funds. The President's budget invades them for the next ten years. It drains $1.5 trillion from the trust funds. And plans, proposed by his Commission, fail to explain how we will pay for privatization.

And they will lead to cuts in benefits for seniors. Even for individuals opting out of private accounts."This is not a debate about numbers. It's a debate, in the end, about our values. What is the value we place on Social Security?

"Our values call for understanding that Social Security will be solvent for the next 36 years -- at a minimum. Our values call for recognizing that people have faith and trust and confidence in our most respected program. Our values call for realizing that Social Security offers economic security not just to seniors -- but to widows, disabled Americans, and children of parents who die before the age of 65. Our values call for keeping our inter-generational contract and commitment in the 21st century. Our values call for keeping our word to the seniors of this country. Our values call for investing in Social Security today, not tearing it down as baby boomers retire a few years from now.

"I urge Republicans: Be not afraid.

"Let's get about having a real debate before the voters speak in November of this year. Let's get about the task of saving Social Security first and today."

http://www.usnewswire.com

CONTACT: Erik Smith or Kori Bernards, 202-225-0100, both of the Office of the House Democratic Leader

http://democraticleader.house.gov/