[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 84 (Wednesday, June 22, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H4965-H4966]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SAVE SOCIAL SECURITY FIRST
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Emanuel) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, today some Members of the Republican Party,
House and Senate, unveiled a proposal to use a surplus in the Social
Security trust fund for private accounts. And they said that in their
words, we are going to keep the Social Security surplus Social
Security.
Well, that is interesting. For the last 3 years my colleagues on the
other side said there was never ever a surplus in Social Security;
there were no accounts in Social Security. In fact, just a month ago or
a little more than a month ago, the President of the United States went
to West Virginia, unveiled an old filing cabinet, if I am using his
words correctly, and said, look at it. That is the Social Security
surplus. As I quote him, and this is the President, ``There is no
Social Security trust fund. Just IOUs stacked in a filing cabinet.''
[[Page H4966]]
All of the sudden now they want to say they have discovered there is
a surplus in Social Security. Well, to tell you the truth, we have
always known there was a surplus in Social Security. In fact, the
Republican Party over the last 5 years has taken $650 billion out of
the Social Security trust fund. And now they want to act like recent
converts that we are going to keep the surplus for Social Security.
Democrats have said for well over 70 years, and as recently as 1998,
save Social Security first. Do not go waste it on tax cuts for the
wealthy. Do not waste that money. It is dedicated. It has been paid
with the commitment for Social Security; and so now today under a new
discovery, Republicans have realized that there is a surplus in Social
Security. They are going to dedicate it, they say, to Social Security.
But the problem is the President of the United States was in West
Virginia just a short time ago, less than 2 months ago and said there
is no surplus in Social Security.
I am sure within short order they will all collectively get their
stories straight and figure out whether there is or is not a surplus.
But whatever you do, do me one favor, just pay back the $650 billion
you have taken out of that Social Security trust fund that good, hard-
working Americans who rely on it just like my colleague, the
gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), just a moment ago spoke
about they rely on the Social Security checks. Forty percent of the
households in America have no other retirement plan plus Social
Security; 80 percent of small business employees in this country have
no other retirement account plus Social Security. They rely on the
checks they pay and the money they pay every month or bi-monthly into
the trust fund.
{time} 1930
So as you become recent believers that there is a surplus, you have
been practicing some of the great absconding of resources; $650 billion
over the last 5 years you have taken out of that account.
I did not see anything about that in today's paper as some were
touting that in their plan, but I am sure as they come to figure out
their math that they will realize they owe some money back before they
talk about integrity of the Social Security surplus.
Clearly, the American people understand that. So before we try to
privatize Social Security or do anything fundamentally to alter the
Social Security trust fund, the first thing we should do is guarantee
that Social Security is there for future generations. To date, the
President has yet to make a proposal, and the half-baked plan being out
touted by the House and Senate today fundamentally misses the same
objective.
The goal here is to strengthen Social Security. The head of the
General Accountability Office, when testifying in front of the
Committee on Ways and Means, said the President's plan on privatization
would actually exacerbate the issue of Social Security's solvency. The
goal is not to change Social Security. The goal is not to exacerbate
its solvency. The goal is to strengthen Social Security.
That is why the first order of business is return the $650 billion.
Both the President's past ideas and the plans talked about today would
exacerbate the problem of Social Security solvency.
What we should deal with is the shortage of savings in this country,
by the fact that Americans are stretched thin, they do not have the
capability to save for their retirement because they are meeting their
housing needs, their educational needs, their health care needs that
are becoming more and more stressful on the paycheck, to get them from
the 1st of the month to the 31st of the month.
There are ideas that exist out there. As I told you, 80 percent of
all small business employees have no plan outside of Social Security.
Social Security is their retirement plan. In 40 percent of all
households in America, Social Security is the only retirement they can
rely on, and I will tell you this as a Member of Congress, who
represents people in the airline industry, specifically United
Airlines, after what happened to their retirement plans that they saved
for, one thing I can tell you about that is the United Airlines
employees are happy Social Security is there. They like the security
that comes with Social Security.
The ideas that we as Democrats have offered, let me run through them
quickly, Mr. Speaker, if I can: automatic enrollment in 401(k)s for all
Americans; direct deposit of tax refunds into personal savings
accounts; a government match for the first $2,000 you save, matching it
50 percent; a universal 401(k) to simplify the 16 different savings
plans that exist on the Tax Code.
Mr. Speaker, the American people are not fools. They rejected the
President's privatization of Social Security. They will reject this
half-baked plan. To put it simply, people like the security that comes
with Social Security.
____________________