[Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: George W. Bush (2005, Book I)]
[March 18, 2005]
[Pages 471-480]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]



Remarks on Strengthening Social Security in Orlando, Florida
March 18, 2005

    Thank you all for coming. Thanks for coming. Please be seated. 
Thanks for being here. Go ahead and be seated. Now. [Laughter] Thanks 
for the warm welcome. It's great to be back in central Florida. Thank 
you all for taking time out of your day to come by and let me discuss 
with you some important topics.
    But before I do, I'm proud to be introduced by one of my favorite 
seniors--[laughter]--okay, my favorite mother. 
[Laughter] She is--I told them earlier in Pensacola, if you're trying to 
figure me out, like the woman who walked up to me when I was campaigning 
for Governor of Texas, you should say, ``You got your daddy's eyes but your mother's mouth.'' [Laughter] Which 
is a compliment. [Laughter]
    Earlier today we were with the great Governor of the State of 
Florida. We're both proud of him. More importantly, 
we both love him dearly. He is a great man, and I'm proud of the job 
he's doing for Florida. I know you are as well.
    I said, ``Mother, we're going to be talking 
about Social Security.'' She said, ``Fine. Don't tell anybody my age.'' 
[Laughter] I said, ``I won't, but can I tell them you were at least born 
before 1950, so you don't have anything to worry about when it comes to 
getting your check?'' She said, ``Fine.''
    Mother and I just came from the Life 
Project Senior Development Center in Orlando, Florida. I went there to 
look at some--tell some seniors that I wanted them to know with 
certainty that nothing will change when it comes to their Social 
Security check, that they will get the check that the Government has 
promised. And that's important for them to hear, because I understand a 
lot of people rely on a Social Security check. Right there is one. 
[Laughter] I don't know if ``Amen'' was the proper response, but 
nevertheless. [Laughter] ``Yo'' is better, yes. [Laughter]
    A fellow walked up to me--I'm finding this to be the case in a lot 
of my travels--he said, ``I'm glad I'm going to get my check. What about 
my grandchildren?'' And that's what I want to talk to the people--to you 
today about, making sure the seniors' grandchildren and their great-
grandchildren have the same safety net that today's seniors receive from 
the Social Security system.
    Before I do, first I--Laura sends her best. 
Up until this very day, I have always said that Laura Bush was the 
Nation's greatest First Lady. And then I had to modify my position. 
[Laughter] Would you go for a tie? [Laughter]
    I'm traveling from Washington to Florida with some fine Members of 
the United States Congress from the great State of Florida. Florida 
Senator Mel Martinez is with us today. The 
Congressman from this district, Congressman Tom Feeney, is with us today.

[[Page 472]]

