[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 6 (Wednesday, January 26, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H225-H226]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 1400
CONGRESS WILL NOT ACCEPT A SOCIAL SECURITY FORMULA BASED ON RACE OR
GENDER
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Issa). Under a previous order of the
House, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney) is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, if any of my colleagues were watching Meet
the Press on Sunday, they may have seen a truly remarkable thing. The
gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas) proposed that Social Security
benefits should be based on race and gender. If we take the
distinguished chairman at his word, he is proposing overt race and
gender discrimination by the government.
Apart from raising serious constitutional questions, this shocks the
conscience. My colleagues can read excerpts from the transcript of his
statement on Meet the Press in press clippings across the country and
in Tuesday's Roll Call.
The gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas) said, Congress ``needs to
examine how many years of retirement you get based on your race and you
ought not to leave gender off the table because that would be a
factor.''
Tim Russert, who seemed a bit taken aback by this, asked Thomas, ``So
if someone is a woman and they live longer, they would get less per
year?''
The gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas) confirmed that is what he
wants Congress to consider.
Then Russert asked, ``Do you think Congress, Mr. Chairman, would
accept any formula that said that people should be treated differently
because of their gender or race?''
I can answer that question and I believe that I speak for many of my
colleagues on both sides of the aisle that the answer is a very strong
no. We will never accept a Social Security formula based on race or
gender.
I am confident that many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle
on this issue find this idea as repulsive as I do. This idea is unfair,
it is unjust, it is profoundly anti-American. It goes against
fundamental constitutional principles of equal protection. Congress
must, and I believe will, repudiate it.
Social Security is the financial safety net for all working Americans
in their old age; and all workers are entitled to its benefits,
regardless of gender or race. Its formulas currently are race and
gender neutral and must remain so for all time, I believe.
Regardless of what projections we each believe in for the long-term
outlook of the trust fund, we must surely agree on the basic
proposition that all retired workers are entitled to this essential
government safety net without regard to gender or race. The chairman's
proposal attacks the most vulnerable among us, those who need Social
Security most, and that is wrong.
He proposes to cut every woman's annual Social Security benefits
because statistically women live longer than men, and that is just
plain backwards. What are retired women supposed to do, live at a lower
level of income payments than men?
On the contrary, women need Social Security even more than men do. We
are a long way from closing the wage gap. We are currently 79 cents to
the dollar, and that translates into an even wider pension gap. Retired
women workers are twice as likely as men to depend on Social Security
as their sole means of support and to depend on Social Security
benefits to keep them out of poverty.
According to Joint Economic Committee figures and the National
Women's Law Center, women are 60 percent of Social Security recipients
at age 67 and three-quarters of the recipients at age 85 or older.
Hispanic women, for example, live the longest of all as a group. The
gentleman from California's (Mr. Thomas) logic would cut their benefits
most. Yet more than half of retired Hispanic women depend on Social
Security for 90 percent of their income and without it would live in
poverty.
The chairman also proposed to adjust benefits based on race, and this
is mindboggling. I am at a loss of words to explain how outrageous it
is to propose basing any government benefit based on race.
Let me just remind the distinguished gentleman from California that
the Constitution requires the Federal Government to treat persons of
all races equally. His proposal raises very serious constitutional
questions and undermines our moral commitment to our society in which
all are treated equally, regardless of race.
I wish I could call the chairman's statements on Sunday ill
considered and not serious, but that was not the first time the
chairman has proposed such a policy, and I call on my colleagues to not
accept it.
I am circulating a letter to the President of the United States. I
will place it into the Record. I urge my colleagues to support it and
to send a strong message that basing any type of Social Security
benefits on race and gender is unfair and just plain wrong. I will also
add in the Record additional statements and some comments from around
the country that have been in major papers.
January 26, 2005.
No, Mr. President, Congress Will Not Accept a Social Security Formula
Based on Race or Gender
Dear Colleague: We expect you were as shocked as we were to
hear Ways & Means Chairman Thomas again propose on ``Meet the
Press'' Sunday that Social Security benefits should be
allocated based on race and gender. Cutting Social Security
benefits to women and minorities--the retirees who need them
the most--is wrong, unfair, unjust and fundamentally anti-
American. We will not accept a formula that has such
unfairness as its centerpiece.
We will be sending the attached letter to the president
asking him to repudiate Thomas' proposal by taking his
outrageous proposal to base Social Security benefits on
[[Page H226]]
race and gender off the table. Please contact Eleni
Constantine with Rep. Maloney at 5-7944 by 6 p.m. today if
you would like to sign the letter.
Sincerely,
Carolyn B. Maloney,
Member of Congress.
Frank Pallone, Jr.,
Member of Congress.
____
January 26, 2005.
Hon. George W. Bush,
President,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. President: We were appalled to hear Ways & Means
Chairman Bill Thomas propose Sunday on ``Meet the Press''
that Social Security benefits should be based on race and
gender. Chairman Thomas said that Congress ``needs to
consider how many years of retirement you get based on your
race'' and that women should receive fewer benefits each year
because they tend to live longer than men. Asked if Congress
would accept such an idea, Chairman Thomas didn't seem to
know the answer.
The answer is ``No,'' Mr. President. We, the undersigned
members of Congress, will not accept a Social Security
formula that is based on race or gender. This idea is unfair,
it is unjust, it is profoundly anti-American. We call on you
to repudiate it. We request a meeting with you to give you
our views in person and receive your response.
Cutting benefits to those who need them most is counter to
the core principles on which Social Security was founded.
That great program is the financial safety net for all
working Americans in their old age--and all workers are
entitled to its benefits regardless of gender or race. Social
Security's formulas are race and gender neutral and must
remain so. To propose that women should receive fewer
benefits because they tend to live longer denies benefits to
retired women workers who depend on them to survive and is
fundamentally wrong. To advocate that minorities should
receive different benefits on the basis of their race is
repugnant in a society that has renounced racial
discrimination and where all men are equal before the law.
Chairman Thomas' proposal attacks the most vulnerable among
us. Retired women workers are twice as likely than men to
live below the poverty line and to depend on Social Security
as their sole means of support. For African-Americans, Social
Security cuts the poverty rate from 59 percent to 21 percent.
Yesterday was not the first time Chairman Thomas has
proposed basing Social Security on race and gender, but it
was the first time he made clear on national TV that he will
advance this outrageous agenda in the Congress. It is time to
make clear that Congress will not accept it. Nor should you
or your Administration, Chairman Thomas' proposal goes
against everything this great nation stands for. It is
counter to our deepest moral values. We call on you to
renounce clearly and unambiguously any change to Social
Security benefits premised on race or gender.
Sincerely,
Carolyn Maloney,
Member of Congress.
Frank Pallone, Jr.,
Member of Congress.
____________________