[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Pages 1468-1469]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                SOCIAL SECURITY AND THE IMPACT ON WOMEN

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to discuss 
the significance that Social Security has for women.
  Before the Social Security Act was signed into law by President 
Franklin Delano Roosevelt nearly 70 years ago, a majority of elderly 
women in America were living in poverty. If a woman's husband died, she 
often became destitute or, if she was lucky, went to live with her 
children or relatives.
  The creation of Social Security changed these women's lives for the 
better. Today only one in five elderly women living on their own is in 
poverty, though, of course, we wish that number were zero.
  Elderly women are now able to live independently and with dignity 
because of Social Security. We cannot forget the extent to which Social 
Security has improved the lives of women, and all Americans.
  Since its beginning, Social Security has been a mainstay determining 
what kind of retirement security an individual will have. And because 
women rely more heavily on Social Security than men, it is a bigger 
factor in determining their quality of life.
  The plan that President Bush is putting forward to reform Social 
Security would dismantle the most important social program in our 
Nation's history, upon which millions of Americans rely for their 
retirement.
  I am concerned about this plan because it does not protect the fiscal 
health of Social Security and would dramatically add to the national 
debt.
  This could be disastrous for women as well as children and minorities 
because these Americans rely most heavily on Social Security.

[[Page 1469]]

  Nearly half of all unmarried women 65 and older depend on Social 
Security for more than 90 percent of their total income.
  An even greater number of minorities rely so heavily on Social 
Security with 66 percent of Hispanics and 74 percent of African 
Americans in the same category using it for more than 90 percent of 
their total income.
  Additionally, more children are part of families that receive some of 
their income from Social Security benefits than receive Temporary 
Assistance for Needy Families.
  All of this is underscored by the fact that women face greater 
economic challenges in retirement than men:
  Women tend to live longer than men.
  The majority of women's Social Security benefits are based on their 
husband's earnings, while less than 5 percent of male Social Security 
beneficiaries depend on their wife's earnings.
  Finally, women continue to have lower lifetime earnings than men 
because, disappointingly, women still earn less than 80 cents on the 
dollar compared to men, and they are more likely to take time out of 
their careers to raise a family.
  Therefore, any change to Social Security will have a much more 
powerful impact on women than it will on men.
  The administration has tried to instill a sense of urgency for making 
radical changes to Social Security. I cannot emphasize this enough, 
there is no crisis.
  Despite the cries from the Bush administration, Social Security is 
not in crisis, though some changes are needed to strengthen its long-
term stability.
  Based on demographic projections, including the retirement of the 
baby-boomer generation, there will be more retirees seeking benefits 
and fewer workers paying payroll taxes. Even so, Social Security is not 
about to go belly up.
  Using very conservative predictions of U.S. economic growth, the 
Social Security Board of Trustees estimates that promised benefits will 
continue until 2042, even if no changes are made. Recipients would 
continue to get 73 percent of their benefits for at least another three 
decades after that--again, with no dramatic changes to the current 
system.
  To ensure that benefits continue at the current level until 2080, the 
Trustees say we need $3.7 trillion.
  The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, which is headed by a 
former Chief Economist of President Bush's Council of Economic 
Advisers, says the Trustees are underestimating economic growth.
  They believe that only $2 trillion is necessary to close the gap 
without any revisions to the program. This means that recipients would 
be able to get all their promised benefits until 2052 when they would 
draw 78 percent of their benefits until at least 2080.
  These are big numbers, but we can ensure that the fund remains 
solvent much further into the future by making some balanced, long-term 
changes. We could do this by repealing President Bush's tax cut for 
those earning more than $200,000 and transferring the revenues to 
Social Security, which could save about $2.9 trillion over 75 years; 
raising the cap for payroll taxes gradually from the current $90,000 to 
$143,000, which could provide up to $1.6 trillion over 75 years; or 
asking the Social Security Trustees to present Congress with options 
for updating the system periodically, which Congress would then vote up 
or down.
  These proposals, and others, deserve careful study so that we fully 
understand the costs and benefits of each. I deeply believe that our 
Nation should take the time to do this analysis instead of rushing 
headlong into one plan or another.
  It is apparent that change is needed in the system, though not 
necessarily the fundamental and dramatic change that the President 
argues we need in the form of private accounts.
  But even the President's own advisors acknowledge his proposal would 
do nothing to address the Social Security shortfall.
  In a leaked White House e-mail, Peter Wehner, one of the President's 
principal advisors, stated ``we simply cannot solve the Social Security 
problem with Personal Retirement Accounts alone.''
  In fact, establishing these private accounts will drain an estimated 
$1 trillion to $2 trillion from the Social Security Trust Fund in the 
first 10 years and more than $4 trillion in the following decade.
  Too many retirees depend on Social Security as their main source of 
income for us to rush into its reform without serious consideration of 
what is best to save the system for future generations of workers.
  Mr. President, the advances of women in the workplace are a big 
reason for the great success of Social Security. When Congress takes up 
this issue, we must not forget how important this program is, 
especially to the women who have helped it thrive. It is a source of 
dignity, it is earned and it is a safety net for these women and it 
cannot be abandoned.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, how much time is remaining on our 
side?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 2 minutes remaining.

                          ____________________