    Congressman Ric Keller is with us today. 
Can I tell them? Yes, I'll tell them. Keller has got an interesting way 
about him in this way: He's getting married tomorrow. Isn't that great? 
Yet he's spending the day with me. [Laughter] So he's marrying a patient 
person. [Laughter] But I wish 
Ric all the best.
    Congressman Adam Putnam is with us today. 
And finally, Congressman Dave Weldon is with 
us today. I appreciate you coming, Dave.
    Mayor Rich Crotty is with us. You 
might remember the mayor--[applause]--wait a minute, you might remember 
the mayor, Tyler's father. [Laughter] I said to Crotty, ``Where's 
Tyler?'' You're not going to believe this: He's 
in Washington, DC, today. [Laughter] One way to avoid a speech is to get 
out of town. [Laughter]
    I appreciate the Y for letting us come by. Jim Ferber, I'm honored that you let us come by and use your facility. 
I'll tell you something interesting that takes place here, which I 
didn't realize until I got here, was that this is more than just a Y--
than the Y that I used to think about. This is an education center. How 
about this idea for people: The YMCA partners with and houses Northlake 
Park Elementary School. Pretty interesting concept, isn't it? It seems 
like to me it would be a wise use of assets--make sure taxpayers' money 
goes well and also provide a great place for kids to not only learn, but 
to learn how to take care of their bodies.
    I don't know if you know this, but Congressman Weldon is a doctor, and he and I were discussing on Air Force 
One, what can we do as Government officials to encourage people to make 
right choices with their body, eat good food, and exercise? I mean, 
we've got to make sure that children understand that it is important to 
be wise about the food you eat and, at the same time, understand the 
importance of exercise in order to make sure that they're healthy when 
they come up, that they're--that when they get older--kind of like me--
they're healthy. Now is the time to encourage people to have 
preventative--choices in life to prevent illness. It seems pretty cool 
to have the elementary school and the Y educating the mind as well as 
training the body in the same building. So I congratulate you for your 
wisdom and your foresight and wish you all the very best.
    I want to thank the teachers who are here. [Applause] Yes. I know I 
speak for Mother when I say this, and certainly 
Laura: We appreciate you teaching. It is a noble 
profession. Sam Houston was my predecessor as the Governor of Texas, by 
the way, and they asked him--he was a United States Senator from Texas; 
he was a Congressman from Tennessee; he was the Governor of Texas; he 
was the President of the Republic of Texas--that was before we became a 
State. And they said, ``Of all those jobs, which one did you like the 
best?'' Without hesitating, he said, ``Teacher.'' It's a noble 
profession. So thanks for teaching. I also want to remind the moms and 
dads who are here that a child's first teacher is a mom and a dad, that 
you have the responsibility to be the first teacher, to make their job 
easier.
    Sam Beard is here--where's Sam? Oh, Sam, 
thanks for coming. Sam is a, I think it's safe to say, a Democrat, which 
is fine. [Laughter] He is a--but what I think you'll find interesting 
is, in 2001, I created a Commission to look at the Social Security 
issue. And there were eight Democrats and eight Republicans on the 
Commission. The Commission was headed by former Democrat, United States 
Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan from New York, one of the really fine, 
distinguished public servants. We attracted some really bright people 
like Sam to serve on the Commission. They came together to talk about 
the Social Security issue, which I'm about to talk about as well. They 
did so in the spirit of what is--trying to figure out how to solve a 
problem, not how to promote a political party.

[[Page 473]]

    And I want to thank you for serving, Sam. You 
came up with some great ideas. And I urge the Congress to take the same 
spirit that the--adopt the same spirit that the Moynihan Commission did, 
to serve this country without trying to foster a party, but serve the 
country to come up with problems so that a younger generation of 
Americans will be able to say, when it's all said and done, we did our 
duty to make sure the safety net for Social Security exists for them 
like it does for today's seniors. So thank you for being here, Sam. I 
appreciate you coming.
    A couple of other things I want to talk about before we get to 
Social Security. Today I met Betty Haggard. 
She is a volunteer. She works for Citizens on Patrol for the Seminole 
County Sheriff's Office. I want to thank Betty for the example she sets. 
The reason I like to bring up people who volunteer is because I want to 
remind you that a great way to serve our country is to feed the hungry, 
find shelter for the homeless, mentor a child, teach somebody to read, 
put your arm around somebody who hurts, help heal a broken heart, and 
you do that by volunteering. You do that by taking time out of your 
life, and when you do, you make America a better place.
    We're living in exciting times. I'm--I fully understand that the 
actions we take abroad and the actions we take at home will set the 
course of events for a half-century, at least. That's how I think about 
public policy. We're laying the foundation for freedom. That will mean 
that your children and grandchildren can grow up in a peaceful world. 
The object of this administration--the objectives of this 
administration--is to, first and foremost, defend our country. But I 
understand, in the defense of America--the long-term defense of America 
will be suited by the spread of freedom.
    Free societies are peaceful societies. I believe that deep in 
everybody's soul is the desire to live in a free society. It doesn't 
matter your religion or where you're from. And I believe that because 
the Almighty God's gift to every man and woman in this world is freedom. 
This isn't bestowed by America; this is bestowed by something greater 
than America. And if you believe that and if you understand that freedom 
leads to peace, then it's got to be the central policy of the United 
States to work with friends and allies to spread freedom. And it's 
happening.
    I mean, if you think about Afghanistan, for example, particularly 
for the young here, it wasn't all that long ago that people in 
Afghanistan lived under the brutal reign of the Taliban. Now, these 
people were--had a dark, dim vision of the world, like, if you didn't 
agree with them 100 percent when it came to their religion, you'd find 
yourself being flogged in the public square or executed.
    We acted in our self-interest. We upheld a doctrine that said, ``If 
you harbor a terrorist, you're equally as guilty as the terrorist.'' But 
in so doing, we freed millions of people from the clutches of the 
Taliban. It didn't happen long after the Taliban was gone that the 
people of Afghanistan voted for the first time for President in the country's history. Millions showed up at the 
polls. The first voter, by the way, was a 
young woman. She wasn't even allowed to express her opinion under the 
Taliban. She's voting. And as a result of Afghanistan becoming a 
liberated, free society, the world is more peaceful.
    There was a vote in the Palestinian territories. President 
Abbas is showing strength and 
courage by saying to the terrorists, ``We'll never achieve peace so long 
as you kill.'' I believe there will be a Palestinian state which is a 
democracy living side by side in peace with Israel, which is a 
democracy. And we're beginning to see the signs of hopeful progress. Two 
free societies living side by side in peace will make it easier for our 
grandchildren to grow up in a peaceful world. I don't have any 
grandchildren yet--your grandchildren. [Laughter]

