[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 14]
[House]
[Pages 19506-19507]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                           THE MISSING DEBATE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of 
January 23, 2002, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Gephardt) is 
recognized during morning hour debates for 13 minutes.
  Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge a free and fair debate on 
this floor about the future of Social Security before the November 
elections occur. Here we are in October, nearing what will become the 
end of the 107th Congress, and we have yet to have a real debate about 
what perhaps is the most important issue facing the American people.
  We have a Republican leadership that wants to adjourn without 
debating one of the most serious concerns that people have about their 
own retirement. We have spent our time renaming post offices, we have 
done very well at that, and passing non-sense of the House resolutions, 
but we have had no time, not a moment, to debate the Republican plan to 
privatize Social Security and cut Social Security benefits.
  The Republican strategy is clear. It is deception. The Republican 
leadership from the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert) to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Armey) to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
DeLay) all are on record in strong support of privatization. They 
support cutting benefits and taking funds that should be secure and 
putting them into risky stock market accounts.
  I think it is vital that we have this debate before the November 
elections and not afterwards when it will probably be too late.
  We are not talking about an academic exercise here. We are not 
talking about theories or philosophies. We are talking about people's 
lives and what happens to them every day of every month. We are talking 
about the President's proposals and the biggest changes this program 
would ever see; and we are talking about a sea change, a fundamental 
sea change in the way the program works.
  Make no mistake about it, Republicans have a plan to privatize Social 
Security, cut benefits and weaken the foundation of this retirement 
system. In 2000, President Bush argued that privatization of Social 
Security would create a better, improved retirement future for the baby 
boomers and beyond. In 2001, the President's Social Security commission 
proposed three plans that I have on this chart, and each plan 
ultimately requires a cut in benefits. Now, the Republican Party has 
developed phony ads to make it look like they are for preserving the 
long-time health of Social Security when it is simply false.
  As the Wall Street Journal recently reported, President Bush's media 
strategist produced these ads which peddle the falsehood that 
privatization of Social Security is the solution to people's retirement 
fears. If my colleagues did not think that was bad enough, it gets 
worse.
  A coalition of right wing organizations has a new pledge card that 
it is urging Republican candidates 
to sign in order to give them cover 
on the issue of privatizing Social 
Security. The organization is called

[[Page 19507]]

