AMENDMENTS TO THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT 1981

RESTORATION OF MINIMUM BENEFIT AND OTHER CHANGES

H.R. 4331 PUBLIC LAW 97-123— 97TH CONGRESS

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Social Security Administration AMENDMENTS TO THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT 1981

RESTORATION OF MINIMUM BENEFIT AND OTHER CHANGES

H.R. 4331 PUBLIC LAW 97-1 23 — 97TH CONGRESS

BILL, DEBATES, AND ACT

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Social Security Administration Office of Legislative and Regulatory Policy PREFACE

Thisone-volume compilation contains historical documents pertaining to P.L. 97-123, the Restoration of Minimum Benefit and Other Changes, amending the Social Security Act. The book contains congressional debate, a chronological compilation of documents pertinent to the legislative history of the public law and listings of relevant reference materials.

Pertinent documents include: • Differing versions of key bills • The Public Law • Legislative history The books are prepared by the Office of Legislative and Regulatory Policy, Legislative Reference Office, and are designed to serve as helpful resource tools for those charged with interpreting laws administered by the Social Security Administration.

Elliot A. Kirschbaum, Director Office of Legislative and Regulatory Policy TABLE OF CONTENTS

Restoration of Minimum Benefit and Other Changes—P.L. 97-123 (HR. 4331)

I.Considered and Passed House A. House Debate—Congressional Record—July 31, 1981

B. House-passed Bill H.R. 4331 (As Referred to the Senate)—July 31, 1981

II. Considered and Passed Senate A. Senate Debate—Congressional Record—July 31, and October 14-15, 1981

B. Senate-passed Bill H.R. 4331 (amended)—October 15, 1981

III. House and Senate Conference (reconciling the differences between the two Houses) A. House Appointed Conferees—Congressional Record—November 4, 1981

B. Senate Appointed Conferees—Congressional Record—November 4, 1981

C. Conference Report Filed House Report No. 97-409—December 14, 1981

D. Senate Agreed to Conference Report—Congressional Record—December 15, 1981

E. House Agreed to Conference Report—Congressional Record—December 16, 1981

IV. Public Law A. P.L. 97-123—97th Congress—Signed December 29, 1981

B. President's Signing Statement—December 29, 1981

C. Restoration of Certain Minimum Benefits and Other OASDI Program Changes: Legislative History and Summary of Provisions—Reprint from Social Security Bulletin—March 1982

Listing of Reference. Materials NOTE: No House or Senate Committee Reports filed on this bill

