The naked truth about politics and Social Security
Political Pulpit
The emperor marched in the procession under the beautiful canopy, and all who saw him
in the street and out of the windows exclaimed: "Indeed, the emperor's new suit is
incomparable! What a long train he has! How well it fits him!" No one wished to let
others know he saw nothing, for then he would have seemed unfit or too stupid for his
office. An emperor's clothes were never more admired.
"But he has nothing on at all," said a little child at last. "Good heavens! Listen to the voice of an innocent child," said the father, and one whispered to the other what the child had said. "But he has nothing on at all," cried at last the whole people. That made a deep impression upon the emperor, for it seemed to him that they were right; but he thought to himself, "Now I must bear up to the end." And the chamberlains walked with still greater dignity, as if they carried the train which did not exist. (From The Emperor's New Suit, Hans Christian Anderson; HCA.Gilead.org)
The concluding paragraph from the children's classic is offered as a way to help sensitize us to a very real problem facing the retired and future retired citizens of the United States of America. The current format of Social Security is simply not working and unfortunately the general populace is replaying the mantra of denying that anything is wrong. Social Security is paraded up and down the streets of this great country as a modern marvel of social justice at its very best. Amen! Our nation owes an incredible debt of gratitude to President Franklin D. Roosevelt for stepping beyond his patrician heritage to institute a federal program that is unrivaled in the history of this country and perhaps the world. In 1940, Ida Mae Fuller of Ludlow, Vermont, received the first benefit check from the 1935 Social Security Act. Incidentally, the program was running so smoothly that distribution of benefits began two years ahead of schedule.
Perhaps our current federal government could use a little history lesson; just a thought! The current year of 2006 is a long way from 1935. In 1935, the average income was $1,800 which equates to $21,100 in today's coinage. The median income today is $42,000. I guess that makes me an economical centrist! In 1935, the average American family paid zero federal taxes. Take a look at your pay stub and notice a 25 percent cut off the top earmarked taxes for many varieties and destinations.
Planning for retirement was not on the radar screen of most citizens in 1935. When Ida received her first check, there were forty workers contributing to the mandatory Social Security tax. Startling as it may sound, today for every recipient of a Social Security check there stands only three workers gainfully employed. This is not the result of massive unemployment and the responsibility falling on a few, rather the natural result of longer life, a much greater workforce, and longevity at our jobs.
It is speculated that by the year 2025, the number of workers directly contributing to a single beneficiary will be an astounding two workers. If you crunch the numbers, the Social Security benefits will hit a critical mass in 2017 as more money will be paid out than received in payroll taxes. The result will call for equally massive reductions in services and/or dramatically increased payroll taxes. Add another ten years, 2027, and the federal government must provide an additional $200 billion every year to keep the checks rolling under the present system. Please do not chant the lyrics of the Social Security "Trust Funds" Blues as the answer, because you will discover in that safe is a stack of IOUs, no real cash.
One of the unfortunate realities is that surplus Social Security taxes for years have been subverted to other governmental programs. How did that happen? Economists predict if we maintain our present course of ignoring the problem, the year 2041 will greet us with a headline in the newspapers, "Social Security Is Bankrupt" (Statistics from the White House web page).
Social Security has become a political football for both parties to attempt to gain field advantage as the midterm elections and the presidential elections creep toward us. Personally, I am infuriated that we make senior citizens the recipient of political maneuvering accompanied by frightening statistics and playing on their intense fear of insecurity. We still have an army of seniors that remember the days of life without the help of Social Security. The White House has not helped with the selling of their new approach to Social Security with the bureaucratic mismanagement of the new laws governing the prescription plans for senior citizens. This is an illustration of a great plan convoluted by extremely poor management.
