[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Pages 8352-8359]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 MOTHER'S DAY: A TIME TO REFLECT ON THE IMPACT OF SOCIAL SECURITY AND 
                       MEDICARE ON AMERICAN WOMEN

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Sweeney). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 6, 1999, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. 
Millender-McDonald) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the 
minority leader.
  Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, as we embark upon Mother's Day 
this coming Sunday, distinguished women of the House thought it was 
really fitting to come and talk again on women and Social Security and 
Medicare and how these two critical issues will impact women leading 
into the 21st century. I have gathered with me tonight a distinguished 
core of women of the House to speak on these critical issues.
  As the Co-Vice Chair of the Women's Caucus, I think it is vitally 
important that we ensure retirement security for women as we work to 
strengthen Social Security and Medicare.
  Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the two women 
who have been in the forefront on these issues, the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) and the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. 
Thurman). Each will speak to these issues as we progress tonight.
  Social Security has played a very vital role in ensuring financial 
security for most elderly women; however, there are still far too many 
elderly women living in poverty. In our work here in the House to 
establish a better and more secure retirement system, we must not 
exacerbate this situation but rather do all we can to resolve the 
discrepancy now and for all future generations.
  Mr. Speaker, tonight is the night for women to speak to the two 
issues and to voice their concerns from their constituents in their 
respective states. So I will call on them tonight as they come to speak 
to this issue as we embark upon Mother's Day this coming Sunday.
  I have tonight the great gentlewoman from the State of Florida (Mrs. 
Meek), who will speak to this issue as she relates to it in the State 
of Florida.
  Mrs. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank very much the gentlewoman 
from California (Ms. Millender-McDonald) my colleague, friend, and 
sister who is the Co-Vice Chairman of the Women's Caucus for yielding 
me this time, and acknowledge my associates in the Women's Caucus.
  Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to be a member of the Women's Caucus. 
It gives me a special chance to come before this body and talk about 
not only the contributions of women, but the issues and concerns of all 
women. Therefore, being a Member of Congress gives us a special 
platform where we can say to the Nation that as women we do have 
special concerns and special problems that this Congress should 
address.
  Mr. Speaker, our government has a Social Security system. It is 
affecting women and it affects them in terms of their security and 
their retirement. But the truth is Social Security provides benefits on 
a gender-neutral basis. Benefits are based on an individual's earning 
record, employment history, and family composition.
  Mr. Speaker, I am an older woman so I do know the benefits of Social 
Security and the benefits of retirement. I am not so sure the younger 
women who are in here tonight will be able to benefit from the Social 
Security system as I have. Hopefully, they shall. If it is up to this 
Women's Caucus, the women will get a chance to benefit.
  Thus, while women tend to collect benefits over a longer period than 
men do because we live longer, our life expectancy is longer, women on 
an average have lower monthly Social Security benefits since they have 
lower earnings, more frequent breaks in employment because of our 
childbearing years, and we are more likely to be widowed or unmarried 
in retirement.
  This occurs despite Social Security's inclusion of certain safety net 
provisions that generally narrow the gap in benefits between men and 
women. Some of the Social Security reform options currently being 
contemplated will change or eliminate the social adequacy components of 
the program, thus disproportionately affecting women relative to men.
  It is important to note that women are generally paid less than men 
and women are more likely than men to leave the workforce. Our 
government must do everything possible to preserve Social Security. 
That is why the Women's Caucus is focusing on this.

[[Page 8353]]

