Saving Social Security

How I Differ From Doc Hastings

A Series

Part 1 – Social Security

As I have been campaigning all across the 4^th District I have been asked how do I differ on the issues with Doc Hastings.  In this series of posts, I would like to specify exactly where I differ.  I believe that as you see these areas of difference you will find that my stand on the issues more closely reflects the majority of the voters in this District.  It is time that your voice was heard in the halls of power in Washington D. C.

One of the most fundamental and I believe one of the most critical differences between us is our vision for Social Security.  Here let me quote passages from Doc Hastings Congressional web site on the issue of Social Security:

• “We cannot afford to increase payroll taxes high enough to keep Social Security from going broke – the burden on hardworking Americans would be much too great.”
• “Younger workers should have the choice of voluntarily investing a portion of their money in personal, protected retirement accounts so they can build a nest egg for themselves and their families.”

These two statements tell us a great deal about how Doc Hastings is really representing his constituents, the very ones that have kept him in Washington for 16 years.  His position on this most critical issue facing each and every one of us living and working in the 4^th District is exactly the Republican Party line.  Unfortunately, while it may be the Republican Party’s position on this issue it shows how far from the facts both the Republican Party and Doc Hastings are when it comes to being up front with the voters of this District and in fact with all Americans. 

For 90% of Americans, Social Security forms the very backbone of their retirement.  As every one of us knows, Social Security is facing a huge problem in just a few years.  It will be seriously under-funded.  Unless changes are made, senior citizens who have been paying for a lifetime into this system will be short changed on this most critical program.  They will be told that there is no money and that their benefits must be reduced.  This is what the Republican Party and Doc Hastings are telling you.  Note his words, “We cannot afford to increase payroll taxes high enough to keep Social Security from going broke.”  He is telling you, the people that have trusted him for 16 years to be doing his best to represent you, that while he has been a member of Congress, your voice in Congress, he has known that Social Security is going broke and for 16 years, neither he nor the Republican Party have done anything to fix this problem.  When were they going to step up and do something?  Was it after you have begun to receive reduced Social Security payments because they did nothing! 

Also note what else he says, ““We cannot afford to increase payroll taxes high enough to keep Social Security from going broke – the burden on hardworking Americans would be much too great.”  (emphasis supplied)  It is clear that Doc Hastings believes that the only way to keep Social Security from going broke is to raise YOUR Social Security taxes.  He offers no solution other than raising your taxes or allowing the system to go broke!  And this man who has been your elected leader in Washington wants another term!  Why would you elect him again if this is the kind of leadership that he offers.

He will counter by saying that he has proposed a solution.  Well lets take a closer look at it.  Here it is again, “Younger workers should have the choice of voluntarily investing a portion of their money in personal, protected retirement accounts so they can build a nest egg for themselves and their families.”  Do you get this?  He is proposing that the only thing that can be done is to allow “younger workers” to take a “portion of their money” (he doesn’t say it straight out, but would that "portion",  be a portion of the Social Security taxes they are now paying?) and invest it in “protected retirement accounts.”  Several issues immediately present themselves.  First how is lowering the amount the government takes in Social Security taxes going to keep the system from going broke?  What kind of “protected retirement accounts” does he have in mind?  Investments in the Stock Market? The financial collapse of the last few years certainly makes that seem unwise.  I wonder, and I hope that you have too, has he forgotten what happened in the Great Depression when millions of Americans lost their retirement savings and never got them back?  It was exactly then that America said there is a better way and we Americans created the Social Security system that we have today.  Do you realize that what Doc Hastings and the Republican Party want to do is to take you all back to those pre-Depression era ways?

Here is my solution to the Social Security Problem.

It is very simple and it preserves two very critical things.  First it preserves Social Security well into the next century without increasing “the burden on hardworking Americans.”  My solution is based on the very same facts that Doc Hastings has available to him, but that he clearly refuses to stand up for.  I hope you ask him, why he hasn’t told you about this solution on his web site.  I have it on mine.

Here it is and it is straight from a report by the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging.  An article on this report can be found in U S News and World Report (Emily Brandon, On Tuesday May 18, 2010, 11:32 am EDT.  The title of the article is, “12 Ways to fix social security”) 

Here is the solution that the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging cites, “Modify the Social Security tax cap. Workers pay into the Social Security system on earnings up to $106,800 in 2010. About 83 percent of worker earnings were subject to Social Security payroll taxes in 2008. If all earned income above $106,800 annually were subject to Social Security contributions but did not count toward benefits, Social Security's projected deficit would be completely eliminated. If the higher income counted toward Social Security benefits, about 95 percent of the shortfall would be absolved. Other ideas: apply a new Social Security formula to earnings above the current cap or raise the amount of the income cap to apply to 90 percent of all worker earnings.” 

I hope you have noted how elegantly simple this solution is.  Simply include all income in the Social Security tax.  That is it!  Notice their words – “If all earned income above $106,800 annually were subject to Social Security contributions but did not count toward benefits, Social Security's projected deficit would be completely eliminated.”  No burden on “hardworking Americans”.  By the way “hardworking Americans” already pay Social Security on 100% of their income.  When was the last time a majority of people in the 4^th District earned more than $106,000 per year?  Ask yourself this question, “If I, who makes a lot less than $106,000 per year can pay Social Security on 100% of my income why can’t someone who is making more than that?  In fact ask yourself that question when you pick up your pen to vote this year. 

Do you want solutions coming out of Washington? Or are you going to settle for the very same fables that you have been getting for 16 years?