I sent email to Sens Chaffee and Reed, and rep Langevin about Social Security. Find attached my email and Sen Chaffee's response.
Executive summary of the Senator's response:
...there is a case to be made for some form of expanded individual investment options, as they could help to increase savings and wealth. If Congress moves forward with such accounts, I believe it is essential that the accounts not add to our already enourmous debt {which currently stands at $7.6 trillion), nor add risk to retirement benefits, particularly those of lower income workers.
Text of my email to his office:
I have been following the private acccounts debate and often read Josh Marshalls website "Talking Points Menu." According to this site, President Bush has been calling the treasury bills backing Social Security to be "worthless IOUs." This is against the Constitution according to my understanding, as the Constitution states that the debt of the US will not be called into question.
My understanding of the issue is that all treasury bills, including the ones backing Social Security, are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. Is this true, or are these particular treasury bills regarded as being interagency accounts?
I would like to express my outrage at the multi trillion dollar swindle being perpetrated by the republicans. In 1983 they jacked up the payroll tax so thay my generation, the baby boomers, prepaid our social security retirement. The idea was to reduce the debt that the US would have when I retire, to make it easier for the federal gov't to raise the money to pay off my retirment. Now that this time has arrived, they have cut taxes drastically, refuse to have those with incomes over $85K pay the same rate that I do, and are trying to reduce benefits.
I am 50 years of age and am very concerned about this issue. I urge you to introduce legistation stating that Social Security has first call on the tax revenues to pay off the obligations, the reason being that we already prepaid.
I attach the specific link from TPM for your information.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://tinyurl.com/6buo8
"As you know, the president says the Treasury notes in the Social
Security are 'worthless IOUs'.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
and his response
Dear Mr 2liberal {not my real name}: Thank you for getting in touch to express your concern about the president's plan to reform Social Security. I appreciate hearing from you.
The Social Security program hasa served this country well for six decades, and has helped keep seniors, disabled people, and families out of poverty. I am committed to ensuring that we maintain those standards as we go forward.
There has been a lot of talk about whether or not Social Security is in crisis, and if it is, whether or not private accounts are the answer to such a crisis. My belief is that while Social Security is not in imminent danger of going bankrupt, it does face a serious solvency problem. When the "baby boom" generation begins to retire in 2011, the pressue on the system will grow. The system will begin to run deficits around 2018. By 2042, the Social Security Trust Fund assets will be fully depleted, adn payroll tax revenues will fund only about 73 percent of benefits. It is estimated that to deliver the full promised benefits for the next 75 years - the time frame used by the Social Security Administration to calculate solvency - will cost an additional $3.7 trillion above what the system currently is expected to take in. This is a significant challenge, and it is prudent to tackle this problem now, rather than putting it off for future generations.
As to the question of whether private accounts will help address the the $3.7 trillion shortfall, the answer is no. Independant and Administration experts have stated taht implementing private accounts will not improve Social Security solvency over the next 75 years. However, there is a case to be made for some form of expanded individual investment options, as they could help to increase savings and wealth. If Congress moves forward with such accounts, I believe it is essential that the accounts not add to our already enourmous debt {which currently stands at $7.6 trillion), nor add risk to retirement benefits, particularly those of lower income workers.
I have been working with the bi-partisan Senate Centrist Coalition to see if there is a way to address the long-term solvency problem without putting our country on worse financial footing. It is good that the discussion about reforming Social Security is underway, and I will be weighing carefully all of the various proposals. While the year 2042 - when the Trust Fund will no longer be able to meet its obligations - seems distant, each year that passes without action makes the choices that remain more difficult.