39–006 

109TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 109–58 

RESOLUTION OF INQUIRY REQUESTING THE PRESIDENT TO TRANSMIT 

CERTAIN INFORMATION TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES RESPECTING A CLAIM MADE BY THE PRESIDENT ON FEBRUARY 16, 2005, 

AT A MEETING PORTSMOUTH, NEW HAMPSHIRE, THAT THERE IS NOT A 

SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST 

APRIL 27, 2005.—Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

Mr. THOMAS, from the Committee on Ways and Means, 

submitted the following 

ADVERSE REPORT 

together with 

DISSENTING VIEWS 

[To accompany H. Res. 170] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Ways and Means, to whom was referred the 

resolution (H. Res. 170) of inquiry requesting the President to 

transmit certain information to the House of Representatives respecting a claim made by the President on February 16, 2005, at 

a meeting Portsmouth, New Hampshire, that there is not a Social 

Security trust, having considered the same, report unfavorably 

thereon without amendment and recommend that the resolution 

not be agreed to. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

I. Introduction .................................................................................................... 2 

A. Purpose and Summary ..................................................................... 2 

B. Background ........................................................................................ 2 

II. Hearings ......................................................................................................... 3 

III. Votes of the Committee ................................................................................. 3 

IV. Comittee Oversight Findings and Recommendations ................................. 4 

A. New Budget Authonty and Tax Expenditures ................................ 4 

B. Performance Goals and Objectives .................................................. 4 

C. Constitutional Authority Statement ................................................ 4 

D. Cost Estimate Prepared By the Congressional Budget Office ...... 4 

V. New Advisory Committees ............................................................................ 5 

VI. Congressional Accountability Act ................................................................. 5 

VII. Federal Mandates .......................................................................................... 5 

VIII. Views ............................................................................................................... 6 

2 

I. INTRODUCTION 

A. PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

House Resolution 170 requests the President to transmit certain 

information to the House of Representatives respecting a claim 

made by the President on February 16, 2005, at a meeting in 

Portsmouth, New Hampshire, that there is not a Social Security 

trust. 

B. BACKGROUND

House Resolution 170 is a resolution of inquiry, which pursuant 

to rule XIII, clause 7, of the Rules of the House of Representatives, 

directs the Committee to act on the resolution within 14 legislative 

days, or a privileged motion to discharge the Committee is in order. 

H. Res. 170 was introduced and referred to the Committee on Ways 

and Means, on March 17, 2005, and was ordered reported adversely by the Committee on April 25, 2005 by a vote of 22 to 1. 

Under the rules and precedents of the House, a resolution of inquiry is the means by which the House requests information from 

the President of the United States or the head of an executive department. According to ‘‘Deschler’s Precedents,’’ it is a ‘‘simple resolution making a direct request or demand of the President or the 

head of an executive department to furnish the House of Representatives with specific factual information in the possession of 

the executive branch.’’ 

On March 17, 2005, Mr. Kucinich of Ohio introduced H. Res. 170 

requesting the President to transmit certain information to the 

House of Representatives respecting a claim made by the President 

on February 16, 2005, at a meeting in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, that there is not a Social Security trust. 

H. Res. 170 focuses on 11 words out of a nearly 3,800–word 

speech. When the 11 words are read in the context of the President’s remarks, it is clear that the President was discussing the 

pay-as-you-go nature of the Social Security program, and the difference between a government and private-sector trust. 

In a private-sector trust, there are assets that are administered 

for a specific beneficiary. The Social Security Trust Funds are different. Instead of real economic assets, the Social Security Trust 

Funds hold IOU’s, and function as an accounting mechanism for 

the government. When the Social Security taxes are received in the 

Treasury, they are credited to the trust funds in the form of Treasury securities. When Social Security benefits are paid, an equivalent value of Treasury securities is removed. When taxes exceed 

the amount needed to pay benefits in a given year, the trust funds 

are credited with a balance of Treasury securities. 

