[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 34, Number 15 (Monday, April 13, 1998)]
[Pages 588-592]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Teleconference Remarks to Regional Social Security Forums from Kansas 
City

April 7, 1998

    The President. Good afternoon. Thank you, Ken. As Ken said, I'm 
speaking to you from Kansas City, where we're talking about what we must 
do as a nation to strengthen Social Security for the 21st century, and 
I'm looking forward to continuing to talk with you today.
    Let me begin by thanking Representatives Bob Borski, Ben Cardin, 
Nancy Johnson, Jim Kolbe, and Jerry Weller for holding these town 
meetings across our Nation. For each of you lawmakers, these forums are 
not the only way you've worked to strengthen Social Security. 
Representatives Borski and Cardin are cosponsors of key legislation to 
establish the ``Save Social Security First Reserve Fund.'' 
Representative Borski supports saving any budgetary surplus for 
investment in Social Security, and I know Representative Cardin does as 
well.
    Now, Representative Johnson has been a strong advocate for Social 
Security beneficiaries. She has urged her fellow Members

[[Page 589]]

of Congress to continue to act with fiscal restraint as they debate what 
to do with the budget surplus. Representative Kolbe is one of our 
foremost experts on retirement and pension policy and is the sponsor of 
a resolution to establish a joint commission on Social Security reform. 
And Representative Weller has been a powerful voice for protecting the 
Social Security Trust Fund and was an original cosponsor of the Social 
Security Preservation Act.
    Together, all of you are proving that we can work in a bipartisan 
way to make sure that Social Security is as solid for our children as it 
was for our parents, and I thank you for that.
    As you know, this year, working together with Congress, we'll be 
balancing the budget for the first time in 30 years. We have a right to 
be proud of that achievement, but we must also build on it. In the State 
of the Union, I called on Congress to set aside every penny of any 
budget surplus until we save Social Security first. Social Security is 
deeply woven into our Nation's social fabric. For 60 years, it's meant 
more than an ID number on a tax form, even more than a monthly check in 
the mail. It reflects our deepest values and the duties we owe to one 
another.
    Today, 44 million Americans depend upon Social Security. For two-
thirds of our seniors, it's the main source of income, and one in three 
beneficiaries are nonretirees. Social Security is life insurance and 
disability benefits as well as a rock-solid foundation of retirement 
security.
    Today, Social Security is sound, but a demographic crisis looms if 
we fail to act. For over the next 30 years, 76 million baby boomers will 
retire. By 2030 there will be twice as many elderly Americans as there 
are today. If we don't act now, by then payroll contributions will only 
cover 75 percent of benefits. That's why I've challenged our Nation to 
act now to strengthen Social Security for the 21st century.
    Here are the principles I want to follow for meeting this challenge. 
First, any reform should strengthen and protect Social Security for the 
21st century. We can't abandon the basic core program that's been one of 
the great successes of our Nation's history.
    Second, we must maintain the universality and the fairness of Social 
Security. For a half-century this program has been a progressive 
guarantee for citizens. We have to keep it that way.
    Third, Social Security must provide a benefit people can count on. 
Regardless of the ups and downs of the economy or the financial markets, 
we must make certain that Social Security will provide a foundation of 
retirement security.
    Fourth, Social Security must continue to provide financial security 
for disabled and low income beneficiaries. We can never forget the one 
out of three Social Security beneficiaries who aren't retirees.
    And fifth, any strengthening of Social Security must maintain 
America's hard-won fiscal discipline, one of the main reasons we're 
enjoying our prosperity today.
    These are the five principles that will guide me on Social Security, 
principles by which I'll judge all possible proposals. They're 
principles I believe can and should guide us all as we work to forge a 
national consensus for reform.
    Above all, I know that we can strengthen Social Security only if we 
reach across the lines of party, philosophy, and generation with open 
minds and generous spirits. For too long, politicians have called Social 
Security the ``third rail'' of American politics. That's Washington 
language for ``You can't really discuss any changes seriously.'' This 
year we have to prove them wrong.
    I know that on the political calendar, 1998 is an election year. But 
on the Social Security calendar, let's all resolve to make 1998 an 
education year, a year we come to grips with the problems of the system 
and come together to find the answers. These forums are a very hopeful 
beginning, and I'm pleased to have had this chance to start this vitally 
important dialog with all of you today. This December we'll host a White 
House Conference on Social Security, and in January I'll convene the 
leaders of Congress to draft a plan to save Social Security for the 21st 
century.
    I'm confident we'll meet this challenge as Americans always do--by 
working together,

[[Page 590]]

honoring our values, and preserving the solemn compact between 
generations that helped to build our Nation.
    Now I'd like to turn the discussion over to Congressman Borski. Bob, 
take it away.

[At this point, Representatives hosting the regional forums each made 
brief remarks.]

