[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 120 (Thursday, September 22, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10379-S10380]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. SANTORUM (for himself and Mr. DeMint):
  S. 1750. A bill to-provide for the issuance of certificates to Social 
Security beneficiaries who are born before 1950 guaranteeing their 
right to receive Social Security benefits under title II of the Social 
Security Act in full with an accurate annual cost-of-living adjustment; 
to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I rise today to talk about a bill I am 
introducing called the Social Security Guarantee Act. The reason I am 
introducing this piece of legislation is in an attempt to try, at a 
time when it looks like the Social Security issue here in Congress has 
ground down to almost a halt--although I think there is still an 
opportunity; as we hear, the House may pass something to move the ball 
forward--I want to put forth an idea I think would be helpful as 
something we can get done that should have, I hope, bipartisan support 
and would create a sense of security and certainly reduce

[[Page S10380]]

anxiety among those at or near retirement with respect to any future 
changes to Social Security.
  The Social Security Guarantee Act is a very simple concept. It says 
if you were born before 1950, this law now creates a right for you to 
the benefits that you have been promised.
  Now, you may say: Why is that a new thing? Well, believe it or not, 
there is a Supreme Court case on this point that says Social Security 
recipients have no right to the benefits they have been promised under 
the law. This would create such a right for people born before 1950.
  Now, why do I pick out 1950? Because in all the legislation that has 
been introduced in the Congress, the statements made by the President, 
and even statements made by my colleagues on the other side of the 
aisle, we have all agreed that people who are at or near retirement 
should not be subject to change, for a couple of reasons, not the least 
of which is there is money there to pay those benefits. Cashflow-wise, 
there will be enough money to pay for the benefits for our seniors and 
those who are near retirement or near the eligible age of 62. So there 
is not a need to change the Social Security system for these 
individuals. Therefore, everyone who is proposing changes to the 
system, to save it and strengthen it for the future, has set them aside 
verbally and said: We are not going to propose anything that is going 
to affect your benefits if you were born before 1950.
  Well, if we are going to say that, and promise that, then I think a 
step forward--both in terms of our ability to find a solution to the 
problem for younger workers and the fact that Social Security will not 
have sufficient resources to pay for benefits in the future--we take a 
step forward if we promise to put in law a guarantee that older 
workers' and retirees' benefits are guaranteed by the law.
  The second benefit is one that is political in this sense, in that 
one of the difficulties in trying to rally support in the public for a 
program that will save and strengthen Social Security for younger 
workers is the anxiety that older workers have and retirees have that 
somehow or other, at the last minute, they will be folded into this 
bill and somehow their benefits will be affected or their taxes will be 
increased.
  This should provide a level of comfort and reduce that anxiety and 
create a proper focus for reform, the proper focus for reform being the 
future, not the present, not the past.
  So I put this forward as an admittedly minimalist step, but I think 
an important one, that creates a better atmosphere where there are not 
political accusations of trying to take someone's Social Security check 
away or that grandma's check be cut in half, or whatever the case may 
be. You hear all these things from those who do not want to make any 
kind of changes to the Social Security system for younger workers. So 
they go out and try to scare older workers and retirees.
  I might add, another reason to do this is, it would not be fair at 
this point to reduce their benefits or to change the structure when 
they are either in the system or very close to being in Social 
Security.
  So this is a step on which I would hope we could get bipartisan 
agreement, that we could pass this by unanimous consent. I do not know 
of anybody in this Chamber who has made the statement that they think 
we should change benefits for current retirees, or that we should 
change benefits for folks who are near retirement. That being the case, 
I see no reason we would not pass this and, in a sense, take those born 
before 1950 and say: OK, you are off the table. No Social Security 
changes are going to affect you. Your interest in the Social Security 
debate then becomes the future, not you. It becomes your children, your 
grandchildren, their children, their grandchildren, not how it affects 
you and your life today.
  I think that is a helpful step in the right direction, to try to get 
something that is appropriate, a stronger Social Security system, that 
is appropriately designed for future generations of Americans.
  I am pleased Senator DeMint has joined me in this legislation. I 
certainly put out a call for all those who are interested in trying to 
take a small step forward in moving the Social Security agenda to join 
me in securing the benefits for our seniors, removing the anxiety that 
often comes, particularly with those who live from Social Security 
check to Social Security check, removing the anxiety that they have 
about the potential for their benefits to be affected by any changes 
Congress would make. This would create a vote, which I suspect would be 
unanimous, that would put every Senator on record for putting in the 
law that they will not change the Social Security benefits for those 
who were born before 1950. That has a powerful effect when a Member 
votes that way. It makes it very difficult for them to come back and 
say: I am going to change my mind.
  It is a meaningful piece of legislation. It is a step in the right 
direction. It does remove the anxiety which is a positive thing for our 
seniors. It creates a platform for us to build into the future a 
stronger Social Security system. I am hopeful that in the next couple 
of months, if not early next year, that we can get a vote on this; that 
we can have unanimous consent to bring it up and to pass it and to get 
a strong vote from every Member of the Senate that Social Security 
reform programs put forward in the Senate to save and strengthen the 
Social Security system will be all about the future, will be all about 
younger workers and how we make the system stable for them without 
using scare tactics about how it is going to affect older workers who 
are, in most cases, the most vulnerable citizens in our society.
                                 ______