[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 136 (Tuesday, September 30, 2003)]
[House]
[Page H8959]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[[Page H8959]]
                         SAVING SOCIAL SECURITY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of 
January 7, 2003, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith) is recognized 
during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I am going to talk for 5 minutes 
on the challenge that faces this Congress and America in terms of the 
growing debt and the growing unfunded liabilities. ``Unfunded 
liabilities'' means the promises that government has made, but it needs 
money to come from someplace to keep the promises we have made, and 
Social Security is one of those promises.
  We started Social Security in 1934, and Congress in effect said that 
instead of people going over the hill to the poorhouse, like they did 
after the Great Depression money should be saved for retirement, 
Franklin Delano Roosevelt said let us have a program where we have 
forced savings during your working years, and that will give you more 
security, ``social security,'' in your retirement years.
  So we started the program in 1935, and it was based on current 
workers paying in their taxes to pay for benefits for current retirees, 
sort of a pay-as-you-go program. I like the cartoon where Uncle Sam was 
explaining this to a young worker how Social Security worked, and said, 
``Well, now, here is a list of names. You put your name on the bottom 
of the list. You pay everybody on the top of the list, and eventually 
your name will be on the top of the list and everybody below you will 
be sending you a check in your retirement.''
  It is a pay-as-you-go program, sort of like a chain letter. But the 
problem is, there are fewer and fewer names under that top name on the 
list as we are looking at a declining birth rate and a longer lifespan.
  The number of people working, for example, in 1940 was 47 people 
working, paying in their Social Security tax, for every one retiree. 
Today we are down to three people working paying in their Social 
Security tax for every one retiree.
  So what we have done of course, is over the years every time we hit a 
problem of not having enough money, we do one of two things, or 
sometimes both. We either reduce benefits or increase taxes or a 
combination. That is what we did in 1983. We reduced benefits and 
increased taxes, so temporarily we have a little surplus coming in for 
Social Security.
  This chart shows what I think should be everybody's goal as we look 
at saving Social Security. Number one, continue to provide retirement 
security for the elderly; number two, give young people an opportunity 
to improve their retirement prospects; number three, benefit the 
economy instead of burdening it. That is what my bill does.
  It seems like every Member of Congress, the House, the Senate and 
White House, should be willing to agree to this kind of a change, 
because what we are heading for is insolvency of Social Security. In 
fact, in 4 years that part of Social Security, the trust fund that pays 
disability benefits, if you get hurt on the job, is going to be broke. 
There is not enough money coming in. Just 4 years. In 12 years, we are 
going to not have insufficient money coming in from the payroll tax to 
pay promised retirement benefits.
  Now, people give complicated explanations of what we might do to save 
the program, but really there is, again, one of two choices, or a 
combination. You either increase the money coming in, or you decrease 
the money going out, or a combination.
  That is what I am doing in my Social Security bill that I just 
introduced. It reduces the money going out, number one, by changing 
wage inflation for calculating future retiree benefits to a CPI, normal 
inflation. It slows down the increase in benefits for high-income 
retirees. For income, instead of the average 2.7 percent return that 
the average retiree is going to get on Social Security, we increased 
that to a minimum of 3.7 percent.
  I think probably the challenge that we have ahead of us is somehow 
convincing Americans that there is a real problem. It is a problem that 
is demagogued over the years. We have got to deal with it. We have to 
stand up to the issue. I am disappointed that there are only 26 Members 
of the House and Senate that have ever signed on to a Social Security 
bill that keeps Social Security solvent. It is an important program.
  We have almost 80 percent of our retirees today that depend on Social 
Security for a majority of their retirement income. It is something 
that we cannot afford to let go broke.
  Look, we are digging some deep holes for ourselves in terms of 
overspending every year. We are overspending this year $540 billion. It 
is going to be over $700 deficit spending next year. You add that on to 
approximately $11 trillion of unfunded liability for Social Security 
and the other promises that we have made to veterans, the other 
promises we have made to civil servants and people working for 
government, and you must agree it is time Congress stood up to the 
issue. It is time, Mr. Speaker, that everybody looking at a 
congressional candidate this next election asks them how they are going 
to save Social Security.

                          ____________________