Date: 1982-05-12
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

I thank the Senator. But the key Democrats in the battle continue to engage in demagogic A new word. Not demagoguery. but demagogicsniping on the social security question instead of trying to make constructive contributions to the compromise effort. Here we areSenate Minority Leader Robert Byrd. for example. says the Republican plan "mortgages the economic future of the elderly." Well. apparently. the American Association of Retired Persons is in the same boat. And House Republican leaders are in the same boat. Mr. President. so much for the editorials. Apparently. they do not really understand what this is all about. And I can understand that. with all of the obfuscation and all of the charges and all of the demagoguery that has come from the other side of the aisle and downtown. as well. We have had these charges of demagoguery thrown around so much that I think we ought to quit talking about demagoguery and get on with the question before the Senate. It is my belief that any reform in social security. any revenue increase and/or benefit cut. should be considered within the context of the social security program alone and without regard to Federal budget needswithout regard to Federal budget needs. Let us make any such reform on the basis of the merits of the case. and not solely to balance the budget. The New York Times editorial failed to recognize that this has been the purpose and true point of our argument. It is responsible to consider changes in social security. only within the challenge and purpose of that program to provide an adequate retirement and disability safety net for all Americans. What is irresponsible is to begin to address the social security issue with the assumption that. we have to cut promised benefit protection now and before the Presidents commission has completed its study and reported anything. The Times editorial appears not to recognize the success and purposes of the social security program. It. terms the program a "sacred cow" and speaks of the Democrats pursuing an "unworthy" battle. Mr. President. there is nothing "unworthy" about the battle the Senate Democrats have pursued on social security during this Congress or past Congresses. or going back to the time when Franklin D. Roosevelt andt a Democratic Congress established the social security prograrr. There Is nothing "unworthy" about preventing the social security minimum benefits from being eliminated for 3 million retired Americans. many of them are elderly women living close to the poverty line. There is nothing "unworthy" about preventing $88 billion in precipitous. deep. and permanent cuts over 5 years. as was proposed by this administration last year. Incidentally. today is the first anniversary of the proposal by this administration to cut $88 billion out of social security. This is the first anniversary. Trust and confidence and predictability have insured the integrity of the Social Security System. There is simply nothing "unworthy" about preventing severe benefit cuts for Americans who have retired upon the promise of a specific level of promised benefits. and there is nothing "unworthy" about preventing a 40 percent cut in benefits for Americans electing to retire at age 62in many instances for health reasons. There is nothing unworthy about that. Mr. President. let me ask the $40 billion question. This is the $40 billion question. Does the Senate have to debate whether to reduce buget deficits on the back of social security recipients every year? Has this become an annual event? One year ago today it was debated. The administration asked Congress for $88 billion in social security benefit cuts over 5 years. There were similar cries of social security bankruptcy then. Who was doing tihe talking? David Stockmanthe OMB Director who fed phony numbers into a computer in order to fool the Congress and the American people. It was David Stockman who said last year. "The most devastating bankruptcy in history" would occur on or about November 3. 1982. Last May. Stockman said this: "The question before the Congress is whether the 36 million Americans who currently depend on the social security system can count on any check at all in less than 2 years hence." Seven months later. many of us read the December issue of the Atlantic Monthly. And this time listen to what David Stockman said. le said. "The Social Security problem is not simply one of satisfying actuaries. it is one of tih- here and now of budget requirements." 8o there he was. baring his soul and stating the truth. le was saying that he social security problem is not sinply one of satisfying actuaries. "it is one of the here and now budget reuirenments." Well. last May It was clear that the $88 billion in social security benefit ruts was part of a budget plan to reduce the emerging KempRoth budget gap. Last May. at the initiative of Senate Democrats. by a vote of 90 to nothing. the Senate unanimously rejected the $88 billion plan only 8 days after it was proposed. Eight days after it was launched. it was shot down. In iejecting the $88 billion in benefit cuts. the Senate declared that the Congress would not let social security go bankrupt. nor would it precipitously or unfairly reduce promised benerits. Last May. the Senate said that any reform in social security should be considered in the context of that program alone. and without regard to other Federal budget requirements. So I thought we had resolved the matter last May. I did not expect social security to become an Issue In the budget process this year. That is a matter for the Finance Committee. But the KempRoth budget deficit project ions have mushroomed over the past year. so 1 year later it is clear that social security has once again become a source for reducing the treiendous budget gap. If we seriously want social security out of the budget debate. then the Senate should take the $40 billion in benefit cuts out of the budget resolution. That is what the Republicans are saying over in the House. That is what they said yesterday. That is what the Democrats said here yesterday. with the exception of two votes. and I respect those two Members. I do not quarrel with any individuals voting his own conscience in the matter. If he sees differently. that is all right. We Democrats want social security cuts removed from the Budget resolution. If we want social security out of the budget debate. then the Senate should take the $40 billion in cuts out of the budget resolution. The question Is that simple. The House Republican leadership has already rejected the $40 billion cut plan. So. Mr. President. I am left asking the $40 billion question. Has a majority of the Senate Republican Budget Committee abandoned their commitnent to cut $40 billion in social security benefits over the next 3 years? If so. let us take this out of the budget resolution. Anything else is Just smoke and mirrors. I do not see anything in the proposal which has been offered by the able Senator from Kansas which is before the Senate. which takes the $40 billion in cuts in social security benefits out of the budget resolution. It still leaves that matter up in the air. It is irresponsible to raise the spector that we may not be able to pay social security benefits next November. as David Stockman did. or in July 1983. as the amendment by my distinguished friend from Kansav Suggests. It Is outrageous to suggest that Congress would sit by and let this happen. Congress is not going to sit by and let this happen. I put my faith in the distinguished Senator from Louisiana. the ranking member of the Finance Committee. and he has been here longer than anybody else in the Senate with the exception. perhaps. of Senator STENNIS. I am sure that Senator LONG and the other Democrats on that committee and on this side of the aisle are not going to sit by and see that system become insolvent. We are not going to see it go broke. It was created by our party in the beginning and we intend to stand by it. Social security recipients have been scared enough. The working young Americans and middle age Americans paying into the system today and who have been promised benefits for the future have been scared enough. They have been scared enough by the repeated assaults on social security that have been made by this administration beginning 1 year ago today with a request for $88 billion in social security cuts. Remedies in social security solvency can and must be found. We will have to find them. It may be difficult. Maybe the bullet will be hard to bite. but we are going to do our best to find those solutions. We Democrats stand ready to work toward those solutions. But we will not support precipitous benefit cuts aimed at reducing the Federal deficit at this time. We want to first see the recommendations of the Presidents task force. Mr. President. I promised to yield to the distingulihed Senator from Missouri. I yield only for a question. and I ask the Chair to protect my rights in all respects.