[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 108 (Thursday, August 1, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7851-S7852]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      SOUNDNESS OF SOCIAL SECURITY

  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, tonight I want to discuss 
another subject which is near and dear to our hearts, particularly the 
two of us coming from Florida, on the attempts to privatize Social 
Security. In fact, it even comes down to the fact that in the State of 
Florida, the pension program for Florida retirees was changed within 
the last 2 years by the legislature of Florida to basically allow a 
privatized element, other than a defined benefit element for all 
Florida's 600,000 retirees.
  It sounded awfully good while the stock market was doing so well, but 
now in the last few months, the stock market has not been doing well. 
Lo and behold, would you believe that out of 600,000 retirees in 
Florida on the Florida retirement system, the State pension, only 3,000 
retirees out of 600,000 have signed up for the privatized retirement 
plan. That should give us a clue as to why we should not be privatizing 
Social Security.
  I do not want to hold my colleague on the floor, but before he left 
the floor, I wanted to share that with him as I get into my comments on 
Social Security.
  Mr. GRAHAM. Will the Senator yield?
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. With pleasure.
  Mr. GRAHAM. The Florida retirement plan, prior to its modification, 
was in what would be called a defined benefit plan that gave security 
assurance to Florida's retirees as to what they would have in 
retirement, what they could count on, what they could sleep comfortably 
at night knowing was going to be available to them.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. That is exactly right. It was a defined 
benefit. Every retiree did not have to worry about the vicissitudes of 
the stock market and part of their retirement suddenly disappearing 
overnight.
  Mr. GRAHAM. Is that not the same basic structure that we have had 
from the very beginning with Social Security, that it also provides the 
same level of security and peace of mind to its beneficiaries because 
it also is a defined-benefit program?
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. It certainly is--the same system that has been 
in place in Florida for years, the system over which the senior Senator 
from Florida presided as Governor, and therefore the chairman of the 
State Board of Administration that oversaw the State retirement system, 
and when I had the pleasure years later, as the elected State 
treasurer, of being one of the three trustees of the State pension 
fund.
  Mr. GRAHAM. Finally, does not the Senator think there are ample 
opportunities available for a person who wishes to take the risk and 
assume the chance that they may be buying into a stock market which is 
not always going up, they might be buying into a stock market such as 
in recent months it seems that goes down more than up, that they have 
plenty of opportunities with their savings, and if they have an 
individual retirement account or a 401(k) to take some risk, but with 
the core of

[[Page S7852]]

their retirement, Social Security and the basic retirement through 
their employer, that they would be well served to have the confidence 
and assurance of knowing what they are going to do and not be on the 
Wall Street roulette wheel as to what their retirement benefits will 
be?
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. The Senator has said it very well, and Social 
Security is a social safety net. The retirees, the senior citizens of 
this country, should know that it is a defined benefit that is going to 
be there when they need it and it is not subject to the roulette wheel, 
as the Senator has suggested, in the case that the stock market is 
suddenly in a downward trend. So, too, the State retirement system of 
the State of Florida was a defined benefit in the past, when the two of 
us had the opportunity of being part of the governing body of the board 
of trustees, and it gave confidence because there was a defined 
benefit.
  So there is an exact parallel between what we have seen in the State 
of Florida and what we want to talk about tonight, which is President 
Bush wanting to privatize a part of Social Security and transfer a 
trillion dollars out of the Social Security trust fund over to private 
individual accounts that the individual would then invest in the stock 
market. That sounded like a good idea to a lot of people when the stock 
market was going up, but now that the stock market is going down, it is 
beyond me that the President is still insisting, as recently as last 
week, that he have Social Security privatized.
  That is what I wanted to talk about tonight, and I am so delighted I 
came to the Chamber before my colleague from Florida left so that he 
could engage in this colloquy and dialogue with me. I thank him for 
that.
  Mr. GRAHAM. I thank the Senator.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Madam President, I will summarize my remarks 
because Senator Graham and I have pretty well covered it in the 
discussion we had, that one only has to look back a couple of years. 
The Nasdaq has fallen by 75 percent, and the broader S&P has dropped 
more than 40 percent, and given this market downturn, as we say in the 
South, it is beyond me, I am surprised that the Bush administration is 
sticking by its proposal to allow workers to divert some of their 
Social Security into private accounts of the stock market instead of 
there being a defined benefit that would give the Social Security 
retiree the security, the knowledge, the confidence that when their 
retirement years came, they knew they had a certain amount they could 
rely on, even though most retirees are going to have to supplement that 
Social Security benefit, but at least they would know that benefit was 
there and was not going to evaporate if, in fact, the Social Security 
privatized account was invested in stocks that had suddenly taken a 
turn going down.
  That is the essence of what I wanted to share. I will be speaking 
frequently on this matter when we resume in September, because this 
issue has had scant attention--an article here, an article there, about 
how the Bush White House is so intent that it wants to privatize these 
accounts. Clearly, if the times had not been of the economic downturn 
and the suffering that so many people have had in the stock market, 
perhaps they would have been lulled into a false sense of security. But 
with the stock market doing what it has done--a reflection, by the way, 
of the corporate scandals that have come to light and therefore a 
lessening of the confidence of the investing public of America in those 
corporations--if that had not come, the governmental decision process 
might have been seduced into going for this privatized part of Social 
Security. Clearly, that is not, in my judgment, in the best interest of 
our senior citizens.
  That is what I wanted to share tonight. I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Nelson of Florida). Without objection, it 
is so ordered.

                          ____________________