[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 44 (Thursday, April 14, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H2087-H2091]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       30-SOMETHING WORKING GROUP

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 4, 2005, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek) is recognized 
for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, it is once again a pleasure to 
address the House of Representatives and also to talk about a very 
important issue to all Americans, which is Social Security. I would 
also like to thank the Democratic leader for allowing the 30-something 
Working Group to come to the floor once again to talk about issues that 
are facing not only young Americans but Americans in general.
  Through her leadership and through others that are in the Democratic 
Caucus, the Democratic whip, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer); 
the chairman, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez); and also 
the vice chairman, the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn), we 
have been able to come to the floor to share facts, not fiction, to 
bring accuracy to the Social Security debate as it stands now.
  First of all, Mr. Speaker, I would like to just share a few things as 
relates to Social Security. We encourage the Members to continue to 
keep an open mind. First of all, I want to commend Members on the 
Democratic side of the aisle for having so many town hall meetings, a 
number of town hall meetings, hundreds of town hall meetings in their 
own districts and that have traveled outside of their districts to 
share with Americans the truth about Social Security and how we protect 
Social Security and how we continue to have the benefit structure that 
so many, 48 million Americans, are celebrating now today.
  I must also add that I would like to commend some of my Republican 
colleagues that have the courage to stand up to the forces of 
leadership, to say that they are willing to make sure that their 
constituents are able to celebrate and to be able to survive in a 
program that they have been promised that will be there for them in 
their time of retirement.
  I would also like to thank those Members on both sides of the aisle 
who see the benefit of protecting Social Security, not coming up with a 
privatization scheme, not because someone said it is a way that we can 
be innovative, not subscribing to saying that there is some sort of 
Federal emergency as it relates to the protection of Social Security, 
not the fact that the President is flying around the country some 60 
days burning Federal jet fuel at taxpayers' expense, higher than at any 
other time in the history of this country since Presidents have been 
flying, to persuade Americans that there is some Federal emergency. We 
will try to address that a little later. We are going to celebrate not 
only within the moment but within the future.
  I want to just share a few things, Mr. Speaker, as it relates to how 
many Americans that are not only beneficiaries of Social Security but 
also Americans who look forward to benefiting from Social Security.
  Social Security is the foundation of all retirement for the American 
worker. Like I mentioned earlier, 48 million Americans celebrate and 
take part in the benefits that Social Security has to provide. Retirees 
receiving Social Security benefits are 33 million. That is a great 
number of Americans that have served our country well. Seniors who live 
within the poverty line, 48 percent of those individuals, of the 48 
million, receive those benefits. The average monthly benefit is $955. 
That is making ends meet for so many Americans, some 48 million 
Americans.
  The size of the average benefit, like I mentioned, is $955; but the 
real issue is the fact that the benefits will be there for almost 50 
years. Some may say 48, some may say 49, but for almost 50 years, the 
present benefit structure as we see it now for Social Security 
recipients, including those individuals that are receiving survivor 
benefits that I must add, Mr. Speaker, those survivor benefits is the 
legacy of the commitment that their parents made that have passed on, 
that have gone on to glory. The only thing that they were able to leave 
for their child are survivor benefits. And the benefits will be here 
until 2052; 2052, Mr. Speaker. That is not tomorrow. That is not next 
week. That is not even 2 years. 2052.
  And so many of the individuals that are running around here saying 
that we need to call the fire department because Social Security is on 
fire are not really telling the truth. One may say that the 
administration has a plan or the majority side leadership has a plan 
for Social Security. That is also not true. One may say that the 
President, like I said, the administration, has a plan. That is not 
true. Is there posturing on the majority side about the fact that they 
are going to come up with a plan? Yes, there is some conversation going 
on, but Washington is known for conversation. There is nothing wrong 
with conversation as long as it is bipartisan. And that is not 
happening. Leadership is about a bipartisan dialogue to improve Social 
Security. So if it is going to be addressed in this Congress, for us to 
move in a productive way, we are going to have to work together. And 
there is no leadership from the majority side for us to work together.

