[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Pages 1473-1476]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                       STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS

  Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, last night we had the occasion on the 
House floor to hear a speech from the Commander in Chief, the President 
of the United States of America--a speech that to me was about two 
overriding themes--one, freedom, and the other, security--and two 
primary subjects--one, the war in Iraq and its liberation, and the 
other, the security of the American people and their retirement.
  To the first, I simply say, as eloquent as the President's speech 
was, as dramatic as his words were, and as many of them as there were, 
the most powerful message last night was not words, but a picture. For 
when Janet Norwood embraced Sofia, the President stopped speaking, the 
Chamber erupted, tears flowed, but not a word was said. If the saying 
``a picture is worth a thousand words'' was ever appropriate, it was on 
that occasion.
  I am very proud of our men and women in the Armed Forces, I am proud 
of this Congress, I am proud of this President, and I am proud of the 
people of Iraq and Afghanistan, and all freedom-loving people.
  The second subject the President addressed was Social Security, which 
is all about freedom and security, and it is the subject about which I 
will make my few remarks on this morning.
  I would like to begin these remarks by asking you to visualize 
another picture. Think about how powerful Sofia and Janet were, and 
think about this picture. Picture the year 2042 or 2052, if you like. 
Picture you in your living room or your den. Picture you looking at 
your son or your daughter and their grandchildren squarely in the eye, 
and picture explaining to them that when you had the chance 37 years 
earlier, you did nothing to secure their future.
  There are those who say Social Security does not have a crisis today, 
but it has a big crisis tomorrow. When I entered into my campaign for 
the Senate, I ended every speech by saying ``I will soon be 60''--and I 
am 60 now--``and the rest of my life is about my children and my 
grandchildren.'' So it is true about all of us in this room. To do 
nothing is unacceptable if you visualize that picture 37 years from 
now, if you look at your daughter or your son or their grandchildren. I 
want to talk about Elizabeth Sutton Isakson and Jack Hardy Isakson, 
both born last year, both of whom will be 37 in 2042 when I would have 
to give them the ``good'' news--if this Congress did nothing--that 
America's promise on Social Security is gone, that by law their 
benefits are lowered and, by absolute practice, their taxes will be 
raised.
  I heard someone in opposition to reform last night criticize the 
President for saying it is their money. They said it is not their 
money. They said, ``It is my mother's money.'' That is what is wrong 
with the system. We have robbed Peter to pay Paul. We are running out 
of Peters, and we are getting a greater number of Pauls.
  Now, personal accounts and a nest egg in the future are a viable 
decision that should not be criticized and rejected out of hand. In 
fact, I will tell you an interesting little fact. Had the United States 
of America 70 years ago invested the surpluses of the payroll tax paid 
by the American workers throughout that time, we would not have the 
problem today. But we robbed Peter to pay Paul.
  There are those who say personal accounts are a gamble. Arithmetic is 
a fact, and facts are stubborn. In the 70-year period since the advent 
of Social Security, pick any 20 consecutive years that you like and 
pick any traditional conservative investment model that you like, and 
in that 20-year period of time, it exceeded the return on Social 
Security four to five times.

[[Page 1474]]