July 31,1981 CONGRESSIONALRECORD —HOUSE H 5743

PARLIAMENTARYINQUIRY Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. FRANK). The gentleman will state it. Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I Inquire of the Chair whether the papers of the reconciliation package, H.R. 3982, are in the possession of the House. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Yes, they are. Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I would further inquire, isit customary for these papers to remain in the posses- sion of the House at the conclusion of a conference committee, and in this in- stance, were they retained at the con- clusion of the conference committee, or were they more recently delivered to the House? The SPEAKER pro tempore, Yes, the Chair would say to the gentleman It is customary for the papers to be transferred to the House which agree to the conference—and is to act first on the report—at the conclusion of a successful conference. Mr. VENTO. In this case, Mr. Speak- er, were the papers retained by the House conferees on the matter of the reconciliation conference? The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evi- dently not, because they were brought back to the House this morning at about 9:15 by a .messenger from the other body. 744 - CONGRESSIONALRECORD —HOUSE July 31, 1981 . VTO. Mr.Speaker, in otherprogram which might be called socialitis going to be honored in all of its this zielatcd one of the tenetssecurity. But there is a fundamentaldetails. And one of those details gives tit we hive in terms of considera-difference between a social Insuranceto the Rules Committee a particular program that guarantees to its mem-function and the Rules Committee is to hafr, bers that as they contribute and asgoing to exercise that function in this The CPàKER pro tempore. Thethey are blanketed in, they have aparticular matter with a great deal of Cufr would advise the gentlemanright under a social compact. care. That is not a threat. ft is not a that this deviated from custom but did promise. It Is a statement ot fact u©t socisUy violate the rules of the 0 1200 The SPEAKER. Thegentleman That I believe is the early theory offrom Illinois (Mr. MI cSTSL) Is recog- !3OLLNCMr.Speaker, pursu-social security. nized for 30 mInutes. peovislons Qf House Resolu• Now. itis perfectly legitimate for (Mr MICHEL asked and was given a1l up the bill (H.R. 4331)peoplewhosepredecessorsfought against the social security system Inpermission to revise and extend his re- to amend the Onn1bus Reconciliation marks.) ct at 1 to restore•.minimum bene.the thirties to say today that the the under the heclal Security Act, andsocial security system should be differ- Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, here we lt lmmed1te ccssideration. ent, that it should be and is in effect aare again on this very sensitive Issue Terk read the bilL as follows: need-oriented program, purely andof social security. I must confess that I simply. have not exactly been beseeched for 1LR 4331 requests on my side tO speak to opposh the $ate and House of I do not have any objection to that srsoentatses of theUnited States ofargument. It is here. It is with us. Buttion to what the thrust of this bill Is 4me?isa inigres ussembzed; That (a) ef-it is terribly important that the peoplehere today. tctlve & of the date of the enactment ofof the country begin to look at that ar- But recognizing the resonslb1lity the Onttos get eoondll1atlon Act ofgument and the meaning of the differ-'for what It is, I should like t© make a iesi, ection 2C01 of that Act (relating toerit points of view. few observations, then yield to those repeal of ulnimuin benefit provisions) is re- I very strongly hold to the notionMembers who similarly would like to that I desezibed as a social securityexpress themocives. (hI çt t© sectisuof this Act, the ©vhiorn of the Sochi Sccuhty Act affect-system, a social insurance compact, It might surprise some Merobem of the provisIons of such section 2201not means tested, except in a very,this body to learn that this Member, shall to in chest as of date of the enact-very limited degree, but designed to beas outspoken as he has been on this of the Ossnibus Budget Reconciliationsensible, fair and contributory. and other issues wi-ion he was a junior of as such provisions Would be In I want to serve notice on everybodyCongressman, was one of the original chest it such section 1201 had not been en-in the institution—and I have neversponsors of legislation to tie social se- acted. done this before—that the Rules Com-curity benefits to the cost-of-living The PAKER pro tempore. Pursü-mittee and its chairman are going toindex three Congresses before we ae-- ant to the rule, the gentleman frombe involved in the legislative processtually adopted it, because I was so sick kiouh (1r oLuxa) will be recog-on this. 'rhere is not going to be any.and tired of the bidding war that wont for 3 nsinntes, and the gentle-more of blanketing this issue into gen-on between parties on who was going an from Illinois (Mr. Mzc) will be• eral legislation. to vote the biggest increase in any k€euØaicd f dv 30 minutes. Those of my colleagues who do notgiven year. ¶'hailr recognizes the gentlemanunderstand what that means should Incidentally, regarding the cast-of- tram hties©url (Mr. BOLTING). - consult with those who are experts inliving index, it takes us about 6 or 7 htSO bOLLING. Mr.Speaker, I yieldprocedure because Itis going to be• years to devise revisions of that Index. t minutes. very difficult to consider the necessaryIt rankles me no end that it takes so Mr. Speaker, I do not know howpackage to cure the problems of thelong. By the time we get- the index re- mush of the time we have on this billsocial security system without havingvIsed to reflect new figures, they are' is going to be taken up. This Is,it,a rule on the bill that does it. already obsolete. But those are the seems to roe, one of the most Impor- I happen to believe that there arefacts of life. But as I said, Mel Laird, tant issues that the Congress is goingproblems in the system, short-rangeJack Betts, who used to serve on our to deal with. This Congress in its twoproblems and long-range problems. IWays and 'Means Committee, and I sessions is not going to have a morehappen to believe that we have tohad talked about tying t.hè' social secu' important Issue than the issueofarrive at legitimate, fair cqmpromlsesrity system to the cost-of-living index social security. I think it is very, veryto achieve the desiredresult, andfor some time, so I do not come to the Ineportunt for all who are directly in.those compromises range all the waywell of the House today as one insensi- valved In the legislative process to un.from making up the deficit from thetive to the, social security problem and derstand that thisIs one Issue ongeneral fund to drastically curtailing solventso that which the Rules Committee Is going tobenefits dlready committed. the need to keep it - take a very special interest. I just want to give the shape of thepeople will continue to receive the That is so because the Rules Com-distance that thereis between thebenefits to which they are entitled. mitteeis,really--despiteitsover-sides and to assure the Members on I must confess that in those earlier whelming Democratic majority—both sides that the Rules. Committeedays, we had never dreamed there irather successfully representative ofis going to attempt to see to it thatwould be the type of double digit infla- all the interests in the House. this, matter is dealt with fairly as totion we have experienced during the I would urge Members to take a lookthe different points of view, and fun-past few years. I would be the first to at the list of the Members on both thedamentaily fairly to .theweakest inadmit today that in view of recent Democratic side and the Republicanthis land who could easily be the vic-trends,theexistingcost-of-living side, and they will see that thosetims of changes, well intentioned per-Indexnow somewhatinaccurately Members pretty generally cover thehaps, but unwise. measures the actual cost of living for views at a very large segment of the That is the only reason that we wentmost of those over 65.. The housing institution, through this exerciseS is to make Itand medical cossponents In particular We have two very different points ofvery, very clear that there is going toproduce distortions that should be cor- view to war in this Government on thebe no cute play on this matter. It isrected. sublest ot social security. I supposegoing to 6edealtwith very carefully, But be that as it mair, I would like to that both of them are legitimate. Butwith due consideration for the systemaddress myself now to the particular fundamentally, there are those whothat the House provides, a system ofissue of minimum benefits, what is in— feel that there should not be a socialcommittees, broken down into subcom-voWed, and why we think there can be security system, that there should bemittees, that the legislative process issome modification in what Iscon- cause kind ot means tested welfaregoing to be honored in every way, andtained In reconciliation. July 81, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE H 514 We have until March 1 of next yearforts to improve this system over theis at this juncture where we omt In which we can act affirmatively torears, and commend him for it; I thinkdecide whether it is prudent to retore redress any grievances that we feelthe cost-of-living-Increase benefit thatthe entire minimum benefit pvlsis ought to be addressed. was put in, while a costly provision,or find some other means of meetIrg Now, as my colleagues know, thewas an equitable one, and I think hethe needs of those in this category. minimum benefit involves roughly 3has been a leader on the other side of We are talking about people who million of our people. However, 1 mil-the aisle In terms of the issue on thatmay not qualify for suppemente1 ae- lion of those are only technical benefi-basis. curity income benefits because they ciaries of the minimum benefit who I would like to point out that thehave cash or liquid resources In excec are actuallyreceiving today muchminimum benefit has been with thisof $1,500 or $2,250 for a couple. more than the minimum, and wesystem for as long as it has existed. It It could be argued that even tiwugh ought to understand that. Their bene-started out at $10 In the late 1930's.these individuals may have assets of fits would not change one dime if weThe fact of the matter Is that if wethis size, and do not quahfy for S1, eliminate the minimum benefit re-look at the benefits, whether they arethat they still have legitimate need for quirement. earned or not earned, I submit to theFederal assistance. I would not ore We haveanadditional450,000gentleman that many aspects of thethat point. people who are currently receivingsocial security program are engaged In I am inclined to think that tho benefits from a Federal retirementso far as like an Insurance benefit. Imeans test for 581 eligibility is system, one of the most lucrative Inthink that is the context in which westringent. After all, it wue established the country, as well as the minimumought to look at the minimum. backIn1972.The econoreyhui benefit. These are not needy people I think the gentleman is fully awarechanged since then. with no other place to go. that there is a freeze starting In 1979 Congress has done nothing to u. Fifty thousand more have retiredon that minimum in which to calcu-grade the means test, dofte spouses receiving benefits from thelate benefits. That was a responsibleIncreases in the cost of living. tdnot Federal retirement system as well asthing that we had. Ing the cash assets level would be one the minimum benefit, I appreciate the gentleman yieldingway of making sure mlnhsn Thirty thousand other recipientsand appreciate lila comments on thatrecipients do not olip ©ngh the have working spouses earning an aver-sub ject. cracks. age of $21,000 annually. Mr. MICHEL. Let me just go on to It woud be far wiser end toe Still another 200,000 are receiving ansay on that point that many beneficia-prudent to provide an additlenel 810 amount equal to the minimum benefitries, if we do not change the rules, willmillion or so In this rcoord than it as a result of what they have paid Intobe eligible for benefits In 1982 at agewould to dump $7 billion bnr into the social security, so their monthly check65 who paid In less than $68 In lifetimeminimum benefit provlisone of the would not change one dime. social security taxes, an amount that And that Is why the President comesthey can recoup, mind you, In only 12Social Security Act. down quite hard, to try to make thedays. I have found, in talking to work- It should be noted here t the differentiation between those who ac-ers in my district—and I have a highlyvalue of one's house does net round to tuallyearned a benefitasdistin-unionized constituency In Peoria—thatdetermining 551 eligibility, A eroen guished from those who have notthey are rather incensed over the factcould own a $200,000 houre fully naid earned it, but simply got blanketed inthat those people who contributedfor, and still be eligible for l. ao let through the minimum provision. into the trust fund over a long periodnobody claim that the elderly will be In my judgment, we ought not toof years and actually earLled thatforced to sell their homes. have that drag on the trust fund. WeIncome, are being somewhat jeopard- A person can own an automobile ought to take care of the needyized by those who contributed so little;valued up to $4,500, and household through other programs, such as 551,as a matter of fact, practically noth-furnishing worth up to $2,000, and still even if these programs have to being. be eligilbe for 551. modified to make sure no one falls So, this is the kind of thing I would I should also point out that the rec- through the cracks. like to change and adjust, and do it Inonciliation conference report contains Continuing with the breakdown ofa manner, hopefully, In which we willspeciallanguage making minimum minimum benefit recipients, there arenot do violence to anyone who actual-benefit recipients between ages 80 and 500,000recipientsreceiving supple-ly has no other place to turn for some64 eligible for 551. Under current law, mental security income benefits asminimum benefit. you have to be age 65 before being eli- well as the minimum, and the way the I would like to say too that on thegible. This will help to prevent people 55! benefits are figured their 551average a husband and wife getting anin this age group from falling through checks would increase to make up forinitial minimum beneift in 1982 wouldthe cracks. what they lose from minimum bene-be paid more than $100,000 during Mr. PASHAYAN. Mr. Speaker, will fits. In other words, their monthlytheir retirement thereafter, taking thethe gentleman yield? checks would not change one dime. actuarial figures Into account from the Mr. MICIiEL. I yield to the gentle- The key diference here is that thesocial security trust funds, which isman from California. flat minimum benefit under the Socialabout 300 times what they paid in. Ob- Mr. PASHAYAN. Mr. Speaker, I ap- Security Act is, as I said, a real drag onviously, that kind of benefit would notplaud the gentleman, who for so many the trust fund, while the benefits fromhave been earned. years has shown leadership in this dif- SSI are drawn from the Internal Reve- Incidentallydidyou know thatficult area, and of course I stand with nue. 35,000 social security minimum benefi-him on his position. ciaries live outside the United States. I think, if I understand what the 01210 And finally, there are 200,000 othersgentleman is saying, to tie it with the The SPEAKER pro tempore. Thewho are adult students or the minorwords coming from the gentleman time of the gentleman from Illinoischildren of those receiving Federalwho is the chairman of the Rules has expired. pensions, whose need for the mini-Committee, the unearned benefit is re- Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, I yieldmum benefit has to come under ques-pugnant to the Idea of an insurance myself 5 additional minutes. tion. fund, and you cannot have an insur- Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, will the These people account for 2.7 millionance fund that benefits In the rane gentleman yield? of the 3 million. manner and same amount people wleo Mr. MICHEL. I yield to the gentle. Now if my arithmetic is still good,do not pay in proportion. That is not man from Minnesota (Mr. VEwro). that leaves 300,000 recipients with aconsistent with the idea of an insur- Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, the pointreal problem. ance fund, and it seems consistent I would like to make, and I appreciate It Is in this category where the ques-with the idea of an insurance fund the the gentleman's sentiment and his ef-tion of need may be most legitimate. Itefforts of the gentleman in the well, in CONGRESSIONAL RECORD HOUSE July 31, 1981 to oove tho hnu ray.piqued that we did not get our waythe other body to concur with us in nnt t-n thoo e who n fetone way or another In this overall oin-this Important matter, or is this a do not eontiboto h tenio of remI•nibus reconciliation package. ploy? ui to toe nounuee fund. &, thnk Mr. BOLLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, will the whot th© ont1Ieun In th udll I5 minutes to thedistinguishedgentle.gentleman yield? ectI c©nhtont wfth theman from Florida (Mr. PEPPER). Mr. PEPPER. Is this a ploy to de- ohotouon off the Ru1e Cnznttee Mr. PEPPER. Mn Speaker, Mem-ceive the elderly of America, that the notion o en Inuanee fund. bers of the House, I think we will all M. XCEL.ap reciate tho gen-agree that perhaps the cruelest thingHouse of Representatives is going to toan oonttbuUon, that en adult can do Is to deceive apass it but with the understanding to OAR. hto will thechild, to make him a promise you dothat the Senate will put It by and, as gentienan ved? not intend to keep; shaking the confi-one Member said, let it pend and pend Mn MCHL.YIeld t© the gentle-dence that he reposes In Lois elders. and pend? woman froEl Ohlo. I would sayitis comparable Lu Mr. MItCEEL. Mr. Speaker, will the XXu OAEA. M eeke, f thewrong to make a promise we do notgentleman yield? gentleman uses that philosophy ofexpect to be kept to tha elderly of this Mr. PEPPER. So I ask the distin- eooned ght, d©ee he enhoe that he Icountry who are InvolvedInthisguished minority leader, will the faith to cut out many, any woimatter we discuss today, over two-of his President and the faith of his who ore ehglbto fey seelol security thirds of whom are above 70 years ofparty, if this House today adopts this wuec o? the deudent igeuse encflt.age, over half a million of whom areresolution today, be behind the affirm- hecense theyfeltthat hoving anabove 80 years of age, many of whomative action of the Senate on this reso- ogtlon, so we want alt women to have,are above 0 years of age, and somelution, are they in concurrence with to he e ho emuhor, wi ldiren.above RN years of age. what we do? yoflug flu und out off the tuber force to They wont to know, as they are sit- Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, if the eatso children and co forth, that theirting, many of them, in their lonelinessgentleman will yield, of course, the o©enemle contribution to o manrtogeand listening to the telecast of whatgentleman, who once served over in to bey©od eeothce, if the gentle-we say or reading the press tomorrowtire other body with such distinction, user toot ©soyhy, then wantreporting on what we have done, whatknows that there are Members over to tell hto or of now that ho Is cuttingdid we mean by what we did? Are wethere, I am sure, who are just as sensi- out ebout hit ee©ent of the future andin good faith today in voting a resolu-tive us he is about this particular current recllonts. tion, net expressing the sentiment ofissue, and I would suspect, while they really thlnt toot Is very, yyy the Congress, but legislating as a partmay not be In a position, because of our, oralthinh woreen ought to beof the constitutional legislative proc-the urgency of the time today and the very concerned. ome of us want toess of America, repudiating a part ofweekend, to resolve the issue, they eorrest the altfler that occun'edthe reconciliationresolution whichknow that this is a vehicle for What I for uarried women who do work, whowillsoon be adopted, denying toexpect to be some significant change geld tot© the system, and Indeed ereL1U0,000 elderly Americans the mini-or adjustment in social security pro- entftied to a better benefit. That Is an-mum social aecurity benefit they nowgrams, whether It is short range or other Issue, but Is not manage an ecoreceive? nomlo gortuershig rico? Is the gentle. There were many of us who werelong range or In one part or another. moo rertt suytngonil t hope he svery much Indisposed to follow the I am confident that the bill simply is notthat he 1?eeis that anyone wholeadership of the distinguished chair-not going to be languishing over there hoe not contrIbuted, even If the spouseman of the Rules Committee becausewith no action whatsoever, because eontributedL that they should not getwe knew that he too had to movethere will be the same pressure over social security benefits? against his conscience to do what hethere to which the gentleman is refer- The SPEAKER pro tempore. Thethought was the honorable thing forring. tune of the gentleman from illinoIsus to observe, an agreement made in Mr. PEPPER, Mr. Speaker,the hoe again expired. respect to this reconciliation resolu-Aging Committee this morning, on the Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, I yieldtion by the leadership of both of ourmotionoftherankingminority myself 2 additional minutes. parties. member, Mr. RINALDO, unanimously I hove noted the gentlewoman's re- got adopted a resolution that the marks from time to time, and I em not 01220 whole Aging Committee of both par- sure it is only confined to women, but We agreed in the Rules Committeetiessupportedthisresolution and I think we are In an area now whereyesterday that we would support thatcalled upon the President and the we arc recognising even In the Socialleadership and would not attempt toleadership of the. Senate to support Security Act and beyond, the equalitybring out a rule that would allow thethe pending resolution. I would hope of women. amendment of the reconciliation reso-that the minority leadership in this Ms. OAKAR. I am not speaking oflution to strike out the prohibitionHouse would do the same thing. Let us the equality of women. against the receipt of these minimumsupportthismeaningful resolution Mr. MICHEL. I want to• say thatsocial security benefits by the elderlypending and call upon our colleagues again we have an option to deal withof America. But we chose to follow thein the other body to concur with us this issue prospectively. We could, foralternative route that was so ably pre-and the overwhelmingly sentiment of example, grandfather In those thatsentedherebyourdistinguishedthe people of the country. are currently in, and talk about thechairman of the Rules Committee to future, but not lock ourselves In so sol-have a separate resolution of legisla- The SPEAKER pro tempore. The idly today that we have got no place totive meaning and purport, casting thetime of the gentleman from Florida turn. Wfy feeling is that those mem-vote of this House, the people's House,(Mr. PEPPER) has expired. bers who serve on the SubcommitteOthat we were adamantly opposed—and, Mr. PEPPER. Mr. Speaker, may I on Social Security Revision, whetherI believe, by a big majority vote—toask the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. they roe on the gentlewoman's side orthe inclusion in the law of the featureB0LLING) if he will yield me 1 more on our side, ought not to be deprivedof the reconciliation resolution thatminute? off the leewey necessary to put togeth-would otherwise make a prohibition Mr. BOILING. Mr. Speaker, I regret er r. good gackege, Chances ore, whenagainst these people receiving thisto say to my friend, the gentleman that package comes forward this gen-minimum benefit after March 1 offrom Florida (Mr. Psprsa), that I have itleman Is going to be supporting it, butnext year, no more time to yield. do not went to see those efforts Now, the question Is what Is going to Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 really Inhibited by some precipitoushappen in the other body, Are weminutes to the gentleman from Flor- action today simply because we arereally meaning that we are expectingida (Mr. Youwc). July 21, 1981 CONGRESMONAL RECORD —HOUSE 1li147 (Mr. YOUNGofFloridaaskedAnd because of the way the social e-difference In the actual checks they and was given permission to revise andcurity has been handled, she Is nutwill receive. extendhis remarks.) sure whether she is going to get that The green social security checks are Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speak-social ty check at the cud of thea symbol of income retired wocers er, I have the privilege of representingmonth or aot. We cannot do that toearned through yesze of lsbor, wlie a county in Florida that has 250,000her; she deserves better than that. Shethe gold-colored welfare chetke are a people who get social security checksIs representative of many people whosymbol of an unearned Clovernment every month. I have to say In theirlive today and survive today only be-handout behalf that we appreciate the factcause of their social security checks. i-Mr. Speaker, the social acewity re- that Congress and the administration So I say to the gentleman from Mis-cipients of our Nation. each are taking a very close look at thesouri (Mr. Bou.na), let us do what heproudly take to the haeik their eeu problems of the system. It Is esentialsaid. Let us approach this problem ofchecks-4he symbol of hard wuri'?t that we discuss the problems of thesocial security in a realistic way. Let uswould bea serious blow to the dfty system and what we are going to do,not frighten the people with a lot oof those recipients wiio wmdd be not only to protect those who are pres-speculation and a lot of possibilities.forced to go on the rolz e2 to ently receiving social security but alsoLet us get down to business and solvereceive the same monetarynefite to protect those who are goinrto re-the problems, not In a haphazard fash- Statistics I have obi dire the ceive social security in the future. ion, and not as a rider or amendmentSocial Security Subcommittee show We appreciate the fact that theburied In some other legislative vehi-just how proud these older Ararrlcsña President of the United States hascle that might be working Its wayare. More than 500,000 recIpients et called attention to the problems In thethrough Congress. the minlimnu benefit are now eligible system because they are many. As we Mr. Speaker, this is a serious matter.for supplemental security Income be- listen to the debate of our leader, theThose who do not work on a day-to-cause the benefits they receive are still. gentleman from illinois (Mr. MIcHa),day basis with these older Americuustoo low to make ends meet. Howewer we know the information he presentswho in fact are surviving because theyMr. Speaker, they have been too is accurate. Of course we also knowhave a sociaL security income9 cannotproud to apply for supplemental seen- that there are a lot of arguments inrealize the panic that goes throughrity Income because they do not weat this matter which need airing. Theresome of their minds when they read ato spend the remaining years of their are obviously people In the systemheadline story that says social securitylives on welfare. who have not earned their benefits.Is going bankrupt or that social secu- It would be unf4r for us to dm1- We know that. There are others whority programs are going to be cut andnate the minimum benefit and feree actually have no real need for theirthey might not get their checks. these 500,000 people, many In their social security checks. But Mr. Speak- That is just not going to happen., Iseventies,eighties, and nineties to er, let me speak to say for the millionsknow that Congress is not going to letswallow their pride anti spend the re- of Americans who need their social se-it happen, and so do you. I know themaining years of their lives on the wel- curity and who have earned them. Presidentis not going to let that'fare rolls. I want to focus my comments todayhappen, and so do you. The action we take today, Mr. on the thought presented by the gen- Speaker, will allow a great many older tleman from Missouri (Mr. BOLLING) So, Mr. Speaker, I say to the Mem- when he talked about the need to ap-bers, let us approach this issue In a re-Amerlcane to live out their fInal years proach social security in a sound, busi-sponsible way and quit scaring thewith dignity and there Is no dollar nesslike fashion, not haphazardly, not• older people of America. figure we can ever put on that. as part of some reconciliation bill, not Now, Mr. Speaker, let me comment And again, Mr. Speaker, to everyone as an amendment to some other bill,on the bill before us, a bill presentedInvolved In the great debate on social but to approach the entire problem,here to undo the piecemeal tamperingsecurity, let us be reponsible In how on its own, in a very realistic way. Iwith social security which occurres Inwe approach the Issue,let. us not can say this to all of my colleagues onthe reconciliation bill. create fear and panic In the hearts of both sides of the aisle, that if we do Mr. Speaker, the action we are aboutmany Americans, let us not approach not do that, if we choose to do a littleto take will not only maintain thethis great Issue In a haphazard fashion. today and a little tomorrow and weminimum social security benefits for 3as an afterthought to some other bill. drop a few hints here and there, ormillion Americans, more Impnrtantly,Let us resolve this matter In a respon- there is a little speculation, we fright-It will allow a great many seulor citIsible way that will bring credit to this en people. zeus to maintain a sense of pride andCongress and a I eehng of security for Some of those 250,000 in my areadignity. our older friends and neighbors. who receivesocialsecurity checks As the representative of more than Mr. I1SON. Mr. Speaker; will the came to my area from your areas.250,000 social security recipients,Igentleman yield? They are your constituents as well asknow how proud these men and Mr. YOUNG of Florida, I yirld to mine, and I think we have an obliga-women who built our Nation throughthe gentleman from Florida. tion to them. their hard work are to now be able to (Mr. NELSON asked and vis given We have an obligation to the 90-retire and receive a monthly return onpermission to revise and extend ins year-old lady I talked to last week whothe money they contributed to socialmarks.) is not going to lose anything undersecurity throughout their long years Mr. NELSON. r. pcaLcr, want- any of the plans we talk ab'out today,of work. It has been said many timesto thank the gentleman from Plorkd but she fears tiat she is. She does notin the past few weeks that the recipi-(Mr. Youxs) forhis @oromcntet understand the things we are talkingents of the minimum social securityconcur with the gentleman and asso- about. She thinks that many of thesebenefit are receiving unearned bene-ciate myself with his enanuents. , cuts have already taken place,al-fits,because for some reason theySpeaker,I rise in support of the bill, though they have not. were not able to work enough years to I support the bill to preserve the The point is that if we do not do thiscollect a full share. $122 minimum monthly social right, if we do not do it as spelled out It has also been said that these menbenefit. This proposal Is a vchle'le to by the chairman of the Rules Commit-and women who will lose their mini-express the overwhelming support In tee in a realistic fashion, we are goingmum benefit will be able to make upthe House to the Senate. The Senate to scare people to death, and they de-the loss through supplemental secu-should listen to this mandate and ct serve better than that. rity income, a Federal welfare pro-accordingly. Now, consider this 90-year-old ladygram for the needy. However, Mr. This bill Is made who caine to my district from one ofSpeaker, although financially thesethe budget reconeijIatsnco bill backed your districts and who has no family;peoplewill be receiving the sameby President Reagan, included the she is by herself. She fears for her life.amount of money, there is a very greatPresident's request for elimination of CONGRESSIONAL RECORD HOUSE July 81, 1981 this imnimmu monthly benefit. At the Itis outrageous that approval ofmonthly minimum payments of the time of consideration of the budget,elimination of the minimum benefitsocial security programs would be even the yentleman from Oklahoma (Mr.was done without regardfor themore severe than In the 50 States the chairman of the Budgetimpact of this elimination on thosesimply because these pensioners In Cofttee, had requested the oppor-individuals who depend on this asPuerto Rico will not be able to avail tuinty to offer an amendment thattheir sole or primary source of income.themselves of benefits under the sup- would have restored the $122 mini-I did not support this elimination andplemental security income program mum monthly benefit, I supported Mr.opposed it every step of the way, In-(851) because the 881 benefits have Jooas request, but it failed by a razor-cluding my opposition to the so-callednot been extended to the residents of thin maroire of 212 to 215. Granim-Latta I and Gramm-Latta IIPuerto 'Rico. Tho overall budget reconciliation billbudget proposals authored by the ad- Puerto Rico is subject to the pay- which cut 344-bilhion of Federal spend-ministration. ment of social security taxes and our ing cud which I supported, contained What will happen to these peopleemployers and employees contribute come mending cuts with which I didafter February 28 if this minimumto the social security fund with their not ogreethe $122 minimum month-benefit is eliminated? Certainly a fairpayroll deductions and the payments ly benefit being one of the items.number of beneficiaries can be trans-of these taxes since the year 1951. There f am grateful to the gentle-ferred to SSI, but clearly not all of Many of our pensioners, because we man from Missouri (Mr. BOLLING) forthem can. A U.S. General Accountingdid not come within this program until aerlug this bill fin order to let theOffice survey of minimum benefit re-1951 have made contributions that House express again Its opposition tocipients could not account for otheronly allow them to receive the mini- this social security cut. sources of 26 percent of beneficiaries.mum benefits, and others have made This cut recommended by the ad-This means that asmanyas 750,000contributions that allow them to be ministration would affect 3 million el-poor, older Americans could lose theireligible only for the minimum benefits deny minsL8 million who areminimum benefit on February 28 withbecause their wages and salaries were poor senior citizens, and rely on thisno alternative source of income. below Federal minimum wages for monthly $122 check for bare subsist- As. onewhovotedconsistentlymany years. Consequently, I fully sup- once. It Is unfair to cut those less for-against the Reagan budget proposals,port H.R, 4331 so that we can restore tunate in our society. including the reconciliation bill whichthe minimum benefit payments under I strongly urge adoption of this leg-contains the elimination of the mini-the Social Security Act to more than 2 islation. mum benefit, I fervently hope thatmillionAmericansInthe. United Mr. BOILING. Mr. Speaker, I yieldCongress will see the error of its wayStatesmainlandand morethan myself 1 minute. and restore these vital benefits. To do100,000 Puerto Ricans, who as Ameri- Mr. IAGGI. Mr. Speaker, will theanything less will make us accomplicescan citizens, should be entitled to gentleman yield? to one of the most grievous injusticesthese benefits. I urge my colleagues to Mr. BOLLING. I yield to the gentle-ever perpetrated against the elderly ofpass this bill today. man from New York. this Nation. Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 (Mr. IAJX ashed and was given I urge my colleagues to join with meminutes to the gentleman from Texas permission to revise and extend his re-in support of this le1slation before us(Mr. ORAMM). and provide 3 million Americans who Mr. GRAMM. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mn, BIAGOL Mr. Speaker, I rise torely upon this minimum benefit thethe gentleman for yielding me this lend my support of the pending billguarantee that they deserve—.-that wetime. which ! understand would restorewill not take away from them that I would like today to talk about the minimum benefit payment underwhich they worked so hard, so long tominimum benefits and about what we socil security for an estimated 3.1earn. million elderly for whom it will expire Mr. CORRADA. Mr. Speaker, willdid in reconciliation and why it is im- on February 28, 1982. the gentleman yield? portant. I am not trying to change I not only ure my colleagues here Mr. BOILING. I yield to the gentle-anybody's mind. I know that virtually to pass this bill today but more impor-man from Puerto Rico. everybody is going to vote for this leg- tantly, I consider it incumbent on the (Mr. CORRADA asked and wasislation. I am going to vote against it. onste of the United States to alsogiven permission to revise and extendBut what I am trying to do here today move expeditiously on final passage.his remarks.) is clarify the issue. Indications are that the Senate may Mr. CORRADA. Mr. Speaker, I rise I think it is important to note what be Inclined to have the legislation lan-in support of H.R, 4331, a bill intro-the minimum benefit is, where it caine guish in the Finance Committee. Iduced by Mr. BOLLING to amend thefrom, and what it represents. In 1939 contend that an indication of supportOmnibus Reconciliation Act of 1981 towe established the minimum benefit from the President would motivate therestore minimum benefits under theat $10 a month. The idea was that a inenate to act with equal dispatch onSocial Security Act. lot of people had a long work history this proposaL If passed, this bill will repeal sectionbefore we ever set up social,securlty, What is at stake hereIs the eco-2201 of the Budget Reconciliation Actand that we would pay them a mini- nomic security of over 3 million elder-of 1981 which repeals the minimummum benefit if they paid anything ly merlcams, If we fail to act expedi-benefit provisions of the Social Secu-into social security. tiously and approve this bill, we willrity Act, thus restoring those provi- In 1974 we set up 881, and 881 was have the unfortunate place in historysions to the law. aimedatprovidingsupplemental of being the first session of Congress Mr. Speaker, this bill will correct aincome to people who were needy. At to ever have approved a reduction ingreat injustice that would otherwisethat point the logic of the minimum socIal security benefits for existing re-be prepetrated against more than 2benefit was really eliminated for two ciplents. million of our elderly, disabled, blind,reasons. No. 1, there were very few Icontend that the suffering,inwidows, and other social security bene-people working who had significant human terms, will far outweigh anyficiaries who are now receiving theparticipation in the labor market prior cost savings which might be achievedminimum benefit payments of $122to 1939; and, second, anybody who met in eliminating the minimum social se-per month. a needstest and an assets test, which curity benefit, The administration, in In Puerto Rico there are more thanexcluded things like the value of one's' proposing this elimination on top of100,000 social security penioners whohouse, the value of one's car, and a massive budget cuts in this and otherreceivethe minimum benefit pay.reasonable amount of savings and in- programs of direct help to the poor el-ments whose pensions would be se-surance, could qualify for 881. Today derly, has shown that its economicverely and drastically reduced if thisanybody meeting the criteria of 881 policies are clearly more callous thanbillis not enacted, In the case ofreceives almost three times as much as compassionate. Puerto Rico, the elimination of thethey do from minimum benefits. July £1,.1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE 1j 5'4A •Wehear a lot of people talkaboutwho will qualify for SSI. What fright•ofwhat is best for our lder11y dtiei the poor widow who is going to loseens me here Is that we cannot deal ra•and not what we want Wfthp©tto ininünum benefits as iresultof thetionally with this Issue—one that af-any particular amendment. action taken by the committee. Wefects the financial viability of the Mr. BAILEY of Pennylvani M hear talk about 3 million needy peoplesocial security system—because it Is soSpeaker, will the gentleman yield? being terrnnated. I do not believe I amemotional. That, I think, Is a real in- Mr. PICKLE. I yield t the gent1e going to change anybody's mind, but Idlctment of the democratic processman from Pennsylvania. would like to have as part of theand of this body. Mr. BAILEY of Pennsy1vaniaI itcord what the facts are, and here, to I thank the gentleman for yielding. thank the gentleman for yIe1ding the best of my ability to determine the Mr. BOLLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield There are two points I think kor tacth, Is what we are talking about. 4 mInutes to the distinguished gentle•tant to correct in this debate There man from Texas (Mr. PIcKLE). may be some misimpressions, 01230 (Mr. PICKLE asked and was given One is SSI is clearly a w&lare bene According to the General Account•permission to revise and extend his re-f it. Second, there Is a mistaken irnro Ing Off4ce there re 3 million peoplemarks.) sion that people receiving, urreiit re- who are dra*ing minimum benefits, Mr. PICKLE. Mr. Speaker, if thecipients of the minimum benefit orne part of ft earned, part of it unearned.debate we are having today, which ishow receive in terms of a relationsh The average minimum beneficiary Isemotional, somewhat factual, and con-between pay-n and pay.out more coin- due $62 a month from what they paidsiderably political, is any portent ofpated to those people who are not into social security, $60 less per monththe difficulties we will have in trytngminimum benefit recipients, who aiso than the $122 mlniminn benefit. to forge a social security reform billduring the life of the system, In tact Four hundred and fifty thousandbest for the American people, then Ipractically everyone on th system re- people drawing the minimum benefitsay it Is a cause for melancholy, par-ceived more in benefits than they paId have an average Federal retirementticularly for those on the subcommit-in, in taxes, over the life of thefr re- pension which exceeds $16,000 a year.tee which must produce some kind ofceiving benefits. These are peoplethatwor1ed a, fewa bill that will be fair. I would like to read just one thing quarterE under social security and are The bill before us now does not ad•briefly from the social security bulle- now drawing a minimum benefit in ad-dress what should happen regardingtin:. dition to their Federai retirement pro-those coming on the minimum benefit The dreaded stigma nc!te wfth gram. roll in the future—as my subcommit-pendence on welfare does not seem to have The bu4get reconciliation would nbttee has done previously and donebeen eliminated by the switch from State- deny them a dime that they haveunanimously. administered programs to 88!. Nonpartici- earned, but it would deny them a sup- Yesterday I Introduced legislation topants were more cnistently ilkelyto plemental payment which they arerestore the original subcommittee po-report that they will never accept we1fa not ntIt1ed to, whith they did notsition on the minimum benefit. I will There will not be a proper rep1acc earn, and which by any needs testcontinue to urge that position. I seekment for those people urreni2Ly on they do not need. the cooperation of the Members ofminimum benefits that need that to Another 50,000 people on the socialthis House and ask them to cosponsorlive, and that is an irnportat o1nt securIty rnlntmum benefit have retiredit with me. Mr. PICKLE. The gentleman is cor- spouses that d±aw pensions exceeding The basic problem here is that therect. There are over 500,000or6'O,OOO an average of $1,5O0 a year. They willcommittee process has been abrogated. continue to draw the benefits thatIt was abrogated in the passage ofpeople that we know will not apply fcr they are due based on the amountGramm-Latta II, and it is further cir-SSI,and we know It, and it would be they rnid in. cumvented here today. It is untimelycruel to assume they wilL Three hundred thousand peop1procedure and in many ways, Mr. Mr. CONABLE. Mr. Speaker, will drawing the minimum benefit todayChairman, thisisa House out ofthe gentleman yield? have: spouses that have an averageorder. Mr. PICKLE. I yield to the gcnt1c annual income which exceeds $21,100 Yet Irecognize that this actionman from New York (Mr. CowAnI.E). a' year. The reconciliation bill wouldtoday is an expected way for Members (Mr. CONABLE asked and was given not deny them a dinie they are dueto protest again the minimum benefitpermission to revise and extend hi re- from ociaI security, but it will ellmi•cut. In all likelihood, the fact is thatmar1s.) nate an unearned iupp1ementa1 pay-when all of this is over It will still be Mr. CONABLE. I agree with much nient. up to the committee to follow throughthe gentleman in the well said. t s In total, we are talking about 800,000and settle the Issue, both for the pastimportant that we preserve the role of people whose unecrned supplementsand for the future. the House In needed reforms for social in the for1 of minimum benefits will The retrospective elimination of thesecurity. Nobody is more convinced of be terminated unde:t' this amendment.minimum benefit Is an abomination. Itthe need for reform, I know, than the An additional one million people willwas a grievous error and it ought to begentleman In the well. be unaffected who. ow draw the mhi-corrected. But more than repeated It is ironic, than, that pasa.ge trio mum benefits,because underthevotes, accompanied by much noise andretreat on the speedier phase-dowr of spouse rule they get the minimumclamor, the elderly of this land needthe social security minimum will g1v benefit, p1u a upplementa1 social se-calm and steady hands tending to thethe .Senate a vehicle to which naor curity 'benefit, bringing them to halfoverall problem of the social securityreform of the system can be tthd, their spouses' earnings. The supple-system. with the result that once gain the ment will go up as the minimum goes In social security it is so importantpeople'sbranch may lose Anftktive down, and they will be unaffected. that we do the right thing, not juston which the pop1e depend for What frightens me here today, Mr.what makes us feel righteous. short and long term solving ©f the peak'er, Is, not that we are talking I know in the view of the politicalsystem. I pledge my best efforts for aboutcuttingbenefitstoneedypundits social security may e thereal reform of ocia eemn. This people. We have clearly targeted a re-main thing going for Members of Con•separate vote on the minmtm wok duction in unearned benefits to peoplegress, but social security is the mainagainst suchreform, substantv1i, wh do not meet the needs test of thething some of our elderly people haveprocedually and politically. 881 and who have not earned thegoing for them as well, and that is far Mr. BOLLING. Mr. Speaker,yeId beneffts they are paid. The Presidentmore Important. 1 minute to the gent1emar from ew hs oonwi1tted to et up a special pro• I implore the Members to keep thisYork (Mr. WEISS. øedure to be sure nobody falls throughIn mind as we address this and other (Mr.WEISS asked and wa the tobe sure that we cansocial security Issues in the weekspermission to revLse and extend moiitor the ti-auition for the peopleahead. It is Important to try to thinkmarks.) i575O CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE July i1, L981 Mr.WXS. Ithankmy distin- I think we need to preserve for ourmost Americans, let alone those on uihed colleague for yielding. elderly the dignity that we promisedfixed incomes. I wholeheartedly support this effortthem when we created the social secu- I am in agreement with the Presi- rtore the ocia security minimumrity program. That islittle enough.dent on the need to get the Federal enef its. This program can be maintained in anbudget under control, and I commend I want to comineid and complimentactuarially sound way. This Congresshim for his efforts to take certain ;hedistinguished chairman of thewill maintain its actuarially integrity,steps toward this end which should ules Committee for the statementand that can be done without reneginghave been taken long ago; But in my hat he made at the opening of thison our pledge, on our clear promise tosecond thoughts on the provisions of lebate. I hope that In the future hethese millions of. Americans who nowthe reconciliation bill, 1 think we can will follow the same line of thinkingcannot be given back those years oflook to other areas of spending to md the same course of action when ittheir lives. The only, way we can keepachieve the President's goal. ornes not just to social security but toour commitment is to maintain good In the meantime, let us leave the ,ll other legislation such as those hun-faith in what they have been led tominimum benefit intact and show a ireds of zieasures which have beenexpect they will receive. little compassion for those on mini- Polled Into one bill in the course of So I hope we will pass this bill by anmum fixed incomes by repealing the his reconciliation process. overwhelming vote and reestablish inelimination provision. This is what our The basic mistake was made at theno uncertain terms the good faith thatelderly constituents asked us to do, egthningin.theconsiderationofthis Government owes to America'sand by a 405-13 vote on July 21, we )ramm-Latta. We allowed the basicelderly. agreed that their requests were not rocesses of this House to be turned Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, I yieldtoo much to ask for. Let us give this uto a travesty. Those entrusted withsuch time as he may consume to thematter a second chance and vote for afeguardhig of thisinstitution,gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr.the bill .put forth by the gentleman hrough a misguided sense of accom-CONTE). from Missouri (Mr. BOLLING). nodatlon unwittingly rolled over and - (Mr.CONTE asked and was given Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield layed dead for Ronald Reagan. Bypermission to revise and extend his re-such time as he may consume to the oing so an injustice was done not justmarks.) gentlemanfromNew York(Mr. o the membership of this House but Mr. CONTE. Mr. Speaker, these lastGILMAN). o the entire American people. several weeks- of dealing with budget (Mr. OILMAN asked and was given — 01240 and tax matters have been most tryingpermission to revise and extend his re- We have legislation packed into aon all of us. The Congress has workedmarks.) ook of over 600 pages that nobodyits will on a host of measures we hope Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in as read in its entirety. We are goingwillrevitalizeoureconomyandsupport of H.R. 4331, to restore social 0 be asked to vote on that today. Istrengthen our productive sector. security minimum benefits by repeal- 'ope that we are never put in that po- During consideration of thefirsting the section of the Reconciliation ition again. I hope the gentleman willconcurrent budget resolution and tileAct that seeks to eliminate these bene- e given the support In his committeeomnibus reconciliation bifi, we gavefits. o make sure that we do not in thethe new President much of what he Earlier today, we lost an opportunity utureexceed the boundsofthewants. However, in the omnibus recon-to restore these benefits—the social se- udget Act. èiliationbill,both the House andcurity minimum benefits—through a 'Mr. BOLLING. Mr. Speaker, I yieldSenateinsertedprovisionswhichprocedural move. Now we have one minutes to the distinguished major-would eliminate social security mini-more chance to restore these benefits ty leader (Mr. WRIGHT). mum benefits; in retrospect, that movefor the 2 million elderly Americans Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I hopewas, I think, a little shortsighted. Thewho depend on these small checks to e will pass this bifi by an overwhelrn.conference locked Inthis provisionmeet their most basic needs. ng vote. By doing that we will send awhich will now become effective in Let us take advantage of this oppor- aessage to the Senate that we expectFebruary of next year, with the Marchtunity to reaffirm our commitment to hem to act expeditiously. 1982 social security checks reflectingmaintaining the security of our Na- Most of the 3 million people who re-the elimination of the benefits. tion's older Americans. I strongly urge eive this minimum benefit are old On July 21, by a vote of 405-13, wemy colleagues to cast their votes today nd most of them are poor. Many ofpassed House Resolution 181 in an at-in favor of the minimum social secu- hem have been domestic workerstempt to effect the removal of therity benefits in order to assist our vho, for many years, were not coveredminimum benefit elimination provi-senior citizens. y social security. That Is the reasonsion. That effort was unsuccessful 1 am hopeful that our adoption of ome qualify for the minimum benefit,though because of the Senate's refusalthis bill will be followed quickly by ecause the number of quarters underto do the same. like action in the Senate. In addition, I rhich they. were covered was limited. Today we have an opportunity, aurge that we move quickly toward a )thers. were homemakers and moth-second chance if you will, to repeal thefull airing of the complex issues sur- rs. Some were religious workers. Fewminimum benefit provision before itrounding the entiresocialsecurity ndeed are affluent. takes effect, and perhaps insure thatprogram's long-term financial stabil- I could scarcelybelieve my earsthose 1 million or so retirees betweenity. This is a matter of utmost impor- vhen one of those speaking againstthe ages of 70 and 90 who cannot qual-tance to all Americans and it should his bill suggested that most of theseify for supplemental security incomebe addressed by the proper author- eople, or a great many of them, hadwill continue to receive the small $122izing committees in a rational, deliber- io moral entitlement from the Gov-per 'month sum for their remainingate, and considered manncr. We must rnment to more than $62 a month. Iyears. bring the most appropriate measures annot really believe that any of us in I, like most of the Members of thisto bear in maintaining the program's humane sense of fairness wouldbody, received a large volume of mailsolvency and assuring all Americans each that conclusion with today'sfrom elderly constituents asking thatthat the social security benefits they prIces. their minimum benefits not be elimi-have earned and that they depend on I could irdly bel1ev that any of usnated. These are not people who havewill continue to be paid to them with- rould ask them to abandon theirnice pensions and substantial invest-out any fear of loss or reduction in ightfulentitlement,swallowtheirments to see them through their re-benefits. lignity, and go with tin cups in handmaining years. They are,in most However, in the interim, I urge my o subject themselves to a needs testcases, people who live from month tocolleagues to support H.R. 4331, to vhich wffild cut off at $284 a monthmonth in an economy where it is diffi-assure our minimum beneficiaries that x' at $1,500 of assets. cult at best to make ends meet forthey will not be singled out to bear the July 31, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE 115751 brunt of an arbitrary and unfeelingbenefit by working Just long enoughthis benefit is unearned and that it Is budgetary reduction. under social security to qualify. unneeded. If these are the real issues, Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield But we cannot tinker with thethen let us face them directly. If the such time as he may consume to thesystem by chopping this or that bene-benefit should not be paid out of the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. PUR-fit. The minimum benefit must be con-social security trust fund, then let the sELL). sidered with great care as part of theCongress consider how it should be (Mr. PTJRSELL asked and was givenoverall social security reforms. Thepaid. If the benefit is not needed in permission to revise and extend his re-Congress must consider this benefitcertaincircumstances, thenletus marks.) based upon who receives it now—andidentifythosecircumstancesand Mr. PURSELL. Mr. Speaker, I ap-who expects to receive it in the future.adjust the benefit for those who have preciate the leadership giving us anIt must determine who has no otherabused the system. The meat-ax ap opportunity to act on this matterbenefit and who will be covered byproach to totally eliminate the mInirn today. other income maintenance programs. mum benefit is not one that I find ac Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the The Ways and Means Subcommitteeceptable. For many Americans, thE legislation before us to maintain theon Social Security currently has innilnimum benefit is an essential part minimum benefit under the old age,markup a comprehensive program toof their monthly income and cannot survivors, and disability insurance pro-revise and reform the social securitybe reduced without causing severe eco gram. system and to insure continued bene-nomic hardship. The Congress and th During the year ahead, Congressfits to present and future recipients. President must recognizethis an must take effective action to Insure In repealing the elimination of themust be sensitive to this. the Integrity of the social security re-minimum benefit, we shall clear the Finally, on a week that the Congress tlreznent trust fund. Meanwhile, it isway for a rational decision—a decisionhas shown great generosity toward imperative that a loud signal be sentthat is based upon intelligence andsome of the richest interests in oui throughout the Nation that nothingcompassion. Nation by giving the oil companies will be done to endanger the benefits Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield$16 billion tax break, I do not thin} of those currently on social security.such time as he may consume to thethat it is unreasonable for us to shov Enactment of this legislation wouldgentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.a little compassion and provide the $1 send such a signal. NEu.IoA.x). billion necessary to retain the mini Most beneficiaries of the minimum (Mr. NELLIGANaskedand wasmum benefit next year. By acting tc payment are women and retired work-given permission to revise and extendrestorethe minimum benefit,th ers over the age of 65. Among retiredhis remarks.) House can take an important step for workers alone, there are about 1.5 mil- Mr. NELLIGAN.Mr.Speaker. I fullyward in restoring the confidence of el lion individuals 70 years or older, ap•support this measure. deny Americans both in the social se proximately532,000people80or (Mr.NELLIGANaddressedthecurity system itself and in the abilit3 older, and about 80.000 beneficiariesHouse. His remarks will appear hereaf-of the Congress to deal with the prob 90 or older. ter in the Extensions of Remarks.] lems of social security responsibly. Mr. MICHEL Mr. Speaker, I yield Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield such tthie as she may consume to the Mr. MICHEL Mr. Speaker, I yieldminutes to the gentleman from Penn gentlewoman from New Jersey (Mrs.such time as he may consume to thesylvania (Mr. WALKER). ROUKEMA. gentleman from Vermont (Mr. JEF- (Mr. WALKER asked and was glvei (Mrs ROUKEMA asked and wasFORDs). permission to revise and extend his re given permission to revise and extend (Mr. JEFFORDS asked and was given permission to revise and extendmarks.) her remarks.) Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I thani Mrs. ROUKEMA. Mr. Speaker, I risehis remarks.) In support of this motion to remove Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. Speaker, I amthegentleman fromIllinois(Mr the minimum social security benefitpleased to rise in strong support of theMIcHEL) for yielding to me. from the reconciliation bill. restoration of the minimum social se- Earlier in the debate, the gentlemat Mr. Speaker, I am supporting thecurity benefit. As I have expressed onfrom Missouri(Mr.Bou.ING)saic repeal of the elimination of the socialother occasions, I feel that the Housethere are two points of view that cai security minimum benefitfor oneacted precipitously and without ade-be expressed about social security. reason. Despite theallegations onquate deliberation when it repealedwould agree with him. I think the both sides of the aisle and despite thethis benefit in the omnibus reconcili-were both expressed when this issw eloquence with which the program hasation bill of 1981. I do not believe thataroseinthe considerationof th been both revered and maligned, at nothe vote on this bill is a formality or abudget bill. At that time we had th time has anyone suggested that thesymbolic vote. I take the leadership ofapproachtakeninGramm-Latt program is all bad or all good. the Senate on its word: It will considerwhich said we were going to cut th There has hardly been sufficient evi-this legislation in September and willminimum benefits and that may hay dence in hearings to justify the com-act upon it. Also, it is my hope and mybeen handled in a somewhat clums: pleteeliminationofthis program.belief that the Senate will pass thisfashion. Hopefully, what we will b However—and I want to be quite clearbill and that the Congress will undodoing on the bill today will help coi on this point—neither has there beenthe damage which it has done to therect any problems that might hay justification for the complete reten-social security system. arisen as a result of the Granim-Latt tion of this program. Both sides agree I do not believe that the social secu•process. But the lss1e was clear. Wha that there are hundreds of thousandsrity system is without the need forwe were trying to do was, we wer of beneficiaries who will either qualifyreform or improvement. However, Itrying to Insure the integrity of th for other assistance or do not need thebelieve that any change in the systemsystem for those who paid into tha benefit. should be carefully considered andsystem and deserve full benefits unde I believe that there are those seg•fully debated. I also believe that wethe system. ments of our society who desperatelyshould consider social security as part Yes, there was another point c need this benefit—for example, womenof a larger debate on the adequacy ofview, too, on the floor that day. It wa who spent too many -yearsas home•our entire retirement security futurethe Democratic leadership's bill. Tb makerS and too fe in the so-calledand that we should include in ourDemocratic leadership'sbill,iftli work force to qualify for more thanreview private savings and pensionMembers will remember, cut futui the minimum benefit. And I a'so be•reform andalternativesforolderbenef its for all 36 million social sect lieve that there are segments of ourAmericans to continue in the workrity recipients, every one of then society who have taken advantage offorce If they so desire. across the board. It cut those benefit the system to augment their pensions A great deal of the minimum benefitThat was the other point of vie withthesocialsecurity minimumdebate has centered on assertions thatbefore us. II CONGRESSIONAL RECORD HOUSE eliily S1 1981 Wee that1cr©t to amendment onfinance billions of dollars In lavish tamany of the recipients of the mini- the floor that thy? No. The memberscuts for oil companies. mum social security benefit would be of the Committee on Ikules were not Most minimum benefit recipients aretoo proud to accept welfare, They going to permit us to touch that provielderly women who did not have thewere probably right. The resulting suf- slon by amenthuent, What would haveopportunity to attain adequate socialfering of the cut In benefits and of been the eonferees choice had wesecurity coverage. Nearly two-thirds oftheir pride Is far too heartbreaking to gone to the conIereoee with that parthe people who receive the benefit arecontemplate, I hope that rmpect for ticular bill? We would have had aover age 70, and one-half million recip-our elderly citizens, rather than num- choicebetweenwhattheSenateients are over the age of 80. Many ofbers on a ledger, will be more Impor- passed on kninimum benefits or thethese Individuals depend primarily ontant today. choice of cutting future benefits forthese meager payments for retirement Understandingthenecessityof all 3 million social security recipients.income. maintaining the Integrity of the social I thought o cut furoilrecipients was Those who favor elimination of thesecurity system. I support the concept wrong. I think At Ac wrong today, minimum benefit argue that the trulyof paying the minimum benefit out of think that even though we have conneedy will have their losses replacedgeneral revenues funds rather than tinued to talk about minimum benewith welfare payments. To qualify forthe social security trust funds. fits, that we leave not really addressedsupplemental security Income, how- I believe that such a removal shows the other side of the argument whichever, an elderly person can have nogood sense as well as compassion and I was the IDemocratic leadership effortmore than $1,500 in savings. Manyam pleased to be part of this effort to the inweervation of welfare aspectsAmericans struggle to put aside sometoday. of social security while taking benefitssavings to supplement their retire- Mr. BOLLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield away from everyone. ment Incomes. If the minimum benefit2 mInutes to the gentleman from Min- Ifr, TOUNC' of Niorida. ilpealiseliminated,theseIndividuals.—nesota (Mr. Vm'ro). er, will the gentleman yield? thrifty men and women who planned Mr. VENTO. Mr. speaker, let me Mr. WALKER. I yield t© the gent1ewisely for their senior years—will befirst of all thank and commend the man from Ploride. rewarded for their diligence by havinggentleman, Mr. E0LLING. I rise In sup- Mr. YOUNG of l©r1da. r. Speskto choose between a reduction inport of this resolution. er, I think the gentleman emphasizesincome or quick disposal of their hard- I want to make It clear. I thought the point come of us ore trying toearned assets. that the rule sh,ould not have cleaved make, that social security should not Additionally, the contributoryoff the social security issue from eec- be considered In a haphanerd fashionnature of social security makes It aoncifiation. I think it Is rather contra- as part of some other bilL The prob-workers' Insurance program not a gen-dictory to pass this one measure.-the lemo surrounding the social securityeral welfare program. Many of ourreconciliation measure--a provision to system should be addressed by thisproud senior citizens would ratherrepeal the minimum benefit arid then Congress as simply that the social sostarve than apply for welfare. to pass in the first Instance a bill t©, An curity trust fund, the people who are If we eliminate the social securityfact, repeal the repealerg sort oil a living on It, and tim people planning tominimum benefit, we will be shiftingdouble negative, live on At he the fotur. critically needed funds Into a massive I know the intention of the chair- lk/r, WdLXEE,, kilo, ispeoteo I yieldgiveaway ta plan, I urge my colleagueman of the ulca Cemwralttee, who bar back the balance oil my time. to loin me lii voting for the passage of 1iI.R, 4331, championed this caused and I apparel- lVZr, OLLNth ldr. ilpeaker, I yield Mr. BOLLIN, Mr. Speaker, I yieldate his comments and his support for such time cc he amy consume to the assuring this House of having votes on gentlemanfrom such time as he may consume to the Connecticut Ur.gentleman from New Jersey(Mr.these provisions. Indeed, the proposals 1inGHs). that generally come from the ways b&r, JUNNilON ochod and was Mr. HUGIS asked and was givenandMeans Committee have a very given permicison to evlse and permission to revise and extend his re-tightly structured rule which do pre- his remarks,) marks,) vent Members from working their will, kilo. CrJDhNilON, him peaker, I Mr. RUOHS.thank the gentle-I take It that the gentleman is com- rise in support to his lcsn, man for yielding. menting that there will be no Insola- kilo. oakcr earilor this week the Mr. Speaker, I rise today In strongtion for those that choose to des) with )2louse passed the largest te cut insupport of H.R. 4331 whIch would re-these social security benefits, that the history. ,r a legislator who feels thatstore the minimum social securityHouse In fact Is going to deal with my the time has come to provide ta reliefbenefit. change In social security on a forth- to help our eltisens get out from under The minimum social security benefitright basis. I appreciate the comments the burden of Inflation, supportedaffects the lives of approximately 3of the gentleman Leone Nennsyhvanla many of the bill's provisions, I couldmillion Americans, approximately In pointing out the reconciliation proc- riot endorse the overall ta cut pack-million of whom truly need thatess has the effect of glossing over sub- age, however, because I consider Itsmoney. This benefit, which could bestantial law change as one of its obvi- tilt toward mejor corporations andphased out prospectively with far lessous flaws. wealthy Individuals, to be unaccepta-cost in human suffering, is the differ- Mr. Speaker, although the &ouse ble. Eg creating unprecedented taence between eating and not eating forhas not agreed to address In reconcili- breaks for oil companies, multination-many of our Nation's elderly, especial-ation the retention of the minimum al coopoilotlons, and large businesses,ly widows over the age of 80. social security benefit, this Issue is not the bill will place the Federal budget Many of my colleagues stood up Indead. over $€ billion In deficit. this Chamber and said that these el- The Vento resolution, cosponsored This massive giveaway program willderly citizens could qualify for 581by over 150 Members, lilemocrate and leave disastrooo ramifications on otherand that would take care of the prob-Republicans, would have enforced the areas of the budget, lem. If they were going to get theircommitment of the House to eliminate I rise he support of kI.R, 431, a billmoney anyway, just from anotherone of the the grossest attempts to to reinstoto the social security mini-budget line, any reasonable personviolate the people's trust by any Con- mum benefit which is scheduled to bewould have to ask how that shows upgress or administration. It addressed terminated in kilooch f S82, Efforts toas a savings on the budget ledger.an egregious error in the reconcili- delete this benefit show us the worstThat Is clearly robbing Peter to payation bill. This strong bipartisan sup- 'effects of Irrespomlblo fiscal policy. ItPaul, not saving money. port demonstrates the commitment of As appalling that come of my coli The eiplanation has become appar-the House to this Issue. loaguss would doug renior citizens ofent over the last 2 months. Those who Reconciliation contains an error for in mcerethly payments to order toproposed this cut In benefits felt thatwhich this Congress and Fresident July 81, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE 115753 Reagan must be held accountable, It Isspent outside the work force athometurnli ig its back on small but desper- one that quietly drains the lifebloodorin other employment not coveredately needy portion of America. out of the most successful and wellac-by the system. So I iow much do we actually save cepted retirement Insurance program The statistics go on and on but theywhen we tally up the administrative in the world. don't tell the full story. I would like tocosts ofexecutingthisproposal? While today we slip the rug out fromdetail for my colleagues a few case his-When we deduct the increase in pay- underneath 3 million social securitytories.John B.is79yearsold.ments forsupplementalsecurity beneficiaries who are at the rockThroughout his life he has worked atincome? When we then compute the bottom in terms of the benefits theyseveral low-paying jobs and has livedhighent cost of all, the loss of public receive, we may also begin the fatalon the small family farm. He us nowtrust IX Ld confidence? When the Con- process by which public trust and con-almost totally dependent upon thegress Is willing to go on record that fidence are drained from the system.minimum benefit. In March he willthere Is nothing sacred in the commit- And surely that trust and confidencelose his social security. To live he mustment oc ial security represents, indeed Is the lifeblood of this system. receive S8I but the farm, though notthat b 'en3f its are subject to the whims The Immediate targets of the moveproductive, disqualifies him. So he willof buc Iget balancers at the expense of to eliminate minimum benefit pay-have to sell his home and spend theretirec I wi )rkers there can be no trust. ment, our 3 million Intended victims,proceeds before he can get any assist- I ur ge i ny colleagues to honor our are not welfare cheats; they have notance Mary S.has recently gonecommitmeflt of 45 years and the prom- defrauded the system. Their onlythrough a traumatic divorce. The onlyise of House Resolution 181 by sup- crime, if indeed it is one, is that theything that she has after many years ofporting con ttinued efforts to reinstate have been living on a benefit eachmarriage is a car worth over $4,500the soc ial security mlnlmtu )inefit. month to which their Oovernment hasand her minimum benefits. Before she I fuz 'therhave reservations about determined they are legally entitled.can get any aid,, her car must be sold.what is goin to happen with this par- They have not misrepresented theirCarol U. lives with her children andticular meas1re, H.R. 203. I have no incomes or their contributions. It is wecollects a minimum benefit. Comedoubt t hat t here is a dusty corner who have misrepresented the entireMarch 1, Carol will have the choice ofwaiting In the Finalice Committee for social security system If we say toleaving her family or getting no finan-dealing with tl us. them now, you are no longer entitledcial assistance because this rent-free I want to co ument a little bit about to that which was pledged to you. room Is an in-kind income. The loss ofsome of the cot nments about social se- In the long run, is not the adminis-a home and all personal possessions,curity today the t have been made. I do tration and Congress also saying thatthe stripping away of all dignity andnot thlrLk the & lution is to bleed the to the other 32 million social securitythe break up of families are the truesocialsecuritysystemtorestore recipients? To the millions of Ameri-impacts of the reconciliation bill. health to the ps itient. I want to say can workers who are now paying 6.65 For what savings are we asking duchthat the effort to repeal the minimum percent of their incomes into social segreat sacrifice? It is estimated it willbenefit proposal does start a process curity with the expectation they tootake something in excess of 6,000 staffby Coniress to t ke one group at- a will be able to draw it benefits? We insurance have never, never in the history of theyears on a one-time basis to identifytimeoffsocialsecurity and recompute the benefits of these 3benefits. One canphrase it In any social security program cut monthlymillion individuals. The administrativeterms that theywant: earned, un- benefit checks for those alreadr re earned. The best fi toe one can put on tired. At least until today. cost of recomputing the benefits is es- Are our actions our trail of brokentimated to be $150 to $250 million. Ithis is that Congra ssisgoing to con- promises, Inspired by a mandate of thedoubt If even the intended victims ofvert those eligible c urrently for social this cut are fully aware that it is theirsecurity and makewelfare recipients American people? No. Today's DSG out of those that an e really the truly analysis of a recent poll conducted forbenefit we are axing. Despite the fact there are many the Republican Congressional Cam-that $122 per month is the most fre-needy. Believe me, paign Committee reveals that two-quently mentioned amount of thepeople in my districtutd I think In all thirds Of the American people do notminimum benefit, this is not in factother districts that w- ill not seek sup- want social security benefits cut. Thethe amount on the face of the monthyplemental security Inc some because i overwhelming support for social secu-check these Individuals receive. Theis characterized as public assistance, rityis across-the-board, from thoseso-called minimum is reduced evenwelfare. - first entering the workplace to thosefurther If the worker retires before Iwant to point out l;h at the reason already enjoying their social securityage 65. Dependents receive less, In-think we have a panlic among the el rights. That is the mandate to whichcluding children of retired or deceasedderly In this country tot lay Is becaus we must listen and act. But maybeworkers and dependent spouses andof the irresponsiblepi 'oposals tha that support for social security is thewidows, since they receive only a frac-came from the admin Istr ation unwar selfish interest we keep hearing abouttion of the worker's benefit. ranted, unnecessary pros rnsals which from the President. This minimum benefit has cometake the least optimistic s tatistics and This effort to reduce social securityunder attack under the pretense ofpredictions. benefits for current recipients, to goridding the social security system of I think itis just ti ils s. tmple. The back On our legal commitment, strikeswelfare-type benefits, unearned bene-commitment to social security and the a cruel blow at a most vulnerable seg-fits, windfalls, or benefits not original-health of the system hi as g )Od as the ment of our society. Most of the vlc-ly a part q,f the social security system.President and Congreu want to make Urns of this unprecedented action doThe attack is unjust and unwarranted.It. I think we ought to make a commit not have large financial reserves uponThe minimum benefit level has alwaysment worthy of the people'e repre which to draw. At least half, morebeen a part of the social securitysent. than 1.5 million of them are over 70system, from its earliest inception In Mr. BOLLINO. Mr. Si eaker, I ylel years old; jobs aren't the answer whenthe 1930's, the minimum benefit was3 mInutes to the gentles ian from n Con they ask "How am I going to make upincluded as a basic, original feature.necticut (Mr. RATCHFORD). the difference?" When we froze the—minimum at $122 The victims of this scandal are over-for the workers who retires at age 65, 01250 wheliningly female—possibly as manyan automatic phaseout was built into (Mr RATCiFORD a;ked and w as 85 to 90 percent of them are elderlythe system. As earnings rise in ourgiven permission toreviseand ext en women. These are wtves and widows;economy and fewer and fewer people his remarks.) they are working women who have la-have such low earnings to qualify for Mr. RATCHFORD. Mr. peaker, bored at low-paying jobs, whose workonly $122 per month, the minimum riseasa formercommlss;i oneron agh instories have been short term or spo-will cease to exist. By forcing theinthe StateofConnecticut, a State I. radic—perhaps as a result of yearselimination now, the administration Iswhich there are about 3 00,000 peoplt H 57M CONGRSSONAL COD HOU Ju'y 31, 1981 over the age of O and a Stat e Ingentlewoman fromMaine (Mrs.needy elderly arc riot eligible for 581 which there are thousands and I ;houSnows). because they have a mall savings or sands of frail elderly peope lothis (Mrs. SNOWE asked and was givenown their home. It Is very difficult to program. perrinlsclon to revise and extend her retell proud older Americans that Com Now, let me say agsh whatis aremarks.) gress has voted to reduce their social talking about are the frailest2 the Mrs. SNOWE. Mr. Speaker,risc insecurity benefits, but that the Govern' frail and the neediest of the support of H.R. 431t, legislation toinent will supplement their lessee with And to talk about cuttln these ,aopleamend the Omnlkus ReconciliationSill If they are willing to soil their from that thread of life, that l12 aAct t© restore the social security min1home and dispose of their assets, month, is unconscionable. mum benefit for current reclpleute There Is also some ekepticLun about Now, let me remind the 1W e mbevsWhile we must consider the alternawhether the Social Security AdmInis what we did in the tax bill tIthe week.tives for social securIty refinancing,trationcould even administer the And if you want to talk about 1a imess0any reforms we pass shunid not hurtchange in benefits for these 21 million if you want to talk about eait y, If youthose who are already receiving theminimum baneflclariee The benefit want to talk about ustlcs, cin we inbenefits for which they have planned,formula has changed many times since conscience cut the frailest of th e frail Eilminathig the minimum benefitthe program's Inception, and and In the anne week give IIII cns offor current recipients would result Inputing each person's benefit would dollars of tax breaks t© the oil lndusan undue hardship for the majority oftake In excess of ,0011 staff.years to try,giveseveralbillion'dolliaisofthese older Americans. We must lookcarry out, breaks to the savings and loan lndusclosely at exactly who Is receiving the Our support for saving the minimum try, give a large break to tscc mmodminimumbenefit.Most minimumbenefit demonstrates to the senior clti ities traders and, yee in say in thebeneficiaries have a history of lowsans of this country that they riced wealthiest of estates, "YG u ar e gothilwages throughout their workIng years,not fear the reduction of their berie to get a break?" To give a break to oil,fu my home State of Maine, manyfits and that they can continue to to banking, to coinmodi ties,and topeople spend their lives working hardhave faith in the social security pro- large estates in the sum e week whenin low-paying Lobs with little potentialgram. we propose to cut21 u duos of thefor Increased onrethigs. Maine has the Mn MICilL. Mr. Speaker, i yield frailest and the neediest of the elderlylowestper cap1t incomehitheminutes to the gentleman from Texas is not somethingcars to u igago In.Nation, and my constituents could riot(Mr. Ancnrn), In the name of cons deuce,In theafford even the smallest reduction In (Mr. ARCHER asked and was given name of justice, In the name of sojulty,social security benefits. permission to revise and extend his re let us pass this bill an i keep our com Most minimum beneficiariesaremarks.) mitment to the older ricann. women; 7 percent of the workers re- Mr. ARCHER, Mr. Speaker, I think Mr. MCHEL, Mr. arker,II yieldceiving thIs benefit are women whowe need to look at why we are dcbat such time as she um cousumo to thecharacteristically earn lower wages orbig this issue at all today, gentlewoman fromCalfovnith(Mc.who have taken time cut of the work- We are debating it because the social FIEDLER). force to raise families. If we include (Ms. FIEDLER adi edand was givendependents and survivors, we find thatsecurity fund is going to be In deficit permission to revise and extend her rean estimated ii in 0 percent of mini-and unable to pay all retirement bene- marks.) mum beneficiaries are women. fits at the end of next year if we do Ms. FIEDLER. M ,Speaker,rise In Most minimum beneficiaries are reriot do something. It menus we are support of H.R. 3 31L, to restore inInl.tired workers, and approximately 'iagoing to have to make some very diff I- mum benefits und er the Social Seempercent of them are at least 6 yearscult choices, They will net go away. rity Act. of age. Among workers alone, thereWe can listen to all of the political There are 21aol .llion senior citisensare about 1.ö million who are over agerhetoric that we want; tile decision receivingminim socialsecurity711, about b3,11O0 who are over age 2111,still has to be made. benefits. Twothi ds of those citlaensand about 80,0110 who are © or older. The question on the minimum bene are over age 70. f 3ome OO,0O are over A mere 12 percent of minimum bene-fit Is whether we continue to pay out age 80. Most ar e elderly women whoficiaries have a public pensIon and aret© people benefits beyond what they, never had theipportunity to make areceiving this benefit because of ahorthave earned by taxes paid In when reasonable sale sry. All are now temterm employment In a social securltythey do not need that for the source uously balanci eg the very high costscovered job. of their sustenance, when they per- of health care, food, and housing on These retirees planned on the mini-haps have millions of dollars of cut udgets that a e dependent on themum benefit as a source of income beside wealth, when they have large pen- inimum ben eff L check each month. cause Congress promised It to them.sIon programs, either governmentally The Feder iiovernmsnt long egoThey have every reason to believe thator privately sponsored, arid In doing ade a corn mit ment to these seniorthey will continue to receive this bene'that jeopardine the basic benefits paid itizens, wh .hwe worked all of theirfit, Most are already living on a tightto the elderly who do needooclal secu- ives hoping; for sonic retirement seembudget, and It Is too late for them tority as a mjor or sole source of sup- ity. To sw deii Jly break that comniitplan on alternative sources of retlrcport. ent would be a cruel and unfairmerit income. The peopleofthis That Is the issue here, easure.Curr ent recipients of theNation are rapidly losing faith In the This bill takes away from the Social inimum bene fit are very frightenedsocial security system, and a cut InSecurity Subcomnultteé and the Ways y unknown liardships they will facebenefits to current recipients will onlyand Means Committee the opportuni- f assistance i cut off, Many are notincrease this lack of confidence. ty to devise a reform program that will ble, pr' epared, or willing to search out I have heard the argument that Ifimplement a policy that will be con- elfarebene'its they will need tothe minimum benefitIschanged,structIve and beneficial to all hi this aintajn adequate incomes, They areneedy recipients will be eligible forcountry who depend on social security, he ii, djvidua[z who are most vulnersupplemental security income (SS) And what will It do? It will send a ble 'o diff Ic alt economic ecnditlopsWhile itIs estimated that perhapsbill to the Senate that they will sit on d J east abli to adapt to them. Ac we80,000 would become eligibleif theuntil they arc ready to tack on their urs us a nee fed program of economicminimum was eliminated, Itis ues-social security proposals and then be eccvery for this Nation, let us nottionable how many would choose tothe moving forco,behlnd what Is done or get the co: tnmltments we have madeapply. The older people In Maine see aIn this vital area, taking away the to senior citizens with the social seemgreat difference between the social se-House's constitutional Lurisdiction to iy program, curitybenefita whichtheyhaveoriginate all tax bills. And make no Mr. MICffL. Mr. Speaker, t yieldearned and the 551 benefits whichmistake about It, that Is exactly what u'h time as aloe may consume to thethey view as welfare, Moreover, manywe are doing today. We are handing a eTly 819 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD HOU/SE 115755 vehicle to the Senate to rewrite thetween70 and 90 years of age. Appro:ri-mum amount has to be guaranteed for social security bill. I do not think wemat,ely 2 million of the 3 million'illthose truly dependent on it, though, should do that. suffer reduction of aiore than o re-and I do not think anyone would Our chafrman, who has done an out.third by next April, and only aboutargue that point. standing ob on the Social Security00,000 of them are likely to even at In sum, Mr. Speaker, I urge passage Subcommittee, my friend, the gentle-tempt to apply for SSL The remain:mgof this bill so that we can take a long, man from Texas, JAI Pxc1uE, has1.4 million persons, half of whom r ehard look at the state of the social se- committed that we will take into con-estimatedtohave Incomesuro fr curity system now and what overall sideration and pass out a reform on$3,200, or $4,800 for a cmole, conchanges have to he made to guarantee the minimum benefit structure, Thatexpect an average net loss in annir lthat those checks still go out to our Is the proper way to do It, not In thisIncome of over $500. Nation's elderly who depend so fully hurried procedure beffcre the House And what about these people wt toon them. today. have another pensIon?chair a Cm a- Mr. BOLLING. Mr. Speaker, I yieldmittee on Compensation and mplo y- Mr. MICIIEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman fromee Benefits for Federal Emloyeee; I2such time as he may consume to the Ohio (Ms. Oi). percent of those peo,le receive a p n-gentleman from Virginia (Mr. PAaais). (Ms. OAKAR asked and was givension of under $6,000. These are I ,he (Mr. PARIIS asked and was given permission to revise and extend her re-groups who are most likely tobepermission to revise and extend his re- marks.) among the 12 percent who got V hatmarks.) Ms.OAKAR,Mr. Speaker, I rise Inother pension, Their combined inec Mr. PAI1!tIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the bill and commend theIs less than $11,G00 annually. support of the legislation. Today I will chairman of the Rules Committee for So I ask you: Is this l'air to ourvote In favor of retaining the mini- offering ft. people? Are we breaking our pioi nisemum social security benefit. This $122 Mr. eaer,have had the prlvt.to the American people? And I b whomonthly oynent provides 3 million lege for the past 3 years of chairing aeveryMember Inthis House= -andretirees with desperately needed as- task force on social security under thereally and truly, the American p ublicsistance. auspicesofthe Aging Committee,and the press-=-to take a look a t our Theminimumbenefit would be de- thanks to the gentleman from flar1dstask force findings. They wtllsee aleted by tho Graunn-Latta budget bill (Mr. PEPpa). We have had countlessvery, very different picture. which the suae upproved last month. hearings and numerous witnesses and, Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, I yieldlimlnat1ng this benefit would create quite honestly.I do disagree withsuch time as he may consume to thea real hardship on those who can least some of the findings of the Ways andgentleman from. California (Mr. Goonafford it. It would be particularly dev- Means Subcommittee. WATPR). astating to those Individuals who have Three former Commissioners testi- (Mr. GOLDWATER asked ad wasworked at low-Income Jobs throughout fied that there was no Immediategiven permission to revise and extendtheir lives and depend on their month- crisis, two funds had surpluses, onehis remarks.) ly checks to make ends meet. One of fund may have an Interim problem In Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. SpQ akcr, Ithe problems with the social security the mideighties interfund borrowingrise In support of H.R. 4331, a billsystem Is that It does not differentiate would take eare of that difficulty forwhich would, in effect, amend the con-between the people who worked at the1980's.Infact,thetrusteesference report of the fiscal yi ar 1982low-Income Jobs and people who have report—and this was not the trusteesbudgetto delete the provision s on themultiple pensions. We would be plac- press release, but this was In theminimum social security benei It rovl-ing an unfair burden on millions of re- report—written by the Secretaries ofslons. I do this out of a sen.aiof fair-tirees if we were to change the rules Treasury, RHS, and Labor, indicatedness and legislative deilberatic n. now. These people are the most v'ul- that for the next 2 years the trust - Thesocial security systemis very,nerable because they cannot supple- fund has at least a 1-percent surplus.very sick. The largest portion of thement their Incomes by going back to TheCongressionalBudgetOfficesystem, old-age survivors and disabilitywork. report shows an even greater surplus. insurance, will be bankrupt v rithin the Those In favor of eliminating the Why are press releases issued by theyear. We are, and rightfully liould be,minimum benefit have said those indi- trustees attempting to hiwe the peopleworried because ultimately t he healthviduals truly in need will be picked up believe the system is bankrupt? Whyof the system affects the flit ancisi se-by welfare or some other Federal pro- have they Induced blind panic on thecurity of almost all present and futuregram. The problem is that there are part of the elderly? I believe it is be-retirees in the country. already 500,000 minimum beneficiaries cause as long as the trust fund is part However, social security n forrii hascurrently eligible for welfare who have of the unified budget, that trust fundto be approached In a com rehiensiverefused to apply for welfare benefits. can be used to wash out other expend-fashion. I believe that we ;hould allEven the administration has said that itures In the areas such as the cost oftake our lead from the distinguishedthey expect no more than one-quarter this tax bill, the cost of our defense in-chairman of the Social Security Sub-of those who are now or would become creases, and so forth, In effect, theycommittee, the honorable gen tiemaneligible for welfare will apply for wel- are going to try to balance the budgetfrom Texas, and look at the ac tuarIalfare benefits. If all those eligible did on the backs of the elderly who paidsoundness of the system as a wholeapply for welfare, the budget savings into the system. rather than amending it in tin hasty,would be cut by one-half. In addition, Now, one of my colleagues frompiecemealfashionoutlinedIn theeliminating this necessary benefit will Texas talked about this GAO report,budget reconciliation bill. not help to restore confidence In the which is really a very poor report be- In all honesty, I recognize V hat realsocial security program. Nor willIt cause, do you know what, it left out 25changes will have to be made in thehelp to solve the financial problems percent of the people who collect thesocial security system. We ha' re to getthat face social security. minimum benefit. They did not ac-the system back to Insuring retirement About 80 percent of current benefi- count for 25 percent of the people. income for retirees and di leth theciaHes have paid taxes toward this So we have to ask who really arefrills that have been added over thebenefit and they are entitled to the these people. They are not the rich, aspast 40 years. In all honesty, major re-proceeds. Those individuals who have the gentleman would have you believe.visions in the minimum be nefit mayretired or are about to retire have They &re not even the middle class, ashave to be made, A means test prob-counted on these benefits In planning the gentleman would have you believe.ably should 'cc implementei i l simplytheir retirements, We have a commit- It has to do with women because thecannot believe that 100 pei 'cent of allment to maintain the minimum bene- fact Is that 75 percent of the peoplerecipients of the $122 per o sonth mini-fit. who are affected happen to be oldermum benefit are over 80, female, and I hope arid I trust this legislation women, two-thirds of whom are be-destitute as some claim,This mini-will be adopted. H 5756 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE July 81, 1981 01300 ly as the chairman of the Social Secu-is not true that the overwhelming ma- nty Subcommittee, in trying to bringjority of these receiving this benefit Mr.MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, to windto this Congress true reform. are destitute without remuneration up debate on this side, I yield the bal- I want to compliment my other col-and will be dropped through all kinds ance of the time remaining to the dis-lea gue from Texas (Mr. Ga&MM), whoof cracks or that they will be put out tinguished gentleman from Californiagave some very positive constructiveto poverty. That is just also bunk. My (Mr. RoussELoT), who serves with sucha;tatistics that we are all going to havecolleague from Texas (Mr. GIUMM) distinction on the Social Security Sub-t ;o Look at. He is right on the mark inhasin a very straight forward manner committee. The SPEAKER pro tempore. (Mr.I tis discussion that, of those 3 millionmade this point clear. BONIOR of Michigan) The gentlemanr,e)plewho are now receiving the Mr. Speaker, I think that we should from California (Mr. RoussELoT) isr rlnimum benefits, many have notface up to the fact that both President recognized for 4 minutes. e arned the full amount of the benefitReagan, and the Social Security Sub- Mr. ROUSSELOT. Mr. Speaker, Iti iey receive. Fo example, there arecommittee, have genuinely tried to ad- compliment my colleague from Mis-n' tany minimum benefitrecipients,dress this issue.I hate to see the souri for providing time for this dis-w. ho are receiving $122 a month fromHouse send a bill separately to the cussion on this• Important issue of thesc cial security, that have paid lessSenate, because we know how gooc minimumbenefit. However, I rise inth an $122 in soiial security payrollthe other body is at picking up on leg- opposition to HR. 4331. ta ces during their entire working his-islation, as my colleague from Texas It Is of the highest importance thattoi y. He is absolutely correct in his(Mr. ARcm) said. It could well be we, as elected Representatives, pro-fig ures and I conipliment him for thethat this bill may come back to haunt ceed in the matter of consideration ofwa vthat;he brought them to our at-us even before we have had a chance restoring integrity to the social secu-ten tion. really address the Issue the way I rity system with great care, addressing First, this is a most important pointthink it should be fully considered not parts of the problem, but bywhir ch my colleague from Texas hasbefore the whole Congress. The best facing theentireproblem oftheraisid. '?Thile many have shown con-way to achieve this full and careful system head on with constructive rem-cern today for those who receive theconsideration is to work within the edies. mini muirtbenefit,while not quitetraditional Institutional framework of It worries me, however, that some ofhavii ig earned the full amount theythe Congress—the committee system. my colleagues are taking actions basedrecei' ye, ie are overlooking the major- I therefore urge my colleagues to on haste, actions based on partisan ef-ity o.f those beneficiaries who havevote against H.R. 4331, allowing for forth, and actions based on emotionpaid Into the system for many, manythe opportunity for full debate and rather than rationale. years and thereby qualifying for aconsideration of proposals to save the It worries me, for the sake of thenormal benefit. I ask my colleaguessocial security system by the Social 35.6 million Americans receiving socialwhat Yiout these individuals' rights?Security Subcommittee, the Ways and securitybenefits,thatthisactionWhat about their right for their bene-Means Conunitttee, and the House of todaycompletelycircumventsthefits to be protected? Should not we asRepresentatives. committee process of the Congress;a Conk ress be concerned about the Mr. HEFIEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise this bill having been introduced onlybenefit 3ofthose who have paid thetoday to defend social security mini- yesterday, more importantly H.R. 4331payroll tax for many years, and notmum benefits. I refuse to believe that entirely bypasses the work of thejust thc se who marginally qualify? this distinguished body is prepared to Social Security Subcommittee, which As I 1 save already stated, this is theIgnore the basic needs of millions of is presently marking up proposals tomain ol )jective we must address: sai-older Americans who depend upon save the system. vaging Eocialsecurity for those pres-their small, monthly checks for their I regret that H.R. 4331 is not part ofent and Euture beneficiaries who havevery livelihood and survival. the overall discussion for the totaltruly eai ned their benefits. It is simply not fair to change the reform that is needed for the social se- SeconcL I want to make it clear therules of the game In midstream, to the curity system. I think it would beway some of my colleagues have trieddetriment of many of our senior citi- more appropriate if this bill addressedto emph: Mize they would believe thatzens, for the sake of short-sighted the problems facing the social securitythe recoi iciliation bill cuts all of thesebudgetary considerations. Mr. Speak- program; but I understand the politi-benefits retroactively. That is bunk.er, when we established the social se- cal nature of this issue. It is a very,The reconciliation bill, over which 250curity system, we made a solemn very hot issue. I can understand myconf,reehave reached agreement,promise to all Americans; let us not Democraticcolleagueswantingtosays that those minimum benefits will jump on it with both feet and trompStop in !arch of 1982. begin breaking that promise. everybody, and in some cases misrep- So, allof the discussion that the Mr. Speaker, I belive that all of my beneficiaries were going to be cut offcolleagues realize the need to prudent- resent the President's position. ly control Government spending. This But that is all part of the politicaltomon,ow, all of that fear that unfor-broad consensus is amply evident from game. Unfortunately, these social se-tunately many of my colleagues pro-our recent actions in the budget area. curity benefits cannot be viewed as amoted, orer the media air waves, thatBut Mr. Speaker, there is a right way game. we were utting all these people of f, is The main objective is to save thejust not•orrect. and a wrong way to cut the budget, social security system. And I do not I want toassurethe Americanand cutting out social security mini- care how many figures we quote frompeople 'who presently receive social se-mum benefits is clearly wrong. Let us the Congressional Budget Office, orcurity L enefits that the intent of ourcut Government spending, let us make anybody else, our social security com-Social S ecurity Subcommittee is not tothe Government cost-effective, but let puters show that unless this Congresscut all he benefits as the Democratus not do so by breaking sacrosanct takes positive action, those trust fundsreconcili. ation bill would have done. Ifpromises made long ago, let us not do will be in desperate trouble in Novem-their bill had passed, 36 million recipi-so by forgetting our elder Americans. ber 1982 or thereabouth. No matterents' ben efits would have been slowed Mr. Speaker, there has been much how much we want to walk away fromdown vera 7substantially. talk in this Chamber of the "social that fact, no matter how hard it is to My coil eague from Minnesota (Mr.safety net." I submit to my colleagues face the system's problems, the truthVo) dk I not mention that in his dis-that the elimination of social security is social security is facing its most seri-cussion to ay and I am sure he votedminimum benefits makes a mockery of ous crisis in its 46-year history. for that bf 'I. this so-called safety net. Years ago, I want to compliment my colleague I want to say additionally that thereour Nation entered into a sacred con- from Texas (Mr. PIcKLE), who in a bi-is no doubt about the fact we need totract with the American people to pre- partisan manner, has handled thissave this s ystem and this minimumserve and protect, to uphold and sus- issue very, very fairly and very square-benef it is a very sensitive area. But, ittain, a quality of life which they had Jdy 81, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSF justlyearned through the fruits ofcan be back asearlyas \Tuesday with ahope that the other body will move their labor. This contract is now jeop.revised conference report saving thewith dispatch to make this bill Iaw, ardized by shortsighted policies ten.social security minimum benefit. LT Mr. BINGEAM. Mr. Speaker,rise dered under the guise of economicthat effort fails, I will vote against theIn support of this legislation to restore progress. conference report itself. It would bethe minimum social security be,noilt. But, Mr. Speaker,ask this distin-regrettable to see the work that wentAs I have argued on many xwaoos, It guished body, can our great Nationinto reconciliation lost but it would beIs unconscionable that the C' move forward by leaving behind thosefar more regrettable to run any riskwould eliminate this source c people who helped forge the Americanthat the minimum benefit will not befor 3 million of our most dream? I think not I urge my col-saved. €ifl leagues to reject this myopic approach Mr. BOLLING. Mr. Speaker, It is azeus. The minimum benlit lo' is and to reinstate the social securitypleasure always to listen to the gentle-$l2 a month.ask my 'lloa'u to minimum benefits. man from California. I suddenly real-contemplate for just I ninute rhat it Mr. BOLLING. Mr. Speaker, I yieldized that he must be coaching a fellowwould be like to live on $22 o mouth. myself the balance of my time. Californian. His use of language is ex-Could a person living on that amount Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker willtraordinarily apt, skillful, and some-afford to pay rent, buy fozui, and pay the gentleman yield? time quite confusing, but really fasci-utility bills too? Yet if we eliminate lfr. BOLLING. I yield to the gentle.nating. the minimum benefit,l.million man from Masachusett.s, The only reason that I take thisAmericans will have to make o with (Mr. MOAKLEY asked and wastime is to urge Members to vote In theeven less than that. glvn permission to revise and extendhope that the other body will show Sut we are told that we must reduce his remarks.) good judgment and begin to relieveFederal spending. We are told that our Mr. MOAKLEY, Mr. Speaker,, I risethe fear that Is in the land with regardPresident has pledged to balance the flu rupport ©I the bill (ELR. 4331) to re-to what this Institution is going to do.budget, and, besides there uo'e people store mhilxnum benefits under the I am afraid of what this Institutionreceiving the minimum benefit who do Social Security Act and commend themay do. I am afraid It may act onnot really deserve it. I ask how any tinguished chairman of the Com-social security the way It has acted onMemb' can dare make arguments like mittee on Rules, the gentleman fromtaxes and on reconciliation in a waythat after passing the President's ta Misromi (Mr. BOLLING) for his leader-that is not entirely representative ofbill the other day. That bonamm for shipin attempting to provide thethis institution. the rich may well result in deficits of ouze with a method by which this I do not like to see a situation where$87 billion over the next 2 years and inst effort can be made to restoreall the members of one party march Ineven higher deficits later. Those defi- these vital benefits. lockstep. cits will be caused by billions of dollars Mr. Speaker, last nIght the Rules I know1 the diversity of both parties.hi tax cuts for our wealthiest citizens Committee was confronted with a dis-I do not like to see a situation inand $10 billion in giveaways to the oil tressing dilemma. We were advisedwhich any President dominates the Inindustry, Is It not Ironic we will strip that the Senate, by Inadvertence orstitution wholly. tens of thousands of needy Americans otherwise. had acquired custody of the It is not the first time I have seen It.above the age of 90 0f the minimum papers on the reconciliation confer-But I do hope that when we considerbenefit at the very time when we are erce report, We were advised that thesocial security we are able to do it likehanding ever tau revenues to the su- R,epubLican leadership In the Senatethe House of Representatives and likeperrich and to those industries which was prepared, In a showdown, to passthe other body, not like partisanscould mount the most effective lobby- the original Gramm-Latta bill. Notmarching In lockstep. ing efforts? only would prograniz salvaged In the I hope everybody votes for this bill. conference be lost, the minimum bene-• Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise In I see that some of the same Republi- fit itself would be almost immediatelysupport of H.R. 4331, a bill that wouldcans and conservative Democratse who lost with some of the minimum bene-restore the minimum benefit undervoted for the Gramm-Latta reconcili fIt cut off in only 90 days. the social security system to law, Ination package will be voting for this The choice before the Rules Corn-perhaps one of the most callous ac-bill today. Many of these Republicans mfttee was a simple one, if thoroughlytions this body has taken since I haveandconservativeDemocratsvoted anguishing to all of us, we could callbeen in Congress, the House eliminat-against a rule which would have al- the Senate's bluff and risk an almosted this benefit when it passed thelowed us the opportunity to preserve immediate cutoff of these benefits, notGramm-Latta substitute to the omni-the minimum benefit. Many of them to mention the loss of more than $3bus reconciliation bill. supported the President's tax package billion which the conferees had recap. When my committee considered leg-which, in the huge and unprecedented tured. islative savings as mandated by thedeficitsit could create only makes The gentleman, from Missouri indi-first budget resolution, we decidedslashes in social security Inevitable. cated that the risk was unacceptablethat the elimination of the minimumFrankly I am appalled at this hypocri- and was supported by the committeebenefit would break a covenant be-sy. which reported a rule which lengthenstweentheGovernmentand,the Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the the time available to try to save thepeople; that cutting back on benefitsHouse has another opportunity to ex- minimum benefit and complajes halfthat people expect and have been re-press its position In favor of retention of the legislative process toward doingceiving was not only wrong, but itof the mimimum benefit. The chair- so on the same day. I recognize thatwould shake the trust that we try soman of the Rules Committee, Mr. there are some risks regarding Senatehard to instill in our citizens about theBou.ING,has madeItclearthat action on H.R, 4331, But the chancesIntegrity of their Government. To me,today's action will not be the last of its will be far better than under the dan-and to many in my district and IkInd. The House leadership shall con- gerous situation which existed •lastassume across the country, the socialtinue to press for continuation of this night. security system is one of the greatbenefit until Its continuation isas- However, Mr. Speaker, I for one con-social programs of our time, and it is' asured. In doing this, this body will tinue to believe that even this risk issource of security to many Americansonly be pushing President Reagan to irnacceptable. Today the House willboth young and old. It troubles me tolive up to the pledge that he made have two more chances to really saveseethis President manipulatethisduring his campaign and repeated the mnthtium benefit. A motion will be.system, and cause anguish and worryagain on Monday night. To quote the offered to recommit the conferenceamong our senior citizens, who deservePresident: report; I will support the motion andour support, not our politicking and I will not see those of you who are de- urge my colleagues to do so. If we arerhetoric. I strongly urge my colleaguespendent on social security deorved of your successful in this effort, the confereesIn the House to support this bill, and Ibenefits. I make that ple1ge to you as your ______