[[Page 474]]

    Lebanon--think about Lebanon. It's a country occupied by Syria. 
However, as the world began to speak with one voice to Syria, saying, 
``Get out. Take your troops out; take your intelligence services out,'' 
people poured out in the public square to say, ``We want to be free.'' 
There will be a free Lebanon and Syria must listen to the demands of the 
world and completely withdraw.
    And finally, in Iraq--I'm sure some of you have had relatives in 
Iraq--been a huge sacrifice by our military families and people of 
America, as a matter of fact, when it came to war. War is always the 
last resort for a President. Diplomacy must always be tried. We 
responded to the challenges of the time. But it should have heartened 
people to see the 8 million-plus Iraqis who once lived under the brutal 
reign of a tyrant go to the polls in defiance 
of terrorists and coldblooded killers. That statement was a powerful 
statement, particularly for young to understand, that when you believe 
freedom lurks in everybody's soul, that people love to be free, to 
realize the bravery and courage of those good folks in the face of 
terrorists has set an example for a lot of countries. A free Iraq is in 
our interests. A free Iraq will make America more secure, the world more 
free, which will help us achieve the peace we all want. Freedom is on 
the march, and over the next 4 years, I'll do all I can to work with 
friends and allies to keep it on the march.
    Just one quick word on what we can do in Congress to make sure that 
we continue the economic prosperity that's taking place in a place like 
Florida--it's got one of the lowest unemployment rates in the Nation, by 
the way. I tried to attribute that to Jeb, but then 
I realized it completely overlooks the entrepreneurial spirit of the 
Floridian people. The truth of the matter is, this economy is growing 
because there's risktakers, dreamers, doers, and hard workers in the 
State of Florida.
    So I'm looking forward to working with Congress to make sure that we 
continue to create an environment in which we can have economic growth 
and vitality. There's a lot of things we can do--pass a reasonable 
budget, for starters; make sure we're wise about how we spend your 
money. Another thing we can do is keep your taxes low. Third thing we 
need to do is to make sure that Congress gets an energy bill to my desk.
    In 2001, I was concerned about dwindling supply in the United States 
and more dependence upon supply from overseas. And so I put together a 
group of smart people, and we came together with an energy strategy. And 
it's a multifaceted strategy. It says, we've got to conserve more; we 
need to work on ways to encourage conservation; we've got to develop 
alternative sources of energy like ethanol and biodiesel. We need more 
LNG facilities so we can bring liquified natural gas to our powerplants 
around the United States.
    We'll spend taxpayers' money on research projects so that we could, 
for example, be able to burn coal in a zero-emissions plant. We've got a 
plant--such a strategy and such an experimentation going on right now. I 
think we ought to explore--and we are--ways to see if we can't use 
hydrogen to power our automobiles, so that we become not only less 
dependent on foreign sources of energy but that we're wiser about 
environmental air standards, about protecting environmental air 
standards.
    In other words, there's a lot of things I put in that report. I'm 
concerned about the price of your gasoline. I'm concerned about rising 
prices. And Congress needs to stop debating this bill. Congress needs to 
get it to my desk, so we can start the progress of becoming less 
dependent on foreign sources of energy.
    You don't have to worry about these ones. [Laughter] We're on 
board--on the same--we're working on--we're working toward the same 
goal, and that's energy independence.

