[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 3]
[House]
[Pages 3294-3295]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                        PROTECT SOCIAL SECURITY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I am here because the President has 
challenged this body and the other to deal with the problem of Social 
Security. And while the President no longer considers it a crisis, 
obviously when it reaches

[[Page 3295]]

the point that you are spending more money than you are taking in, you 
do have a problem and you do have a challenge and we do have a 
responsibility.
  So I think the President has changed the crisis which would occur 
according to the Congressional Budget Office out to 2052 and even then 
it remains a challenge and not really a crisis.
  But we do not have a bill so we do not know specifically what the 
President would want to do. We do know that these types of problems you 
either have to cut the benefits, extend the age or raise the taxes; but 
the President has taken all of these things off the table and said we 
should deal with the question of privatization. I guess the more people 
in the district that looked at privatization and the more economists 
that studied it have caused the President to admit that privatization 
and private accounts and personal accounts has little or nothing to do 
with the question of solvency, which is basically what we are talking 
about.
  We Democrats know how good this program has been for America. We know 
that it has been an insurance policy that most working people cannot 
afford. We know that in addition to the benefits that you get when you 
retire that we have survivor benefits, we have disability benefits, and 
we are prepared to take a look at anything as long as these benefits 
are not cut.
  Now, the President would have us to believe that if you are over 55 
your benefits would not be cut. To me, a guy from Harlem, it means that 
if you are under 55 you can depend on your benefits being cut. But 
still since we do not have a bill we really do not know exactly what we 
are fighting, but we do know what we want to protect.
  It is too unfortunate that many minorities and women because of the 
inequities of the system, which we hope will be corrected, find 
themselves more dependent than the rest of the population. This is 
especially so when we do have a disparity between the life expectancies 
of men and women which means that for 3 or 4 years women sometimes have 
to go it alone and many sometimes their working spouses did not have 
pensions. And so it is abundantly clear that if you take a look at the 
women that sometimes have to totally survive with their families, 
Social Security gave them the base, gave them the independence, and 
gave them the will to move forward.
  It is so hard for me who is so proud of having gone to school as a 
disabled veteran to talk about the G.I. Bill. What has been amazing is 
that even I had no idea how many people even in this body went to 
school under the Social Security Disability Act or under the benefits 
of Social Security. And it is something that you do not say, guess how 
I went to school, because it was unfortunate financial circumstances.
  But now that they see that this program may be in jeopardy because 
just by changing the formula from a wage formula to a cost-of-living 
formula, Republicans and Democrats and impartial economists say that 
the benefits, and that is all of benefits, survivor, retirement, their 
disability, would be cut by at least 40 percent.
  The President has attempted to polarize sometimes the young against 
the old by saying they are getting a bad deal, or the black males 
against the white males saying that we have a disparity. But one thing 
is clear: we cannot openly discuss this until the President fulfills 
his responsibility and at least brings to us what the heck he is 
talking about so we are not fighting against things that may never 
happen.
  We know that Republicans are having a difficult time in defining how 
they would want to assist the President. But I am just saying until the 
day comes where minorities and women are really equal, this has been a 
cushion to provide some type of independence.
  I close by saying that my beloved mother, who I lost several years 
ago, worked in a factory and received a small retirement pension check 
from the International Labor Garment Workers Union, but she also 
received her Social Security check.

                              {time}  2015

  And she would be there every month waiting for the mailman, who knew 
her, for her Social Security check. She felt so proud that she was 
independent; that she did not have to ask her children for anything.
  Seeing that pride in her, I can see it in so many older women. And I 
hope that before the President makes this a crises, that he brings us a 
bill so we can work together on it.

                          ____________________