115758 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE July 3.!, 1981

President . . Youwill continue to receiveGuarlnf Mazzoll Savage 0 1320 your checks in the full amount due you. Gunderson McClory Sawyer Hagedorn McCollum &heuer The Clerk announced the following Mr. Speaker, the House Is makingHall(OH) McCurdy Schneider pairs: its position quite clear on this matter.Hall, Ralph McDade &hrOeder Hall, Sam McEwen &hulze Mr. Richmond with Mr. Dornan of Cali- ThePresidenthas repeated his pledge.Hamilton McGrath &humer fornia. Th ball is now in the Senate'a CoUrt.Hammerschmidt McHugh Seiberling Mr. Young of Missouri with Mr. Simon. The epubllcan Senate has yielded toHance McKinney Sensenbrenner Mr. Fascell with Mr. Holland. on everyHarkin Mica Sharnansky Mr. Moffett with Mr. Coelho. thePresident almost Hartnett Mikuiski Shannon peet of the President's economicHatcher Miller(CA) Sharp So the bill was passed. program. If the President really wantsfawkins Miller(OH) Shaw The resultof the vote was an to ve the minimum benefit he would Heckler Mneta Shelby nounced as above recorded. Hefner Minish Shumway have little trouble in convincing theHeftel Mitchell (MD) Shuster A motion to reconsider was laid on Senate to do so. If he does not do 50, Hendon Mitchell (NY) SliJander the table. the public will surely know where the Hertel Moakley Skeen Hightower Molinarl Skelton responsibility 1ies. Hiler Mollohan Smith(AL) The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-Hillis Montgomery Smith (IA) ant to House Resolution 203, the pre- Hollenbeck Moore Smith (NE) vious question is ordered. Holt Moorhead Smith (NJ) Hopkins Morrison Smith (PA) The question is on the engrossmentHorton Mottl Snowe nd third reading of the bill. Howard Murphy Snyder The bill was ordered to be engrossedHoyer Murtha Solarz Hubbard Myers Solomon and read a third time, and was read aHuckaby Napier Spence third time. Hughes Natcher St Gennain The SPEAKER pro tempore. TheHunter Neal Stangeland Hutto Nelligan Stanton question is on the passage of the bill. Hyde Nelson Stark The question was taken; and the Ireland Nichols Staton Speaker pro tempore announced thatJacobs Nowak Stenholm Jeffords O'Brien Stokes the ayes appeared to have it. Jenkins Oakar Stratton Mr. BOLLING. Mr. Speaker, on thatJohnston Oberstar Studds I demand the yeas and nays. Jones (NC) Obey Swift Jones (OK) Ottinger Synar The yeas and nays were ordered. Jones (TN) Oxley Tauke The vote was taken by electronicKastenmeier Panetta Tauzin device, and there were—yeas 404, nays Kazen Parris Taylor 20, not voting 10, as follows: Kemp Pashayan Thomas Kildee Patman Traxler (RollNo.1891 KIndness Patterson Trible YEAS—404 Kogovsek Pease Udall Kramer Pepper vander Jagt Addabbo Campbell Edgar LaFalce Perkins Vento Akaka Carinan Edwards (AL) Lagomarsino Petri volkmer Albosta Carney Edwards (CA) Lantos Peyser walgren Alexander Chappell Edwards (OK) Latta Pickle walker Anderson Chappie Emerson Leach Porter wanpler Andrews Chishoim Emery Leath Price washington Annunzlo Clausen English LeBoutillier Pritchard watkins Anthony Clay Erdahl Lee Pursell waxman Applegate Clinger Ertel Lehman Quillen weaver Ashbrook Coats Evans(DE) Leland Rahall weberMN) Aspin Coleman Evans(GA) Lent Railsback weber (OH) Atkinson Collins (IL) Evans (IA) Levitas Rangel weiss AuCoin Collins (TX) Evans (IN) Lewis Ratchford white Bafalls Conte Fary Livingston Regula Whitehurst Bailey(MO) Conyers Fazo Loeffler Reuss whitley Bailey(PA) Corcoran Fenwick Long (LA) Rhodes whittaker Barnard Coughlin Ferraro Long(MD) Rinaldo whitten Barnes Courter Fiedler Lott Ritter williams(MT) Beard Coyne, James Fields Lowery (CA) Roberts(KS) williams (OH) Bedell Coyne.williamFindley Lowry(wA) Roberts (SD) wilson Bellenson Craig Fish Lu Jan Robinson winn Benedict Crockett Fithian Luken Rodino wirth Benjamin D'Amours Flippo Lundine Roe wolf Bennett Daniel, Dan Florio Lungren Roemer wolpe Bereuter Daniel, W w. Foglietta Madigan Rogers Wortley Bevill Danielson Foley Markey Rose wright Biaggi Daschle Ford (MI) Marks Rosenthal wyden Bingham Daub Ford (TN) Marlenee Rostenkowski wylie Blanchard Davis Forsythe Marriott Roth Yates Bliley de Ia Garza Fountain Martin (IL) Roukema Yatron Boggs Deckard Fowler Martin (NC) Roybal Young (AK) Boland Dellums Frank Martin (NY) Rudd Young (FL) BoIling DeNardis Frost Matsul Russo Zablocki Boner Derrick fuqua Mattox Sabo Zeferetti Bonior Derwinski Garcia Mavroules Santini - Bonker Dickinson Gaydos Bouquard Dicks Oejdenson NAYS—20 Bowen Dingell Gephardt Breaux Dixon Gibbons Archer Erlenborn McDonald Brinkley Donnelly Gilman Badham Frenzel Michel Brodhead Dorgan Gthgrich Cheney Grarnm Paul Brooks Dougherty GInn Conable . Hansen(ID) Rousselot Broomfield Dowdy Glickman Crane. Daniel Hansen (UT) Smith (OR) Brown (CA) Downey Goldwater Crane. Philip Jeffries Stump Brown (CO) Dreter Gonzalez Dannemeyer McCloskey Brown (OH) Duncan Goodling Broyhill Dunn Gore NOT VOTING1O Surgener Dwyer Gradison Simon Dymally Bethune Pascell Burton, John Gray Coelho Holland Young (MO) Burton. PhillipDyson Green Cotter Moffett BuUer Early Gre Richmond Byron Eckart Grisham Dornan

H

Calendar No. 261

97TH CONGRESS 1ST SJssIoN

INThE SENATEOF ThE UNITED STATES

JULY 31 (legislative day, JULY 8), 1981 Received; read the first time

SEPTEMBER 9, 1981 Read the second time and placed on the calendar

AN ACT To amend the Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1981 to restore minimum benefits under the Social Security Act.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-

2tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 3 That (a) effective as of the date of the enactment of the Om- 4 nibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981, section 2201 of

5that Act (relating to repeal of minimum benefit provisions) is 6 repealed.

7 (b) Subject to section 2 of this Act, the provisions of the

8Social Security Act affected by the provisions of such section 9 2201 shall be in effect as of the date of the enactment of the 2

1 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 as such provi-

2sions would be in effect if such section 2201 had not been

3enacted. Passed the House of Representatives July 31, 1981.

Attest: EDMIJND L. HIENSHAW, JR., Clerk.

By ThOMAS E. LADD, Assistant to the Clerk. m r:i 0 rj) z

m C..3 = C..3 CID 20

S 9074 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE J1iy 31, 1981 For the benefit of colleagues In the Chamber you should understand what happened today in the House of Repre- sentatives. The House by a vote of 404 to 20 voted to restore and maintain the minimum benefit on social security, and to do it by force of law and, In effect, to undo the removal of that benefit con- tained in the reconciliation bill we just passed here moments a.go. Moreover they not only would maintain the minimum benefit for those people who now receive it but they would continue ii on into the future for tho6e who would become en- titled to receive it in future years. I stress again the vote was 404 to 20. So both parties In the House are over- whelmingly on record In term of acting on that today. Now that bill has come over from the House and is right now here at the desk of the Senate. We have the remainder of 15 minutes to discuss this issue, but I thjnk it is essential that the Senate vote on this issue today. The President, within the last week, has gone to the country on national television to repeat his promise that no one receiving social security benefits today will have those benefits taken away, and we know that the bill that we have just pas8ed takes away the minimum benefit under social security. The bill the House has passed today, and which now is at the desk here in the Senate would restore that benefit.It would keep the President's promise and It would enable us to go out during the August recess without having the elderly people in this country, the 3 million who receive this benefit, in doubt, wondering what is going to happen to them, won- dering why it is that the House of Rep- resentatives could take this issue up to- day and vote on it, but here in the US. Senate, despite the fact that we could act on other issues, we just could not find the time or find a way to act on this issue. Well, clearly, we can act. I ththk we can afford the 15 mInutes that a roilcall vote takes. I know people want to leave town, and I can understand that. But we are not sure now but that we will be in HR. 4331—TO AMEND THE OMNIBUStomorrow, so there is not really a cer RECONCILIATION ACT OF 1981 TOtainty as to what the schedule is for the RESTORE MINIMUM BENEFInext hour in any event. UNDER THE SOCIAL SECURITY But even if that were a consideration ACT I would hope the Senate would be willing The PRESIDING OFFICER. Underto take this issue and take it off the desk the previous order, the Senator fromright now within a matter of 15 minutes Michigan is recognized for 10 minutes.and vote up or down, and I would hope Mr. RIEGLE. Mr. President, I had 15vote up the restoration of this nhiiimum minutes on the conference report. benefit under social security. At the very The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chairleast let us not slip quietly out of this understandsthere were15minutes,Chamber today without facing this issue with 10 minutes allocated to the Sena-squarely. tor from Michigan and 5 minutes allo- The President has addressed t, the cated to the Senator from Tennessee.House of Representatives has voted oil, It The Senator from Michigan is recog-today, and we have an opportunity now nized, but before the Senator from Mich-here to vote on it. I think we have an igan begins, the Senate will be in order.obligation to do so. Senators will clear the aisles. The Sen- I think we have an obligation to face ate. is not in order, The Senator fromthis issue, and when you go back to oir Michigan. States during the month of August and Mr. RIEGLE. Mr.President,veryyou talk to people you can tell them you shortly I will endeavor to bring to a votevoted and why. But I do not think it is here on the Senate floor the minimumacceptable to go home today and to say, benefit on the social security restoration."Well, I am sorry, we Just did not have

July 31, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 9075 time. We just could not take the 15 mlii- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-deprived of their benefits. Last October, utes that it took to vote on this Issue." ate will be in order. the American people were told by candi- I think we ought to vote on it and I Mr. KENNEDY. The majority In thisdate Reagan that the benefits of those hope the votes are here to keep the Presi-body has the power to delay, to post-now receiving or looking forward to re- dent's promise. The votes were there inpone, to reject. I think what we are goingceiving social security must be protected. the House of Representatives today.to see now in. inst a few minutes is Today they see President Reagan's Their desire now is to put that burdenwhether the majority is going to delayplan to eliminate the minimum social on our back, the Senate being unwillingand postpone and reject a reasonable re-security benefit received by S million to face the Issue. We should face thequest that should be honored by anyelderly Americans being enacted into Issue, and we ought to vote on It rightMember of this body, and that is thatlaw. And coining right behind the elim- now. We are in position to do so, andwhat we were able to do fOr the confer-ination of minimum benefits Is the rest shortly I will ask unanimous consent, asence on budget reconciliation we shouldof the Reagan ádni1nltratjon's social se- I previously indicatde, that the Housebe able to do with respect to the messagecuritybenefitreductionproposals.— bill, HR. 4331, be taken up and voted onthat came over on the Issue of the mini-proposals to slash the benefits of mil- immediately and we can settle this issue.mum payment. lions and milliOns of Americans who are Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, will So I hope there will not be objec-approaching retirement. - the Senator yield to me? tion to the request of the Senator from Theadmlnlgtration hassaidit Is will- Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President., re-Michigan. ing to compromise on the drasticpro- serving the right to object.— We know what the issue is. We knowposal it announced in May. Mr. KENNEDY. The Senator fromwhat the matter is that is before the Yet, what the American peopl6 have Michigan has the floor. Senate; The elderly people in this coun-seen with respect to the first round of. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-try know what the Issue is, and I thinksocial security benefit reductions Isan ator made unanimous-consent request.we do this body a disservice If we fail tOunyielding Insistence on total, complete, Mr. RIEGLE. I am withholding that.vote either "Yea" or "Nay" on that mat.and retroactive elimination of the mln1. I yield time to the Senator from Mas-ter. mum benefits. It is important to resnem- sachusetts. Mr. RIEOLE. Mr. President, how muchber that the votes that. have been taken Mr. KENNEDY. I think, the Senatortime remains? in the Senate on this Issue Over the past from Michigan has made a very impor- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Two min-several months have not been whether tant point here. We have just receivedutes and fifty seconds. to eliminate the minimum benefit for two messages from the House of Repre- Mr. RIEOLE. I yield 30 seconds tofuture beneficiaries, but whether to take sentatives, one on the conference reportthe Senator from California. who are already receiving these bene- and one on social security. We acted on Mr. CRANSTON. Mr. President, I risefits—elderlybeneficiaries,Intheir the reconciliation proposal here andin support of the motion by the distin-eighties and nineties who retired 20 and handled that within a period of 1 hour.guished Senator from Michigan (Mr.30 years ago. That is what the fight ha Now, 400 Members of the House ofRrEGLE) which would allow the Senate tobeen over—and the Reagan atimin1atra Representatives have said to the elderlyproceed immediately to restore the mini-tion has not yielded an inch. people of this country, "We want to saymum social security benefit. Mr. President, if elderly Americansare. to you we are going to continue the Mr. President, the House has voted to-fearful about the future of the social minirnum social security payments." day by an overwhelming margin of 404security system, it is because they have Mr. RIEGLE. Mr. President, could weto 20 to restore the minimum benefitheard the Reagan administration threat- have order? which would be eliminated for S millionen bankruptcy next year, at the eame The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- time it has refused to allow the ator Is correct. The Senate will be Inelderly Americans in the reconciliation swift conference report. The Senate Isnow Inpassage of leglslatlon_unterfund trans- order. the position to act in an affirmative fash-fer legislation—that would avertany Mr. RIEGLE. This is important. crisis next year. Mr. KENNEDY. Four hundred Mem-ion to put to rest much of theanguish and fears that have been created inthe If elderly Americans are fearful, It Is bers of the House of Representativesminds of mIllions of elderly Amerjcabecause they have seen President Reagan have acted this afternoon and said, "Wein the last few months. breakpromises made bycandidate. want to give assurances to the senior Mr. President, Monday night PresidentReagan not to take social security bone. citizens of this country that theyare fits away from current beneficiaries. going to continue to have the mlnhnnnnReagan told the American people: social security payments." I will not stand by and see those ofyou If elderly Americans are fearful, It Is who are dependent on social securityde-because they have heard the adminftra- Two pieces of legislation cameoverprived of your beneflta. tion talk about compromises on the dras- here. We have acted on one, and all the tic proposals it announced in May, but Senator from Michigan is asking is that Yet, within a few days, he willsign the Senate, In its own good time, act this what they see is an unyielding, uncom- into law a measure that willeliminatepromising stance on elimination of the afternoon on the other which got400the minimum benefit and therebyde-minimum benefit. votes in the House of Representatives,prive some of the poorest and mostneedy on an issue that the President gaveas-social security recipients of theirbenefits. Mr. President, If President Reagan and surance to the American people that Mr. President, over 75 percentof thethe Republicans truly wanted to alleviate there was going to be no reduction. people who will be affected byehinlna-the fears of elderly Americans; they tion of the minimum benefit would demonstrate it by restoring. the Now, what can Possibly be the objec- are elderlyminimum benefit for those currently re-S tion for the Senate of the UnitedStateswomen. Most of them are considerablyceiving this benefit. If they wanted to to vote on that issue? We votedup andolder than 65. Over half areover 70, more down on that issue on three eliminate those beneficiaries who receive differentthan half-million are over 80,and almostpublic pensions or otherwise fail to meet occasions. We know what theissue is.100,000 are over 90. Many ofthese The House of Representatives the administration's definition of who has askedvery elderly social security recipientsshould receive the minimum benefit, they for it and has voted for it.I just thinkpaid into the social security systematwould propose legislation targeted at for us to go out here ata time of thea time when wages were very low andthose individuals—not a sweeping elim- August recess and go home andtry tomany o(them worked In the lowest pay-ination of all the individuals affected by explain to the elderly peopleof thisingjobs—cooks,laborers,domestjè country that we cannot act workers. the minimum benefit. are tied up in some parliamentarybecause we Mr. President, we have a unique op- ma- Mr. President, I think thatmanyportunity to act now to reassure the mil- neuver here, which will refuse topermitAmericans arevery confused the Senate to go on recordon a substan- aboutlions of Americans watching that this tive Issue, is irresponsible what this administration intends to doGovernment will not alloW social security action. about the social security system. On the Now, I would hope that the—. one hand, the President has told thembeneficiaries to suffer, that we will not Mr. MOYNI .Mr.President, may turn our backs upon 80- and 98-year-old we have order? he will not stand by and allow those whoAmericans, elderly women receiving mlii- are dependent upon social security beImuni social security benefits. To delay, S 9076 CONGRESSOIVL COD =SENATE J• 1981 togive excuses, will send the wrong mes-respect to the mIn1znim soàI securityFederal pension Income. The vege axi sage to these Americans. Let the Senatepayment for 3 million people. nüal retirement ncoie Or uc coup1 speak today with compassion. It has passed the House earlier todayexceeds $21,000. Mr. RIEGLE. Mr. President, I yieldby more than 400 votes. It Is at the desk. Yet another group of mininum benefit a minute to the Senator from New York.We can take it and pass it here andrecipients, approximately 300,000, have Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, thethe issue will be put to rest for millionsworking spouses. According to GAO, the elemental justice of the Issue we are go-of elderly Americans. We ought not tocombined income for these coup1es. ing to present to the Chamber surelypass by this oppotun1ty. It would beearnings plus the m1n1mw bene1t=$ commends itself to the Members on bothshameful to do so. at least $23,000 annually. sides of the aisle. We have just adopted Mr. RIEGLE. Mr. President, I reserve To stun up, the relevant data ndUcate an extraordinary reduction insocialthe remainder of my time. that up to 800,000 current minimum programs. We are soon to have a tax bill The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senbeneficiaries have total income8 which, that will provide a third of its unprece-ator from Tennessee has 5 mInutes re-on the average, exceed $20,000. CertaIn1y dented benefits to 5 percent of the popu-maining. few would consIder this a pove'ty level lation, and the administration I fear Is Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, the socialincome. helping to finance consequent deficits bysecurity minimum benefit has been the The only real cont'oversy surrounds taking away social security of elderlysubject of controversy throughout thisthe elimination of thd minimum benefit people, single women, men, who livedreconciliation process. The Senate votedor those now ecevxg it==whet1er tby their lives at $140 a month, and surelyon the issue three times during the last 4too should have ther benefits eca1cu this Chamber will not do that. months and today the House of Reprelated to reflect actual ernng in covered It will have an opportunity not to dosentatives took its second vote on theemployment. The concern Is whether or It in a very short while. subject. The ellmin2tion of the minimumnot there would be s large group of Mr. RIEGLE. Mr.President. howbenefit has become an emoUon1 issueelderly poov adversely affected by th much time remains? and the emotion, Ieightened by Demochange. This, of course, s no one int' The PRESIDING OmCER. Thecratic rhetoric, threatens to obscure thetion. Our investigations to date suggest Senator has I minute and 30 secondsfacts. Obviously, It is time to focus ovthat this would not occur. Anyone who remaining. those often ignored facts. is elderly and poor, or would become poor Mr. RIEGLE. I yield 30 seconds to the First of all, and I think this Is signifi.as a result of eliminating bhe m1ninum Senator from Ohio. cant,thereiswidespread agreementbenefit, is eligible to receive SL Mr. METZENBAUM. Mr. President, Ithat the minimum benefit should be For them, Federal sslstance payments commend the Senator from Michigan foreliminated for future recipients. Thewould rise dollar for dollar to offset ay his leadership in this effort. It Is shame-minimum benefit is largely unearned,loss Of social security Income. The avail- ful that we ought to stand here talkingconsisting of a welfare support ad&on toable evidence suggests that more than about whether we are going to reduce thethe monthly payment a recipient Is en.million of the 3 million minimum bene- minimum social security benefit of $122titled to from his or her taç contribufit recipients will be protected from a a month at the very same time one of thetions. Under current 1gw, some husbandsdecline in their incomes by SSI. The In- major disputes facing this Congress hasand wives retiring on the minimum beneconies of another million beneficiar1e to do with $46 billion in tax cuts forfit next year, for example, would be eliare protected by the fact that they are the oil industry. gible for a lifetime retirement tncomeentitled to more than one social security Mr. President. when I told Budget Di-from social security about 300 timesbenefit. In the event one benefit is re rector Stockman, several months ago,greater than the amount they paid intoduced, the other one is there to make up that I thought that this administrationthe system. the difference nearly dollar for dollar. was cruel, inhumane, and heartless, this It is widely recognized that the mini Two special provisions contained in was precisely the type of issue to whichmum benefit no longer achieves Its orig1the reconciliation bill make It even more I was addressing myself. nal purpose. The minimum benefit wascertain that the elderly poor will not be Who are these people, these minimumintended to provide retirement incomeadversely affected. Under a provision social security benefit recipients, who de-for workers with very low wage historiesadded by the Finance Committee, any- serve to be singled out by this adminis-and for those elderly persons whose ern'one 60 to 64 who meets the SSI eligi- tration for the first actual social secur-ployment took place primarily before so-bility requirements, woUld be eligible for ity benefit cutbacks in the history of thecial security covered their work. Timesa special SSI payment even though they United States? have changed. Today, people who workare not yet 65. To insure that they ex- Almost a million of them, 941,000 totheir lifetimes under social security atperience no reduction In income, the be precise, are over age 75; 270,000 oflow wages—the minimum wage or evenamount of this payment would be equal them are over age 85; 13,678 of them arehalf the minimum wage—receive a bene-to the difference between the minimum over 95. fit based on the regular benefit formulabenefit they had been receiving and their The only argument we hear from thethat exceeds the minimum benefit. newly calculated benefit. This means supporters of eliminating the minimum Elderly poor people actually receive nothat no minimum beneficiaries 60 or benefit is that we are somehow eliminatextra income from the minimum benefitolder who are poor must experience a ing double dipping. Well, I say to youbecause their Federal assistance pay..loss of Income. thatIf we want to eliminate doublements from SSI are reduced dollar for The reconciliation bili also Includes a dipping we should begin with someonedollar on account of other sources ofprovision that instructs the Soc1a Secu other than defenseless senior citizens.income. rity Administration to give early notice We should start with high-paid and The result is that, today, the minimumto recipients who may experience a re- powerful military retirees and Govern-benefit provides a windfall gain to peopleduction in benefits. This notice will ad ment retirees who are in the private sec-with short work histories under socialvise recipients to contact their local so- tor, and not with tens of thousands ofsecurity--such as those with long periodscial security offices foz' thtormation on people who are 75, 85. and 95 years old.of Government employment. This hasnew benefit amounts and eligibility for This Senate must show some compas-been well documented in separate studiesSSI. This is intended to prGvid ample sion here this afternoon. We must showby the CBO and GAO. Based on GAOtime for recipients to contact these of- a sense of justice, and we must honor the fices and be informed of the avi1ability data, it Is estimated that 450,000 minIof SSI. commitment we have made to our Na-mum benefit recipients also receive Fed tions senior citizens. The proposal to ellrninate the znn- eral civil service pensions which averagemum benefit has been carefully studied Mr. RIEGLE. Mr. President, I yield 30$16,000 annually. Combined with thein the Finance Committee since It was seconds to the Senator from Maryland.minimum social security benefit, such refirst recommended by the President n Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, I thinktired Federal employees have anuaI fl'February. Forthe committee,th act it is very important to understand thatcomesover $18,000. spoke for themselves, and w adopted there Isa measure at the desk now It is also estimated that some 50,000the proposal, as dd the eat and the which, if the Senate will take it up andminimumbeneficiarieshavei'etiredHouse in their respectIve 'econdiliation pass It, will resolve this problem withspouses who eceiv $Y85C year nbills. July 81, 1951 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 9077 To be certain that no unintended side- Now, if I understand what the distin-half of Senators KENNEDY, RIEGLE, and effects or Inequities will be created byguished Senator from Michigan has said,myself I move that the Senate proceed eliminating the minimum benefit, we willhe intends to try to produce a rollcall onto the immediate consideratfon of H.R. continue to study the provision duringthis issue. He knows, because I have told4331, the bill to restore the minimum the August recess and hold hearings onhim, he knows, because it was made clearbenefit under social security. the subject in September. If it becomesin a meeting on yesterday, that there The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under apparent that the truly needy will be in-would be a unanimous-consent request torule XIV, paragraph 3, no bill from the advertently harmed by the provision, itproceed to the immediate considerationHouse of Representatives may be con- will be modified when the Finance Com-of this measure and that I would objectsidered or debated on the day it is re- mittee meets again. to it, not because I think there is no needceived unless by unanimous consent. Since the elimination does not becometo address the issue of minimum social Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, is that effective until December, for new recipi-security benefits, but because this is thethe ruling of the Chair? ents,anduntilMarch,forcurrentway we must transact the business of the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there recipients, we will have the opportunitySenate in an orderly way and addressobjection to the request of the Senator? to refine elements of the current prov-this question on some basis that bears Mr. BAKER. I object. sion, where necessary, at the same timeiational relationship to the issues in- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objec- we deal with the very serious social se-volved—by referring it to committee. tion is heard. curityfinancing problem. Mr. President, I do not know what the Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, Mr. BAKER. One of the burdens ofSenator has 11n mind. Presumably, he isI ask unanimous consent to proceed for 1 leadership in the Senate on both sidesgoing to make his unanimous consent re-minute. of the aisle is to attempt to act in a wayquest, and certainly I will object to it. The PRESIDThG OFFICER. Without that serves the ultimate best interestsBut if he attempts to produce a rollcallobjection, it is so ordered. not only of the Members of this com-vote on this issue or an issue related to it, Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, munity of Senators, but of this Nation. may I simply suggest to my friend that heI recognize that my colleagues want a In the course of the discharge of thathas every right to do that. He has everyvote on this measure. I think there ought responsibility, it is often necessary toright to do that. He has every right to doto be a vote on this measure. I support meet with Members on both sides of thethat. But my friend is also at variancethe measure. aisle to try to make arrangements andwith what Members on both sides of this But there are two considerations that agreements on how difficult, tedious, andaisle have agreed was the orderly pro-I am compelled to mention. One, I asked emotional issues will be dealt with. cedure for trying to dispose of this issuethe distinguished majority leader, I be- A good part of my day yesterday wasat this time and for the time being. lieve it was on yesterday, as to whether spent in such a meeting with the dis- Mr. President, I have said, the Presi-or not there would be anything else that tinguished Speaker of the House ofhas said, Congressman MICREL has said,would be be called up before the August Representatives: the chairman of themany have said, and I now repeat, thatrecess, other than the tax conference Rules Committee of the House of Repre-this issue must be addressed—the ques-report, the reconciliation conference re- sentatives, Congressman RICHARD BOL-tion of minimum social security benefits.port, and the HTJD approprIation bill. LING; the majority leader of the HouseThere are men and women in great needHe assured me there would not be. of Representatives; the minority leaderwho receive these benefits, but there are Now, a lot of Senators may have made of the House of Representauves; theothers Who are not in need and who aretheir plans on the basis of that promise. minority whip; the chairman of thea burden on the system unjustly. It is Second, the motion has been ruled by Budget Committee, and others. Because,necessary that we address that questionthe Chair to be out of order. As one who at that time, we were on notice that thereas carefully as the system of the Senatehas acted as the majority leader of this would be an effort in the Rules Commit-will permit. body for 4 years, I have to maintain that tee of the House of Representatives to Mr. RIEGLE addressed the Chair. it is clearly out of order. That is what attach this measure to the reconciliation The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-I would maintain ifI were majority conference report as an amendment toator from Michigan. leader. I cannot maintain anything else be voted on together and that the rule Mr. RiEGLE, Mr. President, I will sayunder the present circumstances. would not have permitted that confer-in the time remaining to me that if the I would hope that we could avoid this ence report to have been voted on andHouse can act today, the Senate can actcontroversial vote at this time, which dealt with by this Congress before thetoday.Ithink the question hereisis not going to accurately reveal the sen- August recess unless it included this pro-whether 3 million elderly Americans aretiments of at least •one Senator here. vision. worth 15 minutes worth of time that itMyself—I can only speak for myself—I I must say, in respect to the Speaker oftakes for a rollcall vote on this 1oor.support the measure. But I cannot vote the House and th Congressman BOLLINGThat is what it takes to vote here. to overrule the ChaIr in this circum- and others, that we mutually agreed that I plead with my Republican friend tostance when the motion s clearly, and that should not be the result; that thereconsider whatever agreements werebeyond any doubt, out of order. Congress should act on this measure andmade yesterday. Staying here for 15 min- Mr. President, I ask the distinguished do so in a rational and reasonable way.utes to vote on this issue is not going tomajority leader if he would—and I know It was decided that there would be ainconvenience anybody. I thinkitisbefore I ask the question that it is within rule in the House today which would pro-wrong to leave those 3 million people outthe rights of any Senator under rule XIV vide for two measures Instead of onethere worrying for the next month whileto initiate action that will force this bill the conference report and a separate billwe are off on vacation. I think it is wrong.on the Ciendar after an adjournment dealing with social security minimumWe ought to vote on it. over to a new legislative day—I wonder benefits. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The timeifthedistinguishedmajorityleader But it was also clearly understood inof the Senator from Michigan has ex-would consider letting this bill go to the that conversation that when that bill—pired. Calendar and setting a date next Tues- not an amendment to the conference re- Mr. RIEGLE. Mr. President, I askday or next Monday, when we could port, not a concurrent resolution, notunanimous consent that the bill that is atmove to take up the bill and have a vote anythingelse—-butwhenthatbillthe desk, H.R. 4331, be called up ow andon it so that my colleagues would get the reached theSenat.e that it would, indeed,voted on at this time. vote that they want and we would not be referred to committee. Mr. BAKER. I object. have to piostitute the rules of the Sen- All I have said has no bearing on the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objectionate In order to attempt to force a vote rights of the Senator from Michigan oris heard. at this time, which is not going to ac- the Senator from Massachusetts or the Mr. MONIHAN addressed the Chair.curately reveal at least one Senator's Senator from Ohio or the Senator from Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I suggestsentiments on this question. If the dis- California or the Senator from Newthe absence of a quorum. tinguished majority leader could find it York. It is to simply tell you the negotia- Mr. President, I withhold the requestin his heart to do that, I would personally tions that went on by the leadership asin deference to the Senator from Newvery much appreciate it. trustees of the responsibility to operateYork. Mr. BAKER. Will the Senator yield? this body. Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, on be- Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I yield. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— SENATE Jtai SZ,1981 Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, as muchChairrules that the motion of the Sen- So the ruling of the Chair was sus- aa I would liketo accommodate themi-ator is not in order. tained as the Judgment of the 8enate. nority leader, I cannot. I recited earlier Mr. MOYNIHAN. I respectfully appeal Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. Presi- the long and difficult negotiations under-the ruling of the Chair and ask for thedent, I shall not detain the Senate for taken yesterday on how this matteryeas and nays. very long. I wish to make clear for the would be handled n both Houses. If for The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there arecord—because I am hearing varlou8 no other reason than that I feel obli-sufficient second? There Is a sufficientquestions that are being asked and I gated to abide by the arrangements that,second. think quite properly so—that I was not were worked out at that thne, I would The yeas and nays were ordered. a participant in the meeting to which not be prepared now to agree by unani- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ques-the distinguished majority leader re- mous consent to proceed now or to set ation, is shall the decision of the Chairferred a moment ago during which cer- time certain next week. stand as the Judgment of the Senate? tam agreements were reached, and I What I am prepared to say Is that ifOn this question, the yeas and nays haveonly wish to say that for the record. this goes to committee, as I Indicatedbeen ordered, and the clerk will call the Mr. BAKER. Mr. President,If the yesterday In our nieetings and have saidroll. minority leader will yield to me, I think today and repeat now, when this goe8 to• The assIstant legislative clerk calledhe will acknowledge that I did not in- committee I am confident that therethe roll. dude his name among them. will be action on it. I wifi Insist. But, Mr. STEVENS. I announce that the Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. No, not at all. Mr. President. this, I believe, Is an effortSenator from MaIne (Mr. CoiiN), theThe majority leader did not, nor did he to force avoteon a collateral issue forSenator from Arizona (Mr. GOLDWATER),so imply as much. the sake of having a vote. I simply can-the Senator from Idaho (Mr. MCCLVRE) Mr. President, there Is a procedure not agzee to that, Mr. President. and the Senator from Connecticut (Mr.whereby this measure can be voted on. I must tell my friend, the minorityWEICKER), are necessarily absent. I do not have any ffluBions that it will be leader, with great reluctance that I feel Mr. CRANSTON. I announce that thevoted on tonight or in the very near obligated to stand by commitments ISenator from Arkansas (Mr. BVMPER5),future—with respect to this particular made in this body aid In the other bodythe Senator fr3m North Dakota (Mr.bifi at least. But under rule XIV the yesterday. I cannot do that. BURDICK), the &nator from Nevada•measure can be put on the calendar and Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD Mr. President,(Mr. CAioN), the Senator from Southonce there, and with passage of two new I ask unaxnous consent to proceed forCarolina (Mr. R0LLINGs), the Senatorlegislative days, a motion can be made 1 additIonal minute. from Montana Mr. MELCEER), the Sen-to proceed to this measure. The PRESIDUqG.OCER (Mr. WAR-ator from Maine (Mr. MITCHELL), the Of course, If a majority of Senators zR). Without objection, it Is so ordered.Senator •from Tennessee (Mr. SAS8ER),would vote to uphold such a motion to Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President,.and the Senator from Nebraska (Mr.proceed then the matter would be before there Is another war of going about this,ZORINSKY) are necessarily absent. the Senate. That is an orderly way n even though I am sure we wifi be unsuc- Mr. INOUYE (after having voted inwhIc1 to proceed.. cessful. n the effort—as Indeed it maythe armative). Mr. President, on this I do not think I wifi succeed but at be unsuccsfu1 in the long run In thevote, I voted "yea." If the distinguishedleast I have the conviction that I should pending approach. I know that the dis-Senator from Texmessee- (Mr. SASsR)try. tingulahed majority leader and au of mywere here, he would vote "nay." There- So, Mr. President, I ask that the clerk colleagues wifi understand if I shouldfore, I withdraw my vote. proceed to read the bifi for the first time. laterresort to another approach by The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill which at least the Senate would haveany other Senators in the Chamberwill be stated by title. an op)ottunity to vote on the measure,wishing to vote? The assistant legislative clerk read as although Indirectly, The result was announced—yeas 57,follows: nays 30, as follows: A bill(H.R. 4341), to amendment. the Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, with Omnibus Reconciliation Act of i98i to re- great reluctance, I cannot accede to the [Rollâall Vote No. 248 Leg.) store minimumbenefits underthe Social recent reque8t of the majority and ml- YEAS-57 Security Act. nority leaders. They know the respect inAbd Om1ey Pockwood which they are held by thiB Member andAndrew Hart P&cy Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, all Members. Arinsttong Hatcb Preer I ask unanimous consent that the Sen- Irespectfully appeal the ruling of theBsker Hatfield Proxmlre ate proceed to the second reading of Boreu Rawkflia Quayle the bifi. Chair and ask for the yeas and nays. Boac1wtt Hayakawa Roth The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ChairByrd, Heinz Rudman THE PRESIDINO OFFICER. Is there has not ruled. Th Chair read rule XIV H1y P., Jr.Helms Scbmitt objection to the request of the Senator Byrd, RobertO. Humphrey Simpson from West Virginia? for the benefit of the Members Chafoe Jepeen Specter Mr. MOYNIHAN. Was that the rulingOocbran Kassebaum Stafford Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I object. of the Chair? Perhaps the Chair will beD'Amato fasten Sten The PRESIDING OFFICER. ObjecUon Inforth Laxt Stevens bheard. kind enough to Inform the Senator. Denn Long Symm8 The PRESIDING OFFICER.TheDole Lugar Thurmond Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, Chafr previouslystated underrule XIV,Donienict Mathiaa Tower I make the next motion, with an apology Duienberger Mattingy Wallop paragraph 3, that no bill from the HouseEast Murkowe Warner to the distinguished majority leader. I of Representatives shall be considered orOarn Nick1 know that I will fall. I always maintained debated on the day it is received unlessOorton Nunn as majority leader that It is the majority by unai1mous consent. NAYS—SO leader who has the responsibifity to make • The Chair Inquired if there was ob-Baucua Exon the motion to adjourn, but it Is within jectioit and an objection was lodged. Bemtnen Ford Matzenbaüm the right of any Senator to make that Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, Biden Glenn Maynthan motion, and during my tenure as major- IBid1ey Hethn PeU move the Immediate consideration of Cbt1e5 Hudd.lestan Por ity leader and during my tenure as ma- the natter and was Informed by thecn2ton Jackson Itaaidoipb jority whip there were Senators from Chair that we could not proceed. There DeOancthL Johnston Reg1e time to time on the other side who made Dixon Kdy Sarnes was a ruling by the Chair and I ask thatDodd Tng the motion to adjourn. My argument al- the rujIrg be appealed. That Is not an Eagleton Levin WULIams ways was that thatIs the majority unusual proceeding.. I ask for the yeasPRESENTAND OWING A LIVE PAIR, party's prerogative and the majority and nayg. PREVIOUSLY RECORDED—i leader's prerogative, but it Is not neces- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the sarily a right that reposes only In the Senator claim that his motion th. in Inouye, for. majority leader. order P NOT VOTING—12 So lam goIng to make that motion to Mr. OYNIHAN. I claim that mymo-Bumpers OoIdeer )tóheU adjourn for the simple reason that by tion s In order. Burdick Ioliths Sa nnou MCOlure We1ck adjourning, if a majority of Senators The PRESIDING OPPICER.TheOohen Melcher ZciDk7 support the motion, the Senate will then July Si,,18J CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 9079 bein a new legislative dfty when It re- tor from Tennessee (Mr. SAssEn), and sumes Its meeting and In that new leglsa the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. Zest- lative day under rule XIV the,measure, iNsHY) are absent on official business. which I have just asked for second read- I further announce that, If present ing on, would get that second reading and voting, the Senator from Tennessee automatically at the Close of morning (Mr. S&ssER) would vote "yea." business and then, with the proper objec- The PRESIDING OFFICER.Are tion to further consideration of the there any other Senators In the Chamber measure, It would automatically go, on desiring to vote? the calendar 'and then, of course, with The result was announced—yeas 37, another adjournment over in a subse- nays 49, as follows: quent calendar day It would be. in order to move to take up the measure from the IRollcaU Vote No. 249 Leg. calendar: YEAS—37 I have no ifiuslons that I have the Baucus Pord Moteonbaum Benteen Oteem Mcthan votes to do this, but at least It Is a proce- Biden Hart Nuim dure whereby the Senate can, In an Ben HefiJn PsU prderly way aid under the rules, get to Brsdley Huddles Von s vote on the measure. ByrdRobertC. Randolph Clitlee Jackson Riegie Mr. President, the Parliamentarian Ctnnston Job.natoel Sarbanes has pointed out to me that this is the DeConcint Kennedy Stennis 31st day of July and that It is necessary Dtron Lenhy Teangas Dodd Levln WiUtazfl8 to adopt a certain concurrent resolution Eagleton Long at this time. .,,. Matsunaga — SoIf the distinguished majority leader NAYS—49 wishes to. take, up this concurrent res- Abdncr Gorton Paokwood olution now, I yield the floor for that Mdrews Hatch Percy purpose. Armstrong Hatfield Bak Hawkloa Pro,onlre Mr. RAKER. Mr. President, I suggest BoacliwiVo Hayakawa Quayte the absence of a quorum. Byrd, Hems Roth The PRESIDING OmCER,Theclerk HMW P., Jr.Helms Rudman will call the roll. Chafes Humpba Schmitt .Oocn Jepeen Simpson The assistant legislative clerk pro- DAmato Knasebaum Stafford ceeded to call the roll.. DanfortI Kasten Stevens Mr. 'BAKER. Mr. President, Denton Lamat Symnis I ask De Luger Thusmond unanimous cOnsent that the order for the Domentol MatMee Tower quorum calU,e. rescinded. Durenberger Matttngty Wallop The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without East Murkoweki Wamsr objection, It so ordered. Gem Nicklee The majority leader is recognized.. NOT VOTING—14 Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, of course, Bumpers Grandey Saiper the minority leader is right, and we must - Burdick Hollings Specter Cannon MoOluiw Weicker pass House Concurrent Resolution 164 Cohen Melcbee Zom1n5 before we can proOeed further. Goadweter MtcheU But mall candor, I must say that the So Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD'S motion to only thing that I can see that we would MOTION TO ADJOURN FOR 1 adjourn for 1 mInute was rejected. do if we make an issue outof 'this is MINUTE', perhaps create anothez rollcall vote. I Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD addressed the have no desire to do that. I must tell you Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD.r. Preslderit,Chair. In all frankness' I had no' desire to ore-I move that the Senate stand in adjourn- The PRESIDING OFFICER.The• ate 'the last one. ment for 1 minute. minority leader. Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I ask 'for Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, the yeas and nays the motion to adjourn having failed, is The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is thereIt not true that under rule XIV, the bill, a sufficICnsecond? ' H.R.4331,will be placed on the calendar There Is a sufficient second. at the close of morning busIness on the The yeas and nays were ordered. next new legislative day, which will re- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Thequire an adjournment, once the second question Is on agreeing to the motion of reading has occurred, which will be auto- the Senator from West Virginia. mat,Ic, and objection to any further pro- On this question, the yeas and naysceedings has been placed thereto? have been ordered, and the clerk w11 The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator call the roll. ' . is correct. The Chair will state The legislative clerk called the roll, for the RECORD that the bill, having been Mr. STEVENS. I announce that theread the first time, shall remain at the Senator from Maine (Mr. COHEN), thedesk pending the second reading the Senator from Arizona (Mr. GOLDWATER), next legislative day. the Senator from Iowa (Mr. ORA8SLEY), Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I thank the the Senator from Idaho (Mr. MCCLURE), Chair. the Senator from' Pennsylvania (Mr. Then once on the calendar, of course, SPECTER), and the Senator from Con-It is a candidate for a motion to proceed necticut (Mr. WEICKER) are necessarilyto Its consideration. absent. ' ThePRESIDING OFFICER. Once It Mr. CRANSTON. I announce that thehas been on the calendar for I legislative Senator from Arkansas (Mr. BUMPERS),day. '--' theSenator from North Dakota (Mr. Mr.- ROBERT C. BYRD. I thank the BURDICK), the Senator from Nevada (Mr.Chair. ' CANNON),the Senator from South Caro- Mr. BAKER addressed the Chair. lina (Mr. HOLLINOS), the Senator from The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ma- Montana (Mr MELCHER), the Senatorjority leader. from Maine (Mr. MITCHELL), the Sena- Mr. BAKER. Mr.' President, there Is S 9080 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE July 31, 1981 no doubt that, when the time comes and we have completed our work, there will be, indeed, a resolution of adjournment. It is my fond hope that it will occur very fast and we can get on with the business at hand. At that time, Mr. President, there will be an opportunity for Members to con- sider the future course of action that they may wish to proceed or pursue on both sides of the aisle on this measure. After we have returned from the recess, and after the requirements of rule XIV and the other Rules of the Senate are comDlied with, of course the minortty leader con move to take up the measure on the calendar. But perhaps by that time the Senate Finance Committee may have other things to say on this subject. as well. I would only—and this Is not meant to reopen the argument or to prolong the debate—I would only reiterate what I began with weeksago.I suggested In public and on the floor that this issue should be addressed, but not In recon- ciliation. I will be addressed. It will be addressed In committee. I assure Members on both sides of the aisle that I do not intend to see that thi3 Issue is laid aside, but that itis dealt with. I also must say, Mr. President, I do not intend to agree to consider this motion. Mr. President, there are two other mat- ters that I would like to take up. I would like to invite the attention of the mi- nority leader, if I may, to another House message which is at the desk, House Con- current Resolution 167, concerning the correction of the enrollment of H.R. 3982, the budget reconciliation bill. If the distinguished minority leader has no objection, I would like to proceed to dispose of that remnant of the bill. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, that is the resolution making technical corrections, I believe, to which Senator H0LLING5 referred in hIs discussions with me and I believe in the presence of Mr. DOMENICT. Am I correct? Mr. DOMENICI. The Senator Is or- rect. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. There is no objection. Mr. DOMENICI. It has been checked out with minority and majority staffson both sides of the aisle. It had already been so cleared on the House side. That is what the resolution does. Technical errors in the reconciliation are cured. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. May I say fur- ther, Mr. President, that the staff lady to whom Mr. HOLLINGS assigned the checking out of those corrections hasre- norted to me and I have no objection. I know that I am proceeding in accordance with the wishes of Mr. HOLLTNGS, who Is the ranking manager on this side. Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I thank the minority leader and I thank the distin- guished chairman of the Budget Com- mittee. S 11354 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE October14, 1981