[[Page 475]]

    I want to talk about Social Security. First, Social Security is one 
of our great institutions. I think Franklin Roosevelt did a good thing 
when he created Social Security--matter of fact, I know he did--because 
it's provided a retirement safety net for a lot of folks. And that's 
important.
    The problem is we've got a problem with Social Security. And that's 
what I want to discuss with you. As a matter of fact, I think this is 
maybe the 16th State I've been to since I gave my State of the Union, 
talking about Social Security, the fact that it's one of the great moral 
successes, the fact that the system has helped seniors enjoy the dignity 
of a secure retirement.
    I'm assuring people I fully understand a lot of seniors rely upon 
their Social Security check. Don't you? It matters a lot. It matters to 
seniors all around our country. And that's why I'm spending a lot of 
time not only addressing the problem--which I'm going to define for you 
in a minute--but, most importantly, saying to seniors, you have nothing 
to fear when it comes to this talk about making sure the system works 
for the next generation. It's really important for people to hear that. 
It's taken 16 States so far to get the message out. I got three more 
next week. No matter how many States it takes or how many speeches I 
give, I want seniors to understand all across America, no matter what 
the rhetoric is, no matter what the pamphlets say, no matter what the 
pundits tell you, this Government will make and keep its promise to our 
seniors who have retired.
    If you're approaching retirement and born before 1950, you're going 
to get your check too. Nothing will change. You've been working hard, 
you've been putting money in the system, and you're going to get your 
Social Security check too. In other words, for those of us born prior to 
1950, nothing changes. I'm a fellow who was born prior to 1950; I guess 
that makes me feel okay.
    What really makes me worried about is I understand that we have made 
promises for younger Americans that we can't keep. And that's what I 
want to explain to you, that this Government of yours has said to 
Americans, ``That safety net that we've created is fine if you retire, 
but for a younger generation of Americans, it has a hole in it.'' And 
let me tell you why: Because Social Security has changed; the dynamics 
of our society has changed in ways that the creators of Social Security 
could never have envisioned.
    First of all, the Social Security system is a pay-as-you-go system. 
That means, you pay; the Government goes ahead and spends. [Laughter] 
You pay in the system at your payroll tax, and the Government pays out 
the promised benefits, and if there's any money left over, it goes to 
pay for other programs. See, some people, I suspect, think that there is 
a trust, and we take your money, and we hold it for you. And then when 
it comes time to retire, we pull it out for you. That's not the way it 
works. It is a pay-as-you-go system. The money comes in the door and 
immediately goes out the door.
    In 1950, there were 16 workers for every beneficiary--16 workers 
paying into the system for every beneficiary. You can imagine it works. 
In a pay-as-you-go system, when you've got a lot of workers per 
beneficiary, it means you're collecting enough money to be able to take 
care of the people who've retired. Today, because we're having fewer 
babies, because there's an increasing number of beneficiaries, there's 
only 3.3 workers per beneficiary. In other words, fewer workers are 
carrying a greater load.
    In a relatively short period of time, there's going to be two 
workers per beneficiary. Like, if you're young, you're going to be one 
of two who are going to have to pay for guys like me. And so you begin 
to get a sense for the math that has changed: 16 workers in the 1950s; 
in the 21st century, there's going to be 2 workers per beneficiary. And 
the other thing--the other problem to complete the math is that