The securities credited to the Social Security Trust Funds are 

guaranteed as to both principal and interest by the U.S. government. However, in order to honor the commitments to the trust 

funds, the Federal Government will need to raise cash by increasing taxes, reducing spending, or increasing the deficit. For this reason, the Social Security system is not a ‘‘trust’’ or a savings plan, 

but a pay-as-you-go system. According to the Social Security Administration, these accounting procedures established in the Social 

3 

Security Act of 1935 (P.L. 74–271) have not changed significantly 

in the last 70 years. 

Information related to the Social Security Trust Funds is widely 

available in the public domain. Each of the last three Administrations has included language in their budgets submitted to Congress 

to describe the differences between a private sector trust and the 

Federal budget meaning of ‘‘trust.’’ Also, the annual report of the 

Board of Trustees of the Social Security Trust Funds includes language explaining how the trust funds work. In addition, the Congressional Budget Office and the Government Accountability Office 

have both issued many public documents to explain the nature of 

government trust funds. 

Also, on March 9, 2005, the Committee held a hearing on the future of Social Security. The primary focus of the hearing was Social 

Security’s structure and financial condition of the Social Security 

Trust Funds. At the hearing, David M. Walker, Comptroller General, U.S. Government Accountability Office, submitted testimony 

that ‘‘the Social Security Trust Fund is a subaccount of the federal 

government rather than a private trust fund. Its assets are not 

readily marketable nor are they convertible into cash other than 

through raising revenues, cutting other government expenses, increasing debt held by the public, or some combination of these.’’ 

Other witnesses at the hearing also discussed the nature of the Social Security Trust Funds. 

The Committee reported the resolution adversely because the 

resolution requests information related to the Social Security Trust 

Funds that is already known and widely available. 

II. HEARINGS 

The Committee did not hold hearings on H. Res. 170. 

III. VOTE OF THE COMMITTEE 

In compliance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, the following statements are made concerning the vote of the Committee on Ways and Means in its consideration of the resolution, H. Res. 170. 

MOTION TO REPORT THE RESOLUTION

The resolution, H. Res. 170, was ordered adversely reported by 

a roll call vote of 22 yeas to 1 nay (with a quorum being present). 

The vote was as follows: 

Representative Yea Nay Present Representative Yea Nay Present 

Mr. Thomas ........................... X ........... ............. Mr. Rangel ........................... ........... ........... .............

Mr. Shaw ............................... X ........... ............. Mr. Stark .............................. ........... ........... .............

Mrs. Johnson ......................... X ........... ............. Mr. Levin .............................. ........... X .............

Mr. Herger ............................. X ........... ............. Mr. Cardin ............................ ........... ........... .............

Mr. McCrery ........................... X ........... ............. Mr. McDermott ..................... ........... ........... .............

Mr. Camp .............................. X ........... ............. Mr. Lewis (GA) ..................... ........... ........... .............

Mr. Ramstad ......................... X ........... ............. Mr. Neal ............................... ........... ........... .............

Mr. Nussle ............................. ........... ........... ............. Mr. McNulty .......................... ........... ........... .............

Mr. Johnson ........................... X ........... ............. Mr. Jefferson ........................ ........... ........... .............

Mr. Portman .......................... X ........... ............. Mr. Tanner ............................ ........... ........... .............

Mr. English ........................... X ........... ............. Mr. Becerra .......................... ........... ........... .............

Mr. Hayworth ......................... X ........... ............. Mr. Doggett .......................... ........... ........... .............

Mr. Weller .............................. X ........... ............. Mr. Pomeroy ......................... ........... ........... .............

Mr. Hulshof ........................... X ........... ............. Ms. Tubbs Jones .................. ........... ........... .............

4 

Representative Yea Nay Present Representative Yea Nay Present 

Mr. Lewis (KY) ...................... X ........... ............. Mr. Thompson ...................... ........... ........... .............

Mr. Foley ............................... X ........... ............. Mr. Larson ............................ ........... ........... .............