RESTORATIONOF MINIMUM SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will resume consideration of the unfinished business, which the clerk will state by title. The legislative clerk read as follows: A bill (aR. 4331) to amend the Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1981 to restore mini- mum benefits under the Social Security Act. The Senate resumed the consideration of the bill.

October 1, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATh S 11355 "(10) with respect to wages received during "(9)With respect to wages received during The PRESIDINGOFFICER.The Sen-the calendar years 1990 through 2000, thethe calendar years 1990 through 2004. the ator from Xansas. rate shall be 5.90 percent; and rate shall be 1.75 percent; and VP AMENDMENT NO. 418 "(11) with respect to wages received after "(10) with respect to wages received after (Purpose: To provide for Interfund borrow-December 81, 2004, the rate shall be 6.20December 31. 2004, the rate shall be 1.45 ing among the Social Security Trust Funds, -percent.". percent.". to restore the minimum benefit for cer- (2)Section3111(a)of such Codeis '(2)Section8111'(b)ot such Code is tain individuals, and for other purposes)amended by striking out paragraphs (6)amended by striking out paragraphs(4) through (7) and inserting in lieu thereof'through (6) and inserting in lieu thereof Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I send anthe following: the following: amendment to the desk in the nature "(5) with respect to wages paid durliig "(4) with respect to wages paid during the of a substitute and ask for its immediatethe calendar year 1982, the rate shall be 5.90calendar year 1981. the rate shall be 1.80 consideration. percent; percent; "(6) with respect to wages paid during the "(5) with respect to wages paid during the The PRESIDING OCER. The calendar year 1982. the rate shall be 0.80 amendment will be stated. calendar year 1983. the rate shall be 6.70 percent; percent; The legislative clerk read as follows: "(7) with respect to wages paid during the "(6) with respect to wages paid during the. The Senator from Kansas. (Mr. DoLE) pro-calendar year 1984, the rate shall be 5.45calendar year 1983, the rate shall be 1.00 poses an unprinted amendment numberedpercent; percent;- - 478. "(7)with respect to wages paid during the "(8) wIth respect to wages paid during thecalendar years 1984, the rate shall be 1.25 Mr. DOLE. Mr. President. I ask unani-calendar year 1985, the rate shall be 5.60 percent; percent; mous consent that further reading of "(9) with respect to wages paid during the "(8). with respect to gages paid during the the amendment be dispensed with. calendar years 1986 through 1989, the ratecalendar years 1985 through 1989, the rste The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without shall be 1.45 percent; shall be 5.70 percent; "(9) with respect to wages paid during objection, it is so ordered. "(10) with respect to— wages paid duringthe calendar years 1990 through 2004. thO The amendment Is as follows: the calendar years 1990 through 2004. therate shall be 1.75 percent; and Strike out all after the enacting clausertae shall be 5.90 percent; and "(10) with respect to wages paid after De- and insert in lieu thereof the following: "(11) with respect to wages paid aftercember 31,2004, the rateshall be1.45 INTER FUND BORROWING December 31, 2004, the rate shall be 6.20percent.". SECTION 1. Section 201 of the Social Secur-percent.". (3)Section 1401(b)of such Code Is ity Act is amended by adding at the end (3)Section1401(a)of such Code isamended by striking out paragraphs (4) thereof the following new subsection: amended by striking out paragraphs (5)through.(6) and Inserting in lieu thereof the "(1) (1) If at any time prior to Januarythrough (7) and inserting in lieu thereoffollowing: 1991 the Managing Trustee determines thatthe following: "(4) in the case of any taxable year begin- borrowing authorized under this subsection "(5) in the case of any taxable year begin-ning after December 81. 1980. and before is appropriate in order to best meet the needning after December 81. 1981, and beforeJanuary 1, 1982, the tax shall be equal to for financing the benefit payments from theJanuary 1, 1983. the tax shall be equal to1.30 percent 'of the amount of the 'self- Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance8.56 percent of the amount of the self-employment' income for such taxable year;' Trust Fund or the Federal Disability Insur-employment Income for such taxable year; "(5) in the case of any taxable year begin- ance Trust Fund, the Managing Trustee may "(6) in the case of any taxable year begin-ning after December 31, 1981. and before .borrow such amounts which he determines toning after December 31. 1982. and beforeJanuary 1. 1983, the tax shall be equal to be appropriate from either such Trust FundJanuary 1, 1984, the tax shall be equal to0.80 ,percent of the amount of the self- for transfer to and deposit in the other such8.35 percent of the amount of the self-employment income for such taxable year; employment income for such taxable year; "(6) in the case of any taxable year be- Trust Fund. ginning alter December 31, 1982. and before 0(2) In any case where a loan has been "(7) in the case of any taxable year begin-January 1. 1984, the tax shall b equal to made under paragraph (1). there shall bening after December 31, 1983. and before1.00 percent of the amount of the self- transferred from time to time, from the.January 1, 1985. the tax shall be equal toemployment Income for such taxable year; borrowing Trust Fund to the lending Trust8.10 percent of the amount of the self- "(7) in the case of any tatable year be- Fund, interest with respect to the unrepaidemployment income for such taxable year;ginning after December 31. 1983, and before balance of such loan at a rate equal to "(8) in the case of any taxable year begin-January 1, 1985, the tax shall be equal to 1.25 the rate which the lending Trust Fundning alter December 31. 1984. and beforepercent of the amount of the self-employ- would earn on the amount involved if theJanuary 1, 1986, the tax shall be equal toment income for such taxable year; loan were an investment under subsection8.46 percent of the amount of the self- "(8) in the case of any taxable year be- (dl. empolyinent income for such taxable year;ginning after December 31, 1984, and before "(3) U in any month after a loan has been "(9) in the case of any taxable year begin-January 1, 1990. the tax shall, be equal to made under paragraph (1), the Managingning after December 31. 1985. and before1.45 percent of the amount of the self- Trustee determines that the assets of theJanuary 1. 1990, the tax shall be equal toemployment income for such taxable year; borrowing Trust Fund are sufficient to per-8.55 percent of the amount of the self- "(9) in the case of any taxable year be- mit repayment of all or part of any loansemployment income for such taxable year: ginning alter December 31. 1989, and before made under paragraph (1). he shall make "(10) in the case of any taxable year be-January 1, 2005. the tax shall be equal to such repayments as he determines to beginning after December 31. 1989, and before 1.75 percent of the amount of the elf- appropriate. January 1, 2005, the tax shall be equal to 9.00 employment income for such taxable 'year; "(4) The Board of Trustees shall make apercent of the amount of the self-employ-and timely report to the Congress of any amountsment income for such taxable year; and "(10) in the case of any taxable year be- transferred (including interest payments) "(11) in the case of any taxable year be-ginning after December 31, 2004, the tax shall under this subsectioti.". ginning after December 31, 2004. the -taxbe equal to 1.45 pet-cent of the amount of REALLOCATION OF SOCIAL sEcURrrY TAXES AND shall be equal to 9.30 percent of the amount-the self-employment income for such taxable ADJUSTMENTS IN ALLOCATION OF RECEIPTS of the self-employment income for such tax-year.". SEc. 2. (a) (1) Section 3101(a) of the In-able year.". (c) Section 201(b)(l) of the Social Se- ternal Revenue Code of 1954 is amended by (b)(1) Section 3101(b) of the Internalcurity Act is amended by striking out clauses striking out paragraphs (5) through (7) andRevenue Code of 1954 is amended by striking(K) through (M) and inserting in lieu there- inserting in lieu thereof the following: out paragraphs '(4) through (6) and insert-'of the following: "(K) .1.43 per centum Of "(5) with respect to wages received duringing in lieu thereof the following: the wages (as so defined) paid after Decem- the calendar year 1982. the rate shall be "(4) with respect to wages received dur-ber 31, 1981. and before January 1, 1983, and 5.90 percent: ing the calendar year 1981, the rate, shall beso reported, (L) 1.38 per centum of the wages "(6) with respect to wages received during1.30 percent; (as so defined) paid after December 31, 1982, • "(5) with respect to wages received durIngand before January 1, 1984, and so reported, the calendar year 1983, the rate shall bethe calendar year 1982. the rate shall be 0.80(M) 1.19 per centurn of the wages (as so 5.70 percent: percent; defined) paid after December 81,, 1983, and "(7) wIth respect to wages received.during "(6) with respect to wages receiveddur-before January 1. 1988, and so reported, (N) the calendar year 1984, the rate shall be 5.45ing the calendar year 1988, the rate shall be1.20 per centum of the wages (as so deflned percent; 1.00 percent; paid alter December 31, 1985. and before "(8) with respect to wages received during "(7) with respect to wages received duringJanuary 1, 1990. and so reported, -and (0) caiepdar year 1985, the rate shall be 5.60the calendar year 1984, the rate shall be 1.251.50 per centum of the wages (as so defined) percent; percent; pald after- December -31,1989. and so re- '(9) with respect to wages received during "(8) with respect to wages received during the calendar years 1990 through 2004, thethe calendar years 1985 through 1989,- theP0rSection 201(b) (2)ofthe Social Se- rate shall be 5.70 percent; rate shall be 1.45 percent; - curity Act Is amended by striking out clauses S 11356 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— SENATE October 14, 1981

(K) through (M) and inserting in lieu there- 1981(relating to the repeal of the minimumthe Internal Revenue Code of 1984 are each of "(K) 1.035 per centum of the amount ofbenefit) were applicable with respect to suchamended by inserting immediately alter self-employment income (as so defined) soindividual; and "sickness or accident disability" the follow- reported for any taxable year beginning after "(C)to whom there is payable for theing: "(but not including any sUch payment December 31. 1981, and before January 1,month of May 1982 a monthly periodic bene-that is made directly to such employee from 1983, (14 0.975 per centum of the amount offit or benefits in a total amount of $300 orthe regular wage or salary account of Such self-employment income (as so defined) 50greater which is based upon such individual'semployer) ". reported for any taxable year beginning af-earnings while in the service of the Federal (b)The amendments made by sUbsection ter December 31. 1982, and before January 1,Government or any State, as defined in(a)shall be effective with respect to re- 1984, (M) 0885 per centum of the amountsection 210(h)(or a political subdivisionmuneration paid after December 81, 1981. of self-employment income (as so defined)thereof, as defined in section 218(b) (2)). or ExTENSION OF DISABILITY IN5URANCE MAXIMUM so reported for any taxable year beginningan instrumentahty of two or more States, FMILY BENEFIT TO OLD-AGE AND suRvivoRs after December 31, 1983, and before Janu-shall, for any month for which the monthly INSURANCE BENEFICIARIES ar'1, 1985 (N) 0900 per centum of theperiodic benefit or benefits described in sub- amount of self-employment income (as soparagraph (C) continue to be payable, be SEC. 5. (a) Seétion 203 (a) of the Social. defined) so reported for any taxable year be-subject to a benefit reduction under para-Security Act is amended— gining after December 31, 1984, and beforegraph (2;. (1) by striking out paragraph (8); January 1. 1990, (0) 1.145 per centum of the "42) The amount of the benefit to which (2) by redesignating paragraphs (1). (2), amount of self-employment income (as soan individual described in paragraph (1) is(3),(4),and (5),is paragraphs(2),(3), (4), defined) so reported for any taxable year be-otherwise entitled for such month under this (5),and (6), respectively; and ginning after December 31, 1989, and beforetitle, as determined without regard to deduc- (3)by inserting before paragraph(2) January 1, 2005, and (0) 1.125 per centumtions on account of work otherwise required(as so redesignated)the following new of the amount of self-employment incomeby this Section. shall be reduced by anparagraph: (as so defined) so reported for any taxableamount equal to so much ofthetotal "(l)(A) The total monthly benefits to year beginning after December 31, 2004,". which beneficiarics may be entitled under monthly periodic benefits (described in para-section 202 or 123 for a month (but prior RESrORATLON OF MINIMUM BENEPIT FOR graph (1) (C)) payable to euch individualto any increases resulting from the applica- CVRRLNT RECIPIENTS for the month of May 1982 as exceeds $300tion of paragraph (2) (A) (ii) (III)of sec- Sxc. 3. (a) Section 2201(h) of the Omnibus(rouiided to the next higher multiple of $1 iftion 215(i)) on the basis of the wages and Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 is amend-not a multiple of $1), but in no event shall self-employment income of an.individual ed to read as follows: the monthly benefit under this title be re-whose primary insurance amount has been "(h) (1) Except as provided in paragraphduced by reason of this Subsection to ancomputed or recomputed under paragraph (2), and in section 203(n) of the Social Se-amount less than the amount to which such(1) or (4) of section 215(a), or under section curity Act, this Section and the amendmentsindividual would be entitled if the amend- ments made by section 2201 of the Omnibus215(d), as in effect after December 1978, made thereby shall be effective only with re- shall,except as otherwise provided by this spect to benefits payable for months afterBudget Reconciliation Act of 1981 (relatingsubsection, be reduced to the smaller of— October 1981, and only in the case of personsto the repeal of the minimum benefit) were '(i) 85 percent of such individual's aver- who are eligible for benefits under title II ofapplicable to such individual. age indexed monrhly earnings (or 100 per- the Social Act on the basis of the wages and (3) For purposes of this subsection, anycent of his primary insurance amount, if self-employment income of an individualperiodic benefit which Is paid on other thanlarger), or who initially becomes eligible for old-age ora monthly basis, shall be allocated on a basis "(Ii) 150 percent of such individual's pri- disability insurance benefits after Octoberequivalcnt to a monthly benefit (as deter-mary insurance amount. 1981, or who dies after October 1981 and wasmined by the Secretary) and such equivalent not initially eligible for old-age or disabilitymonthly benefit shall constitute a monthlyAny such amount that is not a multiple of Insurance benefits before November1981. periodic benefit for purposes of this subsec-$0.10 shall be decreased to the next low- "(2) In the case of an individual who is ation, For purposes ofthissubsection, theest multiple of $0.10. member of a religious order (within theterm 'periodic benefit' Includes a benefit pay- "(B) Subparagraph (A) Shall not apply meaning of section 3121(r) (2) of the Inter-able in a lump sum it It Is a commutation 01,to benefits based on the wages and self- nal Revenue Code of 1954), or an autono-or a substitute for, periodic payments. employment income of an individual— mous subdivision of such order, whose mem- "(4) The provisions of this subsection shall "(i) who dies before 1982; bers are required to take a vow of poverty,not apply to any person who, for the month "(ii) who attains age 62 before 1982. ex- and which order or subdivision had electedof May 1982, isentitledto monthly insurancecept with respect to benefits payable during coverage under this Act prior to the date ofbenefits under this title on the basis ofthe an entitlement to disability insurance bene- the enactment of this paragraph, or whowages and self-employment income of morefits of an individual whose initial entitle- than one Individual, ment to such benefits occurred after June would be such a member except that Such 1980; or individual is considered retired because of"Reductions in Benefits for Recipients of "(iii) who, in the case of an individual old age or total disability, this section and Minimum Benefit Who Reside Outside thewho attains age 62. or dies before attain- the amendments made thereby shall be effec- United States ing age 62, after 1981, became entitled to tive only with respect to benefits payable for "(n) Section 2201 of the Omnibus Budgetdisabilityinsurance benefitsbefore July months after October 1991, and only in theReconciliation Act of 1981 (relating to the1980, and was entitled to disability insur- case of persons who are not eligible for bene-repeal of the minimum benefit) and theance benefits in any month after June 1980 fits under title II of the Social Security, Actamendments made thereby shall be effective on the basis of the wages and self-employ-with respect to benefits payable for anyand before January 1982 (unless the individ- ment income of soch an individual who diesmonth after May 1982 in the case of aual is not entitled to such benefits during a or initially becomes eligible for old-age orperson who, during Such month, is not aperiod of more than 12 consecutive months, disability insurance benefits before Novem- after December 1980, before he dies, again resident of the United States (as definedbecomes disabled, or attains age 82 which- ber 1991. in section 210 (i)), and who was eligibleever first occurs) "(3) For purposes of this subsection, eligi-for benefits under this title on the basis (b) (1) Paragraph (2) (as so redesignated bility for old-age and disability insuranceof the wages and self-employment incomeby subsection (a) of this section) of section benefits shall be determined in accordanceof an individual who died or initially be-203(a) of such Act isamended— with paragraphs (2) A) and (3) (B) of sec-came eligible for old-age or disability in. (A) in the matter preceding subparagraph tion 215(a) of the Social Security Act.". surance benefits before November 1981.". (A),by— (b)(1) Section 203 of the Social Security (2) The amendment made by paragraph (i) inserting "to whom paragraph (1) does Act is amended by adding at the end thereof (1)shallbeeffectivewithrespecttonot apply, and" after "In the case of an in- the following new subsections: monthly benefits payable under title II ofdividual"; "Reduction in Benefits for Certain Recipi-the Social Security Act for June. 1982 and (ii) inserting after "section 202 or 223 for ents of the Minimum Benefit Who Receivemonths thereafter. a month" the parenthetical phrase "(but Governmental Pension System Benefits (c)Section 1622 of the Social Securityprior to any increases resulting from the "(m) (1) Any individual— Act is repealed, applicationofparagraph(2) (A) (ii) (lu) "(A) to whom the amendments made by (d) Subparagraph (A) of section 8103 (1)of section 215(i))", and striking out that section 2201 of the Omnibus Budget Recon- (1)of the Internal Revenue Code of 1984phrase as it appears elsewhere in such para- ciliation Act of 1981 (relating to the repeal(relating to disclosure of certain informa-graph; and of the minimum benefit) do not apply; tion to Social Security Administration and (iii) striking out "except as provided by "(B) who is entitled to a monthly benefitRailroad Retirement Board) is amended byparagraphs (3) and (8)" and inserting in under this title, the amount of which, as de-inserting "and payments of retirement in-lieu thereof "except as otherwise provided termined without regard to deductions oncome," after "chapters 2, 21, and 24,". by this subsection"; and account of work otherwise required under EXTENSIoN OF CovEascE TO FIRST SIX MONTHS (B) by striking out "paragraph (2)" each this section, would be reduced for any month OF SICK PAT place it appears in subparagraphs (A), (B), if the amendments made by section 2201 of SEC. 4.(a)Section 209(b) (2) of the Socialand (C) and inserting in lieu thereof in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act ofSecurity Act and Section 3121(a) (2) (B) ofeach instance "paragraph (8) ". October 1 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE S 11357

(2)Fa'agraph () (A) (as so edes1gnatedtweenthe OASI and DI funds. This In-the Senate action will not be under any by Bubsection () of this section) of 8ectioflterfund borrowing authority would ex-illusion that somehow we have taken 203 (a) o cuc Act a ameided to read aspire at the end of 1990 and it would in-care of the social security problem. What follows: volve only the two cash benefit funds. we have done Is to take the easy way out. "(3) (A) o individuals who tnitially be- Second, the amendment would restoreWe have taken the cosmetic approach. come eligibleforoldage or disability in- surance benefits, or who die (before becom-the minimum benefit for most people on Right now, we have three different ac- ing 80 eligible for those benefits), in calenthe benefit rolls who were scheduled tocounts in social security. Two currently daryear1979, 1980, or 1981— have their benefitsrecalculated nexthave surpluses, one is about to go hi the "(1)the amounts establi8hed with reMarch. Under the committee amend-red by next November. What we are pro- spect to subparagraph (A> of paragraph (2)ment, the minimum benefit would be re-posing to do is borrow from one of the are $230, 8248, or $270, respectively; stored for all people eligible for benefitsother funds, disability insurance, until "(ii)the amounts established with rebefore November 1981. MInimum bene-they are on the verge of insolvency and, spect to subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2) ficiarieswithgovernmentalpensionshopefully, by that time, we shall address are $332, $358. or $390, respectively; and would have their mInimum benefits re-some of the real problems in social secu- "(iii)the amounts established with re rity. spect to subparagraph (C) of paragraph (2) duced dollar for dollar for the portion of are 433, $467, or $508, respectively.". their governmental pension above $300, Mr. President, the passage of this pro- (3) Paragraph (3)(as so redesignated bybut not below the amount of the bene-posal, it is my hope, would not stem the subsection (a)of this section)of sectionfit based on their actual earnIngs. Ac-enthusiasm, if there Is any, in Congress 203(a) of such Act is further amended bycordtng to the Social Security Admln-to move ahead immediately to address striking out subpragraphs (B) and (C) andis'tration,2.7' million of the 3 millionthe long-term problem. I also hope it by redesignating subparagraph (D) as sub-minimum beneficiaries would contInue towould not dampen the efforts by the ad- paragrap1 (B). receive the full mInimum benefit. ministration, particularly the President, (c)Section 203(a)(9)(C)of such Act to come to grips with this problem. IS amended by striking outsection 203(a). For members of religious orders who (4)" and inserting in lieu thereof 'para—have taken a vow of poverty and who The problem is not coming up with graph (5)". were first covered under the social se-good ideas to solve the financing prob- (d) Section 215(i) (2) (D) of such Act Iscurity program as a result of amend-lem. We believe that we have a number amended—- ments adopted in 1972, the amen!mentof good ideas, coming from Democrats (1)by striking out "paragraph(3) (B) would defer the elimination of the mini-and Republicans. The problem Is finding thereof "andinserting in lieu thereof 'para.mum benefit for future recipients or athe courage or the will, if you please, to graph (4) (B) thereof"; and period of 10 years. deal with this matter as it should be (2)by striking out the last sentence dealt with in the appropTiate committees thereof. The committee amendment wou!d achieve trust fund savings by extendingand in the full Senate and the fuU Mr. DOLE. Mi. President, a parliamen'the disability maximum family benefitHouse. tary Inquiry. formulatoretirementandsurvivor Mr. President, I suggest that, hi effect, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-cases, for workers reaching age 62 orwhat we have done in the committee ator will state it. dying after 1981. Additional revenuesamendment is slightly delay the day of Mr. DOLE. It is my understanding thatwould be generated by a provision thatreckoning. We have Indicated that, well, this substitute would be amendable in theremoves the exclusion of certain sickwe know there is a problem.—some may second degree. pay from social security taxes during thenot agree, but most everybody agrees The PRESIDXNG OFFICER. It will befirst 6 months the employee is off work.that there is a problem—and we are amendable In two degrees. - In all, the committee amendment pro-going to take some time to look at that Mr.DOLE. The point I make is thatvides a much needed and widely support-problem. Hopefully, we will solve the there may be Members who have amend-ed mechanism for insuring the solvencyproblem later. I certainly have confi- ments. I would say to those who may beof the retirement fund in. the near term.dence that we are goIng to address the listenthg, or members of their staffs whoIt also restores the mInimum benefit in aproblem and I hope we will solve it. may be listening, that we are prepared tofair and equitable way without worsen- Mr. President, this committee amend. do business. I have a brief opening state-in the condition of the trust funds. Iment Is not an answer to social security's ment on the nature of what the Financeurge my colleagues to support the com-financing needs. Committee accomplished, and I think themittee amendment. While this amendment would certainly Senator from New York has some com- I might remind my colleagues,ofimprove the Immediate situation, it does• ments to make. I am certain others willcourse, that this amendment is by nonot fundamentally deal with the fact wish to speak. means an answer to social security'sthat the system's income Is not certaIn- For those who have amendments to of-financing needs. to meet benefit costs through the decade. fer, I suggest that within the next 20 to I might say, as an aside, that there hasUnder trustees' intermediate assump- 30 minutes we will probably be in a posi-been some feelIng that we ought to justtions, $30 billion would be needed by 1990 tion to consider those amendments. provide for interfund borrowIng and re-to insure the barest level of solvency, By unanimous vote on September 24,allocation of the tax, and our worries willand nearly $80 billion would be required the Finance Committee approved a so-be over. to restore current levels of reserves. cial security amendment that has been Well, maybe our worries would be over Over the longer term, the situation offered to H.R. 4331. The amendmentas Members of the Senate who may beonly becomes more serious. Given the makes several changes hi social securityrunning for reelection In the next yearchronic deficits that are expected to that would help Insure the retirementand maybe through 1984. But the worriescharacterize medicare by the end of the fund can meet beneft payments nextwill not be over for the 36 million bene-decade, the entire system Is expected to year and that would also allow for aficiaries who now receive benefits, or 115run annual deficits beginning hi the nearly complete restoration of the mIni-million workers who now pay into social 1990's. mum benefit foi those currently on thesecurity who are counting on 'a stable Over the next 75 years, the system's rolls. system to be there upon their retirement.deficit Is projected to equal 29 percent First,thecommitteeamendment So I would suggest that what we haveof expenditures. I suggest, as I have be- would reallocate the social security taxdone, in effect, is to indicate that there isfore, that it is imperative that we con- among the three trust funds. KeepIng thea problem. We have Indicated that wetinue efforts to forge a bipartisan solu- overall social security tax rate the sameare not quite ready to come to grips withtionto these financIng problems. as Under current law, old age and survi-it, possibly for fear of constituent reac- • INTERFUND TAX REALLOCATION AND BQRROWINO Vors' insurance tax would be Increased,tion. Certainly, those. beneficiaries now AUTHORITY the disability insurance tax would be de-receiving social security for the most Thepresent law allocations and the creased, and the hospital insurance taxpart have a lot of misinformation, a lotproposed changes are shown in a table would be decreased through 1985, thenof conflicting information, much of itI have had prepared. subsequently increased, well Intentioned. I ask unanimous consent .that that In order to provide additional fiexibil I would hope that if,in fact, thistable, with reference to tax reallocation, ity in meeting benefit obligations overamendment Is agreed to by the Senate,be printed In the RECORDatthis poInt. the next 10 years, the proposal would al.passed by the House and signed into law There being no objection, the table so give the managing trustee, the Secre-by the President, those who may readwas ordered to be printed in the REcoa, tary of Treaunj, authority to borrow be-about the Senate action or hear aboutas follows: '811358 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE October 14, 1981

PROPOSED REALLOCATION OF SOCIAL SECURITY TAX RATES FOR EMPLOYERS AND EMPLOYEES, EACH

' OASI 00 HI , Total

, Present law . Proposal Present law P,oposal Present law Proposal Present law' Proposal

... 4.575 5.185 4.825 0.715 1.30 0.80 6.70 4.70 1993 4.575 5.035 .825 .665 1.30 1.00 4.70 6.70

19S4... 4.575 4.855 .825 . .595 1.30 1.25 6.70 6.70 1985 ...---—.-...-——....--__._... ._ 4.750 5.005 .950 .595 135 1.45 7.05 7.05 .1986—89 4.750 5.100 .950 .600 1.45 1.45 7.15 7.15 1980—20O&...._ . 5.100 6.850 1.100 .750 1.45 1.75 7.65 7.65 iOObandaftev 5.100 5.450 1.800 .750 145 1.45 7.65 7.65

