Date: 1981-05-19
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. the social security program is a contract with our senior citizens and a governmentbuilt on the bedrock of law and moral principlesshould not unilaterally break its commitments. This administration has seized on the budgetcutting hysteria of the momentthe Stockman frenzyto pick up the longheld hopes of some to dismantle the social security system. Economic conditionshigh inflation and a stagnant economycreate severe problems for the stability of the social security system and the administration has conveniently capitalized on this fact to see how far it can chip away at the program. Mr. Speaker. basic changes in the social security system should not be based on temporary economic conditions. After all. this administration has assv..ed usin press releases. brochures. and television appearancesthat these conditions are. indeed. temporary and that we will have a stable economystrong economic activity and low inflation. If the administrations economic projections are accurate. many of the cash flow problems of the social security system will be cured. If they are inaccurate. it is not proper or morally defensible to pass the burden to the senior citizens of this Nation. Mr. Speaker. the administration has asked the American people and the Congress to take it seriously. to accept its commitments and pledges. It has asked us to believe its words. While the administrations social security dismantling has been craftily drafted and provided million of dollars of television exposure. no set of public relations mirrors can alter the fact that the Republican Party has gone back on its pledges to the senior citizens of this Nation. They believed the rhetoric of last falls campaign and they bought on faith the pledges of February that social security would not betouched. President Reagan stood in this Chamber on February 18 and chided those who had expressed concern that the Stockman ax would be aimed at social security. He told us and a national television audience: I know that exaggerated and inaccurate stories about these cuts have disturbed many people. particularly those dependent on grant and benefit programs for their basic needs. Some of you have heard from constituents afraid that Social Security checks. for example. might be taken from them. I regret the fear these unfounded stories have caused and welcome this opportunity to set things straight. * * * The full retirement benefits of more than 31 million social security recipients will be continued along with an annual cost of living Increase * * * . Flushed with their victory on GrammLattathe Stockman wing of the Republican Party decided it now had enough muscle to take on the senior citizenspledges to the contrary not withstanding. The GrammLatta vote opened the gates and today some are pulling out musty old files on every conceivable antipeople proposalincluding elimination of social security. Apologists. of course. are quick to suggest that the administration proposal is simply a means of saving the basic program and the pledges remain intact. even if the program does not. This is nice Potomac doublespeak. but it is not selling among people who have looked on social security as a secure commitment. Mr. Speaker. my guess is that David Stockman and his crowd see the present proposal as simply a way station on the route to even more drastic reductions of social securityon the road to a voluntary program or a private retirement plan operated by a consortium of insurance conglomerates at whatever rate the market will bear. Clearly. Mr. Stockman wants more now. No sooner had the shock waves of the first announcement of social security cuts hit than Mr. Stockman came up with another proposalto defer not only next Julys costofliving increase. but to defer the July 1981 increase as well. Some of the cooler heads in the administration quickly moved to scotch that proposal. but rest assured that Mr. Stockman continues quietly to fondle the plan in the recesses of the OMB. The proposal. as it now stands. would mean a loss of $24 billion a year to social security recipients. A substantial part of the cuts come through a sharp reduction in benefits to those who retire at age 62. This is a particularly cruel cut since most early retirees are forced out of the market by poor health and layoffs in a sagging economy. In some cases. apparently early retirement has been locked into longterm collective bargaining agreements and similar contracts. The administration proposal would reduce these recipients to a subpoverty level. Mr. Speaker. no one questions that -the social security program needs to be examined closely and that there must be longterm stability. The shortterm problems. however. cannot be allowed to become the rationale for a general dismantling. A number of pesons. including former Social Security Commissioner Robert Ball. have suggested that the social security system be allowed to draw on the General Treasury to meet shortterm swings which temporarily affect the systems solvency. This seems to make good economic sense. This same type of Treasury draw is in place. in fact. for the various Government insurance programs which Insure deposits at financial institutions. Commissioner Ball suggested various adJustments in social security taxes. offset by income tax credits. as well as allowing borrowing among the social security systems three trust funds as a means of keeping the system solvent. Mr. Speaker. hardworking Americans have paid into the social security system as an insurance policy. They have trusted their Government to protect their benefitsbenefits they have earned through the years. If this administration is unwilling to meet commitments and to protect the retirement rights. the Congress should make certain that we do meet our obligations to the senior citizens who have met their obligations to the fund and society through the years. Mr. Speaker. reform of the social security system cannot be accomplished through the meatax approaches of David Stockmans OMB. Change3 in the system. where they are required. must be carefully worked out. not put together in overnight sessions at OMB. Any changes must be equitable and they must be phased into the program in a gradual manner and they must assure that the basic benefits of social security remain.e