Posted on 05/29/2002 9:57:52 AM PDT by Stand Watch Listen
Americans talk more and know less about Social Security than about any other program that closely concerns them. They are aware that they contribute part of their wages into a fund labeled "FICA," a contribution matched by their employer, and that at age 65 or so they will receive a "benefit." Don't ask what that will amount to in dollars and cents, or how it will be determined. The Democrats are aware of this general ignorance, so in daily pronouncements to the electorate they insist that they alone stand between Social Security and the rapacious hands of greedy Republicans. From Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) to the lowest Democrat gofer has come a fusillade of charges that the Republicans intend to bankrupt Social Security and put the elderly out in the street.
Social Security has had its difficulties, but in all the years since its inception decades of Democratic Congresses have siphoned Social Security funds to finance tax-and-tax and spend-and-spend boondoggles. Only the Republicans and their alleged "big-business" allies kept Social Security from being turned into another Democratic disaster.
Alas, the truth doesn't halt the propaganda and the smear of a big-enough lie. The latest of these is that Republican efforts to strengthen and reform the system really are part of a "hidden agenda" to cut benefits to the bone. Ask the Democratic National Committee what the "secret" is in that agenda — then duck, because you will be inundated by a blizzard of horseradish (see Washington's Week).
The Social Security system was the product of the Franklin Roosevelt administration, so to discuss its shortcomings is like charging the pope with barratry. But when his brain trust proposed Social Security legislation to FDR during his first term he turned thumbs down, emphatically, even though welfarism already was part of the New Deal bible. FDR rejected the brain-trust argument that oldsters would quit their jobs, making openings for some of the 11 million unemployed. That condition had not changed when the 1936 elections rolled around and did not change until the draft and war production put America back to work in 1941.
But Roosevelt changed his mind about Social Security in 1935, and it is a historical fact that he did so when the brain trust whispered into his ear: "We'll give the Social Security fund 2 percent interest for its money, hand out a bunch of paper IOUs and leave you with a fistful of millions to finance New Deal programs." The lawyers and the pols promptly turned out a statute to do this, which ever since has given the country big trouble. The cutest part was the provision that the Social Security take would not give the taxpayer any title to his contributions. The fund was the government's money, and if the Democrats so decided they legally could fold the program, keep the cash and open the poorhouse for the old folks.
The 60 Plus Association has made an analysis of the Social Security statute in far greater detail than is possible here, and documents the necessity for the reforms that President George W. Bush and the Republicans in Congress hope to achieve. A letter to 60 Plus will get you all the facts to help prevent Gephardt, Daschle & Co. from demagoguing the issue. But how to withstand the drumfire of accusations, supported by the media, that Republicans are plotting to take away from you what you haven't got in the first place?
With the help of former president Bill Clinton and the crooked shift in control of the Senate, congressional Democrats have been able to torpedo Social Security reform. Donning their fright wigs, they hope to keep it going by shouting "stop thief!" at the Republicans. The most cynical and dishonest phase of the Democrat onslaught against the proposals of Bush and the Republicans involves an alleged "privatization." This would allow the taxpayer to deduct a percentage of his FICA payments to be invested privately for retirement. Placed in mutual funds it could yield as high as 8 percent compared to the present 2 percent — a nice piece of change for the retiree, with the added benefits that the equities market would take off like a July Fourth rocket and business would have billions with which to make jobs and increase productivity.
Under our present system, the contributions of a taxpayer who dies before reaching retirement age revert to FICA. The government gets it all. There is a language about survivors in the statute, but in many cases this amounts to nothing, even when the government lives up to its promises. Today, if you die before retirement age, all your contributions and those of your employer remain with the government — gone to waste. Under "privatization," investments and interest would go to the taxpayer's family and heirs.
This, of course, shocks the liberal/left. According to their philosophy, everything belongs to government, which generously allows its citizens to keep such of their earnings as Congress and the IRS reluctantly allow. Government takes its cut of their wages before they can rustle the long green; it decides how much capital profit can be made and what percentage of losses can be deducted; it determines what expenses are allowed by businesses and individuals; and it imposes a death tax even though every penny in any estate already has been taxed at least once.
The Democrats weep crocodile tears about what would happen to a stupid citizenry they claim is just not smart enough to invest in Wall Street, although more than 40 million Americans are doing so successfully. With the overwhelming support of the media, the Democrats continue to diddle the electorate with the argument that reform of Social Security is a "big-business" plot to pick John Q. Public's pockets. The big question: Will voters think of their own interests or of those of the Daschle Democrats, who think only of re-election?
Ralph de Toledano is the dean of Washington columnists and is a frequent writer for Insight magazine.
Like every other corrupt trustee, the United States government should have its assets seized and auctioned to the highest bidder and the proceeds used to retire all current and future obligations. This should include the personal assets of all high-level government employees.
Books by Ralph de ToledanoINSIGHT magazine has been around for a number of years. I have been posting artiles from this publication for the last 4 years. The INSIGHT publishers also publish the Washington Times newpaper.
BACKLOG DELAYS SOCIAL SECURITY
By LEIGH STROPE Associated Press Writer
May 2 2002, 6:01 AM PDT
Washington - Social Security officials say disabled Americans who apply for benefits often must wait two to three years to start receiving them because of a backlog of applications. (Note: Medicare does not kick in for another 2 years after this award!)
SS Commissioner Jo Anne Barnhart delivered those findings Wednesday to Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, who requested during Barnhart’s confirmation hearing last year a study of delays in agency operations. …It can take as long as 1,150 days to process a disability application, the SSA study said. For about half the time, the applications remain idle because of a huge backlog of cases that haven’t been completed because of legal appeals and other procedures. For example, there were about 200,000 backlogged cases in 2001 at the administrative judge level.
Out of 100 people who apply for disability benefits, on average 40 will be approve in about 125 days, the agency said, based on 2001 figures. About 35 of the 60 applications that were denied will go away, and about 25 will appeal. If a person continues through the entire appeals process, a final decision could come in as long as 1,150 days.
…..The SSA receives more than 2 million applications for disability benefits each year.
“The result is that disabled Americans are left to spend hundreds of days in limbo without critical help.” Baucus said………
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.