And it is very fitting. It is near Mother's Day. It is our day coming 
up.
  We know that Social Security is perhaps the most important and the 
most successful antipoverty program ever adopted. Without Social 
Security, over 50 percent of the elderly would be in poverty. Social 
Security is a major source of income for 65 percent of beneficiaries 
over age 65.
  Mr. Speaker, it is sort of important that we stress the many good 
benefits of Social Security. We are not saying that the Social Security 
system is the best in the world and it is the only thing and it cannot 
be improved on. The Women's Caucus is not saying that. They are saying 
to take a look at it to be sure that it does what it purports to do and 
it continues to keep women out of poverty.
  The problem many times in Social Security is worse for minority women 
because of our earnings over the years, and we are much poorer than 
white women, particularly white women age 65 years of age or older. As 
a Member of the Women's Caucus, particularly one over the years that 
has stressed older women, I ask my dear colleagues to consider the 
unique issues of women: Lower earnings, longer life spans, shorter work 
histories, greater dependency on spouses, divorce, and outliving their 
spouse. The current Social Security system contains provisions that 
mitigate but do not eliminate these concerns.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the women in the caucus and I want to 
thank our cochair, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Millender-
McDonald) for putting together this special order so they we could come 
tonight near Mother's Day in this fitting time and say that we want to 
help America understand that the unique issues of women should be 
carefully studied because women are extremely important to this 
country.
  Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from 
Florida (Mrs. Meek) for her comments. Now we will hear from the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney) and our cochair.
  Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank my dear friend and 
colleague, the gentlewoman from California, for organizing this special 
order and calling attention to the plight of older women as we approach 
Mother's Day this weekend. I also thank the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) for working on putting this special order 
together.
  Social Security is tremendously important to all Americans, but 
particularly to women. Many women come to rely heavily on the Social 
Security system when they retire for a number of reasons. First of all, 
women earn less than men. For every dollar men earn, women earn 74 
cents, which translates into lower Social Security benefits. I remember 
when I began working, it was 52 cents to the dollar. We got a raise. We 
are now at 74 cents to the dollar, but it is still terribly unfair and 
our Social Security benefits in our elderly years reflect this 
unfairness.
  In fact, women earn an average of $250,000 less per lifetime than 
men. Considerably less to save or invest for retirement. Therefore, 
they rely more on Social Security.
  Women are half as likely than men to receive a pension. Twenty 
percent of women versus 47 percent of men over age 65 receive pensions. 
Further, the average pension income for older women is $2,682 annually 
compared to $5,731 for men.
  Women do not spend as much time in the workforce as men. In 1996, 74 
percent of men between the ages of 25 and 44 were fully employed full-
time compared to 49 percent of women in that same age group. Women 
spend more time out of the paid workforce than do men in order to raise 
their families and to take care of their aging parents.
  Women live longer than men by an average of 7 years. Social Security 
benefits are the only source of income for many elderly women. Twenty-
five percent of unmarried women, widowed, divorced separated or never 
married rely on Social Security benefits as their only source of 
income. Not only will these women find themselves widowed, they are 
likely to be poor.
  A recent report by the General Accounting Office showed that 80 
percent of women living in poverty were not poor before their husbands 
died. The ``feminization'' of poverty is another reason why Social 
Security must be there for our senior citizens, particularly women in 
their elderly years.
  The financial outlook for elderly women is pretty grim. The poverty 
rate among elderly woman would be much higher if they did not have 
Social Security benefits. In 1997, the poverty rate among elderly women 
was 13.1 percent. Without Social Security benefits, it would have been 
52.3 percent. For elderly men, the poverty rate is much lower at 7 
percent. If men did not have Social Security benefits, the poverty 
level among them would increase to 40.7 percent.
  Social Security's family protection provisions help women the most. 
Social Security provides guaranteed inflation protected lifetime 
benefits for widows, divorced women, and the wives of retired workers. 
Sixty-three percent of female Social Security beneficiaries aged 65 and 
over receive benefits based on their husband's earning records, while 
only 1.2 percent of male beneficiaries receive benefits based on their 
wives' earning records. These benefits offset the wage disparity 
between men and women.
  As we move forward with reform of our Nation's Social Security 
system, we must remember that women face special challenges. It is my 
hope that many of the contributing economic factors, particularly pay 
inequity, will soon be eliminated. In the meantime, Congress must take 
the economic well-being and security of women into account when 
discussing reform. Women clearly are at a disadvantage when facing 
retirement and poor elderly women have the most at stake in the Social 
Security debate. Any reform that is enacted must keep the safety net 
intact. Our mothers, our daughters and our granddaughters are counting 
on us.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to put into the Record a story, a story 
about the life of one of my constituents. Her many years of work, the 
many things that she did in her life, and how much she now depends on 
Social Security for a safety net in her own life.
  Mr. Speaker, I join my colleagues in calling upon Congress on both 
sides of the aisle to be very cautious in the reforms in Social 
Security to make sure that this safety net for men and women continues.
  I am glad to be here tonight to remind my colleagues that it is 
critical that we take the different circumstances of women into account 
as the 106th Congress considers proposals to reform the current Social 
Security system.
  Lucy Thomas' story illustrates many of the key issues.
  Mrs. Thomas is 83 years old. She worked for 35 years as a waitress, 
earning less than minimum wage. At the same time, she reared two 
daughters, and cared for both her father as he became increasingly 
disabled with rheumatoid arthritis, and for her grandmother, a farm 
woman who had virtually no income. She now depends solely on Social 
Security--$650 a month. At age 71, she moved in with her daughter, 
Marilyn, because she could no longer work outside the home to 
supplement her Social Security income.
  As a waitress and a bartender, Thomas and her husband barely made 
enough money to pay for their daily living expenses. Mrs. Thomas does 
not have a pension, nor does she have income-generating savings. Her 
current income consists of about $8,000 a year from Social Security. 
She is one of the nation's elderly poor. Of that amount, $1,600 is used 
for secondary health coverage. Last year she paid an additional $1,000 
in medical costs and another $1,400 for a hearing aid. In the fall, a 
bout with stomach ulcers forced her to pay over $200 for prescription 
drugs. Her daughter purchased most of her clothing and paid for her 
room and board for the past 12 years. Social Security is a real factor 
in her ability to survive with some dignity in her old age.
  Mrs. Thomas' story is not unique. Many women come to rely heavily on 
the Social Security System when they retire, for a number of reasons.
  Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney) the distinguished cochair of 
the Women's Caucus, for her comments tonight.
  Mr. Speaker, indeed America's older women do depend upon Social 
Security

[[Page 8354]]

and Medicare for their security and their well-being. We have now 
another distinguished Member of the House who we will hear from as she 
voices her concerns for the women of North Carolina, the gentlewoman 
from North Carolina (Mrs. Clayton).
  Mrs. CLAYTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commend my colleagues, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Millender-McDonald) and the 
gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) for having this special 
order, and the leadership of the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. 
Maloney) as the President of the Women's Caucus. Indeed they will bring 
the awareness to an issue that should be given and be a major concern 
to all women, because it is of economic value to us.
  Mr. Speaker, Social Security provides an important base for the 
economic security of American women. Women represent 60 percent of all 
Social Security recipients. Today, the Committee on the Budget in their 
task force hearing shared with us that women actually receive 53 
percent of all the benefits because, in fact, we live longer and how 
the Social Security progressivity is structured so that women who earn 
lower wages actually get a greater benefit because it is designed to be 
that kind of bridge.