  The time value of money is the solution to all problems. 
Procrastination on the investment of money is a message for disaster. 
We should not reject this debate out of hand. We should embrace it. We 
should not reject personal investment; we should encourage it.
  Who in this room has not told their children, when we created IRAs, 
to invest in them because you cannot count on Social Security? Who in 
this room has not said it? It has been said this morning. I told my 
children to plan on more because Social Security would not be enough.
  The President has said for a modest debt today, we can prohibit a $26 
trillion catastrophe 37 years from now by giving younger Americans a 
choice to do what we do as Members of Congress in the Thrift Savings 
Plan. We have the opportunity to empower their future and enhance their 
security.
  Yes, there are disciplines we should apply. Yes, there is math that 
we should run. But facts are stubborn. Had we done as a country, with 
the surpluses we received, what the President wants to offer 
voluntarily to younger Americans, we would not be here today.
  Facts are stubborn, and pictures are worth a thousand words.
  I hope I am here in 2042, and I pray to God that Elizabeth and Jack 
will be here, too, and they are going to sit in my den in front of my 
fireplace, and we are going to talk. I am not going to tell them that 
37 years before when I had a chance to make their future brighter I 
said we really did not have a crisis, we really did not need to do a 
thing.
  George W. Bush is a great President for many reasons but, most 
importantly, because he is willing to look a problem square in the eye 
regardless of size and make suggestions and solutions for its 
correction. We owe the American people no less, and I owe Elizabeth 
Sutton Isakson and Jack Hardy Isakson no less.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I do not know if this is the first 
time the junior Senator from Georgia has spoken in the Senate, but I am 
sure it is one of the first times, if not the first time. I just want 
to tell him I thought what a persuasive argument the junior Senator 
from Georgia made that we need to not ignore this problem but tackle it 
for our children and grandchildren.
  Mr. ISAKSON. I thank the leader.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Colorado.
  Mr. ALLARD. Madam President, first, I would like to say straight out 
that I thought the President gave a great speech yesterday. I thought 
it was forward looking, positive, and I think he issued a challenge to 
Members of Congress. It is a challenge we should face up front.
  I rise today to talk about the President's State of the Union 
Address. The President last night reminded us of our freedom and 
liberty, our personal responsibilities, and solemn obligations. Freedom 
and liberty--no two words have given more to those blessed by them and 
damned more those who have taken them away.
  The President's address reminded us that the march of freedom 
continues throughout the world. The success of the elections in 
Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, and the Ukraine clearly demonstrate a 
desire for liberty and democracy, a desire that was revealed to the 
world this week by an ink-stained finger, an understated expression of 
mankind's inalienable right.
  Tyranny has no place in the world. We must oppose it with great 
determination and diligence wherever it appears. The election in Iraq 
in particular showed that people are willing to risk their lives to 
bear the privilege of freedom and the mark of democracy.
  Recent success does not mean our obligations are fulfilled. As the 
President articulated, our Nation must continue to root out tyranny 
wherever it resides. We must oppose extremism, whether it be religious 
or ideological. We must assist those who are in need, those who live in 
desperate poverty, and those who are suffering from deplorable disease 
and epidemic.
  Sadly, freedom comes at great expense. We have witnessed the cost of 
liberty, first at the birth of our Nation and later at the salvation of 
our Union. Today we see the price of liberty as freedom-fearing 
terrorists lash out against the builders of democracy.
  The sacrifice of our men and women in uniform has been great. I 
cannot fully express my admiration and respect for those willing to 
serve our Nation, protect our country, and defeat those seeking the 
return of oppression. Their commitment to freedom is an inspiration to 
me, to the people of Colorado, and to the Nation. To these men and 
women, we owe our solemn obligation, our pledge to not waste the 
blessings their sacrifice has bestowed.
  The President also spoke of the future, our obligations to elderly 
generations, and the duties owed to our youngest children. The 
President has chosen reality over popularity and will address the 
growing threat of insolvency, ensuring stability for all Americans.
  Those resistant to the reality of a losing system claim that Social 
Security is not broken. They want to bury their heads in the sand and 
pretend the looming bankruptcy will go away. But the reality is this: 
In three short years, the baby boomers will be eligible for Social 
Security. At that point, the balance in the Social Security trust fund 
will begin its permanent decline. Even if President Bush were to sign 
the necessary reforms into law this year, it would most likely take at 
least a couple years to implement. If we do not act, we will 
shortchange the American people. I believe, that the time to act is 
now.
  Social Security was created in 1935 under President Franklin Delano 
Roosevelt. At that time, the average life expectancy was 63 years of 
age, most women did not work outside the home, most adult males did not 
live to reach retirement age, and payroll taxes were only 2 percent on 
the first $3,000 of income.
  Today the average life expectancy is 77 years, men and women work 
outside the home, both are likely to reach retirement age, and the 
payroll taxes are 12.4 percent on the first $90,000 of income. The 
American people deserve a system that has been modernized to reflect 
21st Century realities.
  The President is not using scare tactics--Social Security is safe for 
today's seniors. Let me repeat that. Social Security is safe for 
today's seniors. But it is in serious jeopardy for our children and our 
grandchildren. Social Security is a pay-as-you-go system with today's 
workers paying to support today's retirees. But each year there are 
more retirees receiving benefits and fewer workers to support them. In 
the 1950s, there were about 16 workers for every beneficiary. Today 
there are about three workers for every retiree, and eventually, there 
will be only two. Social Security's source of income is rapidly 
disappearing. If the program continues under current law, younger 
workers will face a 26-percent cut in benefits when they retire. 
Congress must act now to save this valuable program for future 
generations.
  In the 1990s, President Clinton advocated reforming Social Security. 
In his 1999 State of the Union Address, President Clinton stated:

       First, and above all, we must save Social Security for the 
     21st century.

  At the time, Democrats wholeheartedly agreed. The current Democratic 
leader said on Fox News Sunday on February 14, 1999:

       Most of us have no problems with taking a small amount of 
     Social Security proceeds and putting it into the private 
     sector.

  Many other Democrats agreed. The current Democratic whip said:

       Due to the increasing number of baby boomers reaching 
     retirement age, Social Security will be unable to pay out 
     full benefits. . . . But the sooner Congress acts to avert 
     this crisis, the easier and less painful it will be.

  But Democrats are now trying to convince Americans there is not a 
problem, that reform is not necessary, and this simply is not true.
  I worked with President Clinton and Senate Democrats to try to reform 
the Social Security system in the 1990s. I am now pledging to work with 
President Bush in making sure the American people have a long-term 
secure

[[Page 1475]]

Social Security system. Social Security reform is a bipartisan issue.
  Some groups oppose the President's push to reform Social Security by 
claiming that personal retirement accounts are not a necessary addition 
to the Social Security system. One such group is the American 
Association of Retired Persons, commonly referred to as the AARP. On 
January 3, 2005, they announced they were beginning an advertising 
campaign in 59 newspapers across the country, and these advertisements 
are intended to warn the public that basing the Social Security Program 
on private investments poses serious risks. I would agree with the AARP 
if this were, in fact, true. However, to my knowledge, that proposal 
has never been on the table. Rather, the President has discussed adding 
the option for younger workers to build a nest egg in a personal 
account.
  The AARP offers its employees a generous benefits package, including 
a pension and 401(k) plan similar to the very option they now oppose. 
Many other employers offer these plans to their employees as well. How 
can it be that personal retirement accounts, such as 401(k)s, are good 
enough for the AARP, Members of Congress, and a good portion of the 
country, but, according to the AARP and the Democrats, they are not 
good enough for all Americans?
  Some reform opponents have suggested that simply raising or 
eliminating the taxable income cap of $90,000 will fix the problem 
completely. By doing this, we would only postpone Social Security trust 
fund deficits by 6 years, and this is why: Under the current structure, 
the more you pay into Social Security, the more you get back upon 
retirement.
  President Bush has said that benefits for current beneficiaries are 
not to be cut or are in any way at risk. The President would like to 
offer the option, not requirement, for workers to invest a portion of 
their own paycheck into a personal retirement account. This account 
would travel with workers from job to job as opposed to a 401(k) plan 
that is with one single employer.
  It is possible that this personal account could even be passed on to 
future generations. This option would benefit all Americans, and give 
them more choices for their retirement. If reforms take place soon, 
retirees could begin retirement with a nest egg far larger than what 
Social Security can offer. It would be irresponsible for any elected 
official, regardless of party, to oppose reform.
  As we head into this debate, I hope that everyone will enter with an 
open mind in forging new ideas on how to solve this very pressing 
problem. Social Security cannot be fixed with minor alterations. Social 
Security is a valuable, successful program from which our country's 
retired citizens benefit. However, unless Congress fulfills its duty 
and obligations to protect its solvency, it will not be around for my 
children's retirement--or yours. Addressing Social Security is not 
divisive--it is responsible.
  The 109th Congress will be long on debate, but we must all work 
together to make sure that it is also filled with accomplishments for 
the American people. I look forward to working with my colleagues in 
the Senate and the House as we pursue a policy of hope and empowerment.
  Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Ensign). The Senator from South Carolina.
  Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I rise today to express my strong support 