[[Page 476]]

a group of us are getting ready to retire. We're called baby boomers. I 
think I'm on the leading edge. I was born in 1946; I turn 62 in 2008, 
which is a convenient year, in my case, for getting to retirement age. 
[Laughter] And you know what else has changed? Guys like me and 
Sam and others, we're living longer, much longer 
than previous generations. And you know what else has changed? Because a 
lot of people ran for office saying, ``Vote for me; I'm going to 
increase your Social Security benefits,'' my generation has been 
promised greater benefits than the previous generation.
    So if you take the issue of baby boomers living longer, getting paid 
more, coupled with fewer people paying into the system, it says we've 
got a serious problem, and it begins to manifest itself in 2018. That's 
when more money starts going out of the system than coming in. Now, that 
may seem like a long time if you've got a 2-year perspective on life, 
but it's not that long; 2018 is 13 years from now. If you're 5 years 
old, you'll be voting in 13 quick years. For those of you who have 
raised children, you understand how fast 13 years goes by.
    In 2027, the system will be 200 billion in the red. In other words, 
in 2018, it starts to go in the red, and it gets worse every year; 2027, 
it's 200 billion, and it gets worse after that. It keeps getting worse 
until it gets up to--2033, the annual shortfall is about 300 billion. 
Finally, 2042, it's bust; it's bankrupt. So in other words, there's a 
huge hole. Because there's more of me--people like me living longer, 
getting paid more benefits, fewer workers in the system, the system 
starts to go into the red, and it just accelerates.
    And you can understand the problem. If you're a grandparent thinking 
about your grandchild, you ought to be asking the question of people 
like me, ``How are you going to--how's this younger worker going to pay 
for it if you don't do anything?'' You can imagine what it means.
    We had an expert today, one of your panelists, Sam, was there. She said that if nothing happens, in order to 
make the system somewhat whole, the payroll tax is going to have to go 
up to 18 percent, I think she told me. Think about that. Doing nothing 
has got serious consequences for a younger generation coming up. This is 
why I like to say this is a generational issue. This is an issue where, 
once we can assure grandparents that you're fine, you'll be taken care 
of, the promise will be kept, a lot of grandparents are starting to say, 
``Whew, I'm feeling good about it. How about my grandchildren? What are 
we going to do for them?''
    I met Don and--Dan and Lois 
Canterbury. Dan is a retired dentist from 
Auburndale. He and his wife have got eight grandchildren. Their--the 
oldest grandchild is Evan. He's not here. He's 17--I hope he's 
studying--[laughter]--but he's 17. On its current path, Social Security 
would take part of Evan's check, of course, for his entire working 
career, but it goes broke 10 years before he retires. I hope that helps 
put it in perspective of what I'm talking about. It's one thing to put 
out dates; it's another thing to put this in personal terms.
    And Evan is out there working hard; the system is bankrupt; he's put 
all this money in; and so what are the choices that future public policy 
people will have? And they're not very good: major benefit cuts, major 
increases in taxes, cutting out all other kind of programs in order to 
make sure that the promises are kept. And those options don't sound very 
good to me, and I know they don't sound very good to you when you start 
thinking about it.
    And so what we need to do is come up with a permanent solution. And 
that's what I'm going to travel the country talking about. I think most 
people have begun to understand that we got a problem, which is an 
important dynamic. See, if Congress didn't think you thought there was a 
problem, nothing would happen. This is one of these issues where people 
in Washington