                              {time}  2100

  However, because women live longer on average than men, they 
represent 70 percent of Social Security recipients after the age of 85. 
Unmarried women, including widows aged 65 and older, receive just about 
half of their total income from Social Security. So, indeed, Social 
Security is very, very important, but it is also the survivor's safety 
net for a large number of women who are on Social Security.
  Women also have a different work pattern. Many of them work part-
time. Some of them, indeed, do not work at all for a period of time. 
Nearly three-fourths of 4 million older poor persons in this Nation are 
women, and older women are twice as likely as older men to be poor.
  In 1996, older Caucasian women had a median personal income of 
$9,990, while older black women's median income was $7,110, and older 
Hispanic women's median income was $6,372. One-fifth of older black 
women received less than $5,000, and nearly three-fourths had an annual 
personal income under $10,000 in that same year.
  Women are also more likely to work part time and take out time from 
the work force. Therefore, they do not build up as much investment in 
Social Security. In fact, women are more likely to be out of the work 
force an average of 11.5 years to raise their children or to attend to 
ailing relatives.
  Social Security has been a tremendous success in reducing the number 
of women in poverty since 1940. Now, this is not to say Social Security 
does not have problems, but it is to recognize that Social Security has 
been a safety net for women. And as we reform Social Security, we 
certainly need to make sure that the structure that aids in securing 
women, and particularly those women who are disadvantaged by receiving 
less money and disadvantaged by not being in the work force, are, 
indeed, protected.
  Again, as I referred to the hearing in the Committee on the Budget 
today, there are several proposals out there, some looking to the 
private sector, some providing some transitional costs, talking about 
consumer taxes, and we need to make sure that those transitional costs 
are taken into account both for women with disabilities as well as 
those who are indeed at the end of the lower economic ladder.
  Again, as we have this special order we want to bring to everyone's 
attention the value Social Security has been to women; and as we reform 
Social Security we want to urge those individuals looking at the 
various options to certainly understand that we should not have any 
less protection for women who have depended on this safety net being 
there. And, indeed, Social Security has been the one program that has 
worked for all Americans but particularly for women.
  I want to commend, Mr. Speaker, again the Women's Caucus for bringing 
this issue and allowing us to bring to the Nation's attention how 
important Social Security is to the economic vitality of all women in 
this country.
  Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman.
  A woman who has kept the focus on women as it relates to Social 
Security is a former co-chair herself. I would like to now yield to the 
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Eleanor Holmes Norton).
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from California for 
her leadership; and I commend her and the gentlewoman from Connecticut 
for their work in organizing this special order to draw attention to 
the various special needs of women in Social Security.
  We are told that there may well be no Social Security reform this 
year. I would regret that, though I want to go on record to say that it 
is certainly not true that Social Security is going bankrupt. We really 
do have more than a quarter of a century before that. Nevertheless, it 
certainly would be better if we could get a bipartisan consensus this 
session.
  Let me say that I would rather see nothing, however, than see a new 
model based on some of the ideas that have come from the majority on 
Social Security. We do not need a new model for Social Security. We 
need a revitalized model.
  The reason we do not need a new model is because the present model is 
a feminized model. It is literally organized around the needs of women, 
around longer lives, around those with lesser earnings, and, if I may 
say so, around housewives. In particular, the notions for personal 
savings accounts do not take into account this feminized model.
  Most of the time when we talk about Social Security reform, we have 
reference to the elderly. I want to talk for my few minutes not about 
the elderly but about women whose Social Security is most endangered, 
because we are talking about Social Security in 2030, not Social 
Security in the year 2000.
  Older women have been grandfathered in. Neither the Republican 
majority or anybody else in his right mind would dare touch Social 
Security today. They would not dare recommend personal savings accounts 
for Social Security today, not when 53 percent of those receiving 
Social Security would be at the poverty line without it; not when it is 
a major source for two-thirds of today's beneficiaries.
  I want to focus on the baby boomers and the younger women whose 
earnings today translate into pensions or Social Security tomorrow. 
Those are the women who are not secure.
  The last time women Members came to the floor to talk about Social 
Security, I spoke from my past work as chair of the Equal Employment 
Opportunity Commission, because it is from that work that I learned to 
focus on women's earnings. It is by focusing on women's earnings today 
that we have any idea of their pensions or their Social Security 
tomorrow. Only by looking at younger women in particular can we 
evaluate the notion of personal savings accounts.
  I want to be clear that we should all be saving, and we should be 
doing more in this Congress to encourage more saving: 401(k)s, IRAs, 
IRAs for homemakers. There is ever so much more we must do to encourage 
savings. And, indeed, savings in the United States is going down, and 
that is itself very serious. But the focus on earnings now is how we 
figure what workers will have tomorrow.
  Let us look at women. Women today earn $24,000, the average woman, 
year-round worker, $24,973. For a man, it is almost $10,000 more, 
$33,674. What does a woman who earns less than $25,000 have to put into 
a personal savings account? Something, I hope, but I guarantee it is 
too little. Social Security, as we know it, needs to be there for that 
woman. She cannot afford to put all of her eggs in a personal savings 
account basket.
  No matter how we look at earnings, we draw the same conclusion. The 
progressive Social Security model now in place must be there especially 
for women.