Mr 'DOLE Mr. President, under pres- The committee approved a provision Mr. President, I would like to suggest ent law (Public Law 97—35), the mini-to remove the exclusion of sick pay underwhat will be obvious, that the degree to mum social security benefit is sched-a plan or system during the first 8which the chairman has brought this tiled to be eliminated for all people whomonths the employee is off work if thechange about is reflected by the fact that become eligible for beneath for the monthpayments are made from the employer'swe bring to the Senate a report of the 'of November 1981 and later. The mini-regular wage or salary account. ThisCommittee on Finance adopted unani- mum benefit is scheduled to be elim-provision would be effective for sick paymously. Itisa committee that was thated for all other beneficiaries begin-in January 1982 and thereafter. scarcely unanimous in this matter when ning with 'benefits for, March 1982. Mr. President, In a very brief discus-the process began. That It should have The committee adopted a provision tosion, the Senate Finance Committee ad-ended up this way Is a tribute to the restore the rnlnlmam benefit for all peo-dressed the problems of social securitychairman and, I think, to the capacity of ple who are eligible for benefits beforesystem and we at least have agreed, byfacts to change opinions In the course Novenber 1981 and who are residents ofa unanimous vote of 20 to 0 In our com-of deliberations in this body. the "United, States, residents of the 50mittee, to authorize interfund borrowing, The chairman will recall, and while I States, District of Columbia, Puerto Rico,reallocation of the tax, restoration, fordo not wish to dwell on it I have a re- Guam, Virgin Islands, and Americanthe most part, of the minimum benefit.sponsibility to note, at least, that this Samo. MbsImum beneficiaries, with gov-We adopted two provisions to pay forparticular phase of the history of the .ernmental' pensions would have theirthat restoration, which we felt was theSocial Security Act begins on the 12th minimum beflt reduced dollar for dol-only responsible thing to do. of May, when we received from the ad- lar'for the.pórtion of their governmental I also say that, as I am certain othersministration, with no advance warning, pension above '$300, but not below thewill say, this. is a retreat from an earlierwith no consultation, and with no prep- amount Of'the benefit based on their ac-position of the administration. aration, a proposal to transform the so- tuaJearning8. It is a recognition by the President,cial security system drastically in two The Committee also agreed to deferby others in the administration, and byrespects. for a period of 10 years the eliminationthoseofus onthe Committee on First, to reduce benefits sharply, some- of the minimum benefit in the case ofFinance—some of us. at least—that per-thing that had not been done before, and members of religious orders who havehaps, in the reconciliation process, wecertainly never contemplated at this taken a vow of poverty and whoweremay have gone too far with the mini-level of reduction. For persons retiring first covered under the social securitymum benefit elimination. at age 62, for example, benefits would program as a result of amendments In view of the politicization of' socialbe reduced by 40 percent, taking them adopted 'in 1972. security since that time, it is now thefrom 80 percent of the full benefit they EXTEWD DISAB!LXTY MAZ!MVM JAMILT EENEI'IT better course to follow to make a restora-would receive at age 65 to 49 percent 'To U'IThEMENT ANS SURVIVOR CASES tion of that benefit, at least a 95-percentand—not to bring too many ratios into restoration. this discourse—leaving such a retiree UndeT psesent law, Mr. President, Finally, the Senator from Kansas indi-with an average replacement rate, as we there is a limit on the amount of month-cates that It is his hope that we cansay, of 19 percent of earning. In effect, ly benefits that can be paid on theearn-move rather quickly on this amendment.this formalizes a retirement In which ings record of' one worker. This limit isIt is my understanding now from thesocial security benefits would be below known as the 'maximum family benefitSocial Security Administrator that timethe poverty line. This is not to say that (MFB). In retirement and survivorcases. the MFB ranges from 150 to 188 percentis of the essence as far as notifying cer-many refflees would not have other re- of the PM, primary insurance amount.tain people who might be affected If thetirementbenefits coming, but many minimum benefit is not restored. Hope-wOuld not. In disability cases, the MPB ,can benofully, today or tomorrow, we will be able It remains the case that only about more than 85 percent of the worker'sto pass this substitute without any crip-half of the people retiring in our country averageindexedmonthlyearnings (AIME) or 150 percent of the primarypling amendments. There may be somehave any other pension with which to Insurance amount. lurking out there Somewhere. I hopesupplement social security. About half that then we can persuade our colleagueslive on social security and nothing else. The committee approved a provisionIn the House to take appropriate actionHence, the importance of something to extend the present law disabilitymax-very quickly. such as the benefit rate paid at early lmwn family benefit formula to retire- Mr. President, I yield the floor. retirement. ment and survivor cases, for workers (Mr., COCHRAN assumed the chair) Early retirement was singled out on reaching age 62 or dying after 1981. Mr. 'MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I risethe ground that this was a privilege of EXTEND SOCIAL SECURITY PAYROLL TAX TO ausr first to respond to my friend, the re-some sortthat was being somehow 8 MONTHS OF SICK PAY spected and exceptionally able chairmanabused. It was and is not in any sense Under present law, sick pay is subjectof the Committee on Finance, to say thata way to take advantage of the system. to social security taxes and is treatedashe has described the measure before us The judgment made in 1962 to provide covered earnings unlessitiseither:as being, in some sense, a retreat todayearly retirement at 80 percent of the FirSt, paid under a qualified plan or sys-from the original proposal. I want thefull rate at 65 was based on an actuarial tem, or second, paid more than 6 monthsfirst remarks I make to assert my con-calculation that this would, on average, after' thelast month the employeeviction that If that is the word to beprovide the same lifetime benefits as are worked. used, so be. it. Butit is a gracious retreat.received by "regular" retirees. It has If the employer's plan or system isIt is a responsible change of opinion. Itturned out to be actuarially precise to a qualified, the payments 'are excluded re-isthe resultof; a legislative processdegree that is not ordinarily found. Over gardless of whether they are made fromwhich, upon conSideration, brings par-time, persons who have retired early the employer's regular wage or salaryticipants to new views. Absent that, wehave received exactly what they were ex- account or from a separate fund orwould not have a deliberative process atpected to receive. Eighty percent of a full Insurance. all. benefit, received at age 62, has led to a October 14, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 11359 payout equal to 100percentat 65, and The distinguished chairman of theberg of Michigan, the funds had the a wash during the intervening intervalsCommittee on Finance Is not wrong whenright to borrow from the Treasury U as well—a nice piece of work for whichhe says that we have to act with somethey were temporarily short of moneys the actuaries should be congratulated.expedition here, else, on Christmas Eve,owing to a combination of economic de- However, it is also the fact that wesome 3 mIllion people are going to is-velopments, or whatever. This did not think most persons retiring at age 62 doceive a notice that their social securityoff end against any great principle. It so because they are ill or are unem-payments are being taken away fromstill does not. ployed. It Is not simply exercising thethem. Some have suggested that the note It can be done if needs be done. It is option to move to Florida and play golfmight have holly and ivy to cheer themunlikely that It will be needed, but if it Instead of going on with your job. It Is,up. It has been suggested, I am told, byis,it can happen. rather, exercising the option suddenly topersons downtown that the distinguished I do not want to stand here advocat- receive income when you have not beenchairman of the committee might be theing that there be a steady infusion of receiving any at all. one chosen to sign the notice, on thepublic moneys, of general funds, into the As we discuss the social security law,ground that no one at the other end ofsocial security system. There is a healthy e will often find persons on both sidesPennsylvania Avenue wishes to do it. discipline that arises from the prospect of the aisle saying as to the character- As a point of fact, under the law, 3that the taxes paid Into the system istics, for example, of persons who takemillion people will receive this specialshould be sufficient for the benefits paid early retirement, that, "We think this Isyuletide notice from the chairman orout. so." It has surprised me, at least, towhoever Is given the distinction of send- But I note that this Is not the case realize how. little is known about theing the greetings, unless we do act withnow, that under the medicare provisions characteristics of the approximately 35expedition, and I believe we should. of the Social Security Act doctor bills million persons in the system. Again, there was the question of dueare paid by general revenues. The notion We have run a very tight administra-notice and due procedure. that these revenues are from social secu- tion in social security, it seems to me. We At this point, I do not have much tority taxes Is not so. know that its computer facilities couldadd, except to say that I believe that In I point out that, in the early days of be usefully brought Into a third andthe course of our deliberations we havethe system, there was a deliberate public fourth generation of sophistication butestablished that there are two problemssubsidy to these funds. It will not seem administrative costs have been very low.facing the social security system. One iscredible to many Members of the Senate On the other hand, the administratorsa near-term problem that responds to thetoday, but the Social Security Act of 1935 have been unwilling to find out veryunprecedented movement of prices andprovided that the moneys collected from much about the 35 million people towages in the last 4years.Prices went UPthe payroll tax be invested in special whom they send checks every month. Weand wages went down, probably for theOovernment bonds, and that the Treas- know about the illness and unemploy-first time in the history of the Americanury pay a full 3-percent interest on those ment causing early retirement from aeconomy; and interest rates were at ex-moneys. survey made In California 4 years ago.traordinarily high levels, interest rates Now, 3 percent interest was higher In 1977, in California, it appeared thatreflecting thIs changing relationship. than the rate of interest at which the illness and unemployment were the larg- The result was that for the first timeTreasury borrowed. It was thought to be est causes of early retirement; some 70in the history of our economic series,an astronomical number, never likely to percent of early retirees were sick or job-real wages in the United States declined.be reached In the market, and in that less prior to retirement. But one wouldUnemploymentremainedhigh.Themeasure, to that degree, and to that pur- think that there would be a nationaleconomy has been flat since 1978, almostpose a subsidy was paid into the fund. survey and that it would be kept up toan extended recession. This was phased out in the 1940's, and date. These are sampling procedures that Payments into the system have gonethe memory of a time when 3 percent do not require any great invention if youdown relatively. With inflation, paymentswas an inconceivably high rate of inter- just will carry them out. out of the s'stem have been going up.est has gone, but I cannot fail to remind Mr. President, the first radical fea-This, combined with the unprecedentedmy friend from Kansas of those grand ture of the May 12 proposal was that itchange in the wage-price relationship,old days of the New Deal when the dollar would have made sharp reductions inhas depleted the trust funds. was sound, when interest rates were low, benefits. The second is that it would have And changes made by the 1977 amend-and when social change was going for- done so with almost no notice. The pro-meñts have not been sufficient for theward at such an agreeable pace. posal came to us May 12. It was in-purposes we contemplated at the. time. Another point I wish to make Is that tended to go into effect January 1. That We are responsibly advised by thehaving talked about our near-term prob- is not the way changes can be made inCongressional Budget Omce and by thelesn, may I also say that there is this a. social insurance system. The conceptadministration that, with the changesother matter, this other question which of due notice and due process has to bewe make today, even after the cost ofI have found myself referring to as the present, and surely it was absent In thisrestoring the minimum benefit to virtu-2020 problem. It is not a problem at all regard. allyallitspresent recipientsisac-but simply a statement of fact that about It was not surprising, then, that oncounted for, the near-term problem willthe year 2020 the baby boom that fol- May 22, by a vote of 96 to 0, thIs bodybe avoided. Enough reductions werelowed the Second World War will have said that it would not go forward withmade in, the reconciliation bill so thatretired and we will have a high ratio of that proposal in that manner. older persons to workers. We will not between now and 1985 or 1990, as wehave a high dependency ratio, unless In the meantime, we were adopting avariously describe the near-term prob-there is a great and unanticipated demo- change in the law wh&ch had an aspectlem, we will get through. graphic change. of sudden death to It—If that is not too Perhaps the ship will cross the bar The dependency ratio, which is the harsh a term—that gave no adequatewith a fairly narrow margin between theratio of persons of working age to young notice to retirees. This is the eliminationbar itself and the. keel, but that has hap-and old, specifically 20 to 64,. against of the minimum benefit. pened before. In any event not a greatthose above 64 and below 20 reached Its The President will know that in thedeal would be at stake If we had toheight in 1965. We will never again have Social Security Afliendments of 1977, byresort to some temporary adjustment atas many dependent persons relative to authorizing the minimum benefitatthe end of thIs decade because there- $122,. we arranged that over time, inafter the system goes into a very amplepersons of working age as we had •in 1965. effect, it would be phased out; that assurplus for a very long time. But we will have this: The baby boom earnings history and therefore benefit I note this not In anticipation of ourwm grow old, it will retire, and then pro- levels rose over time; there would be nodoing it, but simply to make the point,vision has to be made for a higher rate one coming into the system whose en-Mr. President, that through most of theof contribution and of ONP than we titlement would be less than the current1940's, in consequence of an amendmenthave historically known. minimum. So, in an orderly manner, thisproposed in thls body by our distin- I remind the Chair what this body has benefit was to be dilposed of, but not onguished former Member, who is so muchheard before, which is that as a propor- 3- or 4-months' notice. a part of our history, Senator Vanden-.tion of gross national product, social S 11360 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE October 14, 1981 security benefits go down from almostnor long remember that this observation Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unani- 5 percent last year to slightly more thanis made today, but to those who wantmous consent that a list of the members 4 percent about the year 2005, and thento follow this subject, I suggest that theof the National Commission on Social they rise to again about their presenttime may come when the disparity be-Security be printed in the RECORD. level about the year 2015, tween the rising payroll tax and the de- There being no objection, the list was I wish not to be held to the month ofclining tax on capital, the rising tax onordered to be printed in the RECORD, az the calendar year in those terms, butlabor and declining tax on capital, willfollows: there is a decline such that by abouthave consequences which we will want to MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL. COMMISSION the year 2020 we get back up to theaddress. ON SOCIAL SECVRITY present rate of GNP, and then we go In any event, these are consequences Milton Gwirtzman, chairman, attorney and from about 5 percent up to about 6 per-which are to be dealt with apart from theauthor, Newton, Massachusetts. near-term questions that we deal with James J. Dillman, vice chairman, at.oriiey. cent in about the year 2035, something Dillman, Holbrook, Wurtz & Roth, Sheboy- in that range, and at 6 percent it holdstoday. gan, Wlsconsin Trustee, State of Wisconsin. for a period, then declines again to a Inconcluding these remarks—theyRetirement Fund and Member, Retirement bi above 5 percent as best we can know.have been extensive only because I haveReseareh Committee. We presume a great deal about thenot seen any other Member, any other Elizabeth T. Duskin, vice chairman, Direc- forecasting abilities of our actuaries. WeSenator, wishing to speak—I would liketor of Research and Legislation, National solemnly pretend to precision when weto say that I think a fair job was done. ICouncil of Senior Citizens, Washington. D.C. refer to what the GNP in the year 2040think. the unanimous judgment of the Wilbur J. Cohen, Austin, Texas, Sid Rich- committee reflects that fact, and I hopeardson Professor of Public Affairs. Lyndon will be and the work-force ratio, the Baines Johnson School of Public Aairs, labor-force ratio, and the unemploymentthe Senate will adopt this measure, University of Texas at Austin; Secretary of rates and things like that. That, alas, Is There will be some amendments beingHealth, Education, and Welfare, 1U68—rn. one of the prices we have paid for theput forward. I believe there will be one Russell W. Laxson, Plymouth, Minnesota. trappings that surrounded the originalby the Senator from Missouri, the seniorRetiredVicePresident,PublicAffairs. Social Security Act, These gave us toSenator, similar to one I offered unsuc-Honeywell Inc. understand, gave the public to under-cessfully in the Committee on Finance. Donald S. MacNaughton, Nashville, Ten- stand, that a social insurance systemIt may be, it may not be. This is an op- nessee, Chairman and C1ief Executive Officer. portunity for the Senator from KansasHospital Corporationof America;former that in effect constituted an Intergen- Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Pru- erational tax transfer was In fact ato .show that he can exact from the oildential Insurance Company of America. funded investment retirement annuityand gas industries the same draconian Joyce D. Miller, Outenberg, New Jersey, arrangement as well as an insurancemeasures that he has insisted uponVice President and Director of Social Serv- ices, arrangement, - where his own activities were involved. Amalgamated Clothing Workersof This I thank the Chair. America; member of the Executive Council. was never so, it is not so, and Mr. DOLEaddressedthe Chafr. AFL-CIO. cannot in the nature of things be so, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- Robert J. Myers, Silver Spring, Maryland. but nonetheless we solemnly project theator from Kansas. Professor of !nsurance, Howard University; funds' status 75 years in the future as Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, Just for theChief Actuary. Social Security Administra- if this were the portfolio being man-information of Senators and others whotion, 1947—70. aged by the Prudential Life Insurance David H. Rodgers, Olympia, Washington. Co. It is not and is never going to be. may read the RECORD, I ask unanimousChief Deputy Insurance Commissioner. State consent to have printed in the RECORDof Washington: Mayor of Spokane, Washing- One thing I will take note of in pass-comments from study groups and otherston from 1967 to 1978. ing is that we may have a problem dif-who recognize that we do have financ- ferent from one that has been most talk•Ing problems, Mr, DOLE. The commission was com- ed about, and I think the chairman may There being no objection, the com-posed of members of both parties, no or may not share my view on this, whichments were ordered to be printed In theMembers of Congress, but a number of is that one of the consequences of theRECORD, as follows: outstanding Americans concerned about Economic Recovery Act of 1981 was aSTtJDY GROtJPS AND OTHERS RECOGN!ZINO Sv- the problem. I point that out because we very great reduction of taxes on capital. 5TANTIVE SOCIAL SECURITY FINANC!NG PRoa- are about ready to appoint another task Taxes on capital gains were cut, and we LEMS force which will probably plow the same are very happy to see them cut as we National Commission on Social Security:ground. They might find it useful to se were steadily trying to do that in the (March 1981) what the last Commission on Social Se- last two tax bills. Corporation taxes were In order to assure adequate funding forcurity recommended. almost abolished in many cases. Inter- 1981, Congress, in October 1980, enacted Pub- There being no objection, the material generational transfer of capital was cer-lic Law 96-403, which provides for a shift of payrofl tax receipts in 1980 and 1981 fromwas ordered to be printed in the RECORD, tainly changed. So we see the tax onthe Disability insurance Trust Fund to theas follows capital going down while we contemplateOld-Ageand SurvivorsInsurance TrustPRESWENT'S COMMXSS!ON ON PENSION POUCY a steady increase in the taxes on labor.Fund. (FEDRUARY 1981) which is, after all, what the payroll tax Until very recently, it appeared that this The most pressing problem facing social Is. reallocation, plus some borrowing from thesecurity is ts ability to meet future comm1E- We might find ourselves before weHospital Insurance Trust Fund, might re-menth. The social security system relies o notice in a kind of shearing action Insolvetheshort-termfinancing problem.pay-as-you-go nancing.Taxescollected which we have created unintentionallyHowever, the estimates available to the Com-rrom workers and their employers are user mission based on the 1980 Mid-Session Re-almost immediately to pay benefits for cur In the tax system a very powerful In-view assumptions of the Office of Manage.rent retirees. This form of financing Is e - centive to employ capital and a verymezit and Budget show that the Combinedtremelyvulnerable to declining econornc powerful disincentive to employ labor,assets of all three trust funds will be inade-conditions and demographic Imbalances. simply because the taxes on one havequate to pay eatimated benefita a they come In recent years, poor economic conditions almost been abolished. I do not want toduestartingin 1984. have resulted in short-run financing prob- exaggerate that they have been abol- Becauseofthe great Uncertainty inherentlema. Presently, 8ocial security. Is expertencizg ished, but they have been much reduced,In long-term projections, it has always beendifficulties because of high unemployment, while the taxes on labor are much in-acceptable for the long-range actuarial bal-inflation and low wage growth. Asaconse- creased. ance (the relation between anticipated reve-quence, tax revenues decline, while rising in- nues and expenditures over the fujI 75 yearflation results in increased benefit payments. What Is the maximum social securityvaluation period) to show a small deficit or In the next five years, scheduled tax reve- tax that is now to be paid? About 15 per-surplus under the intermediate cost esti-nues are not expected to be sufficient to cent, is It not? The maximum tax pay-mates. Under the. tax rates of present law.cover expected payments. ment from 1990 on will be 15.3 percent.there s an actuarial imbalance under the Social security faces serious long-run fi- The employer will pay 7.65 percent andintermediate estimates in the 1980 Trusteesnancing problema as well. Demographic im- Repoit of 1.52 percent of taxable payroll.balances resulting from the poet-World War the employee will do the same. That Is aAverage expenditures are 112 percent of av-II baby boom are expected to cause financing heavy tax, far heavier than the 1-percenterage income. problems In the next century. tax mandated in 1935, 15 times heavier. The Commission considers this an insuffi- The average scheduled tax rate over the There will be those who will little notecient degree of nanctng. 1980-2054 period Is 12.22 percent, and thiB October 14,1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— SENATE 811361 comparesunlavorably with a estimatedon'yl'/ months worth of reserves. If eco- Then there are a series of statements, average expenditure o 13.74 percentandnomic condiUons in te next 8 years areincluding a public opinion poll. I do not 18.39 percent of payroll under pessimisticonly slightly worse than theReagan admin- have a date on this1 but It Is a recent pub- assumptions. Il either beneflt adjuBtments oristrationpredicts, the trust u.nds will belic opinion poll which Indicates that: financing sohItons to thIs 1.62 to 6.17 per-unableto mate benefit payments at some The Hart public opinion survey conducted cent long-termactuarialdeficitarenotpoint before 1986. for the National Comm1a1on on 8ocial 8e- found, the probern wifl be extremely diffi- An addftional $110 billion tn revenues, orcurity found that 62 percent of all nonretired cult to resolve as the baby boomgenerationapproximately $20 billion a year, likely wiU begins to retire. For example, over the periodbe needed to achieve a 25-percent trust fundAmericans had little or no Confidence that 2030—2054, the actuarial deficit will amount there will be runds to pay their social 8*. reserve by 1986. curity benefits; 73 percent or those age25to to —4.58 percent and —1420 percent of cov- In addition to the practical problem or the 44 relt this way. ered payroll, respectively. Only under providing suNcient revenues to the system, The Lou Harris poll conducted In 1979 on optimistic demographic and economic as-the general public apparenuy has Uttle con-American attitudeB toward pens±ons nd re- sumpUons will the trust funds accumulatedence in the soundness ot the social 6ecuritytiremént found that more than four out of to very hth levels and thendecline whenprogram. We need to take action now thatfive workers have les8 than ruil confidence the baby boomgeneration retires. U the moreill restore the public'B confidence. that aocial Becurity will be able to pay their unfavorab'e, but more likely, alternatives Many Members of Congress feel we Cannotbenefits when they retire, andmore than two develop, more revenue from higher payrollrestore confidence in thIs program 11 we doOut of five have hardly any confldence at all. taxes or other revenue sources mast be found.not also address long-term shortages expected or benefits must be reduced. to confront 8ocialsecurityin the next There is aiso a statement by Robert century. M. Ball before the House 8ocaI Security 1979 SOCIAL StCURrTY ADvISoRY ComCIL, Subcommittee. The record is replete with DECEMBER19,1979 CBO: ALICE R!VLIN BEFoRE JOINT ECONOMIC statements by those who are not Ln the To counteract the trust fund losses attrib- COMM1TrEE (SEPTEMBER 22. 1981) political arena who are tellingusthat utable to the events or the mid-1970s, Con. In short, a'though the CBO currently pro- wehave to do something. gress in 1977 enacted major increases in reve- jects that the combined trust funds win If,infact,additional evidence Is nues. The largest or these increases wasnotmaintain an aggregate balance sumcient toneeded, I would think some might want scheduled to take effect Until 1981. In 1977,allow expected benefits to be paid over the the declir.e 2ri the trust funds was projectednext decade, the margin for error Is veryto explore the brief excerpt8 from thoee to continUe until the 1981 rate increase tooksmall.Ifeconomic conditions—.speclallyreports. effect, after which a buildup of the fundsreal wage growth—are even slightly worse Another statement Is from the Ameri- was anticipated to commence. More recentthai now projected, legislative action beyondcan Academy oz Actuaries (n a state- economic forecasts, however, suggest thatthe authorization of Interfund borrowingment of) on February 27, 1981, indlcat- this buildup may not begin as soon as pre-would probably be necessary to ensure theIng that we are in deep difficulties. viously expected. viabuity or the eystem. Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- The fact that the trust funds are now Given Social Securlty'e sensitivity to eco-sent that these brief summaries be relatively low means that a severe recessionnomic performance, prudent budgeting mayprinted in the REcoiw br the benet of could reduce revenues enough to require in-call for muth larger trust fund reserves thanSenators. creases in the tax rate or base that would nothave been realized in the recent past or than be needed if trust fund ba'ances were atare currently onticipated. Without these re- There being no objection, the sum- normal levels. ThIs temporary situation is nnserves, frequent or sudden program changesmaries were ordered o be printed in the aftereffect oI the severe recession during themay be required. In aprogramthat repre- RECORD, as follows: mtd-1970s and bas little bearing on the long-sents a long-term commitment around which SUMMARIES AND STATEMENT8 DY Roza M. run financial si-ength of the social securitypeople plan their lives, such thanges can cause substantial hardship and may under- B&u. system. Nonetheiess, this temporary situa-mine overall public confidence In the system. (Before the House School Security Subcorn. tion cannot be Ignored, and the council'sLarger reserves—such as the 75 percent of mittee, P'ebruary 17, 1981) recommendation 1o3 Improving the financingannual outlayB recommended by the 1979 At present the contingency fund.a have of medicare and the cash benefits programsAdvisory Council on Social Security—wouldbeen drawn below a reasonably sale level would deal with t. insulate the Social Security programs rrombecause recently we have had the unusual Starting around 2010, however, the trustthe consequences or unexpectedly poor eco- combination or prices rising faster than funds are projected to decline as the largenomic performance. wages and, at the same thne. & relatively hig1 number of persons born in the years imnieai- unemployment rate. ately after World War II begin to reach retire- Mr. DOLE. President Carter, in the fis- It Is clear that 8ome congressional action ment age. The work force is not projected tocal yeai 1982 budget, which was pre-will be needed ehortly to avoid a short-teru increase conrn€ nsuratey because the fertil-sented in January 01 1981, said: financing problem In the old-age and sur- Ity rate is now Jow id is projected to stay Ptnally, no account of future budget needsvivors' Insurance part of social becurity (the low by historical standards. The combinationwould be complete without recognition or disability In&urance programand the hoe- of these two trenda would cause a significantthe need to resolve the problem of socialpital insurance part or Medicare are not In increase in the aeige ae of the Americansecurity fnancing. The administration hasdiMcuty). The reallocation o rates between popu'ation. And.IIthese projections areproposed that the major 6ocial security fundsold-age and survivors' insurance and dis- borne out, soc.a1 scurity revenues wouldbe permitted to borrow Irom eacb other. Theability insurance signed into law on Octo- have to be incresed or benefits would haveestimates contained in the budget assumeber 9, 1980 was intended as a atop-gap meas- to be cut to keep the OASDI system in bal-that enactment of that legs1ation wUl over-ure and Is probably sufficient only through ance after the year 2030. come any shortfalls In the budget planningcalendar year 1981. The action required can period 1982—84. be quite minimal or we can take the occa- CoNGREss:.!.N J. J. P1CKLL, Ci-IAIRMN o So- However, additional action will have to besion—as I think we should—to make rather CIftLSEcnriY op Hovstaken to in5ure uxinte.rrupted payments be-tundamental changeB in financing. W#.s AND Mts Corii1rrEE (HousE FLOORyond the p'anning period. The Carter Administration proposed bor. STATEMENT, AF!L9, l8l) rowing among thethree8ocial ecur1t1 From DHHS press statement.—Janu-funds—the old-age and survivors' insurance The social securty retirement and survi-ary 15, 1981: fund, the disabUity insurance rund, and the vor's trust fund will becoie unable to pay As noted, the bidget proposes that legisla- ho&pital insurance rund—as a way of meet- benefits sometime in mid-1982. Even if thetion be enactcd, effective in calendar yearing the short-term problem in oldage and assets of the disabllzy fund were added in,1981, to allow borrowing among the threesurvivors' insurance between the end of 1981 the two funds together would still be insuffi-funds, to insure that possible temporaryand the point at which the presently sched- dent late in 1982. T1iS shortfall i projectedcash flew problems in one fund would beuled 1985 contribution rate Increases take under both the Carter administration's fiscalsolved through loans from the other runds.hold. ir the economy improves rapid'y and year 1982 budget economic. assumptions andThis proposal assinnes that the revenuessubstantially, this provision alone might well theReagan revised fiscal year 1982 budgetfrom the tax and wage base increases sched-make the present financing of. the cash ben- assumptions. uled under current law and the savings esti-efit program Bumcient ror the next 50 years If the assets of all three funds, inc'udingmated for voluntary hospital cost contain.and the financing or the hospital Insurance health insurance, are considered together,ment will be realized. However, the marginprogram under Medicare sufficient at least the trust funds are adequate to make bene-of safety is so small that ir economic condi-into the 1990's. Under other econom.1c aa- fit payments through 1986 under the Reagantions worsen, or ir cost containment savingsaumptions, however, thi8 plan would be In- economic assumptions, but are insufficientare not fully realized, there will be insuffi-adequate in the 1984—86 period, and Congres8 by late In 1984 under the Carter assumptions.cient resources ror benefit payments by thewould once again need to address the ques- Even under the Reagan assumptions, theend or 1984. Therefore, more substantial So-tion of social security financing. margin Is extremely thin. Assets in all threecial Security financing reform needs to be My own view is that it would be de8irable funds combined drop to only 14 percent oraddressed In the near future. to make fundamental changes In social ecu- S 11362 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE Octóber14, .2481 rityfinancing right away so that financingnomlc scenario is more optimistic in general,rate 188 percent (after 1990), the real wage' of the cash benefit program would be as-and more favorable to the social. security, differential is 200 percentags points (after sured at least into the next century andsystem in particular, than events are 'likely1995), and the long-run fertility rate 182,100 without having to raise the tax rate for old-to be. For that reason, it would be reckless tobirths per 1,000 women. All of these key lOng'- age, survivors' and disability Insurance forlegislate for social security on the basis ofrun assumptions are more optimistic than' at least the next 25 years. It is very disturb-those assumptions. There is too great a riskactual trends in thó 1970s.

ing to beneficiaries and contributors alikethat events will be less favorable, that the ' ' — ' to keep runing into these short-term crisesnationwill confront anothe social securityNATIONAL FEDERATION OP Irmerxzmsuv Bugs. because of an insufficient margin in thecrisis in a few years, and that Cqngreea will NESS/NATIONAL Buaxaw, OP EDUCATION short-term rates. And it is disturbing to con-have to legislate in ...ifnothing is done RESEARCH ' ' -. tributors to keep facing a series of ratetoreduce the sensitivity of social security to(Presented by Michael Boskin 'feparattng' increases. short-runeconomicadversity,economic the Transfer and Ahñulty Functions of events less favorable than our best forecaSts Social SecurIty" 1981): AMERICAN ACADEMY op ACTUARIES could place the system in jeopardy again in, Probably the most overwhelming probleSe (James H. Swenson before the House Socialthe ness future: only large tax increases orconfrontIng social security as a pay-as-you- Security Subcommittee, February 21, 1981) large cuts In benefits for those now receivinggo system is the long-term funding crisis. t is apparent that legislation needs to beor soon to receive them would preclude thI*Even after the 1977 social security amend- enacted to resolve the predicted short-termunhappy possibility. These are really themonte, a long..term deficit of Well over $600 financing problems of the OASI portion ofonly two choices Congress has. billion remains. This is the amount by which the program. The academy believes that it — thepresent value of legislated benefits ex- is equally Important that long-term financ-NATIONAL RNrIEED TEACHERS AssocrarsoN ANDceeds the present value of legislated taxes. Th ing issues be addressed at the same time to THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OP Hxmxsput this in perspective, this amount Is larger help assure the financial viability of the pro- PERSONS - than thó regular national debt. The major gram and to restore public coUfidence in the(JamesHacking Before the House Socialcause of this projected deficit is the drastic program. Security Subcommittee. Feb. 27, 1981) change in the age structure'cf the popula- The short-term financing problems would Proposals to allow the OASI fund to bor-tion. Once the post-World Wer U baby boom be substantially alleviated if proposals per-row or receive funds from the DI and/or HZretiree—around 2010—the ratio of ret&rees to mitting interfund borrowing were enacted.fund, in our opinion are deceptive becauseworkers will increase enormously, The best However, the margins protecting the programthey do not match the magnitude of theestimate Is that the ratio of retirees to work. from adverse economic conditions would beshort-term financing problem. In general, weera will increase by about 50 percent—from very modest unless other steps are taken assupport providing legislative authority for,slightly less than one to three to about one well. interfund borrowing because this would pro-to two. Oiven the pay-si-you-go nature of The relative unpredictability of the econ-vide some flexibility. However, we do notthe system, this implies sither a bug, in- omy indicates that more emphasis should beview this as a Sound solution because thecrease in taxes to maintain the ritlo of bess-' placed on financial projections based uponpossibility that the combined level of trustfits to wages or a significant dacilna In the pessimistic assumptions, it should be notedfunds would fall to unacceptable levels or beratio. Neither prospect Is app.allng but that projections based upon pessimistic as-completely exhausted would still exist. Thethere is no avoiding the choice. sumptions indicated the potential for short-amount of revenue generated for the OASI term cash flow problems shortly after theFund from these devices will not ulthnately CoMalIrrEg p0* Ecoatowo Drvv.onwie 1977 amendments were enacted. Virtually nobe sufficient to protect the system from even ("Reforming Retirement Policies" publicity was given to that fact at the time.minor economic downturns. September 1981) Long-term financing issues pose an even Interfnd reallocation and borrowing pro- greater challenge to the program. Since theposals are being suggested partly because the. Social Security's traditional political and social security program is an intergenera-HI and DI Trust Fund levels are currently insocial strength has rested on low tax rates tional transfer program, funded essentiallya healthy position and could provide someand the widespread belief that today's pay- on a pay-as-you-go basis, the demographicadditional funds to OASI in the short term.ments assure tomorrow's benefits. However, influences of increasing life expectancy com-We suggested that reliance on the DI Fundin recent 'years,it has become apparent bined with the post-World War II baby boomisill-advised, since a recessionary periodthat the system, which has functioned so and subsequent baby bust will require sub-could prompt another surge in the numbersmoothly for so long, is in serious financial stantial increases in future payroll tax rates.of persons on the DI rolls and hence begin totrouble. Fully indexed to the CPf, benedts The financial viability of the program de-deplete the DI Fund in a manner similar toare rising at a rate that many would argue pends upon the willingness and the capabil-what occurred in the mid-1970'a. The HIoutstrips even the real rate of inflation., ity of persons who are working to pay taxesFund is not reliable either; it is eXpected toDemographic trends show that as the "baby sufficient to support promised benefits. be depleted by the early 1990's, if not sooner.boom" generation retires, there will be a' Official actuarial estimates predict OASDH!Hospital cost increases continue to roar alongcast iilcrease in the number of retired non- benefit costs ranging from 20 to 36 percent ofat 'higher than general inflation levels in theworkers to be supported by a decreasing pro- payroll by the year 2030. in addition, long-absence of effective cost control legislation.portion of workers. In 1980. there were 20 term projections based upon Intermediate as- Social Security bónefictaries for every 100 sumptions Indicate that OASDI benefit dis- workers contributing to the system; by 1980, bursements will exceed scheduled taxes by an AMERICAN NTERPEISZ INSTITUTE the ratio had risen to 81 beneficIaries per average of i percent during the next 75 ("Aohieving.Flnancial Solvency of Social 100 contributing workers. This ratio is ex- years. seouritr 1981) pected to rise to a range of 40 to 70 by the: The short-term financing problem facingmiddle of the next century.1 AFL-CIO social security's largest cash program, Old- Faced with this problein, Congress enacted (Bert Seidman before the House Social Se-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI), is sari-.stiff new tax Increases to take effect be- curity SubcommIttee, March 13, 1981) ous and will require corrective action by 1982tween 1979 and 1990. But these increases if scheduled benefits are to be fully financed 'Mr. Chairman, in dealing with thepro- have already proved insufficient to carry the gram's financing problem, I hope that neitherby the OASI trust fund. The other two majorsystem in the Immediate future, and they you nor the other members of the subcom-social security trust funds, for Disability In-will not cover rising costs for the entire mittee will rely on the administration's eco-surance (DI) and Hospital Insurance (HZ),'seventy-five-year period used in the long- nomic forecasts as outlined by Secretaryare in better financial shape, largely ass con-term estimates for Social Security planning. Schweiker In his testimony to this subcom-sequence of the Social Security AmendmentsEven with the scheduled large tax, increases, mittee. of 1977 (Public Law 95-216)•whichincreasedexperts believe that revenues will again fall Those projections might be better cliasac-payroll taxei designated for the DI and HIshort early in the next century. terlzed as wishful thinking rather than seri-trust funds, and the Disability Amendments Even those tax increases that have already ous economic forecasting. of 1980 (Public Law 96-265), whIch tight-been passed will put isignificantstrain on Not only the A1'L.-CIO, but most privateened administrative procedures for the pro-the economy. They will reduce both con-. economists, both conservative and liberal,gram. Both the DI and HI trust fund con-Burner purchasing power and the ability of monetarists and Keynesian, doubt these rosytingency reserves are now projected to remainindividuals tosave.SIn addition, higher So. projections. at adequate levels through the mid-1980a.cial Security taxes levied on employers tend In short, Mr. Chairman, if the Congress forAccording to several recent reports, however.to increase the prices of goods and services, the third time since 1977 undertakes thethe combined OASDHI trust funds are ex-reduce employe, wages and the hiring of new difficult task of shoring up the social se-pected to be inadequate after 1984, so thatworkers, and restrict the availability of funds curity system, we urge reliance on more real-even if the OAf! trust fund is allowed tofor new investment, istic economic forecasts in order to avoidborrow from the other two funds, the short- Clearly, Social Security Is entering a new being faced with the problem again. run financing problem would remain. era. The combined forces of inflation, slow The gloomy long-run projections of socialeconomic growth, and demographic cbange. Hnssy 3. Aaozs security are even more disturbing in light ofas well as the maturing of te system itself, (The Brookinge Bulletin. Sept. 13, 1981) their underlying assumptions. lnder thehave brought about this financial crisis. The 1981 trustees' intermediate projection path challenge Most economists not bound by party dis-U—A. the long-rim unemployment rate is 8 that policy makers face is how to cipflne hold that the adinlolatratlon'seco-percent (after 1995), the long-run Inflation Footnotes at end of article. October 14, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 11363' reshape the system so that the costs to the AMERICAN COUNCIL OP LIFE INSURANCE out in more detail in this document. working generation are kept manageable and(Statement of Kenneth P. Austin before theThere is also a saving from the amend- yet still tu1l1 the social and economic goal Subcommittee on Social Security, Housement which would restrict the total fam- of providing basic benefits to retirees. Ways and Means, February 27, 1981) ily benefits for OASI recipients to either Social Security now faces severe financial85 percent of a worker's AIME, but not HousEDEMOCRATICSTUDY GROUP problems. The retirement program. OASI,less than 100 percent o.f the worker's (October1980) facesacuteshort-range, financialprob-PIA, or to 150 percent of the primary in- Itis clear from both the report of thelems ... Thesystem also faces long-run Board of Trustees of the Social Security pro-deficits on the basis of what now Seems tosurance. Also revenue Is raised by taxing gram and the Administration's mid-sessionbe the moat reasonable economic aid demo-the first 6 months of sick pay. FT 1981budgetreview that the Social Se-graphic estimates. In addition, the informatioit contains curity system is headed for cash-flow prob- answers to questions that may be asked lems in -the short-term. It is equally clear Mr. DOLE. In addition, Mr. President,with reference to the effect on trust fund from the two reports that reallocation isI Understand there may not be final ac-ratios. Questions sometimes arise as to only an interim measure and that even aftertion on this bill today. It is my hope thatthe effect of these changes together, or reallocation additional steps either to raisesome of the amendments could be dis-In part, on the trust fund ratios. I will aggregate revenues or to reduce future bene-posed of or forgotten, whichever would fit obligations may be nece8sary for later inbe the most satisfactory, which I thinkbe including a table which will give that this decade. Information for Members of the Senate is the latter. I would also suggest the lat-and others who are cOncerned about this Because of the unforeseen and unprece-ter to Senators who do not really feelvery important problem. dented economic Situation of the past year—compelledtorushoverwithan. historic high rates of Inflation coupled with Finally, I will ask thUt cost estimates a serious recession—and because wage gainsamendment. for social security proposals approved by have fallen behind price increases, there are We would mention to those Membersthe Senate Committee on Finance as ad- once again serious short-term financing prob-that there will be other opportunities todressed b the Social Security Adminis- lems for OASDI. For example, OASI was ex-offer amendments. We do think there Istration also be made a part of the pected to run out of assets sufficient to meetsome urgency In passing this legislation,RECORD. Again, that Information, I un- benefit payments by the end of next year.particularly in view of its unanimous ap-derstand, for the most part, Is In har- To forestall that, Congress has approved aproval in the committee. I would hopemony with the information from the temporary (two-year) reallocation of tax re-that none of the amendments that have ceipts between the OASI and DI trust funds Congressional Budget Office. in order to ensure sufficient OASt funds tobeen proposed would be adopted, includ- Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- pay benefits through 1982 (HR. 7670)., How-ing the amendment that I understandsent that all of that information be ever, it is anticipated that combined OASI-the Senator from Missouri may offer, HI reserves will fall to a low of 7 percent ofwhich would start general funding of so-printed In the RECORD. one year's outgo in 1985 so that it is possiblecial security. That has never been done There being no objection, the material that even with other reallocation actions notin the history of this program, but thatwas ordered tO be printed in the RECORD, enough money will be on hand to pay someIs precisely what the Senator from Mis-as follows: benefits. souri proposes. (FromtheCongressionalBudgetOffice, The long-term financing problems are the Mr. President, I shall also ask unani- October 6, 19811 result of demographic trends.-4he inexorable aging of the population combined with themous consent that additional informa- MEMORANDUM decline in the birthrates. Sometime duringtion concerning the financial status ofFrom: Stephen Chaikind. the first half of the next century there willthe social security trust funds be printedSubject: Senate Finance Committee Social be too many beneficiaries (retirees) and notin the RECORD. Security Amendments. enough contribuors (workers). The Information that I will include This memo summarizes the costs and trust covers the operations of the trust fundsfund effects of the amendments on social AMERICAN INSTITUTE OP CERTIFIED PUBLICbefore and after enactment of the com-security approved by the Senate Finance ACCOUNTANTS (1980) mittee amendment, and was provided bCommittee on September 24. The amend- The recommendations of most observers,the Congressional Budget Office and thements include four provisions. The most im- including the current administration andSocial Security Administration. Again,portant in terms of social security financing Congress, concentrate primarily on the reve- is the approval of interfund borrowing be- nue side of the system and call for constantthere has been some who always take, Itween the OAS! and DI trust funds along increases in the payroll tax. These taxes havethink, an overoptimistic view of what wewith the reallocation of the payroll tax rates already grown faster than the consumermay be doing here today. We are ad-between the OASI, DI and HI trust funds. price index, increasing by more than 840dressing a short-term problem and aThe amendments also restore the minimum percent between 1962 and 1981 (as projected).short-term problem only. benefit to most current recipients, put a Even with these increases, revenues for 1981 There are many of us who think thatmaximum on family benefits paid from the and later will almost certainly be inadequatein the interim we can address the prob-OASI trust fund and require payment of to support the projected level of outlays. the payroll tax during the first six months Consequently, unless Congress mandates newlem as it should be addressed. I wantedof illness, These provisions will be dlsàussed sources of revenues or further increases into point out for the RECORD that we doseparately below. social security taxes, projected benefits mustrestore the minimum benefit to all those REALLOCATION OF PAYROLL TAX RATES; INTER- be reduced. currently on social security rolls except FUND BORROWING those who are receiving a Government Under current- law projections. the com- NATIONAL A55OCmTION op MANI7PACrURERS pension above $300 per month. Those re-bined OASDHI trust funds will have balances (Statement of the NAM Board September 29 tired Government workers would haveabove 12 percent of outlays at the start of 1981) their social security benefit reduced dol-each calendar year through 1990 (shown in For nearly half a century, three generationslar for dollar for the amounts of theirTable 1, Under CBO economic assumptions). Government pensions above $300. This percentage will be minimally adequate. of Americans have relied on the Social Secur- to ensure continued payment of benefits ity system to help provide retirement income. On a fiscal year basis, the actuaries es-through the period. However, the OASI fund Now that system is in deep financial trouble.timate this provision to cost $500 millionis likely to need adthtional income before in fiscal 1982. the end of 1982, since its balance falls to very CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE UNITED STATES I might say that cost is offset by a sav- low levels by that time. (Statement by Lowell Jones and Mike Romigings in SSI of $240 million in 1982. Under the Finance Committee bill, two before the -Su)co!nmittee on Social Secur- In 1983, the outlay cost because of thesteps were taken to alter this Imbalance. ity, House Ways and Means, March 13,minimum benefit restoration would be $1First, it allows interfund borrowing between 1981) billion,but, again, restoration of thethe 0A81 and DI funds at the discretion of Throughout the 70's high levels of infla-minimum benefit would reduce the costthe Managing Trustee. Second, the amend- tion and unemployment in combinationof SSI payments, so there would be a sav-ment realigns the -payroll tax rates among with lagging productivity and lagging real all three trust funds. These proposed rates wage growth have forced a draw down ofing of about $600 million and a net costare shown in Table 2, along with current-law Social Security trust funds to the point that,of $400 million. rates. unless effective action is taken by Congress Restorationtominimumbenefit, Were these realigned tax- rates to take this year, the OASI trust funds will be outwhich is an added cost results In a sav-effect, with no other changes in revenues or of money early in 1982. ings in 881. This. information is spelledoutlays, the combined balances in the trust S 11364 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE October 14, 1981 fundswould remain virtually the same,1 but (By fiscal years, in millions of doftars TOTAL ECT ON THE BUDGET the OASI fund would have sufficient bal- ances through the period, as would OASIDI The total impact of thiB bill on the budget balances combined. HI balances would fall . 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 would be to very low levels by the start of 1985 under Budget authority.. —240 —575 —590 —610 —665 IByfi!caI years, in miflions of dollarsi this reallocation, although they should re- Outlays —240 —575 —590 —610 —665 main positive. It is unclear if HI can meet FAJXLY MAXTMtTh all of its obligations with such low levels of • 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 trust fund reserves, however. Thisamendmentwouldrestricttotal family benefits for OASI recipients to either MINXMVM BENEFIT REsTORATION Budget authority 54 —193 —114 —20 —38 85 percent of a worker's AIME (but not less Outlays 160 25 —190 —410 —665 The Finance Committee, amendment re-than 100 percent of the PIA) or to 150 per- stores the minimum benefit amount to all cent 01 his PIA. This measure was adopted EFFECT ONTP.UST FtND RATIOS those currently on the social security rollsforalldisabilitycasesin theDisability except those with a government pensionAmendmerts of 1980. The provisloll would Questions sometimes arise as to the effect above $300 per month. Those retired govern.be cifective for all those who become 62 inof these changes together or in part on the ment workers would have their sotal se-1982 or thereafter. This provisionisesti-trust Lund ratios. The table below shows, on curity betiefit. reduced dollar for dollar formated by the actuaries to save; a calendar year basis, the effects of all or the amounts of their government pension parts of the Finance Committee changes on above $300. On a fiscal year basis, the actu- IBy fiseat years,in millions of dolIafs the combined OASDHI balances as a percent aries estimate this provision to cost: o.t outlays at the start of the year, as well as . 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 the balances projected under current law. By fiscal years,n millions of doflarsi Budget authority 4 26 69 131 213 COMBINED TRUST FUND UALANCES PS PERCENT OF OUT. Outlays —100 —400 —600 —800 —-1, 000 LAYS AT START OF YEAR 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 EXTEND PAYROLL TAX TO FIRST 51X MONTHS

lIn ercentf . Budget Authority —22 —88 —179 —278 —384 OF SiCK PA Outlays 500 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 This provision would generate the follow- Calendar year— CBO agreeswith this estimate. ing addttional revenues and budger author- ity by requixmg the payroll tax be col!ected 19821983 19841985 l98 Restoration of the minimum benefit willon sick pay paid froth employees regular alsoreduce the costs of added SSI paymentswages: and Medicaid costs. The federal savings to Current law 20.717.715.0 12. 7 14.9 Finance Committee paehage_ 20.617.414.5 12.2 14.4 these programs reBulting from the provision 8yfiscal years, in miUions of do!iarsI Finance Committee's mini- will be: mum benefitrestoration onty' 20.617.1 13.911.1 12.8 1982 1983 1984 t985 t986 Res!orationof entire mini- 1 Minor differences occur because of differ- mum benefit only I 20.616. 913. 5 10.6 12.2 ent trust fund assumptions on and timing ofinterestpayments on outstanding Revenues 300 400 500 600 600 Budget authority 312 444 586 737 798 Ooes not inctude effects of the caponfamily benefits and balances. payment of sch pay.