    The President. Thank you very much, Congressman. Let me try to go 
back over some of what all of you said.
    First of all, Congressman Cardin talked about the need to increase 
private saving; some others did. Congressman Borski talked about the 
fact that there were still some people on Social Security living in 
poverty. Let me try to address those things together, along with some of 
the other concerns which were mentioned. It is true that there are still 
about 11 percent of our elderly people in America living in poverty. But 
it's important to recognize that that's a lower percentage than in the 
overall population in America, and that it's just been since 1985 that 
the poverty rate among seniors was lower than the overall poverty rate.
    Now, what can we do to make it better? There have to be other 
sources of income. There have to be other sources of private savings. 
And that is--of course, the possibility that some part of that could 
come out of Social Security reform is one of the things we're 
discussing.
    But over and above that, I'd like to point out that Congress has 
done a lot of work with our administration over the last 5 years, first 
of all, to save 8.5 million pensions that were under water when I took 
office, to stabilize 40 million others, and to make it increasingly more 
attractive for employees on modest wages and for small business 
employers to take out 401(k) plans, and then to make it easier for 
people to move from job to job and take their 401(k) with them. We've 
also dramatically expanded the availability of IRA's.
    So we've tried to do some things already to help increase the 
ability and the attractiveness of saving, over and above Social 
Security. I don't think--no matter what we do with Social Security, the 
American people are going to have to be sensitized, the younger 
generation is, to do more to save for their own retirement.
    On the other hand, I think it would be a great mistake, even for the 
youngest members of these audiences today, to believe that we shouldn't 
preserve Social Security as a universal guarantee. Because without 
Social Security today, almost half the seniors in America would be 
living in poverty, even though most seniors have income over and above 
that. So the trick is to save Social Security but also to have more 
income coming to people from private savings.
    Now, let me mention just one or two other things. Nancy Johnson 
talked about wanting--made one Medicare statement about annual 
physicals. I believe that more and more, as people live to older ages 
and are healthier, we'll have to do more preventive care within the 
Medicare program. Nancy, you know, we've worked hard to deal with--to 
have more mammographies, for example. We're doing other preventive 
screening now. I think the more of that we do, the more we're going to 
save over the long run. And more importantly, we'll improve the length 
and the quality of life.
    And she said, ``People want to know whether the seniors can count on 
Social Security.'' The answer to that is, absolutely, yes. The Social 
Security Trust Fund, according to Mr. Apfel, who has got a legal 
responsibility to tell the truth about it, is stable until 2029. In 
2029, shortly thereafter, the taxes coming in will only cover about 75 
percent of our obligations. One of the reasons we want to move now is 
that by making relatively modest changes now we can extend the life of 
the Social Security Trust way out beyond 2029.
    Can young people, the high school students here, look forward to 
drawing Social Security? The answer to that is, they certainly can if we 
do our jobs here in the next several months. You know, a few years ago, 
I can understand your skepticism because we were running huge deficits; 
we were projected to have $300-billion-a-year deficits as far as the eye 
can see. Now we're going to have a balanced budget sometime in the next 
year, and it's projected we'll have a trillion dollars in surpluses over 
the next decade--more than enough money if we do some other things

[[Page 591]]

to fix the Social Security system for the younger people listening here 
today. But I want to say again, no matter what we do to Social Security, 
those of you who are 16, 17, 20, and 21, I know it's hard to think about 
the end of your life, your later years, when you're that age, but you 
will have to do more, through your employer, through your own individual 
efforts, to save for your own retirement over and above Social Security 
if you want to maintain your standard of living when you retire.

    Now, Mr. Kolbe asked a couple of questions about raising the 
retirement age, and then Mr. Weller asked about specific plans. Let me 
say, I don't want to dodge any of that, but I think all those proposals 
should be out there on the table. And I think that the most important 
thing now is, if I advocate a specific plan right now, then all the 
debate will be about that. The first thing we've got to do is to get the 
American people solidly lined up behind change. Let's stick with these 
basic principles I've outlined, and I want to encourage other people to 
come forward with their ideas. In December we'll all sit down, come up 
with our--we'll all put our various ideas on the table, and we'll begin 
hammering out a plan that we can present in January.

    I still hear some new ideas almost every week coming from Democratic 
and Republican Members of Congress and private citizens that I think 
should be aired. If I put a specific plan on the table now, it will 
undermine and weaken debate, not strengthen it.

    I do agree with those of you who say it ought to be possible for us 
to save Social Security without a payroll tax increase. I don't think we 
ought to automatically rule out any ideas over the next 30 to 50 years, 
as some would do, but I think that we plainly know that we can do this 
and provide for increased strength of the system without a payroll tax 
increase, given current assumptions. So I believe that will be possible.

    Now, let me just answer one last question. You asked about raiding 
the Social Security Fund. Let me say that that just depends on how you 
look at it. The Social Security Trust Fund is basically a guarantee that 
certain obligations will be paid out to retirees, including the COLA, as 
well as to the disabled, and to those who are the survivors who are 
eligible to be paid under it.

    Now, in 1983, when the Social Security reforms were passed, it is 
true that the Government was collecting more in Social Security taxes 
than were needed in any given year to pay for that. So rather than raise 
other taxes to pay for other governmental expenses, the rest of the 
Government borrowed and gave a bond to the Social Security Trust Fund, 
with the full faith and credit of the United States behind it, a legal 
obligation to pay back the money with interest to the Social Security 
Trust Fund when it was needed to pay out. And so there is no reason to 
believe that all the money that's been taken out since 1983 will not be 
paid back in as soon as it's needed to meet the legal obligations of the 
Social Security Trust Fund.

    By doing that, by borrowing that money and paying it back, we didn't 
do anything to affect the obligations of the Fund to pay Social Security 
recipients in the future. But we did keep the Government from borrowing 
more money out in the private sector, competing with the private sector 
for money, and running interest rates up. So I think on balance it's 
been a safe and sound thing to do, and I do not believe that the raid 
has occurred on the Social Security Trust Fund. It would be a raid if 
the money were not paid back when it's due to be paid to you, but the 
money will be paid back when it's due to be paid to you.

    And that's one of the things that we have to make sure is never 
interfered with, the legal obligation of the United States Government to 
replenish that Trust Fund and pay back the money when it's needed for 
the recipients.

    Thank you very much.

Note: The President spoke at 1:20 p.m. by satellite from Room 5 at Penn 
Valley Community College to five local forums located in Columbia, MD, 
New Britain, CT, Philadelphia, PA, Sierra Vista, AZ, and South Holland, 
IL. In his remarks, he referred to Commissioner of Social Security 
Kenneth Apfel.

[[Page 592]]