[[Page 8355]]

  First, for the large number of women with no earnings, what are they 
supposed to do with a personal savings account? Look at who they are. 
There are only 7 percent of men who spend time out of the work force; 
21 percent of women spend time out of the work force. Look at part 
time. Seventy-four percent of men work full time; only 49 percent of 
women work full time. What are they going to put in personal savings 
accounts? What will their Social Security look like, for that matter?
  That is why it has to be progressive, because they will have too 
little earnings in even to get out enough of Social Security unless we 
have the present system which benefits low earners.
  Look at the labor force participation: 73 percent of men in the labor 
force, 63 percent of women. This translates into no pensions or 
pensions that are too small, and it certainly leaves very little for 
personal savings accounts.
  Personal savings accounts are not progressive. They go with the 
market, not with need. I am with the market. I am in the market. I want 
more women to be in the market. But I would not want my future, if I 
earned under $25,000 a year, to lie with the market.
  By all means, go into mutual savings. But women cannot afford to 
leave Social Security as we know it today behind.
  The Republican majority would attribute the difference in wages 
between men and women to the fact that women are out of the work force 
more than men, and they tell us that all the time when we complain 
about women's wages. That is true, but not entirely. And there is a 
debate between us as to what accounts for that gap.
  But let us assume for the moment that they are indeed correct, for 
purposes of argument, that the difference is because women spend more 
time out of the work force; and may I ask them to please carry that 
thinking over to the needs of women into old age. If they spend less 
time in the work force, they should be subject to less risk when it 
comes time for old age.
  What will housewives contribute to personal savings accounts? What 
will part-time workers contribute to personal savings accounts? What 
will mothers who go into the work force later, who took time out, 
contribute to personal savings accounts? Where are the family values 
when it comes to security for today's young mothers?
  I am not talking about my mother. Her Social Security is intact, and 
I think mine will be. But what about my daughters? That is who we must 
concentrate on now. What about the young mothers who are staying at 
home? And there are more of them because of the absence of a child care 
system, and many more are going back home rather than go where they 
would like to go, to work.
  Retirement becomes and is a burden in the thoughts of these women, 
and we must make it less of a burden by encouraging them to save but 
also by assuring them that Social Security will be there in the 
progressive way that their mothers and grandmothers have known it.
  Young women are most at risk. They are most in doubt. We cannot 
restore confidence in the Social Security System by dismembering it. We 
must look far more closely at the President's plan, where 62 percent of 
the surplus goes to Social Security and 15 percent to Medicare. Then, 
of course, we have a balanced notion of means tested personal savings 
accounts. We encourage savings and help people to save and encourage 
them to save.
  If my colleagues do not like the President's plan, they should draw 
their own plan, but plan it around women who are the Americans who will 
most need the security our country has guaranteed for their mothers, 
for their grandmothers and for their great grandmothers.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from California and the 
gentlewoman from Connecticut for their important work in drawing these 
issues to our continuing attention.
  Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from the 
District of Columbia.
  Mr. Speaker, Medicare and Social Security, as we know, will be two 
very important issues here in 1999. I cannot think of a more deserving 
person to come before us now to talk about these issues as discussion 
intensifies about the ways to strengthen Social Security and Medicare 
for the future for women. She has been in the forefront on these 
issues.
  Certainly we recognize now that Medicare is required to cover 
screenings for osteoporosis and breast cancer. She has been in the 
forefront to make sure that this took place. We have with us now one of 
the leaders of the House, the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. Rosa 
DeLauro), who will come and speak to us on these two very critical 
issues as we broach Mother's Day.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I truly am honored to stand here tonight 
with my colleague from California (Ms. Juanita Millender-McDonald), who 
has taken a leadership role in our Women's Caucus, along with the 
Congresswoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney), who spoke as well this 
evening, in trying to forge a unified coalition on two of the most 
important issues that face this Nation, and that is Medicare and Social 
Security.

                              {time}  2115

  Quite frankly, we cannot talk about one without the other because of 
their importance in terms of what they have done in lifting older 
Americans out of poverty in this country, what they have done to change 
the face of health care for older Americans. They have come to be two 
programs that working families rely on in retirement security. They 
have become, if you will, the twin pillars of retirement security.
  As my other colleagues who have joined on the floor tonight, they too 
understand the effect that the Social Security system and Medicare have 
had on all Americans, and most particularly for tonight's discussion, 
for the stability and the financial well-being of women in their later 
years.
  They also understand the need to protect these programs, to 
strengthen these programs, to view them as successful programs upon 
which we need to build, and to expand so that not only people today who 
are eligible and women today who are eligible for these programs, but 
those in my generation and the generation of my children and their 
children can utilize for their retirement security. That is what is at 
stake.
  I might just say, with regard to Medicare, that what we need to 
continue in that effort is to make sure that, in fact, there are 
defined benefits that people know they can avail themselves of in 
Medicare and that primarily we can build on the Medicare system so 
that, in fact, we can offer some opportunity for some relief on 
prescription drugs.
  I think all of us today who are talking with seniors with regard to 
Medicare and their health benefits would tell us that the single 
biggest difficulty that they have and where they put their health and 
their safety at risk is because they cannot afford prescription drugs 
today, and if we are going to strengthen and protect Medicare, that we 
must not turn it into a voucher program where people are told, ``Here 
is a sum of money, you go out and find it on your own, ferret out a 
program, you are on your own, my friend,'' when what we ought to be 
doing is making sure that this program allows for the benefits to be 
there that they need and for them to be able to purchase and get some 
kind of relief for the costs of prescription drugs.
  Let me turn, if I can for a moment, to Social Security. Because, as I 
have said, it is really our country's success story. More than half of 
the elderly population would live in poverty today in this country were 
it not for Social Security.
  Now, I have an 85-year-old mother and she said to me, ``Rosa, these 
are supposed to be the golden years, but in many instances they turn 
out to be the lead years.'' And what she is doing is expressing the 
frustration, she gives a voice to that frustration that so many elderly 
women feel that in their older years. They face all kinds of obstacles 
to stability and to security, and without Social Security these 
obstacles would be even greater.
  My colleagues have focused tonight on talking about the plight of 
women