  Some may say, well, where is the Democratic plan? Well, I think the 
Democratic plan is celebrated by 48 million Americans today, not 
fiction, not something that may happen in the future; and in the 1980s 
it was a Democratic Congress that came together with Speaker Tip 
O'Neill and Ronald Reagan and saved Social Security. A supermajority of 
Democrats voted for it, and even the creation of it.
  So when one starts to argue about, well, where is the Democratic 
plan, the Democratic plan is in the wallets of 48 million Americans. 
And those Americans that are walking around working now with a Social 
Security card can say, wow, I am glad we have Social Security in the 
way we have it. And for those retirees that take their card out with 
those digits on them, they can thank the leadership of the Democratic 
Congress when it was created and also the Democratic Congress that 
saved Social Security to make sure that every American can have the 
maximum amount of benefits possible to them to help that 48 percent of 
the 48 million Americans that without Social Security would be living 
in poverty, to help 33 million of those retirees that are now, this is 
fact, not fiction, able to receive Social Security because, let us say, 
for instance, in that 33 million Americans, I am sure, Mr. Speaker, a 
number of their companies have gone back on their commitment on 
retirement. But Social Security is there for them. For those 
individuals that have passed on and gone on to glory, they were able to 
leave legacy benefits for their children.
  Let us talk a little bit about the private accounts, because I think 
it is important that we talk about the privatization scheme that some 
people in this

[[Page H2088]]

town have in store or would like to put forth to the American people. 
Before I get into that, I would also like to add, since we are talking 
about the positive points of Social Security, that Social Security is 
important to stabilize the American way of life. If we start having 
benefits cut back, especially in this era of no health care, I must 
add, one may want to talk about health care accounts or special savings 
accounts and all of those things that are talked about from time to 
time.
  Forty-seven million Americans are working without health care. These 
are not individuals that are sitting at home cracking their toes, 
saying the job situation looks sad. These are individuals that go to 
work every day. So if we start getting along with our friends in Wall 
Street and saying we are going to have private accounts and we are 
going to shore up some more money for Wall Street, then that is a 
gamble that I am not willing to take.
  On the majority side, they are talking about, we need to privatize 
these accounts. Let me tell you, it is going to make it harder for 
everyone to achieve financial security, and I do mean everyone. Not 
just Democrats, not just Republicans, not just independents, not just 
people of color, not just Asian Americans. Every American will suffer 
under it. The size of the benefit cuts proposed in the philosophy that 
the majority side has is 46 percent. The average reduction of benefits 
a retiree would see over their lifetime would be $152,000. The amount 
that Wall Street would profit from the private accounts would be $940 
billion. That is the only real bright spot here for some. The issue as 
it relates to our risk as it relates to this risky plan for private 
accounts, $2 trillion. The amount of government tax on private accounts 
would be 80 percent.
  If the Republican proposal to cut Social Security benefits were in 
place today, the average senior monthly benefit would be $516. This is 
very real, ladies and gentlemen. Remember, I said right now, as in the 
present, today. If we look at the clock right now, if we look at 
today's date right now, the average benefit is $955.

