Social Security is a glossy piece of paper on which nearly every politician wants to finger-paint an agenda. But Social Security has no need of ornament. It is a very grown-up program. Put some other toy into the political playpen.
Come January, for the first time since 1975, Social Security payments will not be ratcheted upward for inflation. The reason is simple: no inflation.
But now President Barack Obama is pushing Congress to send every senior a $250 check to compensate for ... for ... for what? For the fact that some Social Security recipients expect a “raise” every year, whether or not it is warranted? They saw a 6 percent hike in their benefits last year. But that was not a “raise.” It was a cost-of-living adjustment to maintain (not increase) the buying power of their monthly checks.
If the president wants to hand out checks to stimulate the economy, why make them age-specific? Money sent to low-income people, whether young or old, would make far more sense. And the still better stimulus is government spending on roads and other worthy projects. That money gets shot right into the economy.
Sending an extra check to Social Security beneficiaries is also about pandering to older voters. But politicians should first ask themselves, “How many other Americans got 6 percent ‘raises’ last year?”
The plan is foolish and reckless -- and has drawn bipartisan support. These taxes pay for Social Security and Medicare. Cutting payroll taxes puts those programs in jeopardy, which is why some liberal economists, such as Robert Reich, should hang their heads in shame for wanting to monkey with them.
On the right, meanwhile, there is growing affection for the idea. First off, many conservatives hold that cutting taxes solves all problems. (That did wonders for the deficit, didn’t it.) Secondly, fooling with payroll taxes could undermine the public’s faith in Social Security by lending ammo to the false charge that the program’s trust fund is all a fraud.
You see, the Social Security taxes now paid by workers and their employers support current beneficiaries. What’s left over goes into the trust fund to be tapped in future years, when a surge in retirees puts pressure on the program. It’s been a conservative talking point that the Social Security trust fund doesn’t exist; the government has spent the money.
Not quite. The Treasury bonds in the trust fund are real IOUs representing real money taken from real workers for more than 25 years. No matter what the federal government did with that borrowed money, it still has to pay it back.
Make the argument, if you must, that the Treasuries sitting in the trust fund’s file cabinets are not like the super-safe government securities traded around the world -- that the Treasury doesn’t have to make good on them. The truth is that these special Treasury bonds are different, but they still cannot be defaulted upon without a vote by Congress.
So here’s an assignment for anyone who calls the trust fund’s Treasuries “worthless pieces of paper”: Find me one member of Congress, Republican or Democrat, who vows to vote against Washington’s promise to honor them. I’ll buy lunch.
According to the Social Security trustees’ latest report, payroll taxes will cover all of the retirees’ promised benefits until 2016. After that, the trust fund can make up for any shortfall until 2039. That is 30 years from now. We can worry about Social Security’s finances in 20 years.
You know what children with paint want to do with a clean sheet of paper? They want to mess it up. Social Security is a clean program. Let’s keep it that way.
To find out more about Froma Harrop, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.
© 2009 THE PROVIDENCE JOURNAL CO.
Viewpoints
Social Security: Every Politician’s Toy?
- Viewpoints
-
-
Education a focus in Senate this week
FRANKFORT — The Senate passed several bills this week. Of these bills, three education bills are of particular importance.
-
Redistricting ruling offers collateral benefits for voters and taxpayers
Slowing down Frankfort’s redistricting march offers collateral benefits for voters and taxpayers.
-
In defense of southern-fried Paula Deen
Celebrity chef Paula Deen lustily massages salt into "a mighty fat hog,” as the dogs circle the cooking island. For the yams, “I’m only using half a stick of butter,” she drawls before breaking into high laughter. Deen’s popular Food Network show does southern cooking with no brakes on the pork fat, butter, sugar or other dietarily incorrect ingredients.
-
GOP makes Obama look good
The Republican field debated for the 19th time Thursday night, and once again, the media promised us it was going to be a “make or break” event.
Don’t believe the media. -
The real State of the Union
Has Barack Obama learned nothing in three years?
During his State of the Union address Tuesday night, he promised “a blueprint for an economy.”
But economies are crushed by blueprints. -
Looks ain’t everything
I guess we can blame it on television or the movies, that looks are so important in America, especially to young folks. These two mediums place such a premium on beautiful, shapely women and handsome men that most young people believe if you do not possess these attributes you are nothing.
-
It’s politics as usual
FRANKFORT – I’m betting that if you’ve followed the redistricting contortions birthed by the Democratic controlled House and Republican controlled Senate, you’re hardly shocked.
-
Cherry picking and charter schools
National School Choice Week is Jan. 22-28.
There’s little to celebrate in Kentucky – one of only nine states without a charter-school law. -
House knee-deep in important issues
Last week was filled with impassioned and sometimes heated discussions about redistricting as we struggled to meet the constitutional mandate to redraw boundary lines based upon U.S. census data.
-
Senate considers budgetary, drug issues
The second week of session saw several significant issues begin to be debated in committees. Drug abuse, weaknesses in child-protective services, and the state’s debt level were all topics of discussion. The committee process is intended to inform the legislators of the pros and cons of each bill. Lively debate accompanied each piece of legislation.
- More Viewpoints Headlines
-
White House Attacks Romney on Birth Control
Homs Bombardment Continues, Global Outcry Grows
Mo. Teen Gets Life Sentence for Killing Girl, 9
Lower-hassle Screening to Be Tested at Airports
Raw Video: Dog Rescued From Icy Colo. Water
Helmet Camera Captures Calif. Fire Rescue
Worker Tells 911: Powell 'exploded the House'
Triple Win: Santorum Takes Minn., Mo., Colo.
Injured Marine Inspired by Homecoming
No Rape Charges Against Son of NYPD Commissioner
Egypt's Ruling Generals Play Risky Game With US
Former Komen Exec Defends Funding Cut
Skip the Coffee Cup and Inhale Your Caffeine Fix
Calif. Gay Marriage Ban Ruled Unconstitutional
Jury Selection for Ex-UVa Athlete Enters 2nd Day
Cab Driver Helps Wis. Family Escape House Fire
Staff Removed at LA School During Abuse Probe
Runaway Goat Leads Police on Wild Chase