[[Page 477]]

truly respond to what people think. If they think nobody really thinks 
there's a problem, I can assure you, nothing will take place. But I 
think things are changing in Washington. Matter of fact, I know they 
are, in terms of whether or not people think there's a problem. Matter 
of fact, the U.S. Senate approved a resolution the other day, 100 to 
nothing, saying that we have a problem with Social Security, and we need 
to come up with a permanent solution. That is progress. It's a strong 
commitment from the Senate.
    And I want to assure you all that my administration will work with 
the United States Senate and the House of Representatives to come up 
with a permanent solution, and we're willing to listen to anybody with a 
good idea. As a matter of fact, in my State of the Union Address--I 
haven't looked at all previous State of the Union Addresses, but I 
suspect you'll find, when it came to Social Security, mine was unique 
because I said, let's put good ideas on the table. And I mentioned some 
of them. Former Congressman Tim Penny had a 
good idea about the possibility of indexing Social Security benefits to 
prices rather than wages, for younger workers. President 
Clinton spoke about raising the 
retirement age for younger workers. Patrick Moynihan, through the 
committee, talked about ways to change the benefits. There was a Social 
Security expert named Robert Pozen, who 
happens to be a Democrat, proposed a progressive mix of wage and price 
indexing.
    These are all important, very interesting ideas that I just strongly 
urge Members of Congress to bring to the table and consider. It's one 
thing to be thinking about solutions; it's another to say, ``I just--
going to dismiss anything out of hand.'' That's not the way I think, and 
that's not the way this problem's going to get solved. We ought to 
welcome ideas. It doesn't matter if it's a Republican idea or a Democrat 
idea, the idea is to come together and fix this for a generation of 
Americans to come.
    I have said this and I believe--I know we can do this without 
raising the payroll tax rate. The reason why I believe that it's 
necessary is because one way to make sure this economy is slow today and 
slow in the out-years is run up the payroll tax on people. It's a tough 
tax on a lot of people.
    I also know that this can't be a temporary fix. I don't know if you 
remember 1983. Some of you weren't even born then. Kind of envious. 
[Laughter] They said they fixed--they put the 75-year Social Security 
fix together. It's called a 75-year fix. First, I want to applaud 
President Reagan, Speaker O'Neill. I think Leader Dole was involved with that. It was--a lot of people from both 
parties came together, said, ``We've got a real problem; let's come 
together to do something about Social Security.'' And they put together 
the 75-year fix. But here we are in 2005. Doesn't seem like a 75-year 
fix when you're here talking about it 22 years later.
    And so I urge Congress not to think about 75-year fixes. The math is 
just not going to allow for a 75-year fix. It may sound like a 75-year 
fix at first. We need a permanent fix. We need to do it right, now, and 
make sure that nobody has to address the issue again.
    I think we have an additional responsibility, besides making sure 
that it's solvent, the system is solvent. We've got to make it better 
for our children and grandchildren. And so I've laid out a proposal to 
give our youngsters an opportunity that the current system doesn't 
provide, and that is a chance to own a piece of their own retirement, 
own it themselves, and to tap into the power of compounding interest. 
It's called--I call it a personal savings account. It's a chance to give 
workers a voluntary option. In other words, you get to choose if you 
want to. The Government says, you don't have to do this; you can do this 
if you think it's an interesting idea that you want to look at, to set 
aside some of your own money in a savings account

[[Page 478]]

