[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 133 (Friday, September 9, 2011)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1586]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             STATEMENT ON SOCIAL SECURITY FROM JOHN BURTON

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. GEORGE MILLER

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                       Friday, September 9, 2011

  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker. I commend to my 
colleagues' attention the following statement on the debate over Social 
Security from John Burton, our former colleague here in the House, the 
former president of the California State Senate, and the current chair 
of the California Democratic Party. John has a long and distinguished 
career in standing up for the economic interests of the middle class 
and the long-term strength of the American economy.

                  No Social Security Cuts on the Table

                            (By John Burton)

     Chair, California Democratic Party
     Member of Congress 1975-1982
     California State Assemblyman 1998-1994
     California State Senate President 1998-2004

       There has been a lot of pressure from Republicans, the 
     Chamber of Commerce, and newspaper editorials to put 
     everything on the table, including Social Security, in order 
     to deal with the federal deficit. That is a load of baloney.
       No way in the world should Social Security be put on the 
     table to deal with the deficit. One thing should be 
     abundantly clear--Social Security has nothing to do with the 
     current budget deficit or any budget deficit for that matter. 
     It is a self-funding program that pays for itself. The 
     program has actually lent the government money by purchasing 
     U.S. Treasury notes and bonds.
       Furthermore, Social Security, as a separate trust fund, was 
     never included in the U.S. budget until President Lyndon 
     Johnson decided to include it to demonstrate that domestic 
     spending had increased even though our military spending went 
     up during the Vietnam War.
       The social security system is in sound fiscal shape. It has 
     a surplus that will be present until 2037. There is a great 
     deal of fuss about the fact that benefits paid out of the 
     program would exceed the Social Security tax revenue and the 
     fund has to be tapped to make the difference. That is exactly 
     how the social security trust fund is supposed to work. 
     That's why Congress created it. The bonds in the trust fund 
     earn interest. Therefore the total value of the fund will 
     continue to grow after that day. If nothing else changes, the 
     total payout benefit will not exceed tax revenue plus 
     interest on the bonds until 2024.
       Some claim that the trust fund has constantly been looted. 
     Now it is little more than a pile of worthless paper. They 
     are not telling the truth. That paper is in fact a pile of 
     U.S. Treasury bonds, even now considered to be the safest 
     investment in the world. Under the law, the federal 
     government is obligated to pay the bonds held by the trust 
     fund, just as it has to pay interests on other government 
     bonds. The thought that the government would default on its 
     bonds owed to the social security trust fund is a pipe dream.
       If there are perceived future problems with the Social 
     Security system, that is a separate issue unrelated to the 
     ``deficit crisis'' and could be solved in an orderly manner. 
     A point of fact is that if the government pays what it owes 
     the fund, it will be solvent for another 26 years.
       If the Social Security issue is ``to be dealt with,'' the 
     easy solution is to raise the payroll tax ceiling, which is 
     now around $107,000. When the ceiling was set, it was assumed 
     that payroll tax would cover 90% of all wages. When the 
     ceiling was set in 1983, the top 1% of Americans received 
     11.6% of total income. Today that 1% takes in more than 20% 
     of the total income. If the formula pushes it back up to 90% 
     of all wages envisioned in the 1983 legislation, the ceiling 
     would rise to $180,000. The long-term social security problem 
     would be solved.
       In the meantime, the fund is safe and solvent through four 
     presidential elections. It is solvent for twelve more years, 
     if not twenty-six more years before there are any problems.

                          ____________________