Robert Scardapane, Published in Home News & Tribune - Central Jersey on 05/12/05

After a 60-day campaign for privatization, the president revealed the details of his plan in a news conference. This plan unfairly requires steep benefits cuts for 70 percent of Americans. Given that the trust fund will pay 100 percent of benefits until 2042, such extreme cuts are unjustified.

The president claims that all options are on the table yet will not not consider any plan that lacks private accounts. These "carve-out" accounts are offset by additional benefit cuts and are profitable only when the return is 3 percent above inflation. This account must be partially converted to a minimal annuity upon retirement.

The president also contradicted himself by saying the trust fund is invested in worthless bonds, calling them IOU's, while offering bonds as an investment option for private accounts. He appears determined to renege on paying back the trust fund money he borrowed. He is trading off tax benefits given to wealthiest 5 percent of the population for Social Security cuts that harm 70 percent of Americans.

Republicans falsely assert that Democrats have not offered a plan. Yet three nonprivatization plans have already been offered. The plans are from former Social Security trustee George Ball, economist Gene Sperling and an MIT economics professor. Their plans take a balanced approach of increasing revenue by slowly raising the salary limit and reducing costs via mild progressive cuts in benefits. In addition, Sperling suggests the creation of universal 401(k) "add-on" accounts to stimulate savings.

If all options are truly on the table, the Republicans should be willing to form a bipartisan Social Security commission and come up with a fair solution. Right now, they appear determined to railroad an extreme bill through Congress that ultimately weakens the Social Security system, increases the budget deficit and inflicts unnecessary pain on the majority of Americans. Voters will hold them accountable in 2006 and beyond.