The Washington Post reported in March 2005 what seems to remain a fact. "Three months after President Bush launched his drive to restructure Social Security by creating private investment accounts, public support for his program remains weak, with only 35 percent of Americans now saying they approve of his handling of the issue, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. While the White House has helped convince more than two-thirds of those polled that Social Security is heading for a crisis or possible bankruptcy without change, 56 percent disapprove of his approach ... 38 percent approved of his handling of the issue, and 52 disapproved of it in mid- December."
One could easily say to the president, "Look at your popularity polls, you must find a way to keep the people happy and supportive if you want the republican party to have a chance in the midterm or presidential race. Tone down your aggressive approach to reforming Social Security. Forget about the facts and future projections." Yes, we could respond in some like manner, but in reality we are just ignoring the problem.
Dorcas R. Hardy, former Commissioner of Social Security from 1986 through 1989 during the administration of President Ronald Reagan, in her book, Social Security, The Crisis in America's Social Security System and How to Plan Now for Your Own Financial Survival, offers a sobering wake up call that largely went unheeded, but is ringing more true every year. "When I became commissioner of Social Security in 1986, I started out by stressing the financial integrity of the system and promised that the dollars would be there for everyone when they retired. But as I learned more about the future and watched Congress struggle to balance the budget, my enthusiasm became tempered. I began to limit the time span of my assurances to 'as long as you live' when the audience consisted primarily of those already receiving or about to receive benefits. When speaking to younger groups, I limited my promise to the year 2010 'or so.' And I tried to warn them that, in some circumstances, the crunch could come even earlier."
President Bush has come forward with a bold plan created from the "stuff" that makes America truly great. Our president believes the average citizen should have the liberty and freedom to rule over his tax dollars in such a fashion as best suits him. He aggressively has proposed that all who desire, if born after 1950, can place a percentage of their salary historically marked for Social Security taxes in a personal retirement account. The contributing citizen has 100 percent control over the type of investment they desire. What a novel idea, the average citizen has more control over their own future. Seriously, at times I believe the opponents of President Bush have a total lack of confidence in the ability of Americans to think through their investment options.
Personally, I have zero confidence in the federal government. They are too driven by the winds of political dogma and momentary popularity. Will this highly controversial personal investment aspect of President Bush's proposal work? The American Institute for Full Employment offers a case study from Chile. Jose Pinera, a Harvard-educated Ph.D. and economist, guided Chile through a similar program. The results were that worker retirement funds grew significantly, the savings rate increased, even productivity improved, and the general economic growth doubled to seven percent annually. (Building a Nest an Egg for Your Future)
Prophetic words are not often received by the general populace with cheering, rather more like jeering. In fear and trembling I suggest to the reader that Social Security is not an ironclad promise made by the federal government, one they must fulfill. In 1960, the Supreme Court said in the case of Fleming vs. Nestor, "you have no contract, no property right, and no legal right to benefits, based on paying Social Security." I suggest the emperor is naked; of course meaning the Social Security system must have a total new suit of real clothing. We will not serve the cause of the current retirees or future retirees by ignoring the truth and saying something politically correct that sounds good through the elections then cries out the sky is falling. (Sorry, that is yet another great children's story that preaches.)
Dietrich Bonhoeffer said, "The ultimate test of a moral society is the kind of world that it leaves to its children." In the application of a political issue as a social justice cause, I call your attention to 1 Kings 5:2, "You will shepherd my people Israel, and you will become their ruler." There are times when doing the right thing is the most difficult and least popular. The lectionary passage from Mark 6:1-13 reminds us that going against the popular is not always easy.
Shepherding America through the labyrinthine issues attached to securing a lasting security for all retirees into the future is neither simple nor void of passion. President Bush has a plan and it will serve the American people into the future. He is not playing to the grandstands of today, but offering a balanced and hope-filled future to all retiring generations. We need to preach what is best for the citizens of America and not that which is motivated by either opinion polls or popularity ratio. You shepherd by leading the way. I commend to the reader this is the preferred way of honoring our seniors. Although difficult, it is essential to tell the naked truth about Social Security.
