[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 16]
[Senate]
[Pages 23551-23552]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                       PROTECTING SOCIAL SECURITY

  Mr. ASHCROFT. Mr. President, I will try to say what I have to say in 
less than 10 minutes, especially because of my regard for my esteemed 
colleague from the State of Connecticut, who I see has entered the 
Chamber.
  I appreciate the intensity and commitment of the Senator from 
Nebraska. He is correct; we do not have on the drawing board a long-
term remediation for the long-term problems of Social Security. But if 
we just spend and spend and spend so we continue to elevate the debt of 
the United States rather than curtail the spending by not spending the 
Social Security surplus, we are going to make it more difficult, when 
the time comes, to pay for the Social Security benefits for which we 
are committed to pay.
  So I think it is important not to spend Social Security surpluses to 
expand Government and to make Government more and more committed and 
deeper and deeper in debt. It is a major benefit to the future of this 
country if we decide to refrain from spending Social Security 
surpluses, which will allow us to protect the integrity, not only of 
Social Security, on a more persistent basis, but certainly to protect 
the integrity of the finances of this Government so when the time comes 
for us to make payments, we will have the fiscal integrity to do so.
  I know we are in morning business, but particularly today I rise to 
comment on and to support the Nickles amendment to the Labor-HHS 
appropriations bill. I support the amendment because it puts the Senate 
on record demanding we protect the Social Security trust fund from 
being raided to pay for other Government spending. The less we go into 
debt for other Government spending, the more likely we are to be able 
to honor the claims of Social Security.

[[Page 23552]]

