Bush plan takes security out of social security.

President Bush's plan for social security is putting my friend Veronica's retirement in jeopardy. Age 51, an African American woman with an MBA, paying private school tuition for an accomplished son, Veronica worked for 10 years for a subsidiary of Enron. When the scandal broke, she lost the entire pension she had worked to accumulate. Veronica viewed our social security system in the way that it was designed: as the foundation on which to build an individual retirement plan. When the bottom fell out of Enron, there was nothing left to support her retirement--nothing except for the foundation that she had secured with her social security account. Unfortunately for Veronica, there is little security in her social security account. Veronica is in her early fifties--at a point in history when President Bush proposes a transition to private accounts that will make benefits a risk-laden prospect for those in her age group. Under President Bush's plan for social security, Veronica will not be able to keep the full benefits of the current program as will those over 65. Nor will she have time in her work life for her invested money to (hopefully) grow like that of those in their twenties. Veronica paid into her employer-organized pension plan and into our social insurance system, but if President Bush prevails, her benefits will be at risk. After her hard work and careful planning, she may have little to show for it. Social workers understand that assessing the implications of a policy for individual citizens like Veronica is often a good yardstick by which to measure the impact of a change. Moreover, social workers understand that policy change in the United States flows from the political process as informed, when allowed, by rational analysis. We know that the social security system has been subject to extensive analysis, evaluation, and monitoring since its inception. These analyses consistently reveal that, despite President Bush's rhetoric, the system in the United States is not "busted," "broke," or "in crisis." Social security is an example of a program that "works," that benefits all Americans. Indeed, between 1959 and 2000, the poverty rate for the elderly population fell from 35 percent to 10 percent largely because of it (Century Foundation, 2005). Yes, there are demographic dislocations. It has been understood for some time that without adjustment, demographic trends will produce a shortfall of funds available to pay benefits at some time in the future. From the beginning of the program through the working years of the baby boom generation and continuing until 2018, however, workers pay more into the system than retirees and the disabled are paid in benefits. This surplus is used to fund a trust fund that is invested in government bonds and that, together with worker contributions, will, even under conservative estimates, be able to pay all promised benefits until 2042. At that time, benefits due the retiring baby boomers will begin to exceed the ability of the system to finance them. It is this dynamic that forces some adjustment (Andrews, 2005). It is galling that the president's proposed individual retirement accounts will do nothing to address these shortfalls. …