[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.

                          ____________________