[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 34, Number 31 (Monday, August 3, 1998)]
[Pages 1503-1507]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Remarks in a National Forum on Social Security in Albuquerque, New 
Mexico

July 27, 1998

Shootings at the Capitol

    Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, before you sit down, if I 
might, I want to do something quite serious but, I think, important here 
at the beginning. I would like to ask Senator Domenici and Senator 
Bingaman and Congressmen Kolbe and Becerra to come up and stand with me, 
and I'd like to ask all of us to offer a moment of silent prayer for the 
memory and the families of the two police officers who were slain at our 
Nation's Capitol.

[At this point, a moment of silence was observed.]

    Amen. Thank you very much.
    Let me, now on a somewhat lighter note, say that Mayor Baca was 
reeling off all of his relatives on Social Security--I'm glad to see one 
person here who I believe is now

[[Page 1504]]

eligible for Social Security, former Governor Bruce King, and his wife, 
Alice, over there. I point them out for a special purpose. One of the 
demographic realities we have to confront is that women are living 
longer than men. Governor King is in a wheelchair because of a fright he 
received from a rattlesnake, which his wife killed. [Laughter] So we 
congratulate both of them.
    Let me also say, I'm glad to see this great and diverse group of 
Americans here in Albuquerque. You can always depend upon getting an 
audience that genuinely does look like America if you come to 
Albuquerque. I thank all the Native Americans here who are in the 
audience. Thank you very much for coming. I see our friends from the 
Sikh community over there. I know there are a lot of Hispanic-Americans 
here. I know there are African-Americans, Asian-Americans, and others. 
We thank you for coming here. And I also thank all the young people that 
are in the audience, because this is an issue for all ages of Americans 
to deal with together.
    I would like to acknowledge our Social Security Commissioner, Ken 
Apfel, thank Bill Gordon, the provost of the University of New Mexico, 
and all the university family for making us welcome here today. I thank 
Horace Deets of the AARP for being here, and Harvey Meyerhoff of the 
Concord Coalition, and Carolyn Lukensmeyer of Americans Discuss Social 
Security.
    I want to say a special word of thanks to the AARP and the Concord 
Coalition for hosting this forum. And of course, I thank the Members of 
Congress who are here and the leaders of the Congress for nominating the 
Members who are on this program.
    We are very blessed at this moment to have a strong economy in 
America. The question for us is whether we will do what societies often 
do when times are good and sit back and enjoy it or whether we will face 
the larger challenges that our present prosperity and confidence permit 
us to face. They are significant and formidable. If you think about the 
next 50 years, how are we going to build the world's best elementary and 
secondary education system? How are we going to bring economic 
opportunity to the people who don't enjoy this prosperity, whether 
they're in inner-city neighborhoods or rural communities where 
agriculture is in trouble or Native American communities? How are we 
going to deal with the challenge of growing the economy and preserving 
our natural environment? Big, significant challenges.
    One of those challenges, clearly, that we must face together is 
saving Social Security, and I might add, with it, Medicare, for the 21st 
century. One of our biggest challenges is what I call a high-class 
problem: We are an aging society. We are living longer and better and 
healthier, and that imposes costs. The older I get, the more I like that 
problem. That's a high-class problem.
    It wouldn't have been too many years ago that it would have been 
rather unusual to find a mayor who could stand up and cite 3 of his 
family members who are over 75 years of age. That's not so unusual 
anymore. But we know now that because of the demographic challenges 
facing us, we have to make some adjustments in the Social Security 
system to strengthen and preserve it in a new century.
    As all of you know, I have said since my State of the Union Address 
that we should set aside every penny of any surplus until we save Social 
Security first. At the very moment when we have switched from deficits 
as far as the eye can see to surpluses as far as the eye can see, it's 
tempting to offer a large tax cut or perhaps a new spending program paid 
for by the projected surplus. Some have advocated this course, but we 
must not squander the hard-won legacy of fiscal responsibility that has 
brought us our present moment of prosperity. Instead, we should use it 
to tackle the long-term challenges of the United States.
    Any new tax cut or spending program done before we save the Social 
Security system would commit funds that may be needed to honor our 
commitment to our parents and our commitment to our children. I think 
those of us who are part of the so-called baby boom generation feel that 
most acutely because it is in the years when all of us--that is--and I'm 
the oldest of the baby boomers--those who are between the ages of, 
roughly, 52 and 34--when we all get into the retirement system. It is 
then when the greatest

[[Page 1505]]

