College Media Network - Search the largest news resource for college students by college students Jobs and internships for students -

Miami Student > OpEd Page

Kerry wrong on Bush social security reform

Column: De-lux accomodations

By Chris Gardner

|

Published: Tuesday, April 26, 2005

Updated: Sunday, February 14, 2010

Senator John Kerry has been accusing President Bush of planning a "January surprise" in the event that he wins the election. Kerry has charged that Bush, who has not made the privatization of social security a central issue in this year's election, plans to force legislation through Congress to create personal retirement accounts. There are a couple of caveats that must be added to Kerry's statements. Such legislation will still have to pass through both the U.S. House and the Senate, which will likely be relatively evenly divided. Merely because Bush declares such reform as a goal for his administration does not mean it will happen. Even if the president were able to push such a reform into the limelight of national politics, the measure would certainly receive a great deal of debate prior to being approved by Congress. Kerry fails to recognize that Bush was elected to his first term in office with the creation of personal retirement accounts as one of his goals. Perhaps Kerry has forgotten 2000 as Al Gore only wishes he could, but Bush's support for reform of the social security system has not come out of left field. Kerry may have incorrectly assessed the effect that reform of the Social Security system may have on the election. Kerry has obviously introduced this concept of the "January surprise" as a political scare tactic. It has been standard fair for Democrats to charge reform-minded conservatives with "robbing" the elderly of their Social Security benefits. With roughly one-half of the population either very or moderately worried about not receiving full social security benefits (according to the Gallup organization), maybe Kerry has given the president just the impetus he needs to win re-election. The same Gallup Poll reports only 25 percent of those in the workforce expect Social Security payments to be a major source of income during retirement. While these scare tactics may have worked in the past, national opinion may finally be turning against simply maintaining the Social Security status quo. Contrary to the all-too-typical attacks against the president's proposed reform, Bush's plan will not cut benefits to seniors nor will it require every workerto place his money in a personal retirement account. Instead, the Bush plan allows workers, if they choose, to contribute money into a personal account that may be invested in the stock market, in lieu of simply being placed in a government bank. Each worker is given the opportunity to make the most of the 6.4 percent of his income that he is required to pay to the government. Given that the average rate of growth in the United States economy over the past 30 years has been roughly 3 percent, it is hardly unreasonable to believe a worker who invests his savings rather than simply pays them back to the government could do much better than the approximately 1 percent return currently expected on Social Security benefits. No, the issue of Social Security reform is not an issue of robbing the old people, it is an issue of choice. By giving individuals control over their money, we can give them an opportunity for a better future.

Recommended: Articles that may interest you