Mr. Brady .............................. X ........... ............. Mr. Emanuel ......................... ........... ........... .............

Mr. Reynolds ......................... ........... ........... ............. .............................................. ........... ........... .............

Mr. Ryan ............................... X ........... ............. .............................................. ........... ........... .............

Mr. Cantor ............................. X ........... ............. .............................................. ........... ........... .............

Mr. Linder ............................. X ........... ............. .............................................. ........... ........... .............

Mr. Beauprez ......................... X ........... ............. .............................................. ........... ........... .............

Mrs. Hart ............................... X ........... ............. .............................................. ........... ........... .............

Mr. Chocola ........................... X ........... ............. .............................................. ........... ........... .............

IV. COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

The Committee held no oversight activities with respect to clause 

3( c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives. 

A. NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY AND TAX EXPENDITURES

Clause 3(c)(2) of House Rule XIII is inapplicable because H. Res. 

170 does not provide new budgetary authority or increased tax expenditures. 

B. PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

The rule requiring a statement of performance goals and objectives is inapplicable. 

C. CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Pursuant to clause 3(d)(I) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the Committee finds the authority for this resolution in article I, section 1 of the Constitution. 

D. COST ESTIMATE PREPARED BY THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET

OFFICE

In compliance with clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, requiring a cost estimate prepared by 

the Congressional Budget Office, the following report prepared by 

CBO is provided. 

U.S. CONGRESS, 

Congressional Budget Office, 

Washington, DC, April 26, 2005. 

Hon. WILLIAM ‘‘BILL’’ M. THOMAS, 

Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means, 

House of Representatives, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H. Res. 170, a resolution of inquiry requesting the President to transmit certain information to 

the House of Representatives respecting a claim made by the President on February 16, 2006, at a meeting [in] Portsmouth, New 

Hampshire, that there is not a Social Security trust. 

5 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Kathy Ruffing. 

Sincerely, 

ELIZABETH M. ROBINSON

(For Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Director). 

Enclosure. 

H. Res. 170—A resolution of inquiry requesting the President to 

transmit certain information to the House of Representatives respecting a claim made by the President on February 16, 2006, 

at a meeting [in] Portsmouth, New Hampshire, that there is not 

a Social Security trust 

H. Res. 170 would request the President, within 14 days, to 

transmit further information to the House of Representatives clarifying a statement that he made at a stop in Portsmouth, New 

Hampshire, that ‘‘there is no Social Security trust.’’ CBO estimates 

that the cost of complying with the request would be insignificant. 

The resolution would not affect direct spending or revenues. 

The CBO staff contact is Kathy Ruffing. This estimate was approved by Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget 

Analysis. 

V. NEW ADVISORY COMMITTEES 

H. Res. 170 does not establish or authorize any new advisory 

committees. 

VI. CONGRESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT 

H. Res. 170 does not apply to the legislative branch. 

VII. FEDERAL MANDATES 

H. Res. 170 provides no Federal mandates. 

(6) 

VIII. Dissenting Views on H. Res. 170, Resolution of Inquiry 

We disagree with the majority’s action to report the resolution to 

the House with an adverse recommendation. Such a recommendation ensures that the full House will not consider the resolution. 

On the contrary, we believe that the resolution raises an important 

issue which deserves discussion and consideration by the full 

House. 

Unfortunately, we were not able even to have full discussion and 

consideration by the Committee. The markup was scheduled on the 

latest possible day, with the minimum notice, in the evening and 

on a day when many members had previously-scheduled activities 

in their districts. Only one Democratic Member attended. 

The February 16 statement by the President cited in the resolution is only one of many comments by the President and other Administration officials disparaging the Social Security trust funds 

and their holdings. The trust funds are characterized as merely 

holding IOUs or pieces of paper. These comments seem designed to 

weaken public confidence in Social Security’s future and create an 

impression that Social Security’s financial difficulties are larger, 

and more immediate, than they actually are. 