Chester Harris is the senior pastor of Dueber United Methodist Church in Canton, Ohio. He holds a D.Min degree from Asbury Theological Seminary and an M.Div. degree from Pittsburgh Theological Seminary. Chester enjoys being a father and grandfather.
"But he has nothing on at all," said a little child at last. "Good heavens! Listen to the voice of an innocent child," said the father, and one whispered to the other what the child had said. "But he has nothing on at all," cried at last the whole people. That made a deep impression upon the emperor, for it seemed to him that they were right; but he thought to himself, "Now I must bear up to the end." And the chamberlains walked with still greater dignity, as if they carried the train which did not exist. (From The Emperor's New Suit, Hans Christian Anderson; HCA.Gilead.org)
The concluding paragraph from the children's classic is offered as a way to help sensitize us to a very real problem facing the retired and future retired citizens of the United States of America. The current format of Social Security is simply not working and unfortunately the general populace is replaying the mantra of denying that anything is wrong. Social Security is paraded up and down the streets of this great country as a modern marvel of social justice at its very best. Amen! Our nation owes an incredible debt of gratitude to President Franklin D. Roosevelt for stepping beyond his patrician heritage to institute a federal program that is unrivaled in the history of this country and perhaps the world. In 1940, Ida Mae Fuller of Ludlow, Vermont, received the first benefit check from the 1935 Social Security Act. Incidentally, the program was running so smoothly that distribution of benefits began two years ahead of schedule.
Perhaps our current federal government could use a little history lesson; just a thought! The current year of 2006 is a long way from 1935. In 1935, the average income was $1,800 which equates to $21,100 in today's coinage. The median income today is $42,000. I guess that makes me an economical centrist! In 1935, the average American family paid zero federal taxes. Take a look at your pay stub and notice a 25 percent cut off the top earmarked taxes for many varieties and destinations.
Planning for retirement was not on the radar screen of most citizens in 1935. When Ida received her first check, there were forty workers contributing to the mandatory Social Security tax. Startling as it may sound, today for every recipient of a Social Security check there stands only three workers gainfully employed. This is not the result of massive unemployment and the responsibility falling on a few, rather the natural result of longer life, a much greater workforce, and longevity at our jobs.
It is speculated that by the year 2025, the number of workers directly contributing to a single beneficiary will be an astounding two workers. If you crunch the numbers, the Social Security benefits will hit a critical mass in 2017 as more money will be paid out than received in payroll taxes. The result will call for equally massive reductions in services and/or dramatically increased payroll taxes. Add another ten years, 2027, and the federal government must provide an additional $200 billion every year to keep the checks rolling under the present system. Please do not chant the lyrics of the Social Security "Trust Funds" Blues as the answer, because you will discover in that safe is a stack of IOUs, no real cash.
One of the unfortunate realities is that surplus Social Security taxes for years have been subverted to other governmental programs. How did that happen? Economists predict if we maintain our present course of ignoring the problem, the year 2041 will greet us with a headline in the newspapers, "Social Security Is Bankrupt" (Statistics from the White House web page).
Social Security has become a political football for both parties to attempt to gain field advantage as the midterm elections and the presidential elections creep toward us. Personally, I am infuriated that we make senior citizens the recipient of political maneuvering accompanied by frightening statistics and playing on their intense fear of insecurity. We still have an army of seniors that remember the days of life without the help of Social Security. The White House has not helped with the selling of their new approach to Social Security with the bureaucratic mismanagement of the new laws governing the prescription plans for senior citizens. This is an illustration of a great plan convoluted by extremely poor management.
The Washington Post reported in March 2005 what seems to remain a fact. "Three months after President Bush launched his drive to restructure Social Security by creating private investment accounts, public support for his program remains weak, with only 35 percent of Americans now saying they approve of his handling of the issue, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. While the White House has helped convince more than two-thirds of those polled that Social Security is heading for a crisis or possible bankruptcy without change, 56 percent disapprove of his approach ... 38 percent approved of his handling of the issue, and 52 disapproved of it in mid- December."
