[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 22 (Tuesday, March 5, 2002)]
[House]
[Page H658]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        SOCIAL SECURITY LOCKBOX

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of 
January 23, 2002, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) is recognized 
during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, over the last 5 years in the House, 
initiated by the Republican majority, something which I supported, we 
took a series of votes on something called the Social Security lockbox. 
Originally, some of my colleagues on the Democratic side opposed this. 
They said it was a mere gimmick on the part of the Republican majority 
and an attempt to restrain the social spending of the Clinton 
administration, and the Republican majority had no intention of 
safeguarding those funds.
  I did not believe that, and I voted for it. I said, it makes sense to 
me, with the retirement of the baby boom near upon us, we should 
safeguard those funds and be certain they are used only to pay the 
benefits for which they are intended by law.
  Eight, ten times in the House of Representatives we voted for the 
lockbox, Social Security lockbox. Unfortunately, that was all 
superseded by a vote last March when tax cuts were voted on in the 
House, predicated on shaky economic assumptions that we would have huge 
and growing surpluses as far as the eye could see. So let us give the 
money back to the people. Of course, mostly to Americans who earn over 
$383,000 a year and have estates worth more than $5 million, but let us 
give it back. Over my objections and the objections of others, this 
rosy scenario was adopted. The Republican leadership said, do not 
worry, the Social Security lockbox will still be there.
  Here we are a year later. The lockbox is crushed, robbed, torn open, 
and the President has proposed in his budget to spend $1.5 trillion of 
the Social Security trust funds, those which were formerly intended to 
be placed in the lockbox, to fund tax cuts for the wealthy and other 
operations of the government over the next 10 years.
  There is no more talk about a lockbox on the other side of the aisle 
with a Republican President who wants to give big tax cuts and gifts to 
the largest corporations and his friends. No, now they have got a new 
gimmick. What is it? Certificates. At taxpayer expense, we will send 
out to every person receiving Social Security, and, by the way, we no 
longer send them checks in the mail anymore because that is too 
expensive, but now for this special, one-time only offer, we will send 
out certificates to everybody currently receiving Social Security and 
their survivors and others receiving Social Security benefits, saying 
the Social Security benefits which are being e-mailed to Americans' 
bank accounts, do not worry, they will keep coming. We will ensure 
that. These are the same people that gave us the lockbox. Now we are 
going to have certificates.
  Mr. Speaker, how about this certificate? This is a real certificate, 
and this is what the majority in the House, the Republicans, have to 
get serious about honoring. This is an irrefutable obligation of the 
United States of America. Look to this line. ``This bond is 
incontestable in the hands of the Federal Old Age and Survivors 
Insurance Trust Fund. Bond is supported by the full faith and credit of 
the United States.''
  The United States has pledged the payment of the bond with respect to 
principal and interest. But in their rush to privatize Social Security 
and in their rush to give tax cuts to the most wealthy, they are 
questioning whether or not that will be honored. In fact, Secretary 
O'Neill, the Secretary of the Treasury, appointed by George Bush, the 
President, said that this is worthless. He said, starting in 2016, when 
we will have to draw on the interest on these bonds, that is worthless. 
That means he is questioning every investor in America and around the 
world who thinks that U.S. Treasury Bonds are the safest haven.
  I believe they are. I do not believe Secretary O'Neill when he says 
it is worthless. I believe he and the President and the Republican 
leadership here are trying to rush Congress into a hasty privatization 
plan which will actually accelerate the problems of Social Security in 
another thrust to help a few people to the disadvantage of the many.
  Social Security, if we honor these bonds, with the full faith and 
credit of the United States Government as it says right there, Social 
Security is totally 100 percent capable of paying 100 percent of the 
benefits through the year 2038. Starting in 2038, with conservative 
assumptions, not the rosy scenario that the Republican majority pushed 
through last year for the big tax cuts, but with conservative economic 
assumptions, it will have about a 25 to 27 percent problem. That is 73 
percent of benefits could be paid forever after 2038.
  So we have to address that problem, that 25 to 27 percent problem 
starting in 36 years. But we do not address it by further reducing the 
trust fund, giving them to the wealthy in tax cuts, or privatizing the 
system in a way that reduces trust fund income for Social Security, 
because then we have created an even bigger problem.
  Mr. Speaker, that is the real agenda here. They want to go after 
Social Security. They have already broken open the lockbox; now watch 
for the crackerjack box top in the mail, the certificate that gives us 
a hollow promise.

                          ____________________