Ryan Mahoney
Ap government
November 13, 2010
Dem/Repub. Contrast Paper
Social Security Reform
Social Security has recently become an increasingly discussed issue among the public and government officials. The Social Security Act Signed by President Franklin Roosevelt on August 14, 1935, has been a helpful resource for the elderly and retired peoples. It secures their retirement with a required, pay-as-you-go payment system regardless of the economic situation in the economy. But with all the Baby-Boomers beginning to retire, Social Security may only be able to pay the young people of today, two-thirds of their benefits when they retire. So recently, starting with the Bush administration, questions have arisen about whether Social Security should be reformed. Some are even questioning if Social Security should become a strictly private market matter. This debate between whether private or public is best for Social Security has become a largely disputed topic among Republicans and Democrats and has caused division between the two political parties.
The Democratic Party believes that Social Security should not be privatized at all. They believe that Social Security is the number one source of income for the retired and should not be changed. In her paper about Social Security Reform, Mary H. Cooper said about the Democrats beliefs that, “Personal accounts amount to a backdoor assault on one of the country's most successful entitlement programs” (qtd in Cooper). The Democrats fear that privatizing or changing Social Security, will ruin or worsen the situation in the economy and make people worse off in their retirement. When talking about privatization and the use of personal investment accounts, Joan Entmacher, vice president for economic security at the National Women's Law Center, says, “rather than improving Social Security's long-term financial shortfall they would make it worse” (qtd in Cooper). Also, in the Democratic Party Platform for America, the Democrats specifically said that they oppose the privatization of Social Security and that the most important step they could take would be to strengthen Social Security instead (qtd in “The Democratic Party on Social Security” par. 5). So overall it is safe to say that most democrats oppose the privatization of Social Security and would rather look to other types of reform rather than privatization.
The Republicans believe that privatization is a viable option for Social Security reform. It was first introduced by the Bush Administration in 2005 and has been an issue discussed since then. The Republicans believe that workers should have the choice to invest some of their payroll taxes into personal investments for their retirement future (qtd in “Republican Party on Social Security” par. 1). Also, many conservatives siding with the Republicans and the personal investment plan agree that this would be the best option because it reduces the role of government in general (Cooper par. 14). Of course many Republicans believe that complete privatization would not be ideal but rather that partial privatization would be the best course of action. It would supposedly overtime make up for the money being lost in the Social Security program, but this would take many years for the revenue gained from privatization to catch up to the debt developed through Social Security (Bernstein 7,9). Many Republicans are torn as to what they believe, but they were the first to develop the discussions on privatization of Social Security.
Social Security is slowly running out of funds and will soon be outputting more money than its receiving. Some Democrats believe that there is only a need for minor reform and that overtime when the baby-boomers are gone, the Social Security program will stabilize again and privatization is unnecessary. But others such as Republicans believe the only way to balance out the debt created by Social Security is to introduce privatization or partial privatization. There is no sure way to tell which route is the best to take but something must change. Privatization or not, there is a consensus that Social Security needs reforming for the improvement of society as a whole.
Bibliography
Bernstein, Aaron. “Social Security: Are private accounts a good idea?” (January 24, 2005). N.pag. Bloomberg Business. Bloomberg. Web. 13 Nov. 2010.<http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_04/b3917001_mz001.htm>
Cooper, Mary H. “Social Security Reform.” (September 24, 2004). 781-804. CQ Researcher. Web. 13 Nov. 2010.
“Historical Background and Development of Social Security.” (October 6, 2010). n.pag. Web. 13 Nov. 2010. < http://www.ssa.gov/history/briefhistory3.html >
“The Democratic Party on Social Security.” (February 10, 2010). n.pag. Web. 13 Nov. 2010.<http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Democratic_Party_Social_Security.htm>
“The Republican Party on Social Security.” (February 10, 2010). Web. 13 Nov. 2010. <http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Republican_Party_Social_Security.htm>
I guess Jordan doesn't think you might have his econ book...
ReplyDeleteAwesome citations! (I never remember, so it is always cool to see someone cite stuff correctly...) I think this whole matter of Social Security is a giant mess. The main problem with social security is not the amount of people who are becoming old at the same time. The problem is that the funds that are paid to the social security account over the course of the individuals' lifetimes are allowed to go into government's General Budget. This way, the government will spend the money instead of leaving it there for the people as they get old. If they left the social security money in its account and let it accrue as the people lived their lives, they would be able to pay out exactly as much as was paid in, and Social Security would be self-sustaining. Instead, the government uses the money like it is a loan, and people are surprised when there is not enough money left for the elderly. (Which is sad, really, since the social security system is designed so that most people will die before receiving it, thus leaving enough money for the people who make it.)
Your paper was informative to me because I previously knew that there was some split opinion on social security but I did not know the stances from the two parties.
ReplyDeleteDo you know why exactly Democrats think that privatizing social security would be a bad thing, other than the fact that they think the elderly deserve the money, etc.?
There is no doubt that social security is a necessity. All the years that people serve throughout there life, they deserve it. However, I believe that security should only be given to those in need. I am sure that there are many circumstances where this system is abused.
ReplyDeleteI think this is a pretty interesting topic. Personally, I support Social Security as a welfare program, which is a pretty big thing to say because generally I disagree with welfare programs (at least when it comes to how much we are spending on them) but I believe social security is an important program. It's interesting to me that the biggest issue is whether or not to privatize social security instead of being an issue on whether or not to pay more money for it. However, the views on the issue from both Democratic and Republican viewpoints is pretty much a given in my opinion.
ReplyDelete@Stackhouse- There are many pros and cons to the issue of social security reform but some of the cons and reasons why dems are against it are: It puts the money you would of had invested in social security into the hands of the stock market, its very expensive to switch from social security to privitization, and it reduces many benefits such as certain insurance opprotunities to the elderly. The full list of pros and cons, which i found very interesting, can be seen at this address:
ReplyDeletehttp://socialsecurity.procon.org/
So if this topic interests you, check it out!
Social security is one of those topics that I generally have very little knowledge about, mainly due to me actually being uninvolved in political issues until this year. This is a clearly hard-work written paper, with an interesting topic, and is clear for someone to understand to understand despite very limited prior knowledge. Also, thanks for the link above, should be pretty helpful for me. Very well written paper, good job bro!
ReplyDeleteSocial Security seems to me one of those topics that will always be discussed, but never much will be done about it. If at this moment I had to decide what I think the best plan of action is for Social Security reform I would say the Republican option of the partial privatization. People should have the option to save a portion of their paycheck for later in life. I think that this would make individuals more responsible for themselves instead of relying on the government to take care of them. But then at the same time some people live paycheck to paycheck and cannot afford to put any money away. That's why I'm leaning towards the partial option so that people can rely both on the government and themselves for money in their later years.
ReplyDeleteI really liked your introduction and how you began with the history of Social Security and how it has become what it is today. It was not surprising that the majority of Republicans and Democrats are completely opposite in their beliefs concerning this issue. I was somewhat surprised that the Republican Party is somewhat split on how Social Security should be handled. I learned a lot from your paper about the party platforms and how they believe Social Security should be handled.
ReplyDelete