TABLE l.—PROJCTiQNS OF SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUND OUTLAYS, INCOMES, AND 8PLPNCES, BY CALENQPR YEAR

tin billions of dollarsi

1981 1982 1983 ,1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990

Old age and survivors insurance: Outlays 126.9 141.0 155.4 170.0 185.0 201.0 21&7 237.8 259.4 281.5 Income 123.1 130.1 142.8 156.6 177.0 192.9 208.8 225.2 242.1 279.1 Year-endbalance 19.1 8.2 —.4.4 —17.7 —25.8 —33.9 —43.7 —56.4 .737 —76.1 Start-of-year balance (as percent of outlays) 18.0 13.5 5.3 —2.6 —9.6 —12.8 —15.5 —18.4 —21.7 —26.2 Disabdity Insurance: OutIay 18. 1 19.8 20.6 21. 8 23.3 25. 3 27.2 29.1 31.4 33.9 IncomeI 17.0 23.3 26.5 29.8 37.8 42.6 47.5 52.7. 59.3 72.8 Year-end balance 2. 5 6. 1 12.0 19. 9 34. 4 51. 7 72. 0 95.6 122. 5 161. 3 Start-of -year balance (as percent of outlays) 20. 0 12. 6 29. 4 54. 7 85. 4 136,0 190. 3 247.7 304. 1 3l. 3 Hospital insurance: Outlays 30.1 34.4 39.6 45.4 51.8 58.9 67.0 76.1 86.4 98.1 Income' 35.2 39.3 43.7 48,3 54.6 63.3 68.7 73.9 78.8 83.5

Year-end balance 18. 9 23. 8 28. 0 31.0 33. 8 . 38. 1 39.8 37. 7 30. 1 15. 4

Start-of-year bIance (as percent of outlays) 45. 7 54.9 60. 2 61. 7 59. 8 57. 3 . 56. 9 52. 3 43.6 30.6 Comb,ned OASI, DI, and HI: Outlays 175.1 195.1 215.6 237.2 260.1 285.2 312.8 343.0 377.2 4l3 5 Income 175.3 192.8 213.0 234.8 269.4 298.8 32!.0 351.8 379.2 435.3 Year-end balance 40. 4 38. 1 35. 5 33. 1 42. 4 56.0 68. 1 76. 9 78.9 100. 6 Start-of-year. balance (as percent of outlays) 23.0 20.7 17.7 15.0 12.7 .14.9 17.9 19.9 20.4 19. i

'Income to the trust funds is budget authority. t includes pyrolI tax receipts, interest on bat- Note: Minus sign denotes a deficit. Snces and certain general fund transfers. Source: C8O. Based on CBO' eonomic assumptions. Includes the effects of the Omnibus Recon- ciliation bill of 1981.

TABLE 2.—CURRENT LAW ANO SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE PROPOSEO PAYROLL TAX RATE ALII1EMEIT, EMPLOYERS AND EMPLOYEES EACH

un percenti

OASI 01 H Tta

Year Present 'aw Proposal Present law Proposal Present law Propos3l Present aw Proposal

1982 4.575 5.185 0.825 0.715 1.330 0.800 6.700 6.700 1983 4575 5.035 .825 .665 1.300 1.000 6.700 6.700 1984 4.575 4.855 .825 595 1.300 1.250 6.700 6.700 7. 050 1985 4.750 . 5. 005 . 950 . 595 1. 350 1. 450 7. 050 198649 4.750 5.100 .950 .6 1.450 1.450 7.150 7.150 1990—2004 5.100 5.150 1.100 .750 1.450 1.750 7.650 7.650 2005 end thereafter .5. 100 5. 450 1. 100 .750 1. 450 1. 450 7.650 7.650 October 14, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 11365

TABLE 3.—PROJECTIONS OFSOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUND OUTLAYS, INCOMES1 AND BALANCES, UNDER TH COMMITTEE TAX REALLOCATION PROPOSALS, BY CALENDAR YEAR

tin billions of dollarsj

1981 1882 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990

Old age and survivors insurance: . Outlays 126.9 141.0 155.4 170.0 185.0 201.0 218.7 237.8 259.4 281.5 income' 123.1 146.8 159.1 169.7 190.9 212.7 231.7 251.3 271.9 296.3 Year-end balance 19.1 24.8 28.6 28.3 34.2 45.9 58.9 72.4 84.9 99.7 Start-of-year balance (as percent of outlays) ._ 18.0 13.5 16.0 16.8 15.3 17.0 21.0 24.8 27.9 30.2

Dsabilitv insurance: . Outlays 18.1 19.8 20.6 21.8 23.3 25.3 27.2 29.1 31.4 33.9 income' 17.0 20.3 21. I 21.0 22.7 24.9 27.0 29.2 31.5 42.3 Year-end balance 2.5 3.1 3.6 2.7 2.2 1.8 1.7 1.8 1.9 10.3 Start-of-year balance (as percent of outlays) . 20.0 12.6 14.8 16.4 11.7 8.6 6.7 5.8 5.8 5.7

Hospital Insuranco . Outlayi 30.1 34.4 39.6 45.4 51.8 58.9 67.0 16.1 6. 4 98. I Income' 35.2 25.6 32.4 43.8 55.7 61.3 66.6 71.8 76.1 980 Year-end balance 18.9 10. I 2.9 1.4 5.3 1.7 7.3 3.1 —6.6 —6.8 Start-of-year balance (as percent of outlays) 45.7 54.9 25.5 6.5 2.6 9.0 11.5 9.6 3.5 —6.8 Combined OASI, Dl, and HI: Outlays —_ 175.1 195.1 215.6 237.2 260.1 285.2 312.8 343.0 377.2 413.5 Income' 175.3 192.7 212.7 234.5 269.3 299.0 325.3 352.4 380.1 436.5 Year-end balance 40.4 38.0 35.1 32.4 41.6 55.4 67.9 77.3 80.2 103.2 Start-of-year balance (as percent of outlays) 23.0 20.7 17.6 14.8 12.5 14.6 17.7 19.8 20.5 19. 4

Ilncome to the trust funds is budget authority. it includes payroll tax receipts, interest on Source: CBO. Based on CBO's economk assumptions. Includes the effects of the omnibus balances, and certain general fund transfers, reconciliation bill of 1981 and tax reallocation proposal Does not include other revenue or outlay decisions in Finance Committee plan. Note: Minus sign denotes a deficit. MEMOflANDiM, OcroBEa 13, 1981 fects on OASDI income and outgo resulfingbined income and asaet8 of the OASI and Dl From: Harry C. Ballantyne, Acting Chieffrom each proposal are shown in Table 2, onTrust Funds would be sufficient to pay ene- Actuary. the basis of the 1981 Trustees Report alter-fits when due until late 1989 or early 9iO. Subject: Cost Estimates for the Social Secu.native Il—B assumptions. Table 8 presentsThe HI Trust Pund could become depleted rity Proposals Approved by the Senatethe estimated short-range operations of theat about the same time. It Bhould be noted, Committee on Finance. OASI, DI, and H! Trust Funds under thehowever, that the margin of solvency (as The attached tables Contain our cost st1-program aa modified by the proposals, againexpressed by the trnst fund ratios) Is at a mates for the Social Security proposals ap-on the basis of the 1981 Trustees Report al-rather minimal level in the latter half of proved by the Senate Committee on Finance.ternative Il—B aasumptions. Table 4 containsthe 1980's. The point Is emphasized by the The proposals provide for partial restorationsimilar estimates on the basis of the 1981projections wider the "worst-case" assuwp- of the minimum benefit (which waB elimi."worst-case" assumptions. Tables 5—7 pre-tions shown in Table 4, which indicate that nated n P.L. 97—35) and an extension ofsent the long-range OASDI effects of theunder pessimistic (but not unreasonable) the DI family maximum formula to OASIproposals expressed as a percentage of tax-economic assumptions, the total income and bene1ciaries.The proposals also realloca4eable payroll; assets at the beginning of aassets of the OASI and DI Trust Funds would present law tax rates among the OASL DI,year as a percentage of outgo during thebe insufficient to pay OASDI benefit8 when and HI Trust Funds and provide for inter-year for the 75-year projection period are also due as early as 1984. Also, HI Trust Fund fund borrowing between the OASI and DIshown. The long-range estimates are basedassets would represent only 5 percent of funds. In addttion, Social Security coverageon the 1981 -Trustees Report alternative I1Bannual expenditures at the beginning of would be extended to the first six monthsassumptions. 1985. of sick pay. The trust fund operations tables do not The HI Trust Pund projections were pro. Table 1 compares OASI, DI, and HI taxreflect the effects of the interfund borrowingvided by the Office of Financial and Actuarial rates scheduled under present law with theproposal. However, Table 3 indicates that,Analyais, Health Care Financing AdminiB. proposed reallocated schedule. The net et-under alternative fl—B assumption8, the com-tration.

TABLE l.—REVISW REALLOCATION OF SOCIAL SECURITY TAX RATES, AS APPROVED BY THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE

un percenti

OASI DI OASDI HI Tot&

Present Present Present Present Present Calendar year law Proposal law Proposal law Proposal law Proposal law Proposal

EmpIoyes and employers, each: , 1982 4. 575 5. 185 0.825 0.715 5.40 5.90 1.30 0.80 6.70 . 10 1983 4.575 5.035 .825 .665 5.40 5.70 1.30 1.00 6.70 6.70 1984 4.575 4.855 .825 .595 5.40 5.45 1.30 1.25 6.70 6.70 1985 4.750 5.005 .950 .595 5.70 5.60 1.35 I. 45 7.05 7. US 1986—89 4.750 5.100 .950 .600 5.70 5.70 1.45 1.45 7.15 7.15 1990—2004 5.100 5.150 1.100 .750 6.20 5.90 1.45 1.75 7.65 7.65 2005 and later 5. 100 5.450 I. 100 • 750 6.20 6.20 1.45 I. 45 7.65 7.65 Selfempioyed: 1982 6.8125 7.5150 1.2375 1.0350 8.05 8.55 1.30 .80 9.35 9.35 1983 6.8125 7.3750 1.2375 .9750 8.05 8.35 I. 30 I. 9.35 9.35 1984 6.8125 7.2150 1.2375 .8850 8.05 8.10 1.30 1.25 9.35 9.35 1985 7. 1250 7.5500 1.4250 .9000 8.55 8.45 I. 35 1.45 9.90 9.90 1986-89 7.1250 7.6500 1.4250 .9000 8.55 8.55 1.45 1.45 10.00 10.00 1990—2004 7.6500 7.8550 1.6500 1. 1450 9.30 9.00 1.45 1.75 10.75 10. 75 2005 and later 7.6500 8.1750 1.6500 1.1250 9.30 9.30 1.45 1.45 10.75 10. 75

Source: SocIal Security Administration,Office of the Actuary, Oct. l 1981. S 11366 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE October 14,1981

TABLE 2.—ESTIMATED REDUCTiON IN OASDI BENEFIT PAYMENTS AND NET ADDITIONAL OASDI TAX INCOME UNDER PROPOSALS APPROVED BY THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE

. MedIum and long-range effects Calendar year effects (billions) (as percent of pyroIl)

. Medium Long Proposal and sectIon of bill 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1982—86 range range

Estimated reduction in OASDI benefit payments

Beneflt changes: I 1.RestoraUon of minimum benefit to present beneficiaries with certain limitations (sec. 4) —$0.8 $1. 1 —81. 1 —;i. 1 —$1. 1 —$5.3 —-0,03 —0.01 2. ExtensIon of disability insurance maximum family benefit to old-age and survivors insurance beneficiaries (sec. 6) .1 .5 .6 .8 1.0 3.0 .01 .10

Total of benefit changes' —.1 —.6 —.5 —.3 —.1 / —23 .04 .09 Estimated net additional OA5DI tax income

Tax and coverage changes: 3. Interfund borrowing and reallocatIon of social security taxes (sec.2and3)2 $13.3 $9.8 $2.2 —$3.6 —$0.2 $21.5 —0.30 —0.10 4. Extension of coverage to 1st 6 mo of sick pay (sec. 5) .4 .4 .4 .5 .5 2. 1 .02 .02

Total of tax and coverage changes 13.1 10.2 2.6 —3 I . 3 23.1 —.28 —.08

Net total effect I 13.0 9.6 1.1 —3.4 .2 21.4 —-.25 .01

'Estimates for Individual proposals do not include interaction. Total estimated effect ncludes Source: Office of the Actuary, Oct. 9,1981.

interaction among proposals. . - 2Figuresrepresent additional OASDI tax Income resulting from reallocation of tax rates between the OASI, Dl, and HI trust funds. Tile HI trust fund would expedence the opposite effect

TABLE 3.—ESTIMATED OPERATIONS OF THE OASl, Dl, AND HI TRUST FUNDS UNDER PRESENT LAW AND UNDER THE SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE PROPOSALS, ON THE BASIS OF THE 1981 TRUSTEES REPORT AJ.TERNATIVE Il—B ASSUMPTIONS, CALENDAR YEARS 1980—90—Continued

(Dollar amountsin billionsi

Income • Outgo HI Total Calendar year QASI DI OASDI HI Total OASI DI OASDI

$25. 6 $149. I 1980 1O5. 8 $13.9 $119.1 $26. I $145. 8 $101.1 $15.9 $123.5 29.5 114.5 1981 123.3 11.0 140.2 35.3 175.5 127.0 18.0 145.0 33.1 195. 8 1982 150. 3 20. 8 111. 1 26. 3 197. 4 142. 8 19. 3 162. 1 39. 2 219.9 1983 164. 1 22 0 186. 1 33.1 220. 4 160. 1 20.6 180.1 45.4 246.1 1984 175.1 21.9 191.6 45.6 243.2- 179.0 22.3 201.3 52.1 275. 8 1985 198. 1 23.9 222. 0 58.0 280. 1 199. 2 24. 0 223.2 245. 3 60. 6 305.9 1986 220. 0 26 2 246.2 63.9 - 310. 1 219. 5 25. 8 69. 3 336.9 1981 238 6 28.4 26?. 0 69. 3 336. 3 239.9 21. 8 261. 1 18. 5 368. 2 1988 256.6 30.6 281. 1 14. 3 361. 5 259.1 29.9 289. 1 398. 7 1989 214. 3 321 301. 1 19. 0 386.0 278.1 32. 1 310. 8 8. 0 98.9 430.5 1990 295.4 43.3 338.1 . 100.1 438.8 291.4 34.2 331.6

- Assets at beginning of year as a percentage of outgo Net increase in funds Funds at end of year during year

HI Tota' OASI DI OASDI HI Total OASI DI OASDI HI Total OASI DI OASDI

52 29 1980 —$1. 8 —$2.0 —$3, 8 $0. S —$3. 3 $22. 8 $3.6 $26. S $13, 1 $40. 2 23 35 25 47 1981 —3.1 —1.1 —4.7 5.8 1.0 19.1 2.6 21.1 19.5 41.2 18 20 18 2 58 21 1982 7.5 1.5 9.0 —1.4 1.6 26.6 4.1 30.7 12.1 42.8 13 13 13 11 31 19 1983 4.6 1.4 5.9 —5.5 .5 31.2 5.5 36.6 6.7 43.3 17 20 25 18 15 18 1984 —3.3 —.4 —3.7 .1 —3.6 21.8 5.1 32.9 6.8 39.7 11 -21 15 13 14 1985 —1.0 —.1 —1.1 5.4 4.2 26.8 5.0 31.8 12.2 44.0 14 13 20 14 1986 .5 . 4 .9 3. 3 4. 1 2?. 3 5. 4 32.1 1. 4 48. 1 12 19 22 14 1987 —1. 3 . 6 —.1 (I) —.1 26.0 6.0 31.9 15. 5 47.4 11 19 12 11 20 13 1988 —3.2 .6 —2.5 —4.2 —6.7 . 22.8 6.6 29.4 11.3 40.1 10 20 10 1989 —4.4 .1 —3.7 —9.0 —12.1 18 4 1.3 2.5.7 2.3 28.0 8 21 9 13 21 8 2 7 1990 —2. 1 9. 1 7. 1 -1.3 8. 3 16. 3 16. 4 32. 8 3.6 36. 3 6

IBetween0 and $S0.000,000. early 1990 under alternative Il—B. The HI Trust Fund cou'd become depleted at about the same time. Note: The above figures do not reflect the effect of borrowing between the OASI and DI Trust Funds, as provided for th the Senete Finance Committee proposals. The combined income and Source: Social Security Administration, Office of the Actuary, Oct. 9, 1981. assets of the OASI and Dl funds would be insufficient to pay benelits when due in late 1989 or

TABLE 4.—ESTIMATED OPERATIONS OF THE OASI, Dl, AND HI TRUST FUNDS UNDER PRESENT LAW AND UNDER THE SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE PROPOSALS,ON THE BASIS OF THE 1981 TRUSTEES REPORT "WORST-CASE" ASSUMPTIONS, CALENDAR YEARS 1980—86

(Dollar amounts in bilflons

Outgo . Income HI Total Calendar year OASI Dl OASDI HI Total OASI DI OASDI

$25.6 $149.1 1980 $105.8 $13.9 119. 1 $26.1 $145.8 $10?. 1 $15.9 $123.5 29.5 174.5 122.8 11.0 139.8 35.3 175.0 127.0 18.0 145.0 1981 165.6 34. 1 199. 8 1982 150. 3 20. 8 171.2 26. 2 197.4 145. 9 19. 1 190.6 40.2 230. 1 1983 161. 8 21.6 183. 4 33.0 216. 4 168.9 21.1 217. 4 41. 5 264.9 1984 116.2 22.0 198.2 45. 8 244. 0 193. 5 23.9 246. 4 55.1 302. 1 1985 203.2 24.5 221.1 60. 1 287. 8 220. 1 26.2 215. 8 64.9 340. 7 1986 230.9 21. 5 258. 5 67. 8 326. 3 247. 3 28.6 October 14, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE 3111367

TABLE 4.—ESTIMATED OPERATIONS OF THE OASI, Di, AND HI TRUST FUNDS UNDER. PRESENT LAW AND UNDER THE SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE PROPOSALS, ON THE BASIS OF ThE 1981 TRUSTEES REPORT ALTER NATIVE Il—B ASSUMPTIONS. CALENDAR YEARS 1980—90—-Continued

10011cr amounts in blilionsi Assets at beginning of year aa percenteg. of Net Increase in funds Funds at end of year — outgo during year

Calendar year OASI Dl OASOI Hi Total OASI DI OASDI HI Total OASI DI OASDI HI Total

1980 —$1.8 —$2.0 —$3.8 $0.5 —$3.3 $22.8 $3.6 $26.5 $13.7 $40.2 23 35. 25 62 29 1981 —4.2 —1.0 —5.2 5.7 .5 18.6 2.6 21.2 19.5 40.7 18 20 18 47 23 1982 4.4 1.1 5.5 —7.9 —2.3 23.0 3.7 26.7 11.6 38.3 13 13 13 57 20

1983 . —7.1 —.1 —7.2 —7.1 —14.3 16.0 3.6 19.6 4.5 24.0 14 17 14 23 *7

1984 —17.3 —1.9 —19.2 —1.7 —20.8 —1.3 1.7 .4 2.8 3.2 8 15 . 9 3 1985 —16.9 —1.7 —18.6 4.3 —14.3 —18.3 (1) —18.2 7.2 —11.1 —1 7 () 5 1986 —16.3 —1.0 —17.3 3.0 —14.4 —34.6 —1.0 —35.5 10.1 —25.4 7 (a) 7 11 —

I Between $0 and $50,000,000. assets of the OASI and DI funds would be Insufficient to pay benefits when due in 1984 under the Between 0 and 0.5 percent. "wOrstCase" assumptions. The HI Trust Fund could become depleted at about the same tImL Note: The above figures do not reflect the effect of borrowing between the OASI end DI Trust Source: Social Security Administration, Office of the Actuary, Oct. 9, 1981. Funds, as provided for in the Senate Finance Committee proposals. The combined Income and

TABLE 5.—COMPARISON OF CURRENT COST,' TAX RATES, AND TRUST FUND RATIOS FOR THE OASOI TRUST FUND, ASSJJMING ENACTMENT OF THE SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE

PROPOSALS . ..

Scheduled Trust fund Scheduled Trust fund Current cost tax rate2 Difference ratio I Current cost tax rate' Differenc, ratio'

Calendar year: 2009 10.94 *1.80 .86

1981...... — . 11.29 10.70 —0.59 18 2002...... 10.91 . 11.80 .29 1982 11.29 11.80 .51 13 2003 ._ 10.88 11.80 .92 1983 11.23 11.40 .17 17 2004 — 10.87 11.80 .93 74 1984 _ 11.26 10.90 —.36 18 2005 .. 10.89 12.40 1.51 1l 1985 11.34 11.20 —.14 15 2010...... — 11.39 12.40 1.01 . $34

1986 __ 11.43 .. 11.40 —.03 13 2015...... _. 12.62 12.40 —.22 . $43 11.40 —.10 12 2020 .. 14.16 12.40 —1.76 1988 11.56 11.40 —.16 11 2025... . 15.62 12.40 —3.22 1989 11.58 11.40 —.18 9 2030 16.47 12.40 .—4.07 11.56 11.80 .24 8 2035_.__.. 16.70 12.40 —4.33 1991. ._ 11.54 11.80 .26 9 12.40 —4.11. 4 . 4 1992 ...... 11.51 11.80 .29 11 2045...... _.. 16.37 12.40 —3.97 . 1993 11.47 11.80 .33 14 2050 — 16.42 12.40 —4.02. .. .. 4 1994....._...... _ 11.43 11.80 .37 17 2055..... 16.50 12.40 .4.10 1995.... 11.44 11.80 .36 19 25-yr averages: 1996 11.35 lrI.80 .45 22 1981-2005... 11.27 13.64 .37 1997 _. 11.25 11.80 .55 26 2006-2030.._ 13.61 12.40 —1.21 _4. 1998...... 11.15 11.80 .65 31 2031—2055 16.49 12.40 —4.09 _—.._...... , 1999 __ 11.04 11.80 .76 37 75-yr average: 1981—2055 _ 13.79 12.15 —1.64 2000.._...... _? 10.96 11.80 .84 43

'Based on alternative il—B of the 1981 trustees report, Including effects of Public Law 97—35. - 'The fund Is projected to be exhausted end not to recover before Ni, and of the ,ø1oø::

'Combined emploer-employea tanrates. period, . - - ... . a The trust fund ratio is determined to be the trust fund assets at the beginning of the year

Source: Office of the Actuary, Oct. 8, 1981. . expressed as a percentage of the expenditures during the year. .

TABLE 6.—COMPARISON OF CURRENT COST,' TAX RATES, AND TRUST FUND RATIOS FOR THE OASI TRUST FUND, ASSUMING ENACTMENT OF THE SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE PROPO3AI3

Current Scheduled Trust fund Current Scheduled TaIaJfUn cost tax rate Difference ratios coat tea rate' Difference

Calendar year: 2001...... _... 9.61. 10.30 •59 ., ,,. 1981 _.. 9.89 9.40 —0.49 15 2002 — — . 9.55 . . 10.30 .75 - 1982 9.95 10.37 .42 13 2003 9.50 10.30 .60

1983 9.95 10.07 .12 . 17.. 2004 9.46 10.30 .84 1984_ 10.01 9.71 -.30 :.. 17 2005 — . 9.45 1090 345 1985 10.12 10.01 —.11 14 2010 — 9.92 10.90 1.03 , I

1986 10.23 10.20 —.03 12 2015..._ 10.96 10.90 -.06 . .334 1987 10.30 10.20 . —.10 11 2020_ — 12.47 .10.90 ,—1.57 -, 1988 __ 10.36 . 10.20 —.16 10 2025...... 13.97 . 10.90 —3.07 . 1989 . 10.39 10.20 —.19 8 2030 14.90 10.90 .. ...490 - . 4 1990 10.37 10.30 —.07 . 5 2035 15.17 10.90 —4.27 1991...... 10.35 10.30 —.05 5 2040 14.95 10.90 —4.05 4 1992 10.32 10.30 —.02 5 2045 14.78 10.90 —3.8*

. . 1993 . 10.28 . 10.30 .02 4 2050._.... 14.83 10.90 —3.93 1994 — 10.24 10.30 .06 4 2055 __ 14.94 10.90

1995 10.24 . 10.30 .06 5 25-yr averages: 1996 10.13 10.30 .17 5 1981—2005 10.80 10.23 .23 1997 10.01 10.30 .29 2006-2030 11.99 10.90 -1.09 1998 9.88 10.30 .42 2031—2055 14.93 10.90 —4.03 ___.,._. 1999 9.76 10.30 .54 13 75-yr average: 1981—2055 12.31 10.68 —1.63 __..,_.....(- 2000 9.66 10.30 .64 18

I Based on alternative li—B of the 1981 trustees report, Including effects of Public Law 97—35. 'The fund is projected to be exhausted and not to recover before the sad of *.sprojsctlc, pi Combined employer.employee tax rates. I The trust fund ratio is determined to be the trust fund assets at the beginning of the year Source: Office of the Actuary, Oct. 8, 1981 expressed as a percentage of the expenditures during the year. S 11368 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE October 14, 1981

TABLE 7.—COMPARISON OF CURRENT COST,I TAX RATES, AND TRUST FUND RATiOS FOR ThE DI TRUST FUND, ASSUMING ENACTMENT OF THE SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE PROPOSALS

Current Scheduled Trust fund Current Scheduled Trust fund cost tax rate2 Difference ratio5 cost tax rates Difference ratio

Calendar year: 2000 1.30 1.50 .20 228 1981 1.40 ' 1.30 —0.10 20 2001 1.33 1.50 .17 237 982 1.34 1.43 .08 13 2002 1.35 1.50 .15 245 1983 1.28 1.30 .05 20 2003 1.38 1.50 .12 250 1984 1.24 1.19 —.05 25 2004 1.41 1.50 .09 252 1985 1.22 1.19 —.03 21 2005 1.44 1.50 .06 253 1986 1.20 1.20 —.00 19 2010 1.57 1.50 —.07 236 198? 1.19 1.20 .01 19 2015 1.66 1.50 —.16 195 198 1.19 1.20 .01 20 2020 1.69 1.50 —.19 145. 1989 1.19 1.20 .01 21 2025 1.64 1.50 —.14 too 1990 1.19 1.50 .31 21 2030 1.56 1.50 -.06 72 99I H9 1.50 .31 45 2035 1.54 1.50 —.04 56 992 1.19 1.50 .31 71 2040 1.56 1.50 —.06 41 1993 1.19 1.50 .31 96 2045 1.59 1.50 —.09 17 1994 1.19 1.50 .31 122 2050 1.59 1.50 —.09 (4 1995 1.20 1.50 .30 146 2055 1.56 1.50 —.06 (4 1996 1.22 1.50 .28 166 25—yraverages: 199? 1.24 1.50 .26 185 1981-2005 1.27 1.41 .14 1998 1.26 1.50 .24 201 2006-2030 1.62 1.50 —.12 1999 1.28 1.50 .22 215 2031—2055 1.57 1.50 —.07 75.yr average: 1981—2055: 1.48 1.47 —.01

Based on alternative Il—B of the 1981 trustees report, including effects of Public Law 97—35. 4 The fund is projected to. be exhausted and not to recover before the end of the projection Combined employer-employee tax rates. perIod. The trust fund rato is determined to be the trust fuuid assets at the beginning of the year expressed as a percentage of the expenditures during the year. Source: Office of the Actuary, Oct. 8, 1981. From the Department of Health and Human Considering the situation after the enact-ing. And if Congress Is going to recon- Services, Sept. 30, 19811 ment of the Reconciliation Act, the datesider the long-range prospects of this GErERAL MEMOEArThtJM when insufflclent assets would be on handsystem, which it is going to do,it Is time to meet benefit commitments would be ap- From: Robcrt J• Myers, Deputy Commissionerproximately in the middle of 1984 (after thefr us to know that it is now a dual sys- for Programs. June 1984 benefit increases become' effec-tem, not just a single one, and the one Date Subject: When Combined Trust 'undstive). Thus, the effect of the Reconciliationaffects the other. ' - Will be Exhausted Under Worst-CaseAct was to extend the critical date by almost Itwould have been the. case, for ex- Assumptions—Previous Law, Presentone year. (Note that a fund ratio of 9 per-ample, that had the reductions originally Law, and Finance Committee Propozacent at the beginning of the year is gen-proposed by the administration gone into (revision of memorandum of Septembererally sufficIent 80 that benet obligationseffect, you would have renegotiated la- 28). can be met for the rst half of the year.)bor contracts in this country just by vir- Thisrnernrandumwill present informa- Under the Senate Finance Committee tion as to when the combined OASI, DI, anproposal, which has interfund borrowingtue of the changes. This shows the degree H Trust Funds would be exhausted underpossible only between the OASI and DIto which labor agreements, especially worst-case economic assumptions. Consider-Trust Funds (whose combined fund-ratiosthose on pension provisions, are built on ing the combined three trust funds is tanta-are 14 percent at the beginning of 1983 andcertain assumptions on social security, mount to what the situation would be with9 percent at the beginning of 1984), thewhich is why those assumptions cannot intemfund borrowing being permitted (notecritical date would be some time in thebe changed in 4 months or 9 monthS or a that the Finance Committee proposal pro- middle of 1984. 10-month time period. thies only for borrowing between the OASI A general point—and then I wish to arid DI Funds). Mr. MOYNIHAN. Will the Senatortake advantage of this opportunity to The following table shows the trust fundyield? hear the chairman of my subcommit- ratIo for the law as it was before the Ornni Mr. DOLE. Yes. tee—is that no one questions the diffi- bus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 as con- Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I see tained in the 1981 Trustees Report, for theour distinguished chairman of jhe sub-culties which face this system over the situation now after the ReconcIliation Actcommittee is in the Chamber. I wish tonext half century. Nobody does. To do was enacted, and for what the situationhear him and not delay him. that is to deny a self-evident reality. We would be if the current proposal of the Sen- do not want partisan considerations to ate Finance Committee were adopted: I would like to express my appreciationcome forward in the debate, or at least I,. to the chairman for calling attention todo not. tinpercent the Gwirtzman Commission and also May I just say to my chairman, the perhaps, particularly because it is verydistinguished chairman of the commit- After much a part of our subject but not seentee, that the moGt optimistic statement After Senate as such, the work of the President's Com- 1981 Recon- Finance about the condition of these funds In the trustees ciliation Commfttoe mission on Retirement Policy, whichnext 5 years, the statement .that' says report Act proposal was a body headed by C. Peter McCul-•there Is no need to do anything about lough. It came forward with some majorthem, has come from the administration. Ca!endar year: findings and proposals that have not, In I sk unanthious consent that there l9I 23 23 23 fact, been worked Into our consideration. t982 20 21 20 be printed in the REcORD at this point, if l83 15 17 17 I think it could be said as a reasonablethe chathnan will indulge me, table 7 of 1984 5 9 9 985 (I) I I proposition that you cannot any longerthe "staff data materials related to social 19s () (I) (I) seriously discuss social security as ifsecurity finance," prepared by the staff there were no other retirement systemsof the committee, which shows that as- Funds completely exhausted. in place in the country. When social secu-sets at the beginning of the year as a Under the 1v as it was before the Re-rity began, that was by and large so. Itpercentage of outgo during the year, ac- cunciliation Act, the combined trust fundsIs not any longer so. Most workers todaycording tothe administration's mid- would have been unable to meet benefithave a supplemental pension arrange-term review assumptions, range from 29 commitments in a tImely manner some timement designed. to build on top of socialpercent in 1980, dipping down to 22 and shortly after the middle o 183. or slightlysceurity, such as anything we do to therising up, by 1986, to 31 percent.' less than une year after the OASI Trust Fundone system affects the other. Mr. Mc- There being no objection, the table was would be at a level inadequate to pay bene.Cullough very eloquently and persua-ordered to be printed in the REcoRD,as fit.c wheii due (in the fall oX 1982). sively, in his study, showed that Interlink-follows: October P14,1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 11369

TABLE 7.—ESTIMATED OPERATIONS 01 THE OASI, RAND HI TRUST FUNDSAS MODIFIED BY THE OMNIBUS BUDGET RECONCILIATION ACT OF 1981," MID.SESSION REVIEW ASUMPTONS 1980-86 IDoilar aourts In Iiflons

Income Outgo

Calendar year OASI DI OASDI HI Total OASi DI OASDI 141 Total

1980 $105.8 l3.9 $119.7 ?6.1 $145.8 $107.7 I5.9 $123.5 25.6 i49 1981 123.6 17.0 140.7 35.4 116.1 126.7 18.0 144.7 29.5 I?4 3 1982 133. 2 24. 0 157. 2 40.4 197.6 140.6 19.0 159. 7 33 6 393 2 1983 146.8 27.6 174.4 45.3 219.7 154.3 19.9 174.2 38:6 fl2 8 1984 161. 1 31.0 192. 1 50.2 242.3 i68. 0 20. 9 188. 9 44. 3 233 2 1985 182. 3 39. 3 221. 5 56.8 278. 3 182. 4 22. I 204. 4 M. 7 25 I 1986 199. 2 44. 1 243. 3 65.9 309.2 196.6 23, 3 219.9 57. 1 277. 7

. Assets at cginnng of year as a pic tgol ouo Net increase in funds runds at end of year duiin year

OASI DI OASDI HI Total OASI DI OASDI HI Total OASI DI OASDI Ffl lotal

1980 —$1.8 —$2.0 —3. 8 0. 5 —$3. 3 $22.8 3. 6 26. 5 $13. 7 40. 2 23 35 25 52 29 1981 —3.1 —.1.0 —4.0 5.8 1.8 19.7 2.7 22.4 19.6 42.0 18 20 18 47 23 1982 —7.4 4.9 —2.5 6.9 4.4 12.3 7.6 19.9 26.5 46.4 14 14 14 8 22 1983 —7.5 7.7 .2 6. 7 6.9 4.8 15. 3 20. 1 33. 2 53. 3 8 38 11 £9 22 1984 —7.0 10.1 3.2 5.9 9.1 —2.1 25.4 23.3 39.1 62.4 3 73 11 15 23 1985 —.1 17.2 17.1 6.1 23.2 —2.2 42.6 40.4 45.2 85.6 —l 115 II 77 24 1986 2.6 20.7 23.3 8.2 31.5 .4 63.4 63.7 53.4 U7. 1 — 183 18 78 31