SocialSecurityChoice.Org. The campaign is funded by a variety of 
Republican interest groups that support privatization, and Republicans 
who take the pledge make the promise to ``support allowing younger 
workers the option to voluntarily place a portion of their Social 
Security taxes in personal retirement accounts.''
  On Capitol Hill, Republicans want to avoid a real debate that 
involves their schemes to privatize and cut Social Security benefits. 
In fact, Republicans have been running away from this issue as fast as 
they can.
  Karl Rove is assuring Republican lawmakers that after the election is 
done in 2003, then the White House will finally begin its drive to 
privatize Social Security. The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis), 
head of the Republican Campaign Committee, recently said on the radio 
that Social Security privatization ``will probably come up in the next 
Congress'' but not in this Congress.
  Michael Tanner of the CATO Institute predicted that, if the 
Republicans retain the House, the President intends to make a push in 
the spring and they will get a vote in the House; and one Republican 
pollster presentation advised his clients, do not use the word 
``privatize'' when talking about Social Security on the campaign trail. 
Get a new word, he said. Maybe personalize, maybe traumatize, I do not 
know what the right word is; but it sure is not privatization.
  None of this should come as a surprise to anybody who has ever 
followed this issue. In recent months, the stock market has fallen like 
a lead balloon. The market is at its worst September since the Great 
Depression, the worst third quarter since 1987, and is at its lowest 
level in 5 years. If my colleagues look at this chart, the market has 
lost $4.5 trillion in value since January 2001, and on the next chart 
my colleagues will see if the President's plan had been in place at 
that time, today's retirees would have lost $2,016 in benefits as 
compared to those who retired in December of 2000.
  That is the impact of turning Social Security over to the stock 
market. It is not a surprise that Republicans have devoted themselves 
to the evisceration of the greatest retirement protection plan ever 
created. The Republican Party has always sought to weaken and get rid 
of Social Security. In 1935, they opposed its creation. In 1964, they 
wanted to make it voluntary; and in 1994, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Armey) appeared on national TV, and he said, ``I never would have 
created Social Security.'' The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Armey) also 
called Social Security a bad retirement, and he said it was a rotten 
trick on the American people. He continued, ``I think we're going to 
have to bite the bullet on Social Security and phase it out over a 
period of time.''
  Republicans adopted the same approach to Medicare. Newt Gingrich 
said, ``We cannot just get rid of it. We have got to let it wither on 
the vine.''
  Their ideological alliance flies in the face of cold hard facts. It 
represents a defeat for the majority of the American people that oppose 
the privatization of Social Security. My colleagues better believe, if 
the Republicans take the House and retake the Senate, President Bush 
will privatize Social Security before we can blink our eyes.
  Democrats created Social Security in 1935, and we will fight to 
protect it in 2002 and beyond. In our view, since its creation more 
than 65 years ago, no other program in the history of this country has 
provided such dignity and respect for our senior citizens, no matter 
what their income, no matter what their background. Thanks to Social 
Security, people have lived their lives free from fear. Social Security 
has put food on people's tables and shelter over their heads.
  Look at this chart. It is the most important source of income for 
middle-income senior citizens. It has helped millions of people avoid 
poverty. Sixty-four percent of income from middle-income seniors comes 
from Social Security. For 67 years, it has been there for the people 
when they have needed it. For countless seniors, surviving spouses and 
children and Americans with disabilities that fought our wars, 
sustained our economy and built our Nation, it has meant the difference 
between life and death.
  Social Security is based on a contract, an intergenerational contract 
and a commitment that today's generations have a duty to honor and 
uphold. We have a responsibility to simply keep our word by protecting 
the terms of this agreement.
  Our responsibility calls for making sensible decisions that invest in 
Social Security and make it stronger, not weaker, in the decades ahead. 
Our responsibility calls for ensuring our children and grandchildren 
will reap its rewards; and our values call for building Social Security 
up, not tearing it down, to satisfy long-held ideological convictions.
  Social Security is already under attack due to the Republican 
economic agenda. We had a golden opportunity 2 years ago to shore up 
Social Security. Two years ago we could have passed tax cuts to promote 
long-term economic growth while paying down America's debt and 
investing in Social Security for Americans nationwide.
  The Republicans rejected our approach. They had a better plan. Their 
economic plan invaded Social Security, broke repeated promises to 
secure the surplus, and if my colleagues look at this chart, diverted 
almost $2 trillion to pay for the wrong-headed Republican tax cut for 
the wealthiest Americans. They literally took money out of the Social 
Security trust fund in order to give a tax break that primarily helped 
people at way, way, way, way up at the top. The Republican slogan, 
unlike the slogan we had a few years back, seems to be ``Save Social 
Security last, not first.''
  After voting seven times with Democrats to guard the lockbox, the 
Republican leadership in the House failed to keep their word, and they 
have failed to lead; and the lockbox is broken on the floor. We will 
lead.
  Since Republicans have failed to put Social Security on the floor, we 
have mounted a discharge petition to bring up the three plans from the 
President's commission, all for privatization, so we can have a full 
and free debate in the highest tradition of democratic governance. In 
this discharge, we include a resolution of disapproval. This is more 
than a debate. It is a way for the House to vote up or down on the 
Republican plan, as well as the congressional plan of the Republicans 
to privatize Social Security.
  I think it is essential. I am concerned that people are going to go 
in the voting booths and elect candidates next month who say, oh, I am 
going to guarantee Social Security benefits and then turn around the 
day after the election and cut them in some scheme of privatization. 
This is the most cynical, political act that I have seen in my time in 
Congress, to say to the American public, oh, we are going to protect it 
and then the day after the election run to the floor to privatize it 
and cut the benefits that they have said they are going to protect.
  I urge my colleagues, sign this petition. Let us have a meaningful 
Social Security discussion before we go to our districts for the fall 
election. Put the fake pledge cards away. Abandon the empty Republican 
promises and secret plans. Tell the pollsters to keep their new words 
to themselves. Let us conduct a free and fair debate in the open, in 
the sunshine, in the public about the consequences that will be caused 
by the privatization of Social Security. Let us rise up in the highest 
tradition of this body and debate the future of this most important 
program. Let us save Social Security first and today.

                          ____________________