Should Social Security Be Changed to Deal With the Budget Deficit?

July 20, 2010 RSS Feed Print

Here’s something you’re starting to hear whispered in the dens of Washington policy wonks this summer: Social Security. As in, “Given the huge deficit problem we all know we’re going to have to deal with, maybe we should think about some changes to that very big source of money?” I say whispered because in an election year, no politician wants that notion loose in the land. But the topic was broached by members of President Obama’s deficit reduction commission, and though we won’t hear from them until after the election, the wheels are turning. What do you think: Is Social Security related to the deficit? Is it touchable and should it be? Or is it still the third rail of American politics? Leave your comments below and let’s start a discussion that I think will be with us for a while.

Tags:
deficit and national debt,
Barack Obama,
social security

Reader Comments Read all comments (8)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

I know more than one person, from young adulthood and in perpetuity receive benefits from "SSI" despite never having worked a real on-the-payroll job a single day in their lives. One in particular has been doing this for a least 30 years. Never paid a penny into the system, just sits back and collects. Oh, at least two of them that I know also work under the table to make extra cash, doing lawncare or construction jobs. So much for being "unable to work". It is basically from what I can see a bum-support program. Need to pull this garbage out of social security program and put it on the budget, out in the open, for what it is, not hide it in a legitimate program like social security. I would call it the "Free money for Bums" program and see how many congressmen will vote to fund it then.

Disgusted Citizen of FL 11:59AM August 01, 2010

FYI - SOCIAL SECURITY IS INSURANCE. LIKE ANY OTHER INSURANCE IF YOU DON'T NEED IT YOU DON'T GET TO MAKE A CLAIM - REALLY SIMPLE. THERE ARE MANY FORMS OF INSURANCE THAT ARE MANDATORY - SSI NEEDS TO BE INCLUDED ON THAT LIST. THERE IS NO OTHER WAY TO KEEP IT SOLVENT OR FAIRLY DISTRIBUTED.

R.L. SCHAEFER of CA 8:41PM July 26, 2010

Make draconian changes in Social Security? Hell no! But there are some healthy adjustments that could be made like:

-Eliminate all recipients who have not paid into the system (Social Security is not welfare; it is a contributory entitlement)

-Decouple SS from the federal budget and quit using it as a marker to reduce the image of runaway deficit spending.

-Pay back to SS all $ that the Congress pirated from that fund.

-Make modest adjustments to the payout formula to account for longer life spans.

-Require all federal (including Congress) and state employees to contribute to SS.

-If the Bush tax cuts are to be allowed to lapse, use them exclusively to repay the federal government's debt to SS.

-Tie increases in SS to the CPI rather than average changes in wages.

lhansen of WI 8:32PM July 26, 2010

Editor's Note

Brian Kelly was named editor of U.S.News & World Report in April 2007, nine years after joining the magazine. With more than 30 years of journalism experience, including covering Capitol Hill, politics, and the presidency both as a beat reporter and as an editor, Kelly is one of the nation’s most experienced magazine editors in steering national and international news content.

advertisement

advertisement