Terry takes on the little guy

Below is correspondence I sent to Representative Lee Terry (R - Nebraska 2nd) in response to his response to my original letter to him regarding the long term solvency of Social Security. The most incredible position he took on the issue was to reveal his willingness to raise taxes on low-to-moderate income families without addressing the income cap on Social Security contributions, or suggesting that high income families, too, would face increased taxes. NOTE: I have employed the name I use for this site when posting this correspondence here. The correspondence was sent using my full name and address, neither of which are necessary when sharing my views with you. Also, note the disclaimer at the bottom of Congressman Terry's original response. This statement was not intended, by his office, for public release.

Representative Terry,

Thank you for responding to my concerns regarding Social Security. I do take issue with several of the points you have made and would like to reflect back my response and provide you with the opportunity to clarify.

1) In your response you make the claim that: "The sooner we address the expected Social Security shortfall, the less expensive the solution will be. " To me, the average taxpayer, this reads as: "The sooner we cut benefits to working families and retirees, the less expensive this solution will be."

2) When you outlined the consequences of not fixing Social Security you make the following claim: "If no changes are made by 2042, the Social Security trust fund will be depleted, and only 73% of its benefits would be payable then with incoming receipts. Therefore, if Congress does not address the retirement portion of Social Security soon, low-to-moderate-income workers will certainly be saddled with higher taxes or benefits will be cut. " I find it interesting that your imagined solution to the "crisis" includes raising taxes on low to moderate income families, but you do not mention raising the $90,000 cap on contributions or rolling back a portion of the Bush Administration's tax cuts or raising the taxes of those most able to pay them, the high income families.

3) I do agree, part, with your conclusion: "At a time when seniors are living longer, healthier lives well past retirement and with so many baby boomers nearing retirement age, the time has come to ensure the long-term success of this program and address its inequities." We DO need to address the inequities of the Social Security System. As a worker who makes less than $90,000/year, each and every dollar I earn is subject to Social Security withholdings. Somone earning $200,000/year contributes to the Social Security fund on only 45% of their income. To ensure the solvency of the fund it only makes sense that we have a bit more equity, across the economic spectrum, in contributions.

4) In regards to your legislative record, "In past sessions of Congress, I have co-sponsored legislation that would allow on a voluntary basis but not require workers to establish private retirement accounts, while also growing the Social Security trust fund." I do not understand how this improves the status of the Social Security trust fund. It sounds, to me, like a big new government program.

I'm all in favor of big new government programs that fill needs that are not addressed by other areas of society, such as land management and wildlife preservation; however, there is a giant private industry dedicated to providing individuals with private, voluntary retirement accounts.

Even a dyed-in-the-wool liberal is left scratching his head and asking how the government will provide better returns on private investments than the private sector. I'm sorry, Congressman, but government administration of private investment accounts is an oxymoron.

On your last point we do agree: There is a unaffordable cost to inaction. But our action must be measured and consider the broad spectrum of of possible solutions, not just the expedient or immediately remedial.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts with me on this subject. I look forward to corresponding with you in the future on other issues of importance.

Yr. Obt. Svt.
k.michael.f.f

-----Original Message-----
From: Representative Lee Terry [mailto:ne02ima@mail.house.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 1:00 PM
****************************
Subject: A message from Congressman Terry


Dear Mr. F.F.:

Thank you for contacting me regarding Social Security. I appreciate hearing from you.

Social Security is a solemn commitment between our government and hard-working American citizens. It must be preserved. Unfortunately, Congress is long overdue in addressing problems plaguing the Social Security program. I applaud the president for his courage to take on this issue. The sooner we address the expected Social Security shortfall, the less expensive the solution will be.

We should ensure that current recipients receive every penny promised and that tomorrow's beneficiaries can look forward to a secure retirement. That is why I have joined the president in urging congressional leaders to take up legislation that would preserve Social Security for the long term. However, I have not yet endorsed any specific proposal. At this time, several different approaches are being discussed.

Here is what we are facing today: There are 3.5 workers for each retiree receiving Social Security benefits. But more than 70 million "baby boomers" are nearing retirement age. By 2010, there will only be two workers for every retiree. That means that each worker will be responsible for 50% of someone else's benefits.

The Social Security and Medicare boards of trustees warn that tax revenues will fall short of benefit outlays by 2018. If no changes are made by 2042, the Social Security trust fund will be depleted, and only 73% of its benefits would be payable then with incoming receipts. Therefore, if Congress does not address the retirement portion of Social Security soon, low-to-moderate-income workers will certainly be saddled with higher taxes or benefits will be cut.

We must tackle these problems today. In past sessions of Congress, I have co-sponsored legislation that would allow on a voluntary basis but not require workers to establish private retirement accounts, while also growing the Social Security trust fund. I also believe that any changes must address the issue of solvency first. As new Social Security legislation is introduced in the new Congress, I will certainly keep your thoughts in mind.

There are very real challenges facing Social Security today. At a time when seniors are living longer, healthier lives well past retirement and with so many baby boomers nearing retirement age, the time has come to ensure the long-term success of this program and address its inequities. Either we take some sensible, measured steps to fix Social Security, or we risk the retirement benefits of our nation's current and future seniors. We cannot afford the cost of inaction.

Again, thank you for contacting me. Please feel free to contact me on this or any other issue of concern to you in the future.

Sincerely, LEE TERRY
Member of Congress
11717 Burt Street, Suite 106
Omaha, NE 68154
Phone: 402-397-9944

http://leeterry.house.gov
If you would like to receive e-mail updates from me on legislative issues, please email me at Talk2Lee@mail.house.gov with your name and full mailing address and type "subscribe" in the e-mail subject line.
******************************************************************************
DISCLAIMER
Please do not reply to this message. This is an unattended e-mail.
This message was intended for the original recipient only.
I cannot guarantee the integrity of the text of this e-mail if it was not sent to you directly from my Congressional E-mail Account or Talk2Lee@mail.house.gov.
If you have any questions about the validity of this message, or have received this message in error, please call my Capitol Hill office at 202-225-4155.
******************************************************************************