One could easily say to the president, "Look at your popularity polls, you must find a way to keep the people happy and supportive if you want the republican party to have a chance in the midterm or presidential race. Tone down your aggressive approach to reforming Social Security. Forget about the facts and future projections." Yes, we could respond in some like manner, but in reality we are just ignoring the problem.
Dorcas R. Hardy, former Commissioner of Social Security from 1986 through 1989 during the administration of President Ronald Reagan, in her book, Social Security, The Crisis in America's Social Security System and How to Plan Now for Your Own Financial Survival, offers a sobering wake up call that largely went unheeded, but is ringing more true every year. "When I became commissioner of Social Security in 1986, I started out by stressing the financial integrity of the system and promised that the dollars would be there for everyone when they retired. But as I learned more about the future and watched Congress struggle to balance the budget, my enthusiasm became tempered. I began to limit the time span of my assurances to 'as long as you live' when the audience consisted primarily of those already receiving or about to receive benefits. When speaking to younger groups, I limited my promise to the year 2010 'or so.' And I tried to warn them that, in some circumstances, the crunch could come even earlier."
President Bush has come forward with a bold plan created from the "stuff" that makes America truly great. Our president believes the average citizen should have the liberty and freedom to rule over his tax dollars in such a fashion as best suits him. He aggressively has proposed that all who desire, if born after 1950, can place a percentage of their salary historically marked for Social Security taxes in a personal retirement account. The contributing citizen has 100 percent control over the type of investment they desire. What a novel idea, the average citizen has more control over their own future. Seriously, at times I believe the opponents of President Bush have a total lack of confidence in the ability of Americans to think through their investment options.
Personally, I have zero confidence in the federal government. They are too driven by the winds of political dogma and momentary popularity. Will this highly controversial personal investment aspect of President Bush's proposal work? The American Institute for Full Employment offers a case study from Chile. Jose Pinera, a Harvard-educated Ph.D. and economist, guided Chile through a similar program. The results were that worker retirement funds grew significantly, the savings rate increased, even productivity improved, and the general economic growth doubled to seven percent annually. (Building a Nest an Egg for Your Future)
Prophetic words are not often received by the general populace with cheering, rather more like jeering. In fear and trembling I suggest to the reader that Social Security is not an ironclad promise made by the federal government, one they must fulfill. In 1960, the Supreme Court said in the case of Fleming vs. Nestor, "you have no contract, no property right, and no legal right to benefits, based on paying Social Security." I suggest the emperor is naked; of course meaning the Social Security system must have a total new suit of real clothing. We will not serve the cause of the current retirees or future retirees by ignoring the truth and saying something politically correct that sounds good through the elections then cries out the sky is falling. (Sorry, that is yet another great children's story that preaches.)
Dietrich Bonhoeffer said, "The ultimate test of a moral society is the kind of world that it leaves to its children." In the application of a political issue as a social justice cause, I call your attention to 1 Kings 5:2, "You will shepherd my people Israel, and you will become their ruler." There are times when doing the right thing is the most difficult and least popular. The lectionary passage from Mark 6:1-13 reminds us that going against the popular is not always easy.
Shepherding America through the labyrinthine issues attached to securing a lasting security for all retirees into the future is neither simple nor void of passion. President Bush has a plan and it will serve the American people into the future. He is not playing to the grandstands of today, but offering a balanced and hope-filled future to all retiring generations. We need to preach what is best for the citizens of America and not that which is motivated by either opinion polls or popularity ratio. You shepherd by leading the way. I commend to the reader this is the preferred way of honoring our seniors. Although difficult, it is essential to tell the naked truth about Social Security.
Chester Harris is the senior pastor of Dueber United Methodist Church in Canton, Ohio. He holds a D.Min degree from Asbury Theological Seminary and an M.Div. degree from Pittsburgh Theological Seminary. Chester enjoys being a father and grandfather.