Note: Estimates for 1983 and later are theoretical since the OASI Trust Fund wouW become Souice: Office of the Actuary, SSA, Aug. 14, 1981. depleted early in 1983 when auets become Insufficient to pay benefits when due. Mr. MOYNIHAN. If thatwas theIn-already, and I do not doubt we will havetoo, spoke at great length. In fact, he come statement rather than a projec-to do more, with more to be done. We aretook the whole day to give his instruc- tion, you would know the funds to be inready to cooperate, but we also ask fortions to the jury. Interesting'y, after quite ample condition. The 12 or 13 per-cooperation. I might say in this Chamberthe trial had gone or! for several weeks, cent is a scary point, but only at 9 per-we are receiving that cooperation. and all of these gory details had been cent or below do you run out of money. Mr. President, the distinguished chair.brought out in open court, with the judge You cannot pay your bills. But 22. 30, 31,man of our subcommittee is on the floor.taking a full day to give his instructions that is an easy margin. A well-run busi-I hope he will be speaking. I see that heto the jurists, the jury retired, met ness would never want to have any moreis preparing to do so and I happily yieldbriefly, 2nd about 15 minutes 'ater came cash on hand than that, although obvi-to him. back and addressed the court. ously social security is not a business. As Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. President, I The judge said, °Can it be that you a point of fact a business would neverthank the Senator from New York forhave already reached a conchsion?" want to have cash on hand, not beinghis observations and for his contribu- The foreman of the jury reilled, usedforanyotherpurposesthantion to the issue which we are bringingYour Honor, we have. We have decided handling accounts, of much more thanto the attention of the Senate today. we don't want to get mixed up n this 5, 6, 7, or 8 percent of its expected outgo I would say to the Senate, and partic-horrible mess." while maintaining a line of credit at aularly those who have followed closely That, in brief, is the general reaction bank which could immediately take upthe progress of the social security debate,to the social security probern., any shortfall that might happen. That isthat I am reminded of a story Involv- The New York Times a day or two just a principle of business management.ing a small community in which therepub]ished an editorial which expresses I simply mean to say that there is nohad been a horrible crime committed.perhaps with greater precision, the geri- partisan -debate about the existence ofIt was a murder. In due course a per-eral sentiment which I have jist de- problems in this system. It is not that ofson was apprehended and a trial ensued.scribed. I ask unanimous consent, Mr. one party denying or the other party as-The prosecutor involved realized thatPresIdent, that the New York Tnies serting, although it was not a member ofthis was probably going to be the mosteditorial of October 13, 1)81, be pruited this party who saId that In NovemberImportant case of his entire career, soin the RECoRD, because it sums up well 1982 there would be the greatest bank-he spoke at some length during the pres-the real dilemma that we face In trjing ruptcy In history. It was not necessary toentation of his case, for several weeks,to seriously and thoughtfully address say that but, once said, it is not going toand brought out every detail of the case,the issue of social security reform. happen. all of the background, going on and on There being no objection, the editoilal Having agreed there is no party differ-and on. was ordered to be printed In the RECORD, encein our perception, we are nonethe- The person who was charged withas follows: - less separated, one group saying every-marshaling the defence of the case was HIDINGFROM SoctL SECtYRITY thing Is awful and the other group say-not to be outdone and he talked for some Adroit politicians don't ignore Issues to hot to handle. They appoint comrn1sions to ing everything s fine. If you want to findweeks also. - the most optimistic statement made, it is During study them. And &:er an Initial burn or by the administration in their midterm the course of this, the wholetwo, that Is just what President Reagai has assumptions. town sort of came to a stop as they werechosen to do with Soc1aJ Security. In th!s transfixed by recounting day after daycase, through, adrt pofltics doesn't make So be it. We are not trying to faultthe awful details of this heinous crilnefor good public polity. The longer Wahng. anybody's forecast, but we would like towhich had been committed intheirton puts off a rency for Social Security's point out that opthnlsm Is scarcely a financial woesr the a1er it will be to find midst. Finally, the judge got caught upone. monopoly on this side of the aisle In thisin the excitement and the generalsus- matter. As a matter of fact, we have donepense of the event and there came time Sbclal Security's obUgt1on to beneficiaries, some very difficult, U n2cessary, things current and future, far exceeds its resources. to give his instructions to the jury. He,That Is because Social securIty does not col. S 11370 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE October 14, 1981 lectenough payroll tax to pay for the bene• But themost Important conclusion ofthat Is now unable to meet Its obliga- fits Congress has voted for each generation ofallreachedby the New YorkTimesontions. retirees. The Oovernmant has beenmuddlingthis issue Is this succinct observation: But even with interfund borrowing, through. Imposing a gradually Increasing Any change In social security requires bi-Mr. President, the most optimistic as- payroll tax on a growing labor force. partisan support. There Is no way to stripsumption Is that all three trust funds But now the days of the cheap lunch arepolitics from a program that so affects 40will be bankrupt at the end of this dec- over. The combined employer-employee taxmillion voters. Both the House Ways andade. Therefore, Interfund borrowing is has reached 18.8 percent of the wages of mostMeans and the Senate P'inance Committees workers and Ii scheduled to rise to 15.8 per-deserve high marks for aiming at a bipartisannot a solution but merely a postpone-. cent by 1990. It Is unlikely, In the era ofstrategy.PresidentReaganandHousement of the Inevitable reality. ProposItion 18 and Ronald Reagan, that Con-Speaker O'Nrn.s., jostling for political ad- Mr. President, I should like to call to gress will raise the tax yet higher. vantage, effectively sabotage their efforts. the attention of the Senators a few of So virtually all the plans proposed to solve the broad Issues which I perceive as Social Security's long-term financial prob- Mr. President, It Is not my purpose, tothose with which we must wrestle if we lems depend on reducing benefits. The futurepoint fingers at any person, least of all retirement age for maximum benefits could are going to be serious about a long. be gradually raised. Beneflt Increases couldthe President of the United States andterm solution to the problem. be tled'to the growth of wage rates ratherthe Speaker of the House, but I do think First of all, social security Is losing than, as now, to the cost of living. Or ben.-It worth noting In passing the adminis-and will continue to lose something like fits could be taxed like other Income, withtration made a serious tactical error in$12,000 a minute, every day, around the the proceeds earmarked for Social Security.the presentation of their Initial socialclock, 865 days a year President Reagan proposed his variationssecurity reform measures, at least in the Second, social security will continue on t)le benefit reduction theme—some sensi-timing, because in submitting the legis- ble. some not—as part of hIs 1982 budget. to accumulate annual deficits, as it has Congress. acutely aware of the voting powerlatlon at the time that they did, at thein each of the past 6 years. of old folks, Ignored them. Now Mr. Reaganvery moment when a huge battle had Third, the cash reserves of the social proposes to hand the problem to a commis-been fought in the House, successfully, bysecurity system, which are keeping the sion. But there's no reason to think a newthe administration over the issue of thesystem afloat despite the deficits, will group, even if one Is convened, will anybudget reconciliation measure, they In-continue to be depleted and are going more weave silken Solutions from polyestervited the Speaker and others to pouncedown at an alarming rate. Just 9 years thread than others appointed In recent yearson this proposal as at least somethingago, I say to my colleagues, there was to study Social Security. that was an arguable proposition. A stopgap plan to borrow retirement money $100 in reserves for every dollar of bene- from the fund earmarked for hospital bene- In effect, they Invited a partisan re-fit paid. Today, there are just $18 for fits would make It uosslble to keep the sys-sponse 'to a matter which really shouldevery benefit dollar, and next year, the tem solvent for a while longer. But that wall,not have been partisan and which I thinkratio Is expected to drop to $13 to $1. too, will run dry, perhaps—depending on thethe administration never intended to be Finally, and this Is the statistic which economy—as soon as1988, and Congresstaken in that light. Is quoted so often, and properly so, over would then be forced to tackle the issue In any case, through the spring andthe next 75 years, social security will summer, and now through the fall, we At least tb lessons can be salvaged from owe $1.6 trillion in benefits more than this political and economic debacle: have been treated to the spectacle of thisIt will be able to pay. Any change In Social Security requires bi-issue of social security reform being These are not the nightmares of some partisan support. There Is no way to striplobbed back and forth between the twowild-eyedalarmists,Mr.President. politics from a program that so affects 40parties like some kind of political handThese are the facts from legally required million voters. Both the House Ways andgrenade. I regret that very much. reports submitted to the Congress of the Means and the Senate Finance committees The legislation which we are now de-United States by the Secretaries of the deserve high marks for aiming at a bipartisanbating and which we will undoubtedlyTreasury, Labor, and Health and Human strategy. President Reagan and House Speak-soon pass will delay but not prevent the er O'Neill, jostling for political advantage, ef- Services. fectively sabotaged their efforts. threatened bankruptcy of the social se- Under the circumstances, it Is no sur- Budget balancing should not be confusedcurity system. The bill restores the min-prise that the majority of the American with Social Security reform. If the Presidentimum social security benefit, a desir-people believe that the social -security had offered changes solely to guarantee theable piece of legislation. system will not have the funds to pay long-term solvency Of the system. he might But we will delude ourselves and, whatthem the benefits that they are expect- have carried Congress along the high road ofis worse, we will delude the people thating to receive at the time of retirement. reform. Instead he Is trying to exploit Socialwe are here to represent, If we hold out 'The Irony of all this Is that the situa- Security In his effort.to out the budget with- out limiting defense spending. the hope that this legislation will solvetion we face could have been avoided, It is Inconceivable that America would evereither the short- and long-term prob-should have been avoided, and, even at let politics destroy Its most important andlems of social security's financial sound-this late date, can be avoided. most successful social program. But itIsness. This bill Is a stopgap and nothing What Is needed now Is a bipartisan, hard, for the moment to see who will cham-more. bicameral willingness to face facts, and pion Its reform. In the wordeof the men in All it does Is delay the day of finalto focus on specific, practical, and rca- the White House: 'if not us-who? If notreckoning when Congress must square-sona'blesolutionstosocialsecurity's now—when?" ly face this simple fact: Social security,financial crisis, which were alluded to Mr. ABMSTRONO. I will not take butthe Nation's largest domestic program, a'in the New York Times editorial I men- a moment to read two brief excerptsfinancial lifeline for 36 mIllion Ameri-tioned earlier. from It. Mr. President, the cynics are saying— cans, Is going broke. and there are plenty of cynics around Let me call attention to the first para- The main provision of this bill, as hashere—that It will be Impossible for us to graph of the editorial which makes thebeen explained so well by previous speak-come to grips with a broad-gaged social main point. ers, Is interfund borrowing. At best, thissecurity reform bill. I suppose, if you Adroit politicians don't Ignore issues toocan be nothing more than a stopgap.,So-'are sitting up on Mount Olympus, look- hot to handle. They appoint commissions tocial security Is comprised of three sep- study them. And after an initial burn or ing down upon the Congress of the two, that Is just what President Reagan hasarate funds, retirement, disability, andUnited States, and you are placing a chosen to do with social security., In thishospitalization, bet as If you were handicapping a horse. case, though, adroit politics doesn't make Social security Is comprised of theerace or scmethlng, the way to bet Is that for good public policy. The longer Washing-separate funds--retlrement, disability,,the cynics' predictions will be justified. ton puts off a remedy for social security'sand hospitalization. Each of these funds The odds are that we shall not be able financial woes, the harder It will be 'to findIsseparately financed through socialto bring forth at an 'early date the kind one. security payroll taxes. Two of the fundsof permanent, long-range reform of the Among the conclusions which the edi-are in surplus. The other, the retire-social security system which Is so ólear- torial reaches, and one which I un-ment fund, Is badly in arrears. Inter-ly shown to be needed by the condition hesitatingly endorse, Is the following: fund borrowIng permits the trustees toof the trust funds. Budget balancIng should not be confusedborrow from one fund to anothe to But, I say to my colleagues, we are not

with social reform. , helpreduce the deficit In the one fundsitting upon Mount Olympus. We are October 14, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 11371 down here in the real world and I amwhere benefits are paid to widows and are financed on.a pay-as-you-go system. here to report toiay that not only Is Itwidowers, college and high school stu-In other words, beflta paid in 1940 were better than an Impossibility;I thinkdents, early retirees and others. financed through taxes paid in 1940, and there isa real likelihood thatwewill be In addition, basic retirement benefitsbenefits paid today result from taxes able to work out the kind of reform billhave been adjusted upward by no lesspaid today. that will close the $1.6 trillion gap Inthan 699 percent; $1 trillion In benefits But with fewer workers supporting an social security funding. has been paid out, and another trillionever larger number of recipients, no I stress that I cannot promise this,dollars In benefits will be paid in thewonder the system is flowing with red and it Is certainly, I guess, less than anext 5 years. Ink. The point is that for all practical 50—50 prospect. But the Issue Is so Im- We are now to the point where, in 1985and moral purposes, we are cornniitted to portant and the stakes are so high andalone, total pension and disability bene-a system that was created by those who the opportunity Is so fleeting that I wantfit payments will exceed $220 billion. had no conception of today's lifestyle. my colleagues toknowthat a number In short, Mr. President, Congress has Even though solutions to the social se- of us who are working on his problembeen promising benefits far beyond whatcurity financial crisis are limited by ac- have not given up on bringing out awe can reasonably expect to deliver. tions taken by previous Congresses, it social security reform bill even this The second reason for social security'swould be terribly irresponsible for us to year or, if we fall thIs year, early nextplight is that past Congresses have £ sImplypass the pending bill and then year. lied almost exclusi'ely on increasingwash our hands of the Issue and hope Mr. President, the atmosphere for do-payroll taxes to partially offset the coststhat the problem will go away. It will Ing so is quite difficult. We have anof the benefits it promised. Social secu-not go away. The problem cannot be Issue that affects, as I have said, somerity taxes have increased 2,011 percent.solved by ignoring it nor through poUt- 36 mIllion Americans and there is 1- There is little wonder, I think, thatical grandstanding. readya certain politicizing of the issuenone of us In Congress Is seriously pro- In my judgment, it can be solved only which is making the problem very dif-posing additional payroll tax increases.If we can put together a bipartisan, bi- ficult. I know of at least one case whereI know of no one who does advocatecameral Package which will be broadly candidates running against elected In-those Increases. Now that social securityacceptable not only in this Chamber and cumbents are taking out whole-page ad-taxes cost more than 13 percent of pay-In the House but also by the recipients vertIsements In which they declare theyroll and are scheduled to continue toand others who are most directly affect- are for social security and their oppo-rise—indeed, counting both the employer' ed. nent is against social security. and employee portions of the social secu- So the main question is, Are we willing A number of groups have banded to-rity tax, the average working man orto really become serious about social se- gether to form a coalition which, theywoman in Anerica today pays more, sub-curity? One of the Members of the House say,Isnecessary to save the socialstantlally more, in social security taxprivately made the observation that we security system, and their proposal tothan they pay in Federal income tax—will never get this job done at this time save it is to resist any of the changesraising taxes to pay for benefits is notbecause thecrisisisnot Imminent which are so manifestly necessary tothe answer. enough; that the only way we can legis- prevent it from ultimately going .broke. Third, I think we need to recognize,late around here, according to at least So, in the eyes of people like this, if youas a precondition to really solving thisthis one Member, is for the crisis to be- are for social security, you have to beproblem, that we have mismanaged income so serious that the checks rnare not against any changes in the system. the past. Honestly, we have used overlyready to go out. Maybe he is right: I hope Well, to be for social security andoptimistic assumptions about the futurehe is not. against the changes that are needed toof the economy, as we have calculated I know a lot of people who think that assure the soundness of it is to reallybenefits. We have rushed through bene-the task of really reforming the social say that you are for a social securityfit increases In the closing hours of Con-security system—that is, really insuring system that is going to run out of moneygress shortly before adjournment and,in the long run the financial soundness next year or the year after or the yearsome might note, shortly before elec-of social security—is for this Congress to after that. tions. We have done It over and overfocus and discipline itself.

For us to sit around the Senate split-again. . Irecall that Carlyle said that at the ting hairs as to when the last dollar will In 1972, Congress enacted a bill thatoutset, every noble task is seen to be be spent In the social security system,led to the double 'indexing of benefits,Impossible. I believe that saving the so- whether it is going to run out of moneyhuge windfalls to social security recip-cial security system, restoring it to fi- a year from now or 2 years from now orlentS, and which cost the social se-nancial soundness, assuring the recip- In 1084 seems to me to be the height ofcuritytrust fundsbillions andbil-lents and future generations of recipients irresponsibility. lions of dollars in overpayments. the kind of peace of mind that only a We ought to take the same kind of Finally, let me observe that there is anfully actuarially sound social security trustee attitude about this that we wouldInherent problem in the creation ofsystem can provide, is indeed a noble If we were on the board of a private pen-large-scale Federal programs which f u-task, and I trust that it will be one which' sion system—not to assure that we areture generations are obligated to finance,will not be impossible. The issue is, Do going to make it through the next 12That problem is that we cannot reallywe have the will to take on that job? months but to assure that, through thepredict the future. Those Senators and Mr. President, in conclusion, I should lifetime of all the people to whom weCongressmen who voted in 1940 to createlike to share with mi' colleagues the fact have made promises of assistance, it willthe social security system could not, andthat some of us have been meeting be- be sound. did not, predict the massive changes thathind closed doors to consider a number That Is the issue on which I am sure awould occur in the American workplace.of different options. As I have expressed number of my colleagues on both sides In 1940, there were few two-Incomeon other occasions, as I look at more than of the aisle and a number of our counter-married couples, the birth rate was sky-2 dozen—and now more than 3 dozen— parts in the House are seriously In-rocketing, and the Nation was still different options by which we could ad- terested. youth: There were 16 workers for every 1just the eligibility standards or benefits, social security recipient. I find many that I could support. The In order to approach a long-term so- issue is simply this: Out of all the pro- lution to the Social security system prob- It was in this political and demo-posals that have been made, what can, lem,, we need to start by asking ourselves,graphic environment that social securitywe pick and choose that will be broadly how did we get into the morass that wewas- created. That environment bearsacceptable and will close the $1.6 trillion now find ourselves In? How did we getvirtually no resemblance to the work-funding gap? - $1.6 trillionin debt? placetoday. Two-income couples com- It is just as simple as that. Except for First, Congress constantly providedprise more than 30 percent of the work couple of items I have already men- benefits beyond any reasonable abilityforce, birth rates are declining and there' ationed—general fund financing and the to pay for them. Since the program wasare less than three workers for everyprospect of raising the payroll tax—I created in 1940, Congress has adoptedsocial security recipient, am ready to negotiate on any other pro- more than 23 separate benefit expan- This is a key factor in today's socialposals on the table. sions of the program, to the point nowsecurity deficits. Social security benefits I will put In the Rscoaz, a list of no less •S 11372 CONGR1SSIONAL RECORD SENAT2 October 14 1981 than39 separate proposals which have Applyone .half of -ffi tax to OA$DK (addi-higher initial benefits over time and to re- tional income). placementrates—thepercentageof a been suggested by some ted vidual or Repeal the Retirement Test. worker's prior earnings that are replaced by group. In all, I emtoldthat this list of Phase in actuarially based delayed retire-his social security benefit—that remain at options, which was prepared by the otaffment credit. approximately the same level. of the Senate Finance Committee, adds Index earnings records of older workers Proposal:Effectivefor the years1982 up to about $ trillion in potential costcloser to actual retirement. through 1987, increase the doUse' amounts, to savings, over time, to the social security Phase out weighted benefit formula, andwhich each of the percentages apply (the system. We need pick off this shoppingphaseinaproportionalorfiatbenefitbend points in the benefit formula) by 50 list only trillion. amount. percent. rather than 100 percent, of average Phase out derivative benefits. wage increases. In 1988 and thereafter, the In talking to Members on both sides Revise administration of an investmentbenefit formula would be adjusted as under of the aisle in this body and In extensivestrategy for Social Security Trust Funds. current law to reflect the full change in consultation with Members of the other Increase liquor Snd tobacco excise taxes,average wages. body, and with the most thoughtful andand earmarh revenues to Social Security Savings: Long-range: 91.100 trillion (1.29 responsible outside interest groups, theTrust Funds. percent of taxable payroll). consensus is that we do have a chance Implement Social Security Options Ac- Endorsedby:ReaganAdministration, to make those kinds of decisions, tocounts. Congressman Bill Oradison. select from these options or others that Eliminate Social Security benefits for col- 3. RUMINATE DEPENDENTS' SENEFITS IN EARLY- may be suggested the kind of proposalslege students. RETIREMENT CASES which will add up to enough savings to i. LENCTHSN pxsxoo s'os corwzptrrzNo AvERAGE Present law: Under present law, unmar- put social security on a sound basis. EARNINGe SY a YEARS ned children(1)under age 18, and(2) Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- Present Law: A worker's primary insuranceunder age 19. if full-time elementary or sec- sent to have printed in the Rscoa the#enount (PIA)is calculted by applying aondary students, and (3) age 18 or o),ier, if list of social security financing optionsformula to the worker's average monthlydisabled before age 22, are eligible to receive earnings over a certain number of years. Inmonthiy social security benefits based on the which has been peepased by the staff ofretirement cases, the number used generallyearnings of a retlied or disabled worker. the Committee on Finance, to which Iequals S less than the number of years after (UntilJuiy1985,certainpost-secondary very much encourage the attention of1950 (or after age 21, if later) and up to thestudent benefioiares are alsoeligiblefor all Members. year in which the worker reaches age 62. Forbenefitsatages 18—21, on a gradually There being no objection, the mateworkers reaching age 62 in 1981, this meansphased-down basis.) rial was ordered to be printed in thethat earnings are averaged over 25 years. Proposal: Eliminate child's benefits based - RECORD,as follows: After 1990. a 35-year averaging period willon the earnings of workers who elect to re- SocxAL Sscuarrv Fxwswciwc Oerxoes apply to all retirees. 'ceiveearly-retirementbenefits.Children Proposal: The number of years over which would receive benefits when the worker elect- (Prepared by the staff of the Committee on earning8 are averaged would be extended bying early retirement reached age 65. Finance) 3 years. This extension of the computation (The prOposal would also effectively elimi- Lengthen period for computing averageperiod would be accomplished over a 3-yearnate young parents benefits in early retire- earnings by 3 years. phase-in period. Under the phase-in, thement cases. Such individuals, who are not Temporary constraint on adjustment ofnumber of years over which benefits areyet age 62 and eligible for a regular aged benefit formula. averaged would be increased by 1 year forspouse's benefit,are eligiblefor spouses' Eliminate dependents' benefits in early-those reaching age 62 in 1982. by 2 years forbenefits only if they have in their, care a retirement cases. those reaching age 62 in 1983, and by 3 years child who Is receiving benefits.) Eliminate "windfall" social security benefor those reaching age 62 after 1983. As under This provision would apply to children of fitsforpersons with pensions from noncv-present law, all earnings, regardless of theIndividuals who attain age 62 after Decexn- ered employment. age at which they were obtained, can be used ber 1981. Increase waiting period for disability inin the averaging computation. Savings: Long-range: 320 billion (0.02 per. surance benefits to 6 months. A conforming change would similarly in- cent of taxable payroll). Require prognosis of not less than 24crease the number of quarters-of-coverage - Endorsedby:ReganAdministration,- months of disability. required for eligibility for persons reaching CongressmanBill Gradison. Move date for automatic benefit increases from June to September. age 62 before 1991, The ultimate quarters-of- 4.ELIMINATS"WINDFALL" SOcIAL SECURITY BEN- Limit retroactivity of benefits. coverage requirement would remain at 40. EFrrs FOR PERSONS WITIS PENSIONS FROM Acceleration of State and local govern. Savings: Long-range: $210 billion (.25 NONOEflED EMPLOYMENT ment social security tax deposits (increasedpercent of taxable payroll). Present law: The present law benefit for- receipts). Endorsed by: Reagan administration, Con-mula for persons who reach age 62 or become Prorate benefit increase in first year ofgressman Bill Oradison. disabled in 1981 is: 90 percent of first 3211 eligibility. . oaaagCONSTRAXNT ON ADJuSTMENT OF of AIME (average indexed monthly earn- A "salety valve" trigger to limit social se- BENxFrr FORMULA ingS), plus 32 percent of AIME over $211 and curity COLA (with interfund borrowing or Present Law: In computing benefits,a through $1,274, plus 15 percent of AIME with tax reallocation). worker's earnings under social security areover $1,274. Raise the age of eligibility for retirementaveraged and a benefit formula is applied By construction of the benefit formula, benefits. to those average indexed monthly earningssocial security benefits br workers with low Price index the benefit formula. (AIME) to arrive at the initial basic benefitaverageearningsarearelativelyhigh Change the benefit formula used in deter-amountcalledtheprimaryinsuranceproportion (up to 90 percent) of their aver- mining initial benefits. amount (PtA). The PIA is the- amount aage indexed earnings under social security. Cost-of-living ad4ustment changes: Limitworker is eligible to receive at 65. Depend-In the computation of benefits, no distinc- benefit increase to the lower of the increaseents' and survivors' benefits are based on thetion is made between the worker who has in wages or prices; 80 percent cap on annualworker's PtA. a lifetime of low earnings and the worker COLA 3-percent COLA reductionforS The formula for a worker who becomeswho has low average earnings because he years; and Base COLA-on the personal con-eligible for benefits in 1981 is; 90 percent ofworked only a few years in covered employ- sumption exoenditure (POE) chain index. the first 3211 of AIME, plus.32 percent of thement (possibly at high wages) and many Reduce benefits for early retirement. AIME from 3211 through 91.274, plus 15 per-years in employment, not covered by sociai Reduce the benefit rate for spouses. cent Of the AXME over 81,274. security. Both groups receive the heavily Increase the age q eligibility for wid- The two dollar figures in the formula, $211weighted social security benefit that is in- ow(ea)s benefit to S2. and $1,274, are bend points—the points attended for the first group—workers who have Increase disability insured-status require-which the weighing in the formula changes.been dependent on low covered wages dur- ment to 30-out-of-40 quarters. The bend points are raised (indexed) eaching their working lifetimes. The heavily Make disability benefits payable until 62.year to reflect increases in average wages inweighted benefit paid to the second group is Maintain the retirement test exempt agethe economy. Thus, a new formula is createdsometimes referred to as a "windfall." at 79. each year for the new group of workers be- Proposal: Retired and disabled workers Eliminate the cellin on taxable earnings.coming eligible for benefits in that year. who become eligible for social security bene- Extend mandatory coverage to newly hired This system wa adopted by the 1977 SocIalfits after 1981 would-have their benefit re- government employees. Security Amendments. The annual dju8t-duced (but not eliminated)if they also Tax social security benefits in same man-ment of the bend points by the fufl amountreceive a pension based on their own earn- ner as other government or private pensionof the increase in average wages leads toings in noncOvered emoloyment. For such income. workers, the hOaVily weighted SO-percent - Tax one-half 0f cocial eecurlty beneñts. Preseut value of future cost savings (orfactorin the first band of the benefit for- Increase thopayrolltax to eliminateincreased revenues) during the 75 year val-mula would be replaced by a factor of thirty OASDI deficit. uation period, measured in 1981 dollars. two percent. There would be a guarantee October 14,1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 11373 thatthe total benefit under the proposalincreases would be changed to a fiscal-yearapply to State and local governments with would not be less than the present law So-basis, Annual social security and 85! In-respect to depositing Social security taxes as cial security benefit plus 50 percent of thecreases would be payable in October of eachapply to private employers. This means that worker's pension based on noncovered em-year. In addition, the Consumer Price IndexState aud local governments, depending on ployment. Benefits for dependents and stir-for All Urban Consumers (CPI—U) would besize, would be required to make deposits as vivors would not be affected. used instead of the CPI—W. To keep the lagfrequently as every week or as infrequently Savings: Long-range: $80 billion (0.09 per.between the end of the measuring periodas every 3 months. This provision would be cent of taxable payroll). and the payment of the cost-of-living ad-effective for deposits required to be made Endorsed by: House Social Security Sub-justment the same as under current law, thealter December 1981. committee (Pickle Bill)Congressman Billmeasuring period would be from 2nd quarter Additional income. Long-range: Negligible. Oradison. to 2nd quarter instead of from 1st quarter Endorsed by: House Social pcurity Sub. to 1st quarter. committee, General Accounting Office. Con. 5. INCREAsE WAITING PERIOD FOR DI5ABILXTY A conforming change would be made ingressman Bill Oradison. INSURANcE BENEFITS TO 8 MONTHS the effective date of the annual increase in Presentlaw:SocialSecuritydisability *0. PRORATE BENEFIT INCREASE IN FIRST TEAR the SM! (supplemental medical insurance) OP ELIGIBILITY benefits are not payable until the worker (orpremium. widow(er) aged 50—59) has been totally dis- Savings: Long-range: $150 billion(0.17 Present Law: Benefit increases begin with abled throughout a waiting period of 5 fullpercent taxable payroll). the calendar year in which.a worker becomes calendar months. Until amendments enacted Endorsedby:ReagasAdministration.eligible for benefits. (The year in which he in 1972, the Waiting period was 6 months.House Social Security Subcommittee (Picklereaches age 62 in the case of retirement bene- There is no Waiting period for 85! paymentsBill). fits.)If a worker does not file for benefits to the disabled. until a later year, his eventual benefit re- Proposal: Increase the waiting period from 8.LIMITRETRoACTIITT OF BENEFITS flectS all cost.of.living increases which oc- 5 to 6 full calendar months. This provision Present law:Social security retirementcurred starting with the year he became eli- would be effective for people who first be-benefits are paid for as much as 6 month8gible. This adjustment keeps him from being come entitled to disability benefits after De-and disability benefits are paid for as muchdisadvantaged for having waited to a later cember 1981, based on a disability that beganas 12 months retroactively from the datetime to file. after June 1981. (SSI disability paymentsthe pension applies for the benefits. The The benefit increase given for the first year will continue to be made with no Waitingretroactive payment is included as a lumpof eligibility does not take into account the period.) sum inthefirstcheckthebeneficiaryamount of time during that year the indi- Savings: Long-range: $25 billion (0.03 per.receives. vidual is eligible to receive benefits. He re- cent of taxable payroll). Proposal: Limit retroactivity of benefits toceives the full benefit increase provided dur- Endorsed by: Reagan Administration. Con-3 months for retired workers and their de-ing that year. regardless of whether he was gressman Bill Oradison. pendents and for survivors, and to 6 monthseligible for I month or 12 months of the year. e. REQIJIRE PROGNOSIS OF NOT LESS THAN 24for disabled workers and their dependents Proposal: The benefit Increase provided for MONTHSOF DISABILITY and fordisabled surviving spouses. Thisthe first year of eligibility would be pro-rated Present law: One requirement for socialprovision would be effective with respect tobased on the number of months during the security and SsI disability benefits is thatapplications filed after December 1981. year that the worker was eligible.If he an individual's impairment be expected to Savings: Long-range: $8 billion (.01 per-became eligible in December, he would get result in death or last for a continuous pe-cent of taxable payroll). 1/12th of that year's increase. U he became riod of not less than 12 months. The 12- Endorsed by: General Accounting Office. eligible in January, he would receive the full month test, enacted in 1965. replaced a test 0. ACCELERATION OF STATE AND LOCAL SOCIAL increase, and so on. The provision would be which required the disabling condition to be SECIYRITY TAX DEPOSITS effective for persons becoming eligible after of "long-continued and indefinite duration". Present law: States may enter into volun- 1981. Proposal: Extend the prognosis-durationtary agreements with the Federal Govern- Savings: Long-range: $180 billion (22 per. requirement for socialsecuritydisabilityment in order to provide social security cov-cent of taxable payroll), benefits from 12 months to 24 months. (Theerage for State and local employees. A StatsII.A 'SAFETYVALVE" TRIGGER TO LIMIT THS 5Sf prognosis-duration requirement wouldwhich enters into such an agreement bears SOCIAL SECURITY COLA not be changed.) The 24-month prognosis.the responsibility for collection of the so- Present Law: Social security cost-of-living durationrequirement would beroughlycial security taxes v(thheld from employeesadjustments are equal to the percentage in- equivalent in practice to the old law require-by the various local jurisdictions and theircrease in the Consumer Price Index (CPI). ment. The provision would be effective formatching taxes. Payments of social securityand are provided whenever the CPI rises by people Who first become entitled to disabilitytaxes are made first by the various local jur-3% or more. benefits after December 1981, based on a dis-isdictions to the State. The State, in turn. Proposal:If economic conditions prove ability that began after June 1951. is responsible for verifying the payments andmore adverse than now expected, the funds Savings: Long-range: $60 billion (0.07 per-depositing them with the Federal Govern-could reach such a low level that the ability cent of taxable payroll). ment with the taxes which have been paidto meet benefit payments would be called Endorsed by: Reagan Administration, Con-with respect to the State's own employees. into question. To safeguard against such a gressman Bill Gradison. Prior to 1980. the law left the frequencypossibility, a triggered mechanism could be 7. MOVE DATE FOR AIYTOMATIC BENEFIT IN- with which States deposited social securityused which is not projected to be needed but CREASES FROM .ITJNE TO SEPTEMBER taxes for State and local employees to bewhich would prevent unanticipated deterio- Present LaW: The automatic cost-of-livingestablished by the Secretary of Health andration of the funds. This mechanism would increase in social security benefits and SSIHuman Services under regulations whichbecome effective only if the funds are pro- • (supplemental security income) paymentsiswere to follow "so far as practicable" the re-jected to fall below a specified trigger level. payable at the start of July. The amountquirements imposed under Treasury regula- Prior to1991(assuming the interfund of the increase is equal to the percentagetions on private employers. In practice, theborrowing and tax-related provisions are in by which the average of the Consumer Priceregulations prior to 1980 allowed States to effectduringthisperiod),thetrigger Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clericalhold funds until 45 days after the end ofmechanism would be based on the combined Wofkers (CPI—W) for the first quarter ofeach quarter—a much longer time than wasreservelevelinthe cash benefits funds. the current calendar year has increased overgenerally permitted to private employers. InThe trigger level would be set at 15 per. the average of the CPI for the first quarter1980, the law was amended to require thecent of annual outgo at the beginning of of the previous calendar year. No cost-of.deposit of withheld social security taxes for1982 and would gradually rise by 1 percent living increase is paid unless the increase inState and local employees within 30 daysper year to 1990. (After 1990. when the cash the CPI is at least 3 percent. after the end of the month in which thebenefit funds are projected to begin ac- The cost-of-living increase provision, asapplicable wages were paid. cumulating surpluses, the trigger would be originally enacted in 1972, would have made The frequency with which deposits of so-based on the balance in the cash benefits increases effective in January of each year.cial security taxes and income taxes are madefunds and would increase by 2 percent per Legtslatiof'enacted in December 1973 inten-by private employers is determined underyear until it reaches an ultimate level of tionally put the benefit increase on a fiscalregulations issued by the Secretary of the75 percent.) In computing the cost-of-living year basis in order to avoid creating a Sub-Treasuty and vary in accordance with theincreases to be effective at the Start of each stantial outlay increase in the fiscal yeartax liability of the employer. The larger thefiscal year, the Secretary would determine 1974 budget. The fiscal year at that time wasamount of the liability, the more frequentlywhether that increase would draw the funds on a July to June basiS. In 1977, the fiscalit must be paid. down below the trigger level by the end of year Was moved to an October to September State and local governments are nàw ov-the year. If so, the cost-of-living increase basis, but the month in which the benefiterned by the same rules as private employerswould be scaled down just enough to assure increaseisprovidedwasnotsimilarlywith regard to depositing withheld incomethat the trigger level floor would not be changed. taxes, but not with regard to depositing so-breached. Proposal: Effective with the 1982 increase.cial security taxes. On an alter-the-fact basis (at the time the social security and 88! cost-of-living Proposal: The same requirements wouldof the fouowing year's Increase), the Secre- S 11374 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE October 14, .1981 tarywould first adjust benefitsto compen-The bend points are raised (Indexed) eachannuM ost-ot-1ivtng adJustment to O% O sate for any errorthatmay have been madeyear to reflect increases In average wages Inthe increaae In Consume? Prt* Indax. Thta in the prIor year determination. Before com-the economy. Thus, a new formula Is createdchange would be effective fo 3oonaeoutlve puting the next year's cost-of-living in-each year for the new group of workers be-.years.beginning with the1983benefit crease. thatis.the Secretary would firstcoming eligible for benefits In that year. incresse. increase or decrease benefit levels so as to This system was adopted by the 1977 Social Savings: Long-range: $80 billion (.09 per- raise(or lower) them to the level thatSecurity Amendments. The annua' adjust-cett of tazabtepayroll). would have been reached had the triggerment of the bend points by the full amount (3)3-percent COlA reduotionfor3 mechanism beenproperlyapplied.Thisof the increase in average wages leads toyeara.—Limitthe annual cost-of-living ad- would not result in a reduction in actualhigher initial benefits over time and to re-justment to 3 percentage points lose than the benefita, but would simply adjust the baseplacementrates—thepercentageofaincrease in the Consumer Price Index. Th1 amount upon which the new benefit in.worker's prior earnings that are replaced bychange would be effective for 3 consecutive crease would be computed. his social security benefit—that remain atyearsbegiliningwiththe1982 benet approximately the same level. increase. 12. pAyMNr OF FflLLBENFIT8AT AGE 68; Proposal; Beginning in 1987, Increase the Savings: Long-range: $126 billio1 (.14 per- CHANGES IN ACTUARIALREDUCTION dollar amounts to which each of the per.cent of taxable payroll). Present Law: A worker retiring at age 65centages apply (the bend points In the bene- Endorsed by: Senator Pete Domenici, Sen- receives a full retirement benefit (100 per.fit formula) by the increase in the consumerator Fnest Eollings. centoftheprimaryinsuranceamountprice index. This would be a permanent (4) Base COLA on the personal consump- (PTA)). Workers can retire as early as echange in the program that would still per-tion expenditure (PCE) chain indez—T1 62. but the retirement benefit Is reduced bymit initial benefitstorise over time (InPCE chain index has roughly the same cov- q, of 1 percent for each month of entitlementnominal and real terms); however, replace-erage as the CPI. The index uses current prior to age 65 (a 20 percent reduction atment rates would gradually decline. consumption patterns as weights instead age 62). Workers who reach age 62 in 1979 Savings: Long-range: $1630 trillion (1.90of the 1972—73 pattern8 used by the CPI and or later have their full benefit increased bypercent of taxable payroll). ituses a rental equivalence measure for !%of1 percent for each month that retire- Endorsed by: Expert Consultant Panei tohousing costs.. - ment is delayed after age 65 i'.p to. in effect.Finance Conm.1ttee (1978). Beginningwith the 1982 benefit increase, age 70. 14.CHANGETHE BENEFIT FORMULA U5ED IN base the cost-of-living adjustment on in- A disabled or retired workers aged spouse DETERMINING INITIAL BENEFITS creases in the PCE chain index rather than receives one-half of the workers PTA if the Present law:In computing benefits, athe CPI. This Would be a permanent change benefit is taken at age 65. Aged spouses canworkers earnings under social security arein the program. elect benefits as early as age 62. but the bene-averaged and a benefit formula is applied Savings:Long-range:$250 bilUon(.30 fit is reduced by of 1 percent for each percent of taxable payroll). month of entitlement before age 65 (a 25-to those average indexed monthly earnings percent reduction at age 62). (AIME) to arrive at the initial basic benefit 18.REDUcEBENEFITS FOE EMILYaETInEMENT At age 65. wldow(er)s can receive 100 per-amount called the primary insurance amount Present law: Full retirement benefit8 are cent of the deceased worker's benefit. An(PIA). The PIA is the amount a worker ispayable when the worker attains 85 Bene- aged wtdow(er) can receive benefits at ageeligible to receive at 65. Dependents' andfits are payable as early asge62, but the 60,though benefits elected before age 65survivors' benefits are based on the worker'samount is reduced to take account of the are reduced by 1IJof1 percent of the PIAPIA. longer period over which the benefit Is ex- per month (71.5 percent at age 60). A dis- The formula for a worker who becomespected to be paid. Benefits for workerà are abled widow(er) age 50—60 can also receiveeligible for benefits in 1981 is: 90% of thereduced by 6/9 of 1 perce1t for each month. reduced benefits (50 percent at age 50). first $211 of AIME, plus 32% of the AIMEbenefits are received before age 85. (At ge Proposal: Eective in the year 2000. fullfrom $211 through $1,274, plus 15% of the62. the benefit Is equal to 80 percent of the retirement benefits (100 percent of the PIA) AIME over $1,274. full benefit.) Benefits for spouses of retired' would he pa'able to workers retirirrg at age The two dollar figuresin the formula.or disabled workers are first available at age 68. Early retirement benefits would be re-$211 and 81,274, are bend points which are62 and are reduced by 25/36 of 1 percent duced by of1 percent for months of en-raised(indexed)each year to reflect in-for each month the benefit is paid before 65 titlement berore age 68 (a 36-percent reduc-creases in average wages in the economy.(so that at age 82, the benefit is reduced by tion at age 6'2) .Thedelayed retirement creditThis weightingofthe formula produces25 percent.) would be reealed. benefits that replace a relatively high pro- Proposal:Effective forworkers and An aged spouse of a disabled or retiredportion of pre-retirement earnings for work-spouses who reach age 62 in January 1990 worker would receive one-half of the work-ers with low average earnings. and later, the reduction factor would be in- er's PIA at age 68. Benefits couid be elected Proposal: Effective in 1982, apply the fol-creased so that the age-02 benefit would at age 62 but all benefits elected before agelowing benefit formula for newly eligibleultimately equal 70 percent of the full bene- 68 would be reduced by of 1 percent perworkers: 45% of the first $1,000 of AIME, fit. This provision would be fuly effective in month. Aged and disabled widow(er)s whoplus 22.5% of the AIME over $1,000. 1999. start getting benefits before age 68 would After 1982, the bend point—$l .000—would Savings:Long-range:$270billion(.31 continue to receive reduced benefits calcu-be adjusted by increases in average wagespercent of taxable payroll). lated using present law reduction factors;in the economy as under present Law. however, the widow(er) '5 benefit would not Savings: Long-range: $980 billion(1.18 Endorsed (in concept) by: Reagan Ad. be reduced below 64-percent of the worker'spercent of taxable payroll). ministration, 1979 Advisory Council on So- PIA. cial Security: National Commission on So- 15. COST-OF4IVINo ADJUSTMENT CHANGES cialSecurity;and Eouse Social Security The changes would be phased in gradually Present law: The automatic cost-of-livingSubcommittee (Pickle Bill). beginning in 190. increase in social security benefits and SSI Savings: Long-range: 81050 trillion (1.27(supplemental security income) payments is 17. REDUCE THE BENEFIT RATE FOR SPOUSES percent of taxable payroll). payable at the start of July. The amount of Present law: At age 65. the spouse of a Endorsed (in concept) by: Rouse Socialthe increase is equal to the percentage byretired or disabled worker Is eligible for a SecuritySubcommittee,Senator LAWTONwhich the average of the Consumer Pricebenefit equal to 50% of the worker's basic CHILts, Congressman BILL ORADI5ON, 1979Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clericalbenefit—theprimaryinauranceamount Advisory Council on SocialSecurity, Na.Workers (CPI—W) for the first quarter of the (PTA). tional Commission on Social Security. current calendar year has increased over the Proposal: Between 1990—1999. gradually 13. PRICE INDEX THE BENEFIT FORMULA average of the CPI for the first quarter of thereduce the benefit amount for spouses to Present law:In computing benefits,aprevious calendar year. No cost-of-living in-30% of the workers PIA. The reduction in workers earnings under social security arecrease is paid unless the increase in the CPIbenefits payable would be phased in at 2% averaged and a benefit formula is applied tois at least 3 percent. per year. thoseaverageindexed monthly earnings Proposal: (1) LImit benefit increase to the Savings:Long-range:$130billion(.15 (AIME) to arrive at the initial basic benefitlower of the increase in wges Or prices.—percent of taxable payroll). amountcalled theprimaryinsuranceWhenever the CPI rose faster than average amount (PIA). The PIA is the amount awages In the economy, the benefit increase 18. INCREASE TH AGE OF ELXOIEILITY TO worker is eligible to ;eceive at 85. Depend-would be limited to the increase in wages. WIDOW(ER)S BENEFIT TO 62 ents' and survivors' benefits are based on theThe change in average wages would be meas- Present law: Monthly benefite are payable worker's PIA. ured by using the Bureau of Labor StatisticS'to widow(er)s aged 60 and over, of deceased The formula for a worker who becomesaverage hourly wage index, This would be aworkers. Benefits drawn before 65 are pex'ma- eligible for benefits in 1981 is: 90% of thepermanent change in the program, effeotivenently reduced by 19/40% of 1 percent for first $211 of AIME. plus 32% of the AIMEwith the 1982 benefit Increase. each month benefits are received before age from $211 through $1,274. plus 15% of the Savings:Long-range:$410billion(.50 65. AIME over $1,274. percent of taxable payroll). Proposal: Between 1990 and 1997. grad- The two dollar figures In the formula, $211 Endorsed by: National Commission on So-ually raise the age of initial eligibility for and $1,274, are bend points—the points atcia Security. widow(er)s benefits to 62. Pull monthly ben- which the weighting in Lthe formula changes. (2) 80% cap on annual COLA.—Limlt theefits would continue to be pAId at 85. The in- October 14, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S 11375 crease tn the age of benefit eligibility would 21. MAINTAIN THE EXEMPT 24. TAX SOCIAL SECURITY BENEPZTS IN SAME be phaaed in 3 montbs per year for 8 years. AG AT 79 MANNER AS OTHER GOvEaNMENT OR PRIVATE 8avlngs: Long-range: Negligible. Present law: Social security beneficiaries PENSION INCOME i. WcREASE DISABLrrY IN8URED-8TATS RE- under age 72 (age 70 in 1983 and after) .are Present law: Social security benefits are QUIREMENT TO 30-ouT-oF-40 QUARTERS subject to a retirement-earnings test. If anot subject to federal, state or local taxes. Present law: To be in8ured for socialbeneficiary's earnings exceed the annual ex- Proposal: Effective January 1, 1986, include security disability benefits, a worker gen-empt amount, social security benefits are re-aocial security benefits in taxable Income, erally must meet two requirements: (1) heduced $1 for each 82 in earnings above thatfor federal income tax purposes, in the same must be "fully insured'—tbat is, he mustamount. The exempt amount for those agemanner as private or governmental penscon have one quarter ot coverage for each year65 and up to the exempt age is $5,500 in 1981,income. after 1950 (oi age 21. if later) and up to theand $6,000 in 1982, with future increases tied Pension benefits from contributory private year in which he becomes disabled, and (2)to increases in average wages. (The exemptpension plans (including those for govern- a disabled worker aged 31 and older mustamount is lower for those under age 65.) ment employees) are now taxed to the' .ctent have 20 quarters of coverage (about 5 years Proposal: Permanently maintain the ex-that the benefits exceed the employee's accu- ofwork covered under social security) dur-empt age at 72. mulated contributions to the plan. Cumula- ing the 40-quarter period (10 years) ending Savings: Long-range: $15 billion (0.02 per-tive retirement benefits up to the employee's with the quarter ct disability. A disabledcent of taxable payrou). own total contributions are not taxed be- worker under age SJ must have one quarter 22. ELIMINATE THE CEILING ON cause the income from which the contribu- of coverage for 3ach quarter elapsing after tions were paid was taxable. That part of the the year ho becomcs age 21 and up to the TAXABLE EARNINGS benefit representing the employer's contribu- quarter of disability (with a minimum of Present law: In 1981, the social securitytion and interest income on both the em- six quarters of coverage). A blind disabledtax applies to the first $29,700 of an in-ployee's and the employer's contributions ii worker must meet only the "fully insured"dividual's earnings. In futureyears,thetaxed when received. requirement. amount of earnings subject to the tax will Net Income: Not available. rise depending on the increase in average Endorsed by: 1979 Advisory Council on So- Proposal: Change, the 20-out-of-40 quar.wages that occurs from one year to the next.cial Security. ters requirement GO that a person aged 31Under the Trustees' intermediate assump. and Older would need 30 quarters of coverage 28. TAX ONE-HALF OF SOCIAL SECtiErry BENEF!5 (ftbout 71 years of covered work) In thetions, the tax base is projected to rise to Present law: Social security benefits are $42,600 in 1985 and $80,000 in 1990. Approxi- not subject to federal, state or local taxes. 40-quarter period preceding disability in or-mately 94 percent of all workers covered by Proposal:Effective January 1 1986, in. der to qualify for disthility benefits. Thesocial security have their full earnings taxed. disabled worker under sge 31 would need 3 dude one-half o social security benefits in quarters of coverage for each 4 quarters Proiosal: Beginning in 1982, elimInate thetaxable income for federal inccme taxes. The elapsing after the year he became age 21ceiling on taxable earnings so that allearn-income from this provision would be di- and up to the quarter of disability (a mini-ings in covered employment are subject toverted into the trust funds. mum o 6 quarters of coverage would stillthe social security payroll taX. Tncome: Not available. be required). Effective for disability bene- Net income: Long-range: $800 billion (0.9 Endorsedby:1979 Advisory Council on fits payable after December 1981 but onlypercent of taxable payroll). Social Security. if a worker becomes disabled after June 23. ExTEND MANDATORY COVERAGE TO NEWLY 26. INCREASE THE PAYROLL TAX TO ELIMINATE 1981. HIRED GOvER.?MEN'r EMPLOYEES OASDI DEFICIT Savings: Long.range $160 billion (.19 per- Present law: Social Security coverage has Present law: The schedule of social secu- cent of taxable payroll). been extended to the vat majority of peoplerity tax rates in present law is: Endorsedby:ReaganAdministration,who work for a living in the United States. Tax Rates for the Social Security Trust House Social Sour1ty Subcommittee, Approximately 90% of all workers contribute Funds to social security; 8 million jobsare exempt 20. MAKE DJSABILITY BENEFITS PAYABLE from participation. The major exceptions (Employers and Employees, Each) - UNTIL62 now are permanent civilian employees of the (In percentj Present law: Under present law, a workerfederal government, employees, of stateand Total who becoMes disabled before 85 is eligiblelocal governments which have not elected Year (OASDHZ) to receive full monthly benefits—100% ofcoverage for their employees, and employees 1982—84 6,70 his primary insurance amount (PIA)—un-of nonprofit organizations which have rio 1985 7 05 1988—89 7 15 til age 85 is attained. At 85, he is eligible towaived their tax-exempt status in order to1990 and later receiveretirementbenefitsatthe sameprovide social security coverage for theirem- 7.65 monthly rate. By contrast, the worker whoployees. Proposal:To eliminatethelong-term —retires before 85 is subject to a permanent Proposal: (1) Effective January 1, 1982,ex-deficit in the c&sh benefit programs, Increase reduction in monthly benefita of 5/9% fortend social security coverage on a mandatorythe tax rate so the combined OASDHI rare each month benefits are received before agebasis to all newly hired federal, state, and 10..beginning in 2010 is 9 percent employee and 65. The age 62 retirement worker, therefore,cal government employees. employer each. is eligible for 80% of his PIA. Net Income. Long-range: $425 billion (.50 AdditionalYncome.Long-range:$1460 Proposal: Effective for workers first becom-percent of taxable payroll). trillion (1.65 percent of taxable payroll). tng eligible to rece!vo disability benefits after (2) Effective January 1. 1982. extend social Endorsed by: 179 Advisory Council on 1981, make disability benefits payable untilsecurity coverage on a mandatory basis to allSocial Security National Comrnlsson on So- age 62,. rather than 65. Under this proposalnewly hired federal government employees. cial Security, the disabled worker would convert, to re- Net Income. Long-range: $260 billion (.31 27. APPLY ONE-HALF OF HI TAX TO OASDI AND duced retirement benefits at age 82. percent of taxable payroll). PARTIALLY FINANCE HI 'ROM GENERAL REvE Endorsed by: 1979 Advisory Council on So- Savings: Long-range: $210 billion (.25 per. NVtS cent of taxable payroll). cial Security National Commission on Social present law: The schedule of social se- Security, Representative Barber Cbnable. curity tax rates in present law is:

TAXRATES FOR THE SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUNDS

. un percentj

CaIendr year CASI DI OAS0 HI TotaI (OASDHI) Calendar year OAS DI 0ASD Tot3I (OASDHI)

Emptoyeri and employees, each: .

1982—84 • Self-employed persons: 4.575 0.825 5.40 1.30 6.70 1985 4.750 1982—84 6.8125 1.2375 8.05 1.30 .950 5.70 1.35 7.05 1985 9.35 1986—89 4.750 7.1250 1.4250 8.55 1.35 .950 5.70 1.45 7.15 1986—89 9.90 1990 and Iate. 5.100 7.1250 1.4250 8.55 1.4 1.100 6.20 1.45 7.65 1990 and tater 10.00 7.6500 1.6500 9.30 145 10.75

ProposalReallocate, one-half o the HZSecurity, Rouse Social Security Subeommit. tax to OASI and DL The lii trust fund wouldtee (Pickle bill) 'Rep. Barber Conable. Proposal: Repeal the earnings limiLation be replenished through general revenueap- for persons aged 85 or older by gradually raig- propriationa. 28. REPEAL THE RETXREMENT TEST (ALSO KNOWN Ing the exempt amount above that projected Additional Income: (OASDI), ASThEEARNINGS LIMITATION) under current law. Long-range: $1220 trillion (1.88 percent (t Present Law: Social Seàurity benefits for Savings: This proposal costs money, rather taxable payroll). persons aged 65 or over are reduced by 3.50than saves money. Outright repeal of the . forevery dollar of earned income above Endorsed by: 1979 AdvIsory Councilon So- earnings limitation for persons aged 65 or clal Security, National Oomniton $5,500 that is earned by those under the ageover would increase social security payments on Socialof 72. - an average of $2.3 billion annually for S 11376 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE October .14,.198.1 the next five years, and increasingly largerInsurance Trust Funds at the current rats of Proposal:Add four new trustees to the annual amounts thereafter. To keep thisdisbursements, some $15 billion is for SO-trust fund board . .. arepresentative from proposal revenue "neutral" one option is tocalled derivative benefits. the employers who contribute to the funds, combine repeal of the retirement test with Proposal: Gradually phase out derivativea representative of the beneficiaries, an in- reducing benefits for early retirement (seebenefits over a long time period, and thusvestment counselor, a representative of em- page—), restore social security to its original conceptployees who contribute to the fund. Short-range: (on basis of Administrationof a worker retirement program. This pro- The proposal would charge the trustees proposal)—$7 billion in 1982—86. posal would be coupled with increasing socialwith the responsibility to secure the maxi- Long-range: $130 billion additional cost'security benefits paid to workers (see previ-mum possible interest yield on the fun.ls 0.14 percent of taxable payroll. ous item). The phase out of the derivativecommensurate with the safety of the trust benefits would begin 5 years from now withfund. 29.PHAsE IN ACTUARIALLY-BASED DELAYED derivative benefits reduced by 2 percentage Third, if the funds continue to invest In RETIREMENT CREDIt points over the next 25 years. Treasury "special issues," that the mterest Present Law: Monthly retirement and Savings or Cost: rate be set at the weighted average of the widow's benefits are increased (beginning for Interest rate of all the government or gov- persons who attain age 65 in 1982) for every Short-range: No cost effect in 1982—86. ernment-backed securities the funds can year the worker delays retirement beyond Long-range:$600billioninsavings' legally invest in. age 65. (0.65% of taxable payroll). Savings: Not available. Proposal: Provide a delayed retirement in.32. PHASE OUT WEIGHTED BENEFIT FORMULA, AND Endorsed by: Senator William Proxmhe, centive that equals the savings that accrue PHASE HI £ PROPORTIONAL OR FLAT BENEFITand 20 Senate cosponsors. from delayed retirement (about 8 percent to FORMULA 35. INCREASE TOBACCO FEDERAL EXCISE TAXES, 10 percent a year, on an actuarial basis, in- Present Law: (See item S for description.) AND EARMARK REVENUES TO SOCIAL SECURITY cluding corresponding increases for spouses Proposal: Replace the weighted benefit TRUST FUNDS benefits). As an alternative, combine thisformula with a phased in proportional or Present Law: Social Security benefits are actuarially based delayed retirement creditfiat benefit formula so that benefits wouldfinanced almost exclusively through employ- with repeal of the earnings limitation. be more closely related to prior earnings ander and employee paid Social Security taxes. Savings: If the actuarially-based retire.contributions. The fiat benefit formula could Proposal: Increase tobacco federal excise ment credit is coupled with the repeal of thebe set at 50% of the worker's average ad-taxes, and earmark revenues to Social Secu- earnings limitation, the only cost should bejusted (indexed honth1y earnings). In otherrity Trust Funds. The excise tax increase the cost of repealing the earnings limitationwords, social security would replace at leastwould be about 10 cents a pack. One other (about $150 billion over 75 years, not count.half of a worker's average pre-retirelnentoption Is to increase federal excise taxes on ing possible refiows through increased in-earnings; under the current system replace-liquor, and to earmark those revenues to the come taxes). ment rates range from 25% to 128%. ThIsSocial Security Trust Fund. A. If earnings test after age 65 is repealed.proposal would be phased in over 15 years, Savings: $3 billion annually; $225 billion and delayed-retirement credit is given only 11beginning in1987. The person becomingover 75 years. benefits are not claimed: eligible In 1987 would receive 10% of thO Endorsed by: Senator Jack Danforth. Short-range: No significant cost effect Inbenefit amount determined Under the new 1982—86. 86. ELIMINATE STUDENT BENEFITS Long-range: No change in cost (except asformula and 90% of the amount determined Present Law: Social Security benefits are to cost of repealing earnings test). by the present formula. Those becoming eli-presently paid to full-time students aged 18 B. If both the earnings test is repealed andgible in the second year would receive 20% to 21 who are children of retired, disabled theactuarially-baseddelayed-retirementof the new formula and 80% of the presentor deceased workers. credit is given: formula, and so forth for the next 8 years. Proposal: These benefits would be phased Short-range: $1 billion increased cost in Since many lower wage earners would sus-out over a three to four year period. Any 1982—88. tain benefit losses under this provision, thestudent now eligible and receiving benefits Long-range: Increase in cost of $130 bil-SSI payment standard should be graduallywould be allowed to continue until age 22 lion' (in addition to cost of repealing earn-raisedtoatleast125% of the povertyif enrolled full-time. No new students would ings test); 0.14 percent of taxable payrolL threshold. be eligible. C. If earnings test at age 65 and over is not Savings or Cost; Savings: 5 years:$6 billion;75 years; repealed, but increased delayed-retirement Short-range: No cost effect in 1982—86. not available. credit is given: Long-range: $1,400 billion in additional Endorsed by: Senator Lawton Chiles. Short-range: $1 billion increased cost Incost' (1.50% of taxable payroll). 1982—88. Mr. ARMSTRONG, Mr. President, I Long-rahge: $130 billion of increased cost;' NOTE: The above figures do not includeam now ready to yield the floor. 0.14 percent of taxable payroll. the edded cost for the higher 85! benefit level. Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, first, 80. INDEX EARNINGS RECORDS OF OLDER WORKERS 33. PHASE OUT DERIVATIVE BENEFITS I congratulate the distinguished Senator CLOSER TO ACTUAL RETIREMENT from Colorado on his, as usual, very Present Law: In determining benefits, a Present Law: Provides an array of benefits benefit formula is applied to the worker'swhich are provided in addition to workerthoughtful and appropriate speech. average earningsin covered employment.retirement benefits. These benefits include Senator ARMSTRONG Is obviously one of Each year of earnings is indexed prior to thespouse, children and other dependent bene-the most intelligent Members of the US. second year before the worker attains agefits. It is estimated of the $127 billion inSenate and Is a very responsible Member. 62, becomes disabled, or dies, or adjusted tobenefits paid out from the Old Age SurvivorsI am most encouraged to hear his re- reflect increases in average wages In theInsurance Trust Fund, some billion pays formarks, as I am sure other Senators are. economy. -so-calledderivative benefits. Proposal: Index earnings records of older Proposal: Gradually phase out derivative I know that the Senator from Kansas workers up to second year before the year ofbenefits over a longer time period, and thus.Is anxious to pass this bill. I have an actual retirement. restore Social Security to its original conceptamendment whichInItsblUform, of a worker retirement program. This pro-9. 1528. to reform the investment policy Savings or Cost: posal would be coupled with increasing So- of the social sccurity trust funds, Is Short range: $ billion additional costcial Security benefits paid to workers (see In 1982—86.' previous item). The phase out of the deriva-sponsored by 20 Senators of both p0- Long-range: $190 bililon in additional costtive benefits would begin five years from nowlitical parties. I should like to bring It (.20% of taxable payroll). with derivative benefits reduced by two per-up now or at an appropriate time later. 81. PHASE OUT DERIVATIVE BENEFITS TO DEPEND- centage points over the next 25 years. This amendment would save, In my ENTS OF RETIRED AND DISABLED WORKERS Endorsed by: American Association of Re-judgment, $2 billion a year for the social Present Law: Provides an array of benefitstired Persons. security trust fund and move toward the which are provided in $ddition to worker re- 34. REVISE ADMINISTRATION OF AND INVESTMENT sound social security system for which tirement benefits. These benefits include STRATEGY FOR SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUNDS the Senator from Colorado so eloquently spouse, children and other dependent bene- Present Law: Three cabinet secretaries.—called. fits. It is estimated that of the $145 billionfrom the Department of Health and Human I have written the Senator from Kan- per year in benefits paid out from the Old-Services, Treasury and Labor—are the trust-sas and the Senator from Colorado (Mr. Age and Survivors Insurance and Disabilityees for the Social Security System and are charged by law to report annually on the .ARMSTRONO) •askingfor a hearing on 'Present value of future cost increases dur-stability of the Social Security System, and5. 1528. ing the 75-year valuation period, measuredto prudently invest funds for best rate of I should like to accommodate the Sen- in 1981 dollars. return. ator from Kansas, because I believe that October 14, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 11377 if we have a hearing and the Issues arebond, that Is available only to the civilIs the combined rate on the OASI and DI fully aired, a consensus may very wellservice retirement and railroad retire-Trust Pund8. In every year the combined develop in its support and it could passment, which can be redeemed at any timerate is equal to or higher than the return overwhelmingly. at its full premium value so it nevei de-on the OASI Trust Fund. Source, Social Se- Would the Senator from Kansas beclines. There Is no risk of the bond losingcurity Administrations willing to commit himsell and his corn-value. The interest rate Is set at the aver- Source: Economic Report of the Presi- inittee to hold a hearing on 5. 1528, soage rate paid on Government debt notdent, January 1981, table B—65, pp. 308—309. that those of my colleagues eswellasdue or callable for 4 years. The bond yield Mr. PROXMIRE. If the Senator from others who wish to testify could do so?curve, as it is called, provides the expec-New York or I had an investment man- Mr. DOLE. I assure the Senator fromtation that long-term yields for theseager handling our money that way we Wisconsin. who has a direct interest inbonds will be higher than near-termwould get rid o him and maybe we this matter and has discussed it with meyields. would even sue him. But when they are and with other members of our commit- We have recently been in a quitethis far below the average yield as they tee, that there will be a full and com-ahistorical period when this has not beenwere last year, and I am not attacking plete hearing, with whatever witnessesso and it may be the Senator will wishthis administration—the past adminis- the Senator from Wisconsin might liketo repond to It, but it should be. trations have been responsible for this, of to have. Ido want this agreement nottocourse—when they are this far below it I also have discussed it with the ablepass without offering the Senator fromseems to me we should take a very hard manager on the Democratic side, Sena-Wisconsin my understanding that overlook at the management of the fund, and tor M0YNIHAN, and the answer is an un-time the arrangements made and par-when we have a situation where the qualified "yes." ticularly those that are in place sinceaverage return Is around 131/2 percent 1960 have been designed to, one, protect.and the social security trust fund yields Mr. PROIIRE. I want to be sure 8.3 percent that is a loss of $2 billion and, that if we withhold offering the amend-funds, and two, to produce the highestof course, that loss is being used as part ment on this bill, the procedural argu-possible rate of return. of the alibi for the shortfall and part of ment will not be made against us, when Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, maythe reason why the argument has been we offer It later, that this bill was theI say to my good friend, in the first place,made that benefits have to be reduced. proper vehicle. Will the Senator agreeI am always in awe of the Senator fromIt seems to me that we shouldd correct that we will not be told at a later dateNew York. It is amazing the detailedthat and see that the fund is managed that the social security bill before us to-knowledge he has of matters of this kind.to maximize the return since there is no day was the bill and the only time andBu I might point out to him that yearquestion of the safety, no question of place i should have been done? after year after year for 20 consecutivesafety whatsoever, since the money has Mr. DOLE. That is a very good ques-years every year, every year, the yieldto be invested in Federal securfties. tion. I certainly would not raise thatfor the social security trust fund has Mr. MOYNIHAN. May I say to my argument. There will be other vehicles. Ibeen below the long-term rate, withnofriend from Wisconsin, who is formid- understand that there are a number ofexceptions, no exceptions. It Is almostable in debate as in all other matters, tariff bills reported by the House whichmiraculous that they could have suchanthat these are questions of fact for which will come through our committee. incredibly consistent record of gettinga lower yield. the Treasury can andwillgive us Some o us still have not given up hope answers. It is my understanding and only of solving the long-term prGblem of so- Mr. President, I ask unanimouscon-that, and I do not assert ft. I simple say cial security. So there will be other op-sent to have printed in the RECORDa portuniies, and I assure the Senatortable showing the comparison of yieldsthat it is my understanding that for the from Wisconsin that I will not stand onon social security trust funds and long-past 5 years the rates of return on social this floor and suggest to my colleaguesterm, 10-year, Treasury securities forsecurity bonds, the premium bonds, have that he missed his chance in October. the two decades 1961—80. been lower than the long-term rate at Mr. PROXMIRE. I thank the Senator There being no objection, the tablewhich Treasury sells, but this would have from Kansas. ras ordered to be printed in the RECORD,not been so previously. It would surprise Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I cer-as follows: me If this persisted over 20 years because it is designed to make it possible. tainly wish to associate myself com-Comparison 0/yieldson social security trust pletely with the commitment of the dis- /unds and iong term (10 years) Treasurp Mr. PROXMIRE. My information is tinguished chairman of the full commit- securities for the two decades 1961—80 that the long-term rate exceeded the re- tee—I know he will be joined in this by turn on the social security trust funds in those years. the subcommittee chairman—that we Yields on Yields on wiU hold hearings. social se- 10-year Mr. MOYNIHAN. We will find out. I make the point that the Senator from curity trust Treasury Mr. PROXMIRE. Very good. Wisconsin has done a service In raisingYear funds' securities Mr. MOYNIHAN. We will find out. We this question, which is a complex one. will get numbers and facts, and we will There is a history here, just as there Is a1980 8.3 11.46proceed from there, and we would not be history of this system. 1979 7.5 9.44doing so were it not for the initiative of In 1935—I make this point to the dis- 1978 7.3 8.41the Senator from Wisconsin. I thank him tinguished Senator from Colorado—the 1977 7.0 7.42very sincerely for this. interest rate on social security funds in1976 6.9 7.61 Mr. PROXMIRE. I thank my good the Treasury was set at 3 percent. This 1975 6.7 7.99friend from New York. was a rate considerably higher than the1974 6.1 7.58 Mr. President, I yield the floor. rate at which the Federal Government 1973 5.6 6.84 Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, I wish 1972 5.3 6.21to send an amendment to the desk. borrowed money. 1971 5.3 6.18 And as a result it was a deliberate 1970 4.8 7.35 Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, will subsidy to the social security fund from 1969 4.2 8.87the Senator defer one moment while I general revenues, as would be the neces- 1968 3.9 5.65speak to the chairman of the Committee sary case. The Federal Government paid 1967 3.8 5.07on Finance? social security more than they had to 1966 3.3 4.92 Mr. PRESSLER. Yes. pay other borrowers and thereby were1965 3.2 4.28 The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk the subsidies. 1964 3.0 4.19 1963 2.9 4.00will withhold. In 1939 investments were to pay the 1962 2.8 3.05 Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I suggest current rate of interest for outstancUng 1961 2. 7 3. 88the absence of a quorum. debt 5 years and over, at which pont The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk the payment levels declined over time to 1 MonthsEnding June 30. Equalswill call the roll. a low of 2.6 percent in 1951. It is hardthe combined rate on OASI (Old Age and to remember those days. Survivors Insurance), DI (Disability Insur- The assistant legislative clerk pro- In 1960 the present arrangement wasance) and W (Hospital Insurauce) Trustceeded to call the roll. set whereby the Treasury sells a specialFunds from 1912 to 1980. Erom 1961 to 1971 It Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I ask S 11378 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE October 14, 1981 unanimous consent that the order for the The Commission will report to Con-of what Is our Nation's largest domestic quorum call be rescinded. gress its recommendations within theprogram.Socialsecurityprovidesa The PRESIDING OPPICER(Mrs.next year or so. But it wifi be Congressmeans for Government to responsibly KAS5EBAUM). Without objection, it is soresponsibility to act. Frankly, what wetake care of the elderly and handicapped ordered. are doing today is a short-term u1ckIn a dignified way. As workers contribute Mr. DOMNICI. Madam President, .1fix which contributes very little to solv-to the system over a 'number of years, shall vote for the 'Finance Committee'sing longer run problems. The next timethey are preparing to provide for their ameflment that restores the social secu-we work on social security Congress willretirement. They have a promise that rity minimum benefit, permits interfundneed to be far more oourageous than ittheir contribution to the system will be borrowing among its trust 'funds,andis being today. honored at retirement. Madam Presi- makes other changes. The President has Mr. DOLE. Madam President, it Is mydent, we must not break thàt Commit- given his support to this bill and it obvl-understanding that there is no objectionment. ously has broad congressional support.If we go ahead and act on the committee To avoid arousing the fears and frus- My support has a few qualifications. substitute and to make• unanimous-con-trations of the American people again,! I am truly disappointed that we can-sent requests that it be considered asbelieve we must assure them that we will not agree on a wider range of propoaIsoriglna1textforthepurposeofnot renege on our promise. Retirees necessary to the soundness of social secu-amendment. should be able to rest assured that we rity. After all that this Congress has ac- Is that the understanding of the dis-wifi not reduce the benefits for which complished, we failed on perhaps thetinguished manager on the Democraticthey have worked and planned. most important issue facing us. The bifiside? At the same time, it is Imperative that today Is merely a bandaid on a very seri- Mr. MOYNIHAN. The SenatorIswe acknowledge the very real financial ous wound. Correct. Droblems of the social security system. I am also disappointed in this amend- Mr. DOLE. Madam President,.! moveWithout some changes, it is highly p05- ment from a budget standpoint. This billthe adoption of the committee substitute.sible that the old-age and survivors in- will cost over $300 million in fiscal year The PRESIDING OFFICER.Thesurance (OASI)trust fund could be 1982, undoing a portion of reconciliation.question is on agreeing to the motion ofbankrupt by the end of 1982. Fortu- We are also conceding that the $4.2 bil-the Senator from Kansas. nately, the other two social security trust lion In additional social security savings The amendment (UP No. 478) wasfunds, disability insurance (DI) and hos- assumed In the first concurrent budgetagreed to. pital insurance (HI) are in better finan- resolution Cannot be achieved. I want Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I askCial shape. Interfund borrowing will al- every Senator to understand that his orunanimous consent that the committeelow an interchange of assets to avoid her vote Could increase the projectedamendment be considered as originalany failure In meeting benefit obliga- fiscal year 1982 deficit by almost $5text for the purpose of amendment. tions. billion. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without While this interfund borrowing, real- Let us face a few realities:Thisobjection, it is so ordered. location of taxes and additional changes amendment does not solve the underly- UP AMENDMENT NO. 479 proposed by the Senate Finance Com- ing financial problems of the social secu- (Subsequently numbered amendmentmittee will assure that payments can rity system. The President knows this;No. 585.) continue through 1982, I support Presi-. the Congressional Budget Office has • Mr. PRESSLER. Madam President, Ident Reagan's request to appoint a task stated this; the House and Senate knowhave an amendment at the desk and Iforce which will review all the options it; and the public had better understandask for its immediate consideration. for maintaining the long-term solvency it. We will have to act again, and soon, The PRESIDING OFFICER.Theof the system. I believe we must make to save the social security system and re-amendment will be stated. changes which will not in any way re- assure millions of elderly and disabled The assistant legislative clerk readduce or alter the benefits of those already recipients that their benefits will con-as follows: receiving social. security. While changes tinue. - The Senator from SouthDakota(Mr.may be made over a period of time. any Howsoon? The estimates vary. De-PRESSLER) proposes unprinted amendmentabrupt change or transition would be pending upon the estimate, social secur- numbered 479: unfair. ity could be in deficit in 1984 even with At the end of the bill add the following: I am pleased to see that Congress is the legislation now before us. It afl de- SEC. 6. It is the sense of Congress that anyrestoring the $122 minimum social se- pends upon the economic recovery of thefuture legislative changes in the Social Se-curity benefit. I have consistently sup- country. If economic conditions are evencurity Act, will not reduce the current dollar amountofmonthlyOld-Age.Survivor.ported the retention of this benefit, for slightly worse than projected, we couldand Disability Insurance benefits to whichagain I believe that our Government be facing urgent social security financ-individuals are entitled for that month ofmust not renege on its promise. South ing problems even sooner. enactment. One of the few reasons I can support Dakota is primarily an agricultural State Mr. PRESSLER. Madam President, Iand most of our farmers were not cov- this amendment is that it shows some bi- ered by the social security system until partisan effort on social security canoffer this amendment to the social secu-the 1950's. These people have not had still exist. This cooperation must expandrity amendments which will secure exist- if we are to find solutions to this prob-ing benefits for those people currentlyvery many years in which to build bene- lem. I have confidence that Chairmanreceiving social security. This resolutionfits and thus receive the minimum bene- DOLE and the Finance Committee canassures the American people that any'fit. muster tooperation on this issue. I trulyfuture revisions in the social security In addition, 75 percent of the mini- hope that everyone in this Chamber willsystem will not, mean a reduction Inmum benefitrecipientsarewomen. join in support of the committee's effortsbenefits for those currently receivingMadam President, an estimated 72 per- to address the social security financingsocial security payments. cent of the elderly poor in this country dilemma. No partisan benefit will accrue Millions of Americans have come toare unmarried women. The lackof to anyone if we allow social security todepend upon a monthly benefit paymentearned income or pensions leaves the go bankrupt. under the social security system. As aolder Women with no sources of retire- The administration has clearly indi-result, the predicted bankruptcy of thisment income other than those minimal cated its willingness to discuss and con-program has generated what I would de-social security payments. sider all possible solutions to social se-fine as an unprecedented reaction from Madam President, over 15 percent of curity. I think that is a wise judgment.our Nationc especially the most vulner-South Dakota's population are elderly. Social security must be separated fromable segment of our population—theSince coming to Congress, I have held partisanship and discussed in an openelderly. numerous senior citizen seminars and and honest manner. I endorse the Presi- As a member of the Senate Aginghearings in my State. I am continually dent's recently announced decision to setCommittee, I have had the opportunityreminded that' the elderly depend on up a Commission on Sotial Security,to review the long- and short-term prob-these monthly benefits. Infiatton and the which should prove to be a productivelems of this program. First, however, itconstantly increasing cost of living hit forum. is important that we recognize the merits the elderly the hardest and their cost- October 14, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE 8.11379 of-livingadjustment and this monthly STUDY 01 SOCIAL SECURITY ADMITISTRATIO1I greeted them there. It was frozen for I ma-' check are their only protection. UTICIENCY ment as she studied the check; then there Szc..Thecomptroller General of thewas this crisp, forced Uttle smile. I am pleased to see that Congress IsUnited States shall undertake a study of the "There has been I mistake," the woman acting rationally on this matter. I urgeSocial Security Administration for the pur-Said. the Senate to adopt my resolution whichpose of determining the management ef- No one knows how many times this little will mean added assurance to our elderlyficiency, employee productivity, and techni-drains was repeated last July, when checks population that their benefits will not becal capacities (Including computer hardwareIncluding cost-of-living increases 'were sent reduced. In doing so, I am confident thatand' programming) of such Administration,to 30 million retired workers. -. we may maintain the fiscal integrity ofand the extent of current Information of the Maybethe Social Security computer sys- the social security system and redirectcharacteristic of recipients. The Comptrollertem knows, but it isn't telling. That system, General shall report the results of such studywhich computed the new amounts and trig- the program to its original purpose—anot later than 180 days after the date of thegered the checks, is having the electronlo stable base upon which working men andenactment of this Act, Including any recom-equivalent of a nervous breakdown at Its women can plan for retirement. mendations for Improvements In any of thehome In Woodlawn, Md. The problem Is Madam President. I would like to re-operations studied. being compounded by fraud, sabotage, hw. quest a rollcall vote on the amendment. man error and confusion. tomorrow. I understand there are no Mr. PELL. Madam President, In ac- cordance with the wishes of the senior.. "ezvzzz CRISIS," votes today. Mrs. Branch'soutsizecheck,resulting Mr. DOLE. Madam President, If theSenator from New York (Mr. Moxmxi)from a glitch In a computer program called Senator will yield, the Senator fromthe amendment has been modified to addSfadcap (Manually Adjusted Credits and Kansas has no objection to ordering theof the end of line 7 the words: "and theAwards Program), .isjust one .of tha' In- yeas and nays, but I think we can protectextent of current Information of thecreasingly bizarre symptoms of that prob- the other side and accommodate thosecharacteristics of recipients." lem—which, depending on what Social Secu- absentee Senators as well as the Senators Madam President, during the past 2rity,, official you talk to,Is a "crisis," a weeks there have been many disturbing"severe crisis" or a "living manifestation of from South Dakota. Perhaps while 1. am Murphy's Law" (If anything can go wrong, preparing to respond to the amendment,reports about administrative and me-It will). we can suggest the absence of a quorumchanical problems that exist In the social It Is no small problem, nor will it be easy or temporarily lay the Pressler amend-security system. I am sure that many ofto deal with as the Reagan administration ment aside and take up the amendmentmy colleagues were dismayed, as I was,and Congress struggle to save the Social Se- of the distinguIshed Senator from Rhode&o read the Wall Street Journal's recentcurity' system. The 1,200 computer programs, Island. It will just take a minute or twosummary of this situation. The article,,that' run the system have been amended and here. which appeared on the front page of lastamended to the point where no one really Let me suggest the absence of a quo-Monday's edition,citesinstancesofunderstands them anymore. That, coupled checks being issued to Individuals whowith a chronic lack of trained computer rum and check it out with the leadership technicians at ,the Social Security agency, Is as to the rollcall vote, Is that agreeable?have been dead up to 2 years; a case of amaking even simple changes dictated by Mr. PRESSLER. I suggest the absencebeneficiary receiving a $9,000 payment:Congress difficult to put into effect. of a. quorum. stories about the growing problem f em- Social Security's computer system is a big The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerkployee vandalism and comments aboutpart of the federal government's money ma- will call the roll. tle present Inadequacy of the agency'schine. It gives presses at the Treasury De- The legislative clerk proceeded to callcomputer system. partment the orders to print Checks that the roll. Just yesterday, the Washington Postamount to 23 percent of all federalspendlng. published a feature story zeroing In onIn the coming year the- system will trigger Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I ask about $170 billion worth of 'benefits for 50 unanimous consent that the order for theInefficiency of the computer system atmillion people—recipients of benefits from quorum call be dispensed with. the. Social Security Administration. TheSocial 8ecuritys huge retirement and dis- The PRESIDING OFFICER. WithoutPost quoted a Clpvernment computerability Insurance programs and' clients of objection, It is so ordered. analyst who described the present sys-.Medicare and the Supplemental Security In- Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I asktern as a patchwork of old fashioned ma-come program for the blind, disabled and unanimous consent that the pendingchinery which has been updated by addaged. ' - amendment of the distinguished SenatorIng a modern glass wing to an old fash- ACCURACYcRows CHANCIER from South Dakota, Senator PRESSLER, beioned log cabin. - Largely because of the haphazard, hurried Iask unanimous consent, Madamway those programs were computerized and' temporarily laid aside so that we might becauseofIncreasingly severe personnel consider an amendment of the distin-President, that the text of both of theseproblems in the five-acre computer complex guished Senator from Rhode Island. articles be printed In the RECORD. at Woodlawn, the matter of whether those The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without There being no objection, the articleschecks are sent out on time, to the right objection, It Is so ordered. were ordered to be printed In the Rsc-people, in the right amounts, is becoming Mr. PELL. I thank my friend and col-01w, as follows: increasingly chancy. league from Kansas very much. IFrom the Wall Street Journal, Oct. 5, 19811 Here are some -of the specific problems BOTCHED BENEFITS: PXLINO COMPUTERS GIVE Social Security is facing: VP AMENDMENT No. 480 congress's General Accounting Office is In- (Purpose: To require a General Accounting Soci&x.SECURITY SY5URM ANoTHER BIavestigating reports of 45 acts of "apparent Office study of the management efficiency, PROBLEM vandalism" by employees at the computer employee productivity, land technical ca- ("Breakdown" is compounded by fraud,complex. The reports, compiled by Social pacities of the Social Security Adininistra-human error, sabotage, and confusion. Please tion) Security managers sInce February 1977, telt return huge checks.) 'of memory discsbeingIntentionally Mr. PELL. Madam President, I send (By John 3. Flalka) scratched, of tapes containing beneficiary an amendment to the desk and ask for WA5HmOT0N.—Three months ago Ednainformation being throWn In the trash and Its immediate consi'deration.. M. Branch. 65, a retired bookkeeper, re-of various damage to computer machinery, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerkceived a letter from the Social Security Ad-Inchiding one large computer disc-drive unit will state the amendment. ministration. It said her monthly benefitthat someone urinated on. was being raised from $181.80 a month to The Inspector general of the Department The legislative clerk read as follows: $9,281.60 a month. of Health and Human Services is investi- The Senator from Rhode Island (Mr.PuLL) gating more than 8,000 cases where Social proposes an unprinted amendmentawn- "Honey, this has got to be an error," 3.Security benefits are' being sent to people bered 480. Woodrow Branch recalls telling his wife thatwho have been deed for at least two years. day. "Maybe they're going to cutIttoThe Investigation, called Project Specter, Is Mr. PELL. Madam President,I askaround $90. You know Reagan'S been talkingbeilig carried out by matching Social Secu- unanimous consent that further readingabout doing that." rity tapes against Medicare tapes. of the amendment be dispensedwith. Three days later the check arrived. It was A "suspense file" containing wage infor- The PRESIDING OFFICER.Withoutfor $9,281.60. mation that the computers were unable to objection, It Is so ordered. Soon afterward 'Mrs. Branch and her hus-match with people's benefit records has now The amendment Isas follows: band drove from their home near Carthage,grown to 167 million wage records totaling At the end of the bill add NC., to the nearest Social Security office, 40$69 billion. The records, many of which are new section: the followingmiles away. Mr. Branch stili remembers thecomplicated by misspelled names and erro- expression on the face of the woman whoneous Social Security numbers, date back to _____

S 11380 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE October 14, 1981

1937.Although Social Security officials notethe software, the programming of the coin- Meanwhile, the latest temporary x a that this gap is a tiny fraction of the $9.7puters. In 1979 the Carter ad.thlnistrationrepair f the glitcb in the Madc$p progr trillion in wages recorded by the system overrounded up two óp computer experts, Janthat gave Mrs. Brah b $9281.00 cbeôk the years, GAO investigators and congres-Prokop irom the Commerce Department andthsteadof one for $20L80—wilL. be in p1a sional leaders do not view the problem asRhoda E. Mancher from the Whate Hou8e andby mid-October. The erzot is beileved to be small. sent themtoWoodlwn to take charge. Mr.* rare xnaifunctLon In that program. wMch RACE WON BY 18flOUR8 Pokep took over as bead of 8dclaI Securitydeals -w1t onIV 5 percent eZ Social &cir1ty The declining state o the Social Securitycomputer opersuons, the post held now byreciplent6. So ar. according to a spokesman. computer sstem—a network of 16 bg com-Mr. Wick1en. and 'Mrs. Mancher became hisonly one other Cbeck of that size 1as been puters fed by more than 500.000 tapes waachief assistant. returned to the agency. highlighted last July when the agency came Appivprtatlons for new software have been Soctat Security would, however. weIcme within 18 hours of missing the deadline forsought. But Mr. Prokop decided that t reallyreports of sny ctber8. issuing Social Security checks with new cost-wasn't 'ust a software and he.ydware prob- of-living Increases. lem, e1ther: it was more ofpeople problem.IFrom the Wsshthgtm Post, Oct. 1. 1081J "We had people on call 24 hours a dayMany of hie best managers and technicianG and they were in here 16 to 18 hours a day.'were quickly siphoned off byprive.te Industry,SSA Coapua: MANY Cuczs. No BALANCES says John Wicklein, head of computer oper-leaving from 10% to 50% of ht eupervl8ory (By Paul Tay1r) ations at the agency. What was needed wasslots vacant at any given time. And Social There are times, and this is cne of theni. fairly simple: The space fo? uumbs on the8ecurtys tn-house training staff did not con-when the 80dM Security £dmln&stratfon checks had to be Increased from five digitstain experte In modern coniputer gystems.seems to be lp a race with ttaelf to deter- to six digits to accommodate checks thatSo Mr. Prokop found his people learningmine whlc'n way It will eelf.destruót: by could now go. In rare eases. Into the thou-more snd more *bout 20-year-old techniquesbankruptcy or computer collapse. sands of dollars. and processes that were becomln€ less azid The b&zikruptcy ecenaito Is famill*r to sny ut that meant that 600 computer pro-less useful. reader oq the daily papu. The putr grams had to be changed. And that waa. in And some people. he ound. were out totiorrors axe Just aa real wd embedded In many cases, extremely difficult. Many of thedestroy or defraud the Lystem. Ticking off aciacitine that s ZflIisiv. intricate end evft programs had been developed hurriedly andnumber of 'cases of willful and maliciousexpandthg. But even the experts who oper then repeatedly changed without any writ-nIsch1ef" during an appearance before theate the computer canno& aZways conUol It. ten notation of their formulas. There wereHouse Oovernment Operations Committee, "You cafl't mainten it. you can't ciange fixes upon fixes upon fixes, agglomeratingMr. Prokop said that morale tn the com-it and you can't hire people to work it. like so many electronic barnacles. puter center was extraoMinarfly low. partay1ameut Zolui A; Scahn, the new oonnnI- -The effort to go to the sixth digit badbecause of a series of never-completed rear-Etoner aX SSA. who hsa nade ovl*u1 the begun In February and ultimately absorbedganlzauons that left a number-of people notcomputw system bi top pdorlty. 20,000 man-hours of programmers' work plusknowIng what their 'obs were. There was "The mere mention of the system Is guu. 2,500 hours of computer prooesslng time. Italso strong resentment of his efforts to bringoiiteed to provoke gases of laughter and nearly collapsed in late June durIng anIn outside experts. bouts of biee-alappMig ang people In the unusual, three-week spate of thunder8toam8 Mr. Prokop and Mrs. Mancher are quickcooputar £cienfle&" rnya Jan Prokip, a around Woodlawn. a suburb of Baltimore.to. point out that many of the workers at thecomputer scIentist bo served. aa scLate "When lightning knocks out the power, thecomputer center are dedicated to gettingcommtssioner for systexns at SSA In 1979 data In the machine Is lost and you have tothe checks. out" and work long hours undand 1980: restart, the entire program.". Mr W*cklelfloften-frustrating deadlInes. SO far, the compur system hsnotfal- explains. But there ae also some who kick thetered to the