[[Page 8356]]

and how, in fact, Social Security does work for women today. And it is 
because they live longer, they are in and out of the work force, they 
make less money, they are often dependents, they rely on a cost-of-
living increase, they rely on a month-to-month lump sum of money which 
they receive.
  Much of that goes away if we follow a program which people are 
talking about today, and that is to get us to privatize the Social 
Security system. Those pieces of cost-of-living increases, benefits if 
you are a spouse, getting a month-to-month lump sum, consideration of 
less money earned by women, consideration of their being in and out of 
the work force, all of that is taken into consideration in the Social 
Security program today. That all goes away if we privatize Social 
Security.
  I will speak for just a moment on my State of Connecticut. Social 
Security has lowered the poverty rate among elderly women from 46 
percent to 8 percent. That means over 100,000 women are lifted out of 
poverty by Social Security in my State of Connecticut.
  I want to mention one proposal that is on the table now that has been 
offered by the majority party, by the Republican leadership, and that 
is the Archer-Shaw plan which was promoted last week. I just want to 
say a few words about this plan, and I want to caution people to look 
at it very, very carefully.
  This plan may be cloaked in the rhetoric of reform, but if we take a 
closer look at it, it is a risky scheme that will end Social Security 
and put millions of elderly women and men in jeopardy. We cannot let 
this happen. This is a delayed execution of the Social Security plan.
  Let me just say that that is the goal. But even if the true goal of 
my colleagues or some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle 
was to improve retirement security, this plan does not get it done. It 
is flawed from a policy perspective. It claims to use the budget 
surplus to create individual retirement accounts. These accounts are 
personal in name only.
  The CATO Institute, which is a very conservative organization, has 
talked about this proposal, and Michael Tanner of the Institute told 
the Washington Post last week, and I quote, that ``The individual 
accounts are phoney accounts. They are made up of a tax credit equal to 
2 percent of each person's Social Security taxable wages. It would flip 
Social Security on its head by allocating, if you will, more money and 
resources to the wealthiest in our society.''
  It hurts women particularly. The claim is that the plan would extend 
Social Security further than the President's plan to protect the 
program. They hold up a Social Security actuary report that estimates 
that their plan would keep Social Security solvent for 75 years.
  But, my friends, the devil is in the details. They do not talk about 
the specifics of the program. They hide the fact that ultimately this 
plan eliminates all the surpluses, it forces the Federal Government to 
have to increase taxes, cut spending in necessary programs, such as 
domestic programs that benefit women elsewhere in the budget. They 
evade the fact that if the rate of return on these individual accounts 
drops by just one percentage point, that the whole plan goes up in 
smoke and Social Security will fall short by about 10 percent.
  The long and the short of it, one needs to look at it very carefully 
and very closely. What it attempts to do is deal with, as I talked 
about earlier, privatizing Social Security in the long run, which in 
fact is a detriment to the Social Security program, in my view, in 
general and in particular with regard to women.
  One of the purposes of why we are here tonight is to talk about it, 
is public education. We need to let people know what is at stake and 
that, in fact, when we take a look at some of the schemes that are on 
the table, they are meant to turn Social Security on its head, to 
change the focus and the nature of this program that has meant so much 
in the lives of families today, and our specific topic, for women's 
lives today.
  Again, we cannot afford to let it happen. I know that my colleagues 
are committed not only to speaking on the floor of this House but 
taking this message to the country to start to talk about women and 
Social Security, what it means, what it has meant in the past, what it 
means for the present, and what it means in the future, and that we are 
not going to allow this program, which has meant so much to the 
safeguard of women and the independence of women in their later lives, 
be jeopardized in any way.
  The American public needs to know what is at stake. The American 
women need to know what is at stake. And I am proud to join with my 
colleagues tonight as we begin that program of public education.
  I cannot thank my colleagues enough for letting me participate in 
this effort tonight.
  Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, I cannot thank my colleague 
enough for the leadership that she has provided for us in this House to 
ensure that we have Medicare and Social Security as the top issues for 
women in 1999 and leading into the millennium.
  I would like to echo what she said, because public education is 
important. We must make sure those who are today's citizens in this 
country, more of them are women and the elderly, do not get hooked and 
locked on this privatization of Social Security and Medicare, 
especially Social Security. We must ensure their well-being, their 
safety, their security by not having privatizing and not privatizing 
with these private accounts that is being discussed as we move into the 
discussion of Social Security and Medicare.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to now yield to a person who has been on 
point, who is one of the senior Members of the House, and she has just 
done a yeoman's job in talking about the unique effects that this 
proposal, Social Security and Medicare, will have on women. The 
distinguished gentlewoman from the State of Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) will now 
speak to us on Social Security and Medicare.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Juanita Millender-McDonald) for championing this effort 
this evening and so many of the other initiatives that she has taken as 
a sparkling Member of this House, certainly the cause of women in this 
case, in her role as co-Vice Chair of the Democratic Women's Caucus to 
bring us all to the floor this evening to talk about Social Security, 
Medicare, and women in America.
  I also want to acknowledge the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. Rosa 
DeLauro), the assistant Vice Chair of our caucus, and so many of the 
other women that have joined us this evening, our good friend the 
gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Carrie Meek), the gentlewoman from 
Florida (Mrs. Karen Thurman), the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. 
Eva Clayton), the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn Maloney), and 
it literally goes from coast to coast.
  Without question, Social Security is the lifeboat for a majority of 
seniors in our country and certainly for women. And even with Social 
Security, the poorest people in America today are women over the age of 
80. So even the current program, as critical as it is to families and 
to citizens across our Nation, could be made stronger.
  Certainly for women, we know that in the way that the formulas were 
written in past years they do not always receive as much as men 
because, when they did work, their pay was less. Others this evening 
have talked about women spending more time out of the work force 
raising their children, caring for their families, often caring for 
sick relatives. Women often work in jobs that have no pensions.
  I was amazed to go into a little cookie shop in an airport in Chicago 
a couple years ago and I approached someone who worked there and I 
said, ``How much do you pay?'' And they said, ``Minimum wage.'' And I 
said, ``What are my health benefits?'' They said, ``You would not get 
any of those or retirement. Only management gets that.'' I said, ``I 
guess I would not want to work here.''
  But often one of the young women I was talking to did not know the 
answers to those questions. She had to go

