Candidates diverge on Social Security fix

WASHINGTON — When President Bush tried last year to overhaul the nation’s Social Security system by introducing private investment accounts for younger workers, Congress balked at the idea and Democrats attacked the plan as a veiled effort to cut future benefits.

But lawmakers from both parties agree some type of reform is necessary to boost the financial security of the system, which provides benefits to more than 1 million Missouri residents.

Under current projections, Social Security will begin to pay out more in benefits than it takes in by 2017, and the trust funds will be exhausted in 2040.

Both Republican Sen. Jim Talent and his Democratic opponent, State Auditor Claire McCaskill, say they oppose privatization, but they disagree on the urgency of finding a solution to the financial problems.

Here, they discuss their views in answers to written questions.

Q. The government has projected that the trust fund for Social Security will be depleted by 2040. What should the government do to keep the program solvent for future generations?

McCASKILL: The best way to ensure Social Security will not be depleted by 2040 is by stopping efforts to privatize this guaranteed source of income that seniors can trust. We have the time to work together to get it right. The trust fund still has $1.7 trillion in reserves and will pay full benefits for another 50 years. However, diverting funds from the Social Security trust fund into private accounts is not the answer. It will deplete the trust fund faster and put seniors at risk. We need to ensure that seniors, widows, children and disabled workers get the earned benefits of a program they paid into.

TALENT: I believe that Congress must act to strengthen Social Security to protect its long-term viability for our children and grandchildren. Today, there are 48 million people collecting Social Security benefits. These benefits are funded by payroll taxes collected from 159 million working Americans. As the baby boomers retire, there will be fewer workers supporting the benefits of each retiree and Social Security will begin running deficits. Projections from the Social Security Trustees show that in 2017, the government will have to use general revenue funds to pay benefits, as the amount of money paid out in benefits will be greater than the amount taken in through the payroll tax. Congress cannot save the program unless the money collected for Social Security benefits is used for that purpose.

Q. Last year, President Bush proposed to overhaul Social Security with the introduction of private investment accounts for younger workers. Do you support the creation of private accounts?

McCASKILL: No. I do not support the privatization of Social Security. After a bipartisan Congress defeated President Bush’s first attempt at privatizing Social Security, he has recently pledged to push private accounts through Congress again in 2007. The president’s plan to privatize Social Security will worsen the shortfall by diverting $1.4 trillion over the next 10 years. Ultimately, this will add to the growing deficit that has already saddled our grandchildren with debt.

Under that plan, seniors will face a 40 percent cut to their guaranteed benefits and then face the inevitable risk of their benefits at the whim of the stock market. I will fight any attempt to privatize Social Security because I oppose the risk associated with private accounts.

TALENT: I’m strongly opposed to privatization.

The people who are for privatization are the people who are for doing nothing because if we don’t do anything, the funds are going to run out and people will be left with only their private savings. That’s privatization.

What we have to do is use the money paid into Social Security for Social Security — first, to pay the current retirees and then to save in some form so that we have something there for people who are going to retire in the future.

Q. Should Congress create a bipartisan commission to study entitlement reform, as President Bush proposed earlier this year?

McCASKILL: Yes. I would support the creation of a new truly bipartisan commission to study ways to strengthen Social Security. If we want to get serious about strengthening the long term solvency of this vital program, we need to control rising government debt and the out-of-control spending going on in Washington.

TALENT: Yes. I’m willing to listen to ideas on both sides of the aisle. Any plan that I would support must protect Social Security for current retirees and provide for future retirees. Those workers who have paid into the system have a right to collect benefits once they become eligible to do so.

Another key to protecting Social Security is economic growth and productivity. The more productive the economy is, the better off Social Security is. That means lower taxes, better energy policies, liability relief and health care plans for small businesses and their workers.