In addition to exaggerating the scope of Social Security’s problems, the Administration’s effort to disparage the trust funds and 

imply that they have no value suggests that the Administration believes we either cannot afford to pay back the monies that have 

been borrowed from Social Security over the years, or that we 

should not pay back the trust funds. 

Either choice is disturbing. The trust funds have been built up 

through workers’ hard-earned contributions to the fund. A regressive tax has been effectively used to fund the rest of government. 

We simply must pay back the Social Security trust funds. It is our 

moral, legal, and financial obligation to every American. 

The Administration should not hint that we cannot afford to do 

so or should not do so. This would be troubling from any Administration. But it is particularly troubling to hear such comments from 

an Administration that reversed the policy of saving every penny 

of the trust funds’ surpluses, has diverted $670 billion of those surpluses over five years, and now proposes to divert every penny of 

future surpluses. 

This is irresponsible from the standpoint of the Social Security 

debate. However, it is also irresponsible as a matter of our overall 

fiscal circumstances and the financing of the Federal government, 

a topic of central concern to our Committee and the Congress. 

The bonds held by the trust funds are Treasury securities, similar to those held by individual and institutional investors—as well 

as Central Banks—in the United States and throughout the world. 

Questioning the value of the trust funds is questioning the value 

of those other bonds as well. Those bonds are also ‘‘merely’’ lOUs 

7 

or pieces of paper. To respond to criticism by acknowledging that 

we will honor the trust funds’ bonds, while making other statements suggesting that the United States really can’t afford to do 

so, sends a message about Social Security but also one about our 

other debt. Treasury bondholders have to wonder whether the 

President and his Administration believe we can afford to honor 

the debts we owe them as well. 

If investors begin to worry about the safety of Treasury bonds, 

we could see significant repercussions in our domestic and international financial markets and in the U.S. and global economy, including a significant rise in our interest rates. The situation could 

be particularly damaging if the international investors who have 

purchased 91 percent of U.S. debt the past four years decide to stop 

buying new Treasury bonds or to sell their existing holdings. 

This is why we find comments such as those the President made 

on February 16 and on many other occasions—including his recent 

visit to West Virginia—so troubling. The resolution before us 

sought clarification of these remarks—clarification that could play 

a significant role in allaying any possible market concerns. 

We have sought such clarification from the Administration this 

year with little success. The Ranking Member submitted a written 

question on this topic to the Treasury Secretary following his testimony at our February 8 hearing. The Ranking Member also wrote 

to the Secretary following the President’s April 5 visit to West Virginia. To date, the Treasury Secretary has not responded. 

H. Res. 170 raises an important issue which the Administration 

has ignored. We have sought to obtain further information and 

clarification of the Administration’s views through testimony and 

correspondence. The Administration has not responded. Therefore, 

we believe it is appropriate for this Committee and the Congress 

to explore other avenues to obtain an appropriate explanation of 

the President’s comments, as well as similar comments from others 

in his Administration. 

8 

H. Res. 170 is necessarily limited, in that it addresses only one 

specific instance and phrasing of a view that the Administration 

has expressed in many forms. We would prefer that the Administration respond to the general concern, and to do so without Congress having to pass legislation. That could have a reassuring effect 

on financial markets and also facilitate a more accurate and honest 

debate about Social Security’s finances. Committee adoption of the 

resolution would have been a valuable step towards that goal. Unfortunately, the majority has opted to effectively kill the resolution, 

permitting the Administration to continue to stonewall on this important matter. 

CHARLES B. RANGEL. 

SANDER LEVIN. 

JIM MCDERMOTT. 

RICHARD E. NEAL. 

MICHAEL R. MCNULTY. 

RAHM EMANUEL. 

XAVIER BECERRA. JOHN LEWIS. 

BEN CARDIN. 

WM. J. JEFFERSON. PETE STARK. JOHN B. LARSON. LLOYD DOGGETT. EARL POMEROY. 

Æ