that you will invest in a conservative mix of bonds and stocks.
    This isn't the solution to Social Security; it is a part of the 
solution to Social Security. It will mean that younger workers, when 
they retire, get a better deal than under the current system, is what 
I'm trying to tell you. It's a--if you think about this--let me explain 
compounding rate of interest to you, that if you let a younger worker 
invest a third of their payroll taxes, let's say 4 percent, in a 
conservative mix of bonds and stocks, and that younger worker started 
saving at about 21 years old and made $35,000 a year over his or her 
lifetime, by the time he or she retired, there would be a nest egg of 
$250,000. In other words, 4 percent of that person's payroll tax, or a 
third of the payroll tax, invested and held, and it just grows, 
compounds.
    And what's important is, is that the rate of return in the voluntary 
account would be greater than that in which the Government--you can get 
through the Government. In other words, by putting in a conservative mix 
of bonds and stocks, you're going to make a better rate of return than 
your money today. And the difference between what you will earn in a 
conservative mix and what the Government gets is substantial, 
particularly when you start saving at 21 years old. And that matters.
    And so they've got an opportunity under this system to have an asset 
that you call your own. The system today, you have no assets. The money 
goes in, and it goes out. There's IOUs; they're paper. But there's no 
asset base.
    Now, look, we're going to make sure there's careful guidelines about 
what you can invest in. You can't put it in the lottery. You can't take 
it to the track. [Laughter] You've got to invest it in a conservative 
mix of bonds and stocks. But we're used to those kinds of things, aren't 
we, in our society? We got the Thrift Savings Plans that people--
Congress are able to use or Federal employees are able to use.
    Today I was with a Navy pilot in Pensacola, 21-year-old kid getting his wings, talked about his Thrift Savings 
Plan. He said, ``I like my Thrift Savings Plan.'' He says, ``I watch my 
money grow.'' I said, ``Oh, yes--you get a quarterly statement?'' He 
said, ``No, I get it online all the time.''
    You see what's interesting about this notion about saving and 
investing is, the world has changed when it comes to investing. At least 
it's changed since I was being raised. I was telling Mother in the 
limousine, I don't remember talking to her about 401(k)s when I was a 
little guy. I don't remember IRAs, defined contribution plans. This 
world has changed since I was raised.
    And there are a lot of young kids who now understand what it means 
to invest. They're comfortable with the concept of watching their money 
grow. They understand that it's possible for Government to allow a 
younger worker to invest, that--in a conservative mix of instruments. I 
mean, this is not a foreign concept. People are getting used to that. It 
seems like to me that if a Thrift Savings Plan is good enough for a 
Federal worker, it's good enough for a private sector worker. It's good 
enough for you.
    I met Anna Brooks from Sanford, Florida. Her 
husband was a Methodist minister. He died. Let me talk about one of the 
benefits of personal accounts when it comes to somebody who has been 
widowed. If your spouse dies before 62 and you're not working, you get 
nothing from the system until you turn 62 years old. Think about that. 
Your husband has been working, putting money in the system; he passes 
away--or it could be the opposite, wife is working, husband is the 
beneficiary, and the person passes away, and there's nothing left until 
that person turns 62 years old. Or how about the case of the--both 
couples--both folks working, and one predeceases the other, and the 
spousal benefits are less than the person's retirement benefits when the 
person living retires. You only get one or

[[Page 479]]