[[Page 8357]]

back and ask the manager back behind the swinging doors. So many women 
who are working do not ask the important question, ``What are my 
pension benefits?''
  We know that most women who have lost their jobs as a result of ill-
fated trade agreements, like NAFTA, lose their pensions as a result 
and, in fact, most of those who have lost their jobs under trade 
agreements like this, because they are minimum wage jobs and entry 
level jobs, are mainly minority women across this country.
  We also know that most women do not begin saving for their retirement 
and they think it will not matter to create a savings account that 
would be a supplementary account to Social Security. And if they do 
have a little savings account or an investment account, they do not 
hold it long enough so that it would grow in a little bit of a larger 
nest egg. I want to say something about that this evening.

                              {time}  2130

  We also know that women who do manage to have a little bit of cash, 
if they have any at all, often do not look at other investments that 
they might make during their working years, for example, in buying a 
home.
  Today, with interest rates the way they are, many, many people, if 
they check it out, this is not just women but people working across 
this country and paying rent, you would be surprised if you really 
looked at all the available programs, through your city, through your 
county, through your locality. You would find you could buy a home 
today cheaper probably than you could rent it. You ought to check that 
out. Because a home can become a very important source of equity. You 
own it. It does not belong to someone else.
  It is very important this evening that all of us participate in this 
session to help educate the American people, and certainly women, about 
retirement planning. It is important if you are applying for a job to 
find out if that employer has a pension plan. Is it just Social 
Security? Or Social Security plus something else, like a 401(k) or an 
individual retirement account. If they do have a retirement account, 
what kind of plan is it? And are you, in fact, participating in that 
plan? Were you asked about it? Did you ask about it?
  You really also, if you are married, need to know what your spouse's 
plan is. I cannot tell you how many women have come to me after the 
death of their husband and they say, ``He didn't check the little 
box.'' That means that my retirement pay from the company, putting 
Social Security aside for the moment, is less. And they, of course, do 
receive lower payments from Social Security on the death of a spouse.
  So it is very important to know what your benefits are. You need to 
know which Social Security benefits you are entitled to. And the Social 
Security Administration will tell you that if you fill out the little 
card, they will be able to tell you how many quarters you have in, what 
your potential benefits might be, and you can get ready for that moment 
ahead of time. One of the biggest mistakes women make is not asking and 
not finding out soon enough.
  Another issue women have to be concerned about, and the American 
Association of Retired Persons recommends these tips for women in 
addition to Social Security, think of your retirement security as a 
necessary expense, and no matter how small your check, take a few 
pennies or dollars out of that every month and put that in a pension 
program that is separate from Social Security, that can augment Social 
Security, which should be your base plan.
  Think about setting up an Individual Retirement Account. Your banker, 
your credit union preferably, your employer can help you do this. But 
make sure that you control that money and that the employer does not 
control that money. Make sure you have a voice in that.
  Also, figure out ways to try to control your spending. Create a 
budget with savings in mind, cut unnecessary expenses and pay credit 
card balances. If you can, think about resoling your shoes rather than 
buying new shoes or moving up or down the hem in your skirt rather than 
buying a new one. There are lots of ways to put a little bit of money 
aside for the future.
  Really, it is a good idea to have a budget. Then you will come close 
to it or perhaps meet it, and you will begin to set up this little 
extra nest egg.
  Whatever you do, invest with inflation in mind. When women tend to 
invest, they do so in very low-yielding assets. They find out that the 
income from those assets in later years really does not cover inflation 
and taxes.
  So I think this evening is very important in helping women to think a 
little bit about planning for retirement. I know when I hold sessions 
in my own district on women and money, it is the most popular session 
that we have. Actually, more people attend that than the sessions we do 
on health. That is because women, though they have tremendous financial 
responsibilities in our schools, we do not always teach how to manage 
personal finances anymore. They used to have courses called home 
economics. Those are sort of outdated now, but we really need to have 
financial planning for all of our citizens, including women. I know 
every woman in this country has the ability to do that.
  So I think my message tonight as a part of this excellent session 
that the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Millender-McDonald) has 
organized along with the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) is 
that Social Security is your base plan, and those of us here will make 
sure that Social Security remains sound as a promise between 
generations. It is an insurance program, a program of promise to the 
Nation.
  If there are seniors listening this evening, do not get high blood 
pressure, do not worry about Social Security. You do not have to 
contribute to any of those groups that make you pay money to say they 
will lobby for you here in Washington. We are your best lobbyists. Use 
us. You pay us through your tax dollars to do your work for you. Save 
those dollars that you are paying all those lobbying groups. Put it in 
an investment account for yourself to augment your Social Security.
  The most important thing you can do to preserve Social Security and 
Medicare is to elect the right people to Congress. You know who they 
are, because they are right at home where you live. You do not have to 
come here to Washington to meet them.
  Then if you have the ability, especially if you are younger or even 
if you are not that young, to set a little bit of extra money aside in 
a special savings account that earns interest, get a little bit of 
advice on that. Talk to some of your friends. Have some sessions where 
you live, in your neighborhood, in your church, in your senior 
retirement building. Start little clubs where you talk about investing 
money and take some of those bingo chips and take some of those little 
earnings that you have from bridge, even if it is a few dollars, and 
think about putting those dollars away and seeing what they will earn. 
Maybe you can do it as a group working with some of your credit union 
advisers, let us say, in your area.
  It is important for you to learn about money. As you learn more, your 
children will learn, your grandchildren will learn, and the best 
teachers in America are our mothers and grandmothers. So they can do a 
lot to help those who are younger than they are to plan for their own 
retirements.
  I really believe you can start saving at a very early age and you can 
start thinking about your future years, whether it is saving for 
education or saving for your retirement.
  I want to compliment the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Millender-
McDonald) for holding this special order this evening. She is doing a 
big favor to all the women and families of our country.
  Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. I thank the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. 
Kaptur) for the outstanding contribution she has made tonight and the 
ongoing leadership and support that she gives to these critical issues.