  So the theft of Social Security funds this year must stop. We should 
stop spending as if Social Security were a funding resource for all 
kinds of other spending programs. I am concerned the Labor-HHS bill 
will result in the Senate's completion of all 13 appropriations bills 
and, as a result, perhaps take us into the Social Security trust fund.
  Some estimates have been as high as $5 billion. I would work to delay 
the bill if I did not have assurances from the majority leader that the 
conference reports will not touch the Social Security surplus, even if 
Senate appropriations have, that the entirety of the package of bills 
we send to the President after negotiation with the House will not 
touch the Social Security trust fund.
  The majority leader has worked tirelessly to protect the Social 
Security trust fund. I commend him for it, and I appreciate his ongoing 
effort.
  Furthermore, the Congressional Budget Office has stated in a letter 
to Speaker Hastert that the House plan to spend $592.1 billion will not 
touch the Social Security trust fund.
  If we do dip into the Social Security trust fund this year, it would 
erase all the hard work we have undertaken to protect Social Security.
  In January, President Clinton proposed bleeding $158 billion out of 
Social Security surpluses over the next 5 years. This Congress objected 
to President Clinton's proposal, and I am glad to say that the Congress 
got the President to change his mind and to take far less out of the 
Social Security surpluses over that 5-year period of time. I wish I 
could say that he had agreed to take none, and sometimes he represents 
it that way.
  In the President's midsession review of the budget process, he said 
that Social Security surpluses should be spent for Social Security, 
period. That is right. That is the Social Security lockbox philosophy. 
Unfortunately, his new budget still took $30 billion out of Social 
Security over the next 10 years, but that is a lot better than $158 
billion. I commend the President for moving so aggressively in the 
direction of the Congress.
  Still the President's midsession review, while it is a vast 
improvement, and Congress has succeeded in moving him as far as he has 
moved, it is not far enough. We need to work throughout this year to 
demonstrate our commitment to protect every single penny of the Social 
Security trust fund.
  In April, we passed a budget resolution that does not spend 1 dime or 
1 cent of the Social Security trust fund surplus. In addition to 
protecting the Social Security surplus, the budget resolution sticks to 
the spending caps from the 1997 balanced budget agreement. It cuts 
taxes and increases spending on education and defense.
  In addition to ordering our spending priorities correctly, the budget 
resolution contained a majority point of order preventing the use of 
Social Security surpluses for non-Social Security purposes. The Senate 
voted unanimously in favor of this point of order. I had the privilege 
of sponsoring this particular provision, and since that point, the 
Congress has continued along its responsible spending path and has also 
repeatedly demonstrated its commitment to the Social Security lockbox 
concept, which is to limit Government spending to the revenues designed 
for Government spending, and not to have general Government spending 
come out of the revenues designed to provide for the retirements of 
America's workers.
  The House of Representatives passed the Herger bill which created a 
supermajority point of order of protecting Social Security.
  These actions demonstrate a strong commitment and dedication to 
protecting every dollar of the projected Social Security surplus to 
shoring up Social Security, making sure we treat it with integrity.
  In addition, a majority of Senators have repeatedly voted for the 
Abraham-Domenici-Ashcroft Social Security lockbox provision. 
Unfortunately, the lockbox, which was approved by the House, has been 
endorsed by the President, and a majority of the Senate has been held 
hostage in the Senate by those on the other side of the aisle.
  Despite this setback, we have made great progress in protecting 
Social Security, the integrity of the fund, and limiting the kind of 
spending that would jeopardize our capacity to make good on our 
commitments at some date when Social Security needs to call upon us.
  The most important thing we can do right now is demonstrate our 
commitment to protecting every cent of Social Security resources to 
make sure they are available for Social Security and to make sure they 
are not spent on the operations of Government generally. This is a plan 
that we have agreed to under the budget resolution. We promised the 
American people that Social Security surpluses will be reserved for 
Social Security, and now is the time when we are testing that resolve.
  Last year, when faced with this test, Congress failed, agreeing to an 
omnibus appropriations bill that raided--and I think that is the right 
word--$21 billion from our retirement security fund. I voted against 
the bill but was unable to prevent the raid by doing so.
  This year, we have all been committed to completing all our spending 
bills on time and avoiding the omnibus spending train wreck such as we 
saw in last year's $21 billion raid.
  I approve of this plan, but a necessary element of the plan is that 
Congress not spend resources on operating Government that were destined 
to and designed to support the Social Security trust fund.
  The Nickles amendment would put us on record stating we categorically 
oppose a raid on our retirement system and will support spending cuts 
to let us meet that goal. As I said, according to unofficial Budget 
Committee estimates, the Congress is now poised to spend as much as $5 
billion out of the Social Security trust fund. If that is the case, I 
will vote against any plan that would do so. We must avoid filching 
resources from the Social Security trust fund to support the operations 
of Government.
  This spending bill, the Labor-HHS fiscal year 2000 appropriations 
bill, is the last of the 13 appropriations bills to reach the floor. It 
is also the largest of the nondefense discretionary appropriations 
bills. If the estimates about this year's spending that I have referred 
to are correct, we are going to dip into Social Security, and this is 
the bill that will push us over the edge. For this reason, I commend 
Senator Nickles for bringing up this amendment on this bill at this 
time.
  Now is the time for us to stand up and say we will not support taking 
any money out of the Social Security trust fund to finance the 
operations of Government. Making sure that Social Security funds do not 
go for anything other than Social Security is essential to the 
protection of long-term Social Security integrity.
  Social Security is expected to meet all of its obligations until the 
year 2034--until then. Starting in 2014, however, Social Security will 
begin spending more than it collects. It will begin spending the trust 
fund, the surpluses. By saving Social Security surpluses and using 
those surpluses to pay down the debt, Congress will ensure the Nation 
is on secure economic footing when Social Security surpluses diminish 
and then disappear. If we do not save Social Security now, it will make 
it that much harder for us to meet our own obligations later.
  We need to protect Social Security now for the 1 million Missourians 
who receive Social Security, for their children, and their 
grandchildren. We need to protect Social Security now, and this bill 
fails to do that. It certainly threatens not to do it, and it is time 
for us to vote in favor of the Nickles amendment, and to vote against 
any plan that would invade the Social Security trust fund.
  It is for this reason I urge my colleagues to support the Nickles 
amendment calling for the full protection of our Social Security 
resources.
  I thank the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. I thank the Chair.




                          ____________________