We are still waiting for the president to introduce a concrete plan. He has just hinted at what he is thinking about doing, but no one has seen a proposal.
Grace Napolitano
Our political leaders must be honest and forthcoming with data that will allow citizens to use facts and figures to judge for themselves what state Social Security is in.
We must explain the truth: There is no free lunch.
A Congressional Budget Office report released as recent as June 2004 says the system will be able to pay full benefits until 2052, and 80 percent after that.
The president's claim that Social Security is going broke is misleading at best. The sky is not falling, although there is no doubt that the system needs to be strengthened.
For people who have for been putting their hard-earned money into the system for years, the president's idea would replace their safety net with a risky gamble with no assurance of a stable return of investment.
Because of my own experience with market fluctuation, I recognize the great risks one takes on investments. This converts the Social Security safety net into a risky proposition many cannot afford to take.
We must work to stabilize Social Security. We must not gamble with our nation's social insurance program, one of our most popular and effective federal programs that has remained dependable and stable for the past 70 years.
We must take the time to do what needs to be done now, what is right, instead of passing a bad bill.
We must level with the people and explain to them that Social Security will first face funding problems in 2042 that can be fixed now with changes that do not undermine and ultimately drain from the entire program.
To allow all U.S. workers to put part of their earnings into private investment accounts would definitely erode the Social Security system and cause uncertainty for new investors.
There is a need for Social Security reform to ensure its stability, and Congress must act.
Social Security has been effective for 70 years; prior predictions of its demise have been totally overstated.
President Bush has consistently used rhetoric, and that is not convincing given his past record.
Our Hispanic community needs to understand how important the Social Security system is for not only its retired citizens, but also its disabled workers.
Latinos are disproportionately more likely to be injured on the job than other ethnic groups.
Latinas' life expectancies are relatively long. When a current retiree hits 65 and begins receiving her benefit check, she can expect to live another 22 years. That life expectancy is higher than white women or men.
If Congress doesn't raise taxes, you cannot get a private investment account without forgoing a portion, possibly all, of your guaranteed benefit check.
I am not criticizing investing in the stock market; I am an investor.
Even without reforms, the Social Security fund will be able to meet 100 percent of its obligations until 2042.
Because Social Security is specifically designed to boost the retirement income of low earners with a progressive benefit formula, the program has played an enormous and necessary role in keeping Latinas out of poverty.
Because of their low earnings and family obligations, Latinas would not be putting much money into private investment accounts. An average Latina could wind up losing thousands of dollars under this proposal.
Almost half of all Latinas currently on Social Security rely exclusively on their benefit check in retirement.