for the bold and forward-thinking agenda that President Bush laid out 
for us last night.
  The President was right in saying that the state of our Union is 
``confident and strong.'' We have been blessed with a healthy, growing 
economy, with more Americans going back to work, and with our Nation 
acting as a positive force for good in the world.
  Our economy is bouncing back, but we all know that more must be done 
to make it stronger and more productive. The President understands that 
by making our economy more flexible, more innovative, and more 
competitive, we will keep America the economic leader of the world.
  The President was very clear about the need for Congress to help 
reduce wasteful spending and burdensome regulations, make tax relief 
permanent, eliminate junk lawsuits, and lower health care costs. But I 
was most impressed with the President's willingness to tackle tax 
reform.
  The President accurately pointed out that year after year, Americans 
are burdened by an archaic, incoherent Federal Tax Code. We all know 
that the Federal Tax Code is the No. 1 job killer in America, but very 
few of us seem willing to stand up and push for meaningful reform.
  Earlier this year, the President established a bipartisan panel to 
study the Tax Code and to make recommendations. This is something I 
have been calling for for many years. When their recommendations are 
delivered, I stand ready to work with the President to give this Nation 
a Tax Code that is progrowth, easy to understand, and fair to everyone. 
If we want to secure the best jobs in the future, we must make America 
the best place in the world to do business. The President understands 
this, and I am hopeful that this body can make strides toward 
accomplishing that important goal.
  Another goal the President put forward last night that is very close 
to my heart is the challenge of permanently fixing Social Security. I 
thought the President was clear about the financial problems facing the 
program. He pointed out what we all know but often fail to 
acknowledge--that Social Security will begin paying out more than it 
collects in just 13 years.
  The current program does not have enough money to pay for all its 
promised benefits. Some may argue with this and say the trust fund will 
keep Social Security afloat until 2042, but I challenge them to show me 
the money, show me how they plan to make good on all of those IOUs. Our 
future seniors will not accept IOUs instead of real money, nor should 
they.
  It is not enough to just oppose and obstruct one solution. The 
critics of reform must put forward their own plan. So far, we have not 
seen one.
  I am very concerned about the misinformation surrounding this debate, 
and that is why I am introducing legislation today to require the 
Social Security Administration to update the information it gives 
American workers. The current statement entitled ``Your Social Security 
Statement'' fails to communicate the serious problems facing Social 
Security. The current statement reads like a passbook savings account 
and leads workers to believe that the Government is actually saving 
their money. It is not. The statement should tell workers that their 
combined employee and employer taxes total 12.4 percent of their wages 
throughout their life. It should tell them that none of that money is 
saved for their retirement. And it should tell them that each year that 
goes by, retirees get a lower and lower rate of return.
  I thought the President's argument last night for the personal 
savings account was very accurate. He said:

       Your money will grow, over time, at a greater rate than 
     anything the current system can deliver, and your account 
     will provide money for retirement over and above the check 
     you will receive from Social Security. In addition, you will 
     be able to pass along the money that accumulates in your 
     personal account, if you wish, to your children and 
     grandchildren. And best of all, the money in the account is 
     yours, and the Government can never take it away.

  That last point is the most important part of this debate. Reforming 
Social Security with personal accounts is about forcing the Government 
to start saving workers' money for the first time in history so that no 
President, no Congress, can ever again spend it on other programs.
  I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

[[Page 1476]]



                          ____________________