stresses will be placed upon it at present levels of retirement, 
projected birth rates, and projected immigration rates.
    So I am very grateful for the bipartisan spirit in which we have 
been pursuing this. I'm grateful for the people who are here. I 
appreciate Senator Domenici's strong leadership and his strong support 
for taking the responsible course. In an election year, asking 
politicians to hold off on a tax cut is almost defying human nature, but 
Senator Domenici and many Republicans have joined our Democrats in 
saying together, ``Let's deal with this problem. The American people 
waited 29 years to get out of the red ink and look at the black; we can 
take a year to enjoy the black and deal with the long-term problems of 
the country before we decide everything we have to do with the surplus. 
Let's deal with first things first.''
    Also I want to thank, as I said, Senator Bingaman, Congressman 
Kolbe, and Congressman Becerra. We have to reach across the lines of 
party, philosophy, and generation. This will require open minds and 
generous spirits. We all have to be willing to listen and learn. In 
preparation for this forum today, I had three different sessions with my 
staff members briefing me on all the various reforms that have been 
advocated by the extraordinarily distinguished panel of experts from 
whom you will hear in a few moments. And I've been doing my best to be 
open to new ideas and to listen and to learn.
    I have asked every Member of Congress not only to support the forums 
we're having here today but to hold town meetings in every district in 
America. And we will have a White House Conference on Social Security at 
the end of this year. Next year I will convene the bipartisan leadership 
of Congress to craft a solution.
    The stakes are very high. Those of you who are older or who have had 
family members dependent on Social Security know that for 60 years 
Social Security has been far more than an ID number on a tax form, even 
more than a monthly check in the mail. It reflects the duties we owe to 
our parents and to each other, and this kind of society we are trying to 
build.
    Today, 44 million Americans depend on Social Security, and for two-
thirds of seniors it's the main source of income. Today, nearly one in 
three of the beneficiaries, however, is not a retiree. Social Security 
is also a life insurance policy and a disability policy.
    Since its enactment over 60 years ago, it has changed the face of 
America. When President Roosevelt signed Social Security into law, most 
seniors were poor. A typical elderly person sent a letter to FDR begging 
him to terminate the ``stark terror of penniless old age.'' Now, in 
1996, the elderly poverty rate was below 11 percent. Without Social 
Security, today nearly half of all seniors would still live in poverty.
    Today, the system is sound, but we all know a demographic crisis is 
looming. There are 76 million of us baby boomers now looking ahead to 
retirement age and longer life expectancies. By 2030, there will be 
twice as many elderly as there are today, with only two people working 
for every one person drawing Social Security. After 2032, contributions 
from payroll taxes to the Social Security Trust Fund will be only enough 
to cover about 75 cents on the dollar of current benefits.
    We know the problem. We know that if we act now, it will be easier 
and less painful than if we wait until later. I don't think any of you 
want to see America in a situation where we have to cut benefits 25 
percent or raise inherently regressive payroll taxes 25 percent to deal 
with the challenge of the future and our obligations to our seniors.
    I can tell you, I've spent a lot of time talking to the people I 
grew up with. Most of them are middle-class people with very modest 
incomes, and they are appalled at the thought that their retirement 
might lower the standard of living of their children or undermine their 
children's ability to raise their grandchildren. So let's do something 
now in a prudent, disciplined way that will avoid our having to make 
much more dramatic and distasteful decisions down the road.
    Now, today we're going to discuss one of the most interesting and 
important issues that will affect how much it will cost to stabilize the 
Social Security Trust Fund and what the nature of it will be, and that 
is, whether and how there should be Social Security investments not just 
in low-risk government bonds, as the investments are made

[[Page 1506]]

today but also in the stock market. I think we have to be openminded 
about these proposals, and we also have to ask the hard questions.
    One I'll start with is, in the 6 years I've been President, the 
value of the stock market has nearly tripled. I'm grateful for that. Can 
we look forward to having that happen every 6 years from now on? If not, 
what are the risks? What will it cost to administer such a program? If 
you don't have individual accounts where administration costs may be 
higher, what would be the dangers of having the Government, either 
itself or through some third party independent agency, make such 
investments?
    I think that we just have to look at this and listen, and I hope all 
of you today will leave with a better understanding of both the appeal 
as well as the questions in each and every proposal that has been 
raised. As I said, I have spent a lot of time studying them. I have 
tried to set out the five principles by which I think we should judge 
any proposed reforms. And let me just briefly state them again.
    First of all, I think we should reform Social Security in a way that 
protects the guarantee for the 21st century. We shouldn't abandon a 
program that has lifted our seniors out of poverty and that is reliable.
    Second, I think whatever we do we should maintain universality and 
fairness in the program. For a half century, this has been a progressive 
guarantee for citizens.
    Third, Social Security must provide a benefit that people can count 
on so they can plan for their future. Regardless of the gyrations of the 
markets, there must be at least a dependable foundation of retirement 
security.
    Third, Social Security must continue to provide financial security 
for disabled and low-income beneficiaries. Remember, one in three Social 
Security recipients is not a retiree, something that is often lost on 
people when they comment on the relatively low rate of return of the 
retirement program.
    Now, finally, we must maintain our hard-won fiscal discipline in 
anything that we do. That means, from my point of view, that any change 
we adopt must not lead to greater long-term projected deficits. We 
worked awful hard for a generation to get our country out of the deficit 
mode. It's resulted in a lot of prosperity for our country. I can tell 
you, as I deal with other nations around the world--with the Asian 
financial crisis, with all the challenges other countries face--money 
moves around the world today in the flash of an eye. Investment is 
important. America will continue to be successful because of our great 
free enterprise system as long as we have a responsible economic policy 
in this country. So we should not abandon that.
    Now, those are the principles that I will use when I try to evaluate 
all these proposals. But they don't answer the questions. These are hard 
questions. And every person who's on this panel of experts has worked 
hard to answer them. You'll see they have very different answers, but 
they all deserve a respectful listen from you, and you need to start, as 
I always try to start, by saying, ``What's good about this idea? What 
are the positives about it? What are the inherent questions that are 
raised?'' Try to work them through for yourself and go back and discuss 
them with your friends and neighbors. And most of all, let's try to keep 
an open, positive, old-fashioned American attitude toward this.
    We dare not let this disintegrate into a partisan rhetorical battle. 
Senior citizens are going to be Republicans and Democrats and 
independents. They're going to come from all walks of life, from all 
income backgrounds, from every region of this country, and therefore, so 
will their children and their grandchildren. This is an American 
challenge, and we have to meet it together.
    Thank you very much.

Note: The President spoke at 10:30 a.m. in the Johnson Center Gymnasium 
at the University of New Mexico. In his remarks, he referred to Mayor 
Jim Baca of Albuquerque; Horace B. Deets, executive director, American 
Association of Retired Persons (AARP); Harvey M. Meyerhoff, member, 
board of directors, Concord Coalition; and Carolyn J. Lukensmeyer, 
executive director, Americans Discuss Social Security.

[[Page 1507]]