Tancredo Warns the Social Security System Endangered by Bush’s "Totalization Agreement" with Mexico

Congressman Tom Tancredo ^

[Happy2BMe]

From the Office of Congressman Tom Tancredo FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE January 09, 2004

Tancredo Warns that the Social Security System Is Endangered by Bush’s Proposed "Totalization Agreement" with Mexico

A September 2003 GAO Report warns that the cost of the proposed agreement cannot be reliably estimated because the number of eligible Mexican workers in unknown and may number in the millions.

WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman Tom Tancredo (CO-06) today criticized President Bush’s proposal for allowing both legal and illegal Mexican workers to reclaim their Social Security contributions when they reach retirement age. "The President’s proposal bears no resemblance to the other agreements we already have with 20 other countries," said Tancredo. "Bringing illegal Mexican workers into the Social Security System not only rewards illegal behavior, it also further endangers the fiscal health of our Social Security System."

"The President’s proposal for a "Totalization Agreement" with Mexico was included in the Administration’s proposals released on Wednesday, but few in the media have reported on the ramifications of that proposal," said Tancredo. "The American public needs to understand how this plan might impact an already fragile Social Security System."

"We do have agreements with 20 other countries, agreements which allow foreign citizens who have worked in the United States to reclaim their Social Security contributions when they retire in their home countries," Tancredo noted. "American citizens benefit from these agreements because the agreements are reciprocal."

But the proposed agreement with Mexico is radically different from earlier agreements, Tancredo noted. By including illegal workers in the program the costs will skyrocket.

"Including illegal Mexican workers in our Social Security System will add untold billions of dollars in future liabilities. The September 2003 GAO Report basically says the cost estimates being used by the Treasury Department and the Social Security Administration are not founded in actuarial realities. Among the many questions raised by the GAO, most challenge the adequacy or the SSA’s analysis of future costs.

The cost of a totalization agreement with Mexico is highly uncertain. [ p. 2]

Mexican citizens with fewer than 40 coverage credits[calendar quarters of active employment]will be permitted to combine their annual earnings under their home country’s social security program with their annual earnings under the U.S. Social Security program to meet the 40-credit requirement...A Mexican citizen need work in the U.S. only six quarters to qualify for the program. [p. 8]

An agreement with Mexico...represents unique and difficult challenges for SSA because so little is known about the size, work history, earnings, and dependents of the unauthorized Mexican population... An agreement with Mexico [is] potentially far more costly than any other. [pp. 14-15]

Poor data undermine the reliability of SSA’s cost estimate. [p.9]

The reliability and integrity of Mexican government data on birth, work history and retirement contributions are open to question because of poor internal controls within the Mexican government. [pp. 6-7]

"Adding Mexico to the list of countries with which we have reciprocal social security agreements makes no sense unless the primary goal is to encourage more illegal workers to enter the U.S. workforce," said Tancredo. "I think not only our senior citizens but all who care about the fiscal health of the Social Security System will have serious objections to this plan."

###

[Happy2BMe]

Should there be a TOTALIZATION AGREEMENT BORDER with Mexico?

[Happy2BMe]

"For one you have to remember that 42% of hispanic births are to unwed usually very young mothers --- you can look at the street children of Mexico City to see where that leads."

Shhh...! We have TOTALIZATION going on around here.

[AzJohn]

The point is to be clear as to what the problem is with this proposed agreement. It does not provide full cash benefits to Mexicans who have worked here only a few years. To get full benefits they would still need 10 years of working and paying into the system--same as it is for Americans and same as it has always been. Nor do I see anything wrong with legal Mexican immigrants benefitting from this proposal.

The real problem is that the administration of Social Security has insufficient restrictions on illegals of any nationality qualifying for and receiving Social Security benefits. Strictly speaking, that is not due to the proposed agreeent, but it would exacerbate the problem by expanding the pool of potential beneficiaries.

[Ben Ficklin]

As you know, the the stats on unwed mothers apply to many, many countries. For you to attempt to present this as unique to the Mexicans only damages your credibility.

[FITZ]

I didn't say it's unique to them but to count on youths who are clearly disadvantaged by all statistics to pay for the retirement years of American seniors is silly.

[FITZ]

Anyhow if the youths of Mexico are our salvation --- as if they'll be giving up their own seniors to support us ---then Mexico's own retirement plan must be doing superbly --- why don't they just let us in on theirs? (Mexico already does have a pension program) Why are they wanting in our ours?