                              {time}  1715

  Under the proposed philosophy that the majority side has, it would be 
$516. That is not something to be proud of.
  There are a lot of other things that were mentioned recently in the 
media, and we will talk a little bit about that. But as we start, as we 
continue to talk about the issue as it relates to the price tag of 
privatization, it is staggering. It is a lose-lose proposition, as 
presently presented, the philosophy that the President has. More than a 
40 percent cut in benefits, adds nearly $5 trillion in additional debt 
over a 20-year period; 70 percent privatization tax, which on average 
takes back 70 cents on every dollar in private accounts. Some argue 80 
percent. I mentioned this a minute a ago: $152,000 in benefit cuts for 
young people is based on the price index.
  So I think it is important that we look at this, especially as 
Americans are forced to start thinking about this, something that is 50 
years away of being a problem. And I must say, after 50 years, Mr. 
Speaker, 80 percent of the benefits that are now offered in Social 
Security will still be intact. In 2052, 2053, people will still be able 
to receive 80 percent of the benefits. So I am wondering, where is the 
fire?
  I can tell the Members what is the fire right now, if we can use that 
as a metaphor, or the emergency. The emergency now is the fact that we 
have Americans working without health care. Emergency is the fact that 
we are not able to provide benefits to our veterans that are now paying 
more for health care that they were promised that would be free. 
Emergency is the fact that we have a Department of Homeland Security, 
that we are rated as an F as it relates to protecting our information 
technology. Those are true emergencies.
  Emergency is the fact that we cannot protect our borders. Those are 
true emergencies. Emergency is the fact that we have local districts, 
local cities, counties and State governments that are suffering through 
the acts of this Congress in what we call devolution of taxation. We 
will cut taxes, but we are going to make them raise them on the local 
level. Those are emergencies. Those are right now pocketbook, wallet 
issues that are facing Americans right now.
  I am glad the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan) joined me. I am starting 
to think that some people in this town may want us to say that 
something is an emergency, and it is actually not, while we are not 
looking at the ever-growing federal debt, the highest in the history of 
the republic; the fact that we are not looking at the fact that 
Americans do not have health care; the fact that we really do not have 
anything going on as it relates to making the dollar stronger; the fact 
that we do not want to address gas prices. Maybe this is the reason why 
we are spending all of this Federal jet fuel that the President is 
using flying around the country to try to persuade people to believe in 
a philosophy of privatization of Social Security when he himself has 
said privatization of Social Security alone will not save Social 
Security.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio, my good 
friend.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to 
me.
  I think he makes a great point, and I think the phrase that he has 
used in the past that is applicable to the Social Security debate is 
the ``Potomac two-step.'' They want us looking at Social Security over 
here and having this debate and flying around the country and talking 
about what needs fixing and a crisis that really does not exist, and we 
have numbers that say it does not exist, but we still want to have this 
debate over here.
  Meanwhile, on this end, we are cutting Medicaid. Health care costs 
have gone up 50 percent over the last 5 years; education costs of 
college tuition up 36 percent. No one wants to talk about these issues. 
No one wants to talk about the fact that Youngstown city schools, the 
district that I represent, 85 percent of the kids who go to that school 
qualify for free and reduced lunch.
  We do not want to have that debate. We want to have a manufactured 
debate. And I think the gentleman is exactly right. That is exactly 
what is happening here, and I think it becomes more and more important 
on us to fight this on a couple of different fronts. One is to make the 
argument that Social Security is solid up until 2041 and that we need 
to make some corrections maybe on a bipartisan way but make sure that 
the benefits are guaranteed, make sure that no American is going to get 
a reduction in their benefits, especially the 50 percent of the people 
who qualify for Social Security, in which Social Security lifts them 
out of poverty. So I think it is very important for us to broaden this 
debate over here and not just talk about Social Security but to talk 
about all these other issues.
  One of the issues that I have been working on with Members of the 
other side, trying to somehow get the attention of the administration, 
is the issue of China, manipulating their currency up to 40 percent. We 
had a hearing today in the Committee on Armed Services.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. A joint hearing, I must add, Mr. Speaker.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. A joint hearing with the Committee on International 
Relations and the Committee on Armed Services. I appreciate the 
gentleman's correcting me.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. I just want to make sure that we are factual, 
sir.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Constructive criticism. I appreciate that.
  We had a discussion about the Europeans wanting to lift the arms 
embargo on China, which has been the Europeans cannot sell all these 
different types of military arms to the Chinese. The ban has been on 
since Tiananmen Square in 1989. Now the Europeans are saying we want to 
sell to the Chinese. So here we have this huge country that is growing 
at a rapid rate, and now we have even some of our allies wanting to 
sell arms to a rapidly growing Chinese government.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I think it is 
important that we realize the urgency of so many issues that are before 
us. And the issue as it relates to Social Security, as the majority 
side or as the administration would like for us Americans to see it, is 
that it is not rocket science. It is not a Federal emergency.

[[Page H2089]]

Forty-eight million Americans celebrate Social Security right now. 
Thirty-three million of those Americans would be living in poverty if 
it was not for it. We have a number of young people that are going to 
school solely on survivor benefits because their family members have 
moved on.