the other. You get the higher of the two, not both. Think about that 
system for a minute. Somebody works all their life; the spouse works all 
their life; the spouse is only going to get what she has or he has 
contributed into the system. But the other--the other member of their 
family's money, it just goes away.
    If you have a personal account that grows over time, it's your asset 
you call your own. You can leave it to whom you want. If you get--if 
you--the wife or husband whose spouse predeceases them will be able to 
have that asset. It's yours. You get to decide, not the Government. And 
the money you've earned over the course of your lifetime becomes real. 
It's a part of an asset. And that's an important part of why people 
should take a serious look at personal accounts. There's something 
beneficial in a society where more and more people have a real asset 
they call their own, where they get to decide to whom to leave it to.
    And so I was talking to Anna. She's got a 
lot of grandkids. She's interested in making sure that the system for 
the grandkids--she's got two great-grandkids; she's fixing to have 
another great-grandchild--so she's interested in the subject, because 
she understands that if we don't do anything, those kids are going to be 
saddled with a serious problem. And the idea of her kids or grandkids 
and great-grandkids being able to have an asset appeals to her, 
something she wasn't afforded when she was coming up and working.
    And so what I'm telling you is, personal accounts would replace 
empty Government promise with real assets. I really like the idea of the 
fact that in our society today, more people own a home than ever before. 
More minority families own a home than ever before. That's positive, 
isn't it? Isn't that great? I like the idea that more and more people 
own their own small business. People from all walks of life have their 
own business and they're struggling and working hard, employing people, 
but it's theirs. Personal accounts in a Social Security system would 
give millions of Americas their first chance to own something, the 
chance to pass something on to a son or a daughter, if that's what they 
choose to do.
    Now, ownership is powerful. Ownership was--you know, it means you 
can--somebody can inherit something from a mom or dad. And that 
shouldn't be the privilege of just the wealthy. That should be the 
opportunity of everybody who lives in America.
    And so one of the reasons why I think Congress ought to consider 
personal accounts is because it empowers the individual. It is--conforms 
with the way people are getting used to investing now, particularly 
younger Americans, through 401(k)s or defined contribution plans. It 
will allow people to earn a better rate of return than they will under 
the current system. It will help complement whatever is left over in the 
Social Security system. The Government will have promised benefits, but 
I've told you, we can't pay what we've promised. But the personal 
account, because of the compounding rate of interest, will help you get 
closer to that which Government has promised. It will make it a part of 
a good retirement system for people.
    And this idea is a idea that's not a Republican idea or a Democrat 
idea. There are a lot of people from both political parties who 
understand the power of this. I happen to think it's a really good 
people idea. I think it's an idea because it empowers people. I think 
it's an idea because it says that the United States Government really 
does trust the people with their own money.
    And so I urge Congress, as we take on this issue, to listen 
carefully to the American people. And I urge you to make sure that 
Congress hears your voices.
    Over the next weeks, I'll continue to talk about how the--to the 
people about the fact that we have got a serious problem. Oh, it's fine 
for people like me and people

[[Page 480]]

born after--before 1950. People born after 1950, you better be asking 
your elected representatives, ``If we've got a problem, what do you 
intend to do about it?'' I find people are really tired of partisan 
bickering: ``We can't accept this idea because it's a Republican idea.'' 
``We can't accept this idea because it's a Democrat idea.'' People just 
don't want that when it comes to the Social Security debate. People want 
there to be good will and a good-faith effort by people of both 
political parties to sit down at the table, and say, ``The people are 
worried about it. There's a lot of grandparents in America worried about 
their grandchildren. We have run for office for a reason.''
    One of the reasons I have put this idea or this issue on the table, 
because I understand the job of the President is to confront problems, 
and not just pass them on to another President or another Congress. Now 
is the time.
    And I want to thank you all for giving me a chance to come by. Sam, 
thank you for your good work on this issue. Thank you for your interest 
on this issue. I want to thank the younger folks who are here for paying 
attention to an issue which I promise you is going to affect your life. 
It's either going to affect it in an incredibly positive way, or about 
20 years from now, you're going to be saying to yourself, ``I wonder how 
come the Congress didn't listen to old George W. Bush. [Laughter] How 
come they didn't get together and fix this for generations to come?''
    God bless. Thank you for coming.

Note: The President spoke at 1:58 p.m. at the Lake Nona YMCA Family 
Center. In his remarks, he referred to Gov. Jeb Bush of Florida; Mayor 
Richard T. Crotty of Orange County, FL; James W. Ferber, president and 
chief executive officer, Central Florida YMCA; Sam Beard, founder and 
president, Economic Security 2000; President Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) 
of the Palestinian Authority; former President Saddam Hussein of Iraq; 
former Representative Timothy J. Penny, senior fellow and co-director, 
Hubert H. Humphrey Institute Policy Forum; Robert C. Pozen, chairman, 
MFS Investment Management; and former Senator Bob Dole. The transcript 
released by the Office of the Press Secretary also included the remarks 
of former First Lady Barbara Bush.