                             General Leave

  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 
legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on the 
subject of this special order today.

[[Page 8358]]

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Sweeney). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentlewoman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, as we continue to talk about 
both Social Security and Medicare, we know that the faces of Medicare 
are really the faces of women you know. They are your mom, your 
grandma, your wife, your sisters. They might even be the person whom 
you see in the mirror.
  Medicare, being an important issue, is very timely that we speak 
about it today and we talk about this critical issue as it relates to 
women age 65 and older. Women are 58 percent of the people who receive 
Medicare. At the age of 85, that number will rise to 71 percent. At age 
85, women outnumber men in the Medicare program two to one. Women's 
average life expectancy is 6 years longer than men. At every age, women 
are at greater risk of poverty than men.
  There are many gaps in the Medicare program, Mr. Speaker, and there 
are a number of gaps in this program, most notably the absence of 
coverage for prescription drugs and long-term care. Also, in Social 
Security, we know that, on average, women are in the workforce fewer 
years than men and earn less than men, yet women tend to live longer. 
Meanwhile, women's pension benefits are based on such factors as years 
in the workforce and lifetime earnings relative to those of their 
husband.
  Mr. Speaker, we must remember that just 33 percent of women retirees 
65 and older versus 53 percent of retired men at that age receive a 
private pension annuity fund. In fact, in 1994 those were the numbers. 
Women simply cannot rely on other forms of retirement savings to the 
extent to which men can. Women must continue to have a strong, secure 
Social Security and Medicare system that recognizes the need of widows 
and divorced women to receive their spouse's benefits.
  Lastly, any effort to strengthen our retirement system must resolve 
this vast economic chasm that exists between women and men in America.


                    Security, Protection, Safety Net

  Mr. Speaker, tonight Congresswoman DeLauro and I have gathered our 
colleagues to address two critical issues concerning women. As Co-Vice 
Chair of the Women's Caucus, I think it is vitally important that we 
ensure retirement security for women as we work to strengthen Social 
Security and Medicare. Social Security has played a pivotal role in 
ensuring financial security for most elderly women, however there are 
still far too many elderly women living in poverty. In our work to 
establish a better and more secure retirement system, we must not 
exacerbate this situation but rather, do all that we can to resolve the 
discrepanacy now and for all future generations.
  Mr. Speaker, the Social Security rules provide critical income 
security for women. The progressive benefit formula provides 
proportionately higher benefits for low earners than for high earners, 
which is important for women who continually earn less incomes than 
men. In 1997, the median annual earnings year-round for full-time 
workers was approximately $33,000 for men and $24,000 for women, which 
means women are earning 74.1% of the wages men earn.
  For working women in their fifties, who should be earning close to 
their peak salaries, the income differential is equally disturbing. 
These women earned just 63 percent of what men of the same age earned 
in 1996. The entire group of older women have less than three-fifths 
the personal income of older men. In 1996, older women had a median 
personal income of approximately $10,000.
  Providing higher benefits for women through the current Social 
Security system helps compensate for the countless paychecks that are 
at most 73 percent of their male counterparts. Social Security also 
places the necessary emphasis on the value of raising children by 
helping homemakers establish retirement security. For these women, 
Social Security provides a retirement benefit equal to 50 percent of 
their spouses' benefits. For the homemaker who becomes divorced after 
at least 10 years of marriage, Social Security provides a retirement 
benefit based on her former spouse's benefits. In addition, Social 
Security provides widow's benefits equal to 100 percent of her 
husband's benefits for the older woman whose husband dies. Social 
Security survivor's benefits are even provided for younger widows whose 
children receive survivor's benefits while the widow is caring for them 
and not working.
  For all of these reasons: the pay gap, the fact that women live 
longer than men, and the current Social Security benefit rules, is why 
a significant proportion of older unmarried women are solely dependent 
on Social Security. In 1994, 40 percent of unmarried women 65 and older 
who received Social Security depended on it for at least 90 percent of 
their income--and more than one-fifth had no other income. Even more 
alarming, half of older unmarried women of color relied on Social 
Security for 90 percent of their incomes, and for more than one-third 
of these women, Social Security was their only source of income. In 
real terms, this means that most elderly women are living on just 
$10,000 to $12,000 per year. Social Security clearly serves as a vital 
safety net for women who are divorced or become widows.
  As strong as this system is, however, too many women fall through the 
cracks. Nearly three-fourths of the nation's four million who are 
elderly poor are women. Older women are twice as likely as older men to 
be poor. In addition to the consistently lower income women earn per 
year as compared to men, the disparity in other retirement options 
contributes to the feminization of poverty among our elderly women.
  In the Nation's pension system, men benefit significantly more than 
women since most mothers do not have a consistent work history due to 
the time off for raising children. Just 33 percent of women retirees 65 
and older versus 53 percent of retired men that age received a private 
pension annuity in 1994.
  Women simply cannot rely on other forms of retirement savings to the 
extent to which men can. Women must continue to have a strong, secure 
Social Security system that recognizes the need for widows and divorced 
women to receive their spouses' benefits. Any effort to strengthen our 
retirement system must resolve this vast economic chasm that exists 
between women and men in America.
  I would like to thank the women and men of the House who are joining 
us tonight to address women's retirement security.
  Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, the subject, Social Security, is on 
the minds of our constituents. Citizens want to know if there will be a 
system when they need it, and they want to know how the system impacts 
them as individuals, as family members, and as tax payers. They're 
asking good questions that require good answers.
  It is especially encouraging to see the emphasis being given to the 
concerns of women. Comparing women to men, statistics demonstrate that 
women live longer, are paid less, and are more likely to depend on 
Social Security for retirement benefits. All women, whether or not they 
have been in the workforce, need to know how the system works.
  I am pleased to join in supporting you on Tuesday May 4th as you 
discuss ``Women and Social Security/Retirement''. I know that there 
will be information disseminated that I will be able to share at the 
11th District Forum, ``Social Security & You'', which I will host in 
Cleveland on May 22nd.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, recently, leaders of the National Council 
of Women's Organizations came to Washington. Foremost on their agenda 
was the impact of Social Security reform proposals on women.
  These women said ``Don't forget about us.''
  Our nation's social security system has had a successful tradition of 
providing ``assistance'' to our seniors and disabled. However, changes 
in our society's economic and social conditions warrant structural 
revisions.
  Although there is no immediate danger to the system, the threat of 
insolvency has moved us to take action to preserve Social Security for 
the ``baby boom'' generation. As such, this debate is not about whether 
reform is necessary, but what structural revisions would best suit our 
seniors.
  Mr. Speaker, I submit to you today that as we evaluate these 
revisions, I will not forget that Social Security benefits are 
essential to the women of America.
  I will not forget that without Social Security, more than 50% of all 
women over age 65 would be living in poverty today.
  I will not forget that during their most employable years, women earn 
only about 74% of what men are paid.
  And, I will not forget that women are less likely to work full-time 
and more likely to spend time outside the paid labor force while 
raising children. As a result, only 26% of women over age 65 received a 
pension of annuity payment in 1995.
  Our current Social Security benefits structure protects workers with 
lower lifetime earnings--including most women and minority workers. 
Social Security provides an inflation-