  And I can tell the Members what is even further appalling is the 
President saying to the African American that I am pushing private 
accounts because African American males do not live as long as Anglos.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Unbelievable.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. In my opinion, Mr. Speaker, that is very wrong. 
But it goes to show us the desperation that some majority leaders on 
the majority side have to try to do this because they can.
  But I can tell the gentleman the reason why we do not have a bill on 
this floor yet is not because we have staff or Members here that are 
lazy and do not want to write a bill. The reason why it is not here is 
that Americans are not with the administration and some Members of the 
majority side on messing with Social Security, especially as it comes 
down to private accounts on a risky scheme, because if not the number 
one, it is one of the main reasons why so many Americans appreciate 
this Federal Government, that we will keep our word, that we will stand 
by what we said we will do.
  So when we start looking at these issues, the American people are not 
necessarily with the administration and some Members on the majority 
side as it relates to trying to change Social Security on a scheme of 
private accounts. That is why there is not a bill here. That is the 
reason why we hear some posturing here and there and an article saying 
we are going to start marking some up pretty soon.
  I am going to tell the gentleman right now that discussion has been 
going on since 1978, and the reason why that discussion has been going 
on as it relates to private accounts since 1978 is the fact that the 
American people are not marching up and down the street saying, ``We 
want a reduction in our benefits; we want to gamble on our 
retirement.'' They are not saying that. What they are saying is that 
``I have a Social Security card and guess what. When I reach the age I 
should be able to receive Social Security, I look forward to it. I want 
you to stand next to your word.''
  So earlier I commended not only all of my Democratic colleagues but 
even some of the Members on the majority side that have the courage to 
stand up and say, I am here on behalf of my constituents, I am not here 
on behalf of myself, on being accepted by those who are trying to 
persuade them to do otherwise.
  So when we start looking at it in a nutshell, Mr. Speaker, I am 
starting to believe more and more it is one of these things, look over 
here and think Social Security is Social Security. Meanwhile, we have 
the highest deficit in the history of the Republic. In Florida, that is 
a real issue; and I guarantee the reason why there are a number of 
Members of the Florida delegation that are not necessarily with the 
administration and the majority side and even some of those Members on 
the majority side are not with the majority side on the issue of 
privatization of Social Security, because eventually many of the 
gentleman from Ohio's constituents will be my constituents in the end 
in Florida.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. If the gentleman would further yield, Mr. Speaker, 
the gentleman is absolutely right. Maybe one day I will even be his 
constituent, that one day I will move to Florida.
  But I think the point that the gentleman from Florida brought up is 
the issue of the perennial budget deficits that we are having it seems 
every year in this Chamber, $400 to $500 billion a year, and I think 
when we talk in the 30-something group that we have established here, 
the reason we like to talk about and highlight the deficit is because 
long term that is going to have the most detrimental effect on members 
of the 30-something generation, 20-something, teenagers, born today.
  We have huge numbers. Our debt is rising. Our deficit is going up and 
up and up every single year. And now to implement the Social Security 
plan, $5 trillion to implement the President's version of his 
privatization, $5 trillion over the next 20 years. We already have 
almost an $8 trillion national debt. Let me move this over.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. And those are as-of-today numbers.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. These are today's numbers. And this clock is 
ticking by the second. But $7.7 trillion is the national debt today and 
ticking. Maybe we will be able to get the technology here where this 
will keep moving, $7.79 trillion national debt today.
  And I think this is the most staggering number. Someone sitting at 
home watching this or sitting up in the gallery, their individual share 
of the national debt is $26,300. So if one is born today, welcome to 
being born in the United States of America, they have a $26,000 tag on 
their head.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I think it is 
important for the Members to understand and also for many Americans to 
understand that we did not just draw that number up in the back, that 
we were back there drinking a bottle of water, saying can we come up 
with a number that is a big number?
  I know some of the Members are in their offices, and I think it is 
important that they know that national debt number as of today, and 
Americans and Members can go to the official Website of the U.S. 
Treasury. They have to go a couple of clicks, but I am going to share 
with the Members how they can get directly to that number and that 
ticker. Because if I am in the Treasury Department, I am going to have 
people go into two or three different clicks once they go to my home 
page and maybe, just maybe, they will get to the ticker because it is 
nothing that we can be proud of.

                              {time}  1730

  Also, as it relates, we need to talk a little bit about those 
countries that have bought our debt and we are beholding to foreign 
countries. The gentleman does that better than me. But the Web site is 
www.ustreas.gov. That is the Department of Treasury Web site. 
Www.ustreas.gov. Or you can go directly to when you go on the page, 
because we are trying to share with the Members and educate the Members 
and make sure the American people understand exactly what is happening 
here, because it is not a badge of honor to be a Member of the 109th 
Congress and for history to reflect that we made the decisions to have 
the highest deficit in the history of the Republic. That is just not 
something that one can be proud of. But you can go if you want directly 
to www.house.gov/budget_democrats. That is www.house.gov/
budget_democrats.
  It is important, because our Democratic budget committee has really 
worked hard in making sure that we can pull this information out, that 
not only it should be useful to the Members on both sides of the aisle, 
but also to the American people.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. If the gentleman will yield, I appreciate the 
gentleman sharing that information.
  The real question is, we have to agree on this, and it is not a 
Democrat or Republican thing. This baby that is born with a $26,000 
debt on their head, we do not know if that baby is a Democrat or a 
Republican. We have an obligation here for the next generation. And for 
many, many, many years our colleagues were standing in the well on that 
side talking about a balanced budget amendment, talking about fiscal 
discipline, talking about tax and spend. Now we are borrowing and 
spending.
  This is worse. It is bad to tax and spend, and I do not think any of 
us advocate that. But to borrow and spend, because you are borrowing, 
you are spending and then you are paying interest on the money that you 
borrow, primarily from the Japanese and the Chinese banks. That is 
reckless. It is bad foreign policy, it is bad domestic policy, it is 
not conducive to providing opportunity for the next generation, your 
kids and the young kids that are coming up.
  When you talk about funding health care, Medicare, Medicaid, 
education, tuition costs, Pell grants, No Child Left Behind, how are we 
going to compete with 1.3 billion Chinese, how are we going to compete 
with over 1 billion Indians in the next couple of decades, when we have 
kids, students, that are unhealthy and not getting the proper education 
that they need, and at the same time we are leaving this kind of burden 
on their backs?