[chatham]

I'm starting to believe Mr. Bush is Bi-Polar.
On the one hand he is supposedly protecting the people and the Soverignty of the U.S.A.
On the other he is heading headlong into a Global One world Order and he refuses to control the Border with Mexico.
Those two goals seem to me to be mutually exclusive.
From all I've heard S.S. can't support itself because of our politicians shifting the S.S. Funding and leaving I.O.U.'s.
Bush wants to share S.S.Benefits with Mexico and comingle the methods used to create eligibility.
I think his trolley is off the Tracks.
The N.E.A. is just downright insulting and corrosive to Christians,h since soaking A Crucifix in Urine is not my idea of respect for my Savior and not one dime of My taxes should be used for these Slimy Idiots.
I was a big Bush Fan and still believe he is better than any Democrat but i'm getting P.O.'d more every day.

[Consort]

It looks like Tom Tancredo, Ron Paul, and John McCain are competing on who will be the Ross Perot of this general election. So far, Tom is in the lead. Ron isn't trying hard enough. John could switch parties.

[Ben Ficklin]

Your right, Mexico does have a system.

It is a two edged sword, it is designed to prevent workers from both countries having to pay into both systems. We have this arragement with many countries.

Of course you will next parrot the "it may, it could, it might" cost the US a lot of money. Even if it is triple the projection, its still beans.

Let me tell you, there's no if about it, as more and more US citizens work in Mexico, this will be beneficial.

If you weren't so hung up on the past, you could see the future.

[FITZ]

The past? Things were better 20 years ago in Mexico --- a million a year weren't fleeing and there was far less crime. They say the street children are becoming a serious problem --- now and for the future especially in Mexico City, Mexico is quickly losing it's family values. It's funny how many Mexicans will tell you there are serious problems in that country --- but you're insisting there are none, and that they haven't only saved their country but are coming to save ours.

[Ben Ficklin]

Once again, you are trying to represent that Mexico has problems that are unique to Mexico, when the reality is that they are experiencing the same problems found thru-out the world.

[Don Joe]

I don't like this. Initially, Bush balked at endorsing concurrent receipt benefits for disabled U.S. military veterans because it would cost too much.

Where is the same concern when it comes to granting social security benefits to illegal migrants from another country?

It goes like this:

The mexican illegals bring their culture, their values, their hopes and dreams to America. The disabled American veterans, on the other hand, have served their purpose. Screw 'em.

Thus spracht Rovathustra.

[Don Joe]

I foolishly voted for Perot and helped Bill Clinton become President in 1992. Never again will I make that mistake!

I hear ya. I foolishly voted for Bush three years ago.

Lessons learned...

[Don Joe]

Why not try a write-in for Tancredo or Paul. Perhaps even vote for the Constitution Party candidate.

I'm thinking that voting for all the other races, but leaving "President" blank, will send the strongest message. It'll be real easy for 'em. All they'll have to do is look at the total number of ballots cast, minus the total number of votes cast for President. And with all the talk of people not voting for President this time around, I figure it's a given that Master Rove will be looking at those numbers.

[FITZ]

Mexico has problems that are not unique to any other third world country. They are not coming here because they read about our lower population growth and figured our Social Security program might need some help. They are coming here --- some because they're offered dirt wages with no health insurance benefits --- and taxpayers will make up the difference, or strictly because of our welfare and handout programs. Employers are bringing them in just to avoid paying Americans minimum wage and overtime etc. The many billions of dollars being provided for their free health care, education, housing, food stamps, peso bailouts would go a long way to bailing out Social Security. That argument that they're coming to save our Social Security is nothing but a hoax.

[Happy2BMe]

"The disabled American veterans, on the other hand, have served their purpose. Screw 'em."

Bush came so close to losing the VA, DAV, VFW, MOA, NCOOA, and a whole host of other organizations by stonewalling concurrent receipt. He relented at the very last minute, but only at the risk of losing literally millions of votes.

George Bush is hot on the path of a "New Worlder" and it shows.

A George Washington, he is not.

Freedom Is Not Free

"The willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional to how they perceive veterans of early wars were treated and appreciated by our nation." - George Washington

[dennisw]

These 3rd world illegal alien invaders aren't bailing out Social Security. They are robbing Social Security and welare programs in general. Plenty of legal elderly immigrants come here to "retire" and rob our Social Security and welfare programs that they have never paid a dime's worth of taxes for.

[Ben Ficklin]

The world changes, and if you don't change with it, you get left behind.

[Happy2BMe]

"I'm starting to believe Mr. Bush is Bi-Polar.
On the one hand he is supposedly protecting the people and the Soverignty of the U.S.A.
On the other he is heading headlong into a Global One world Order and he refuses to control the Border with Mexico.
Those two goals seem to me to be mutually exclusive."

How would Samuel Adams size up George Bush on his record of protecting our border with Mexico?

"The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil constitution, are worth defending at all hazards; and it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors; they purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood. It will bring an everlasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men." Samuel Adams

[Happy2BMe]

Here's another one for the collection, Don Joe . .

"The world changes, and if you don't change with it, you get left behind." --Ben Ficklin, 01/30/2004

"Bush owes the 'base' nothing." --Texasforever, 01/28/2004