[[Page 8359]]

protected benefit that lasts as long as the beneficiary lives. Since 
women tend to live longer than men, they are in greater danger of 
outliving their other sources of retirement income; but it is 
impossible to outlive one's Social Security benefit.
  The current system also provides extra benefits to spouses with low 
lifetime earnings which helps many women, even if they did not work at 
all outside the home.
  Further, Social Security provides benefits to spouses of any age who 
care for children under 16 if the worker (other spouse) is retired, 
becomes disabled, or dies. Women represent 98 percent of recipients 
receiving benefits as spouses with a child in their care.
  In the future, Social Security will continue to be important for 
women. As the labor force participation rates of women rise, women will 
reach retirement with much more substantial earnings histories than in 
the past. Therefore the percentage of women receiving benefits based 
solely on their own earnings history is expected to rise from 37 
percent today to 60 percent in 2060. However, this means that 40 
percent of women will continue to receive benefits based on their 
husband's earnings.
  These aforementioned provisions allow us to claim that our current 
retirement system is equitable and just. Significantly, both financial 
necessity and social justice demand that to maintain this claim, a new 
system must retain minimum, guaranteed benefits and critical 
protections so that women are not penalized for inequity in pay and for 
taking care of the rest of us.
  As Franklin Roosevelt stated: ``* * * [this] law will take care of 
human needs.'' Let's not forget women's needs.
  I urge my colleagues to remember women and support social security 
reform that would bring their real life needs and circumstances into 
account.
  Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Congresswoman 
Millender-McDonald and Congressman DeLauro for arranging this special 
order tonight. We must bring attention to the exceptional circumstances 
of women as we examine the Social Security issue. As other Members of 
Congress have mentioned tonight, there are a few simple facts that show 
why women are effected by changes made to Social Security more than 
their male counterparts. First of all, most women earn a lower salary 
than men and therefore put a smaller amount into the Social Security 
Trust Fund with every paycheck. They are also more likely to spend a 
portion of their lives out of the workforce than men and women are half 
as likely as men to receive a pension which means they depend on their 
Social Security check as their sole source of income. Finally, women 
live longer than men and depend on Social Security for a longer period 
of time.
  Therefore, changes made to the Cost of Living Adjustment and the idea 
of converting Social Security funds in private accounts will have a 
drastic effect on the way that retired women live. These factors must 
be taken into consideration when we decide how to resolve the issue of 
the potential insolvency of the Social Security Trust Fund. While 
limiting COLA's may cut costs, it will lower the standard of living for 
retired women because they rely heavily on Social Security as their 
only means of income and they live longer and need these adjustments to 
stay out of poverty. Private accounts may also have a negative effect 
on the retirement income of women because they may outlive their 
accumulated funds. Private accounts may put many women in a position 
where they live the later half of their retired years in poverty.
  While Social Security is the economic mainstay for many women, we 
must also make a better effort to educate working women today about the 
benefits of investing in a pension plan. We must give them an 
opportunity to invest so they do not have to live out their golden 
years on an annual Social Security income that amounts to less than the 
minimum wage for most recipients. This coupled with making changes to 
the Social Security system that helps not harms women will improve the 
lives of all women in their retirement years.
  Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Again, Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank all 
of the women who were here tonight. We did not cover this as 
extensively as I would have wanted to. We will be back, because as we 
embark upon Mother's Day we must remember the elderly women in this 
country and their need for Medicare and Social Security.

                          ____________________