[[Page H2090]]

  Now, I have to excuse myself. I have a meeting I have to be at 3 
minutes ago. But I want the gentleman to carry on here because this is 
important. I think the best thing we can do in our 30-something Caucus 
and our 30-something Working Group that our leader, the gentlewoman 
from California (Ms. Pelosi), has helped us establish, is talk about 
this, because if there is one thing I hope that I can say in my tenure 
in Congress and the gentleman's is that somehow we were able to fix 
this and make the kind of investments that the young students need and 
that they deserve and that will lead to the kind of opportunity that 
the gentleman and I have had.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, before the 
gentleman leaves for his meeting, that I am pretty sure is very, very 
important, the gentleman is going to have to not only give the 
information on the Web site, because we want to hear from Members, we 
want to hear from Americans, to make sure that we get the information 
from them on how they feel, especially as it relates to Social 
Security, the Federal deficit and other issues, because it is important 
that we share this, not only with young people.
  We have the 30-something Working Group. But in our age range, I say 
to the gentleman, there are a number of young parents that are out 
there, and so many times here in Washington, people say, well, we are 
doing this for the future generation.
  Well, the future generation has $26,000 in debt right now and 
climbing. So I do not know. I do not feel good about my daughter and my 
son having to worry about college and all these other things, and then 
worry about the Federal debt at the same time.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. If the gentleman will yield further, exactly. When 
you add on it the $26,000 that you are born with that is going to keep 
accumulating every day, especially when we are running $500 billion 
annual deficits, and you add on to that, just picture the baby born 
today, and this clock ticking, 18 to 22 years out, say 22 years out, 
that number keeps going up and up and up, and maybe next week we will 
have the math and figure out what it will be based on inflation. And 
then add on to that college costs rising at the rate they have been 
over the past 4 years.
  I know in Ohio alone they have doubled, and I think average college 
students graduates with a $20,000-some debt, and that is not even if 
they go after a masters or Ph.D. or law degree. It is about $22,000 for 
the average college student's debt.
  So you take the 26, you add on the 22, now you are talking close to 
$50,000; and then project that out 22 years. So your baby born today, 
if you want them to go to college or get a masters degree or law degree 
or Ph.D., you are talking at least $100,000, if not hundreds of 
thousands of dollars in debt. That is not providing opportunity. At the 
same time, they are competing with billions, over 1 billion Chinese 
workers and over 1 billion Indians. So this is becoming very dangerous 
for the long-term prospects of our country.
  If you want to e-mail us, 30something democrats @mail.house.gov. 
30something [email protected].
  I have enjoyed this. I look forward to us coming back next week. I 
hope this in some way has broadened the discussion and deepened the 
discussion on the issues facing the country.
  I yield back to my very good friend from Florida.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. I want to 
thank the gentleman for co-chairing this 30-something Working Group 
that consists of 16 or 18 Members on the Democratic side of Members of 
the House. We, like I said earlier, try to come together and share this 
information, not only with Members of the Congress on what is important 
to the American people, but also what is important to young people that 
are trying to raise their families and have a good future for their 
children.

  I think that it is important once again to know that on the 
Democratic side when we start talking about Social Security or we start 
talking about Social Security reform, I think it is important that the 
American people understand that we want to strengthen Social Security 
without slashing the benefits that Americans have earned. I think that 
is important.
  I think that when you start talking about what Americans have earned, 
I believe that is paramount in this debate. And I think when they earn 
something, I think we need to make sure that we stand by our promise.
  Now, when we have a forecast for the present benefit structure that 
will for almost 50 years be in place, and then beyond those 50 years 80 
percent of those benefits will be provided, I think that is standing 
next to our promise.
  I think there are some things that we need to do to make sure that 
the Social Security trust fund is solvent for years to come. One is to 
stop deficit spending in such a large amount of money every Congress; 
every budget that is passed, deficit spending. The whole philosophy of 
pay-as-you-go is no longer a philosophy as it relates to the majority. 
It is putting it on the credit cards. It is saying it is okay for 
foreign countries to buy our debt. It is saying that we will forestall 
it off to future generations.
  I do not believe that that is something that we should subscribe to. 
I think we should work hard in bringing the debt down and paying back 
into the Social Security trust fund. That will have us continue to 
provide the kind of benefits that we look forward to, that many 
Americans look forward to.
  When the President starts off in saying it is going to be $5 trillion 
to put forth his philosophy, I think that is problematic at the 
beginning, saying we are going to save you money, but we are going to 
borrow money to help you save money. It sounds like the Potomac Two-
Step once again. And so it is important that we realize the gravity of 
this situation, knowing that there are issues that are greater than an 
emerging problem in 50-some-odd years.
  So it is important that we do as we always do as Americans, come 
together to save great programs and to be able to help our elderly and 
frail, to be able to help those individuals that have worked all their 
lives, the 48 million Americans I speak of that are already receiving 
Social Security benefits and that are counting on them.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I look on the bright end of things as I start 
heading towards a close here. The 48 million Americans that are 
celebrating Social Security right now, that are receiving on average 
$550 a month right now, which we know as of today if the majority side 
and the President's philosophy was in force, because there is no plan, 
that those benefits would be $516. That is easy math. That makes a 
world of difference to someone that is on a fixed income.
  We know that 33 million of those 48 million are retirees. So when the 
30-something Working Group starts to look at priorities, we want to 
watch out for our parents, we want to watch out for our future and for 
our children's future.
  So when we were here in the state of the union and the President 
started talking about, well, people over 55 do not worry about it, my 
proposal will not affect your benefits, are we promoting two Americas, 
or are we promoting unity? I am glad my mom did not call me up and say, 
Kendrick, guess what? I am okay. You are not. Good luck. That is not 
what Social Security is about. It is not the ``Kendrick Meek Report.'' 
This is what took place here in this Chamber, in the state of the 
union, with both Houses coming together at that time.
  So it is important that we realize what is being said and what is 
being done. Forty-eight percent of those individuals, of the 48 
million, would be living in poverty if it was not for Social Security. 
That is important to the 30-something Working Group, especially for 
those young professionals that the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan) 
talked about when they leave their higher educational experience on 
average $20,000 in debt.
  For those individuals, I mean, I thank God for the ability to have 
had the opportunity to go to school on a football scholarship and I 
left college without being in debt. But, guess what? Everyone is not an 
athlete. Every student going to college did not go on a scholarship. 
Some people had to get a student loan. And even for those that went on 
scholarships that had parents that could not afford it, Mr. Speaker, 
the money that it takes to buy books and other things that scholarships 
do not provide, they leave college or a post-graduate degree $20,000 in 
debt.

[[Page H2091]]

  So if we start messing around with the benefit structure under the 
privatization scheme, guess what? We are going to have to take care of 
our parents and our grandparents. We are going to have to subsidize 
their income. We do now, but it will be greater. So that is the reason 
why this is important, that the facts are put forth. Forty-seven years 
of solvency, the way Social Security is right now will continue.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I look forward, as long as there are those that are 
in this Chamber and outside of this Chamber that are sharing with the 
Americans inaccurate information and saying that privatization is good 
and it is going to be a really nice thing for all Americans and we all 
should do it, the 30-something Working Group will continue to work not 
only with the Democratic leader, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. 
Pelosi), and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), who is our whip, 
and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez), who is our chairman 
of the Democratic Caucus, and the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. 
Clyburn), who is our vice chair of the Democratic Caucus, and sharing 
accurate information with the American people and staying in the fight 
of informing them on the truth about what is happening right now; not 
what might happen, what is happening right now and what is going to 
happen for years to come.

                              {time}  1745

  Because, remember, I say to my colleagues, Social Security in the 
1980s was saved by a Democratic House, working along with Ronald Reagan 
in the White House, doing what we had to do on behalf of individuals 
that were carrying Social Security cards to keep our promise to them. 
We did the right thing, and we will continue to do the right thing. But 
the right thing is not increasing the Federal debt, and it is not 
taking a gamble on private accounts.
  So we will continue to share this information. I want to thank the 
Democratic leader for allowing the 30-something Working Group to have 
this hour. We look forward to being back next week, sharing good and 
accurate information, and the topic will be Social Security, with the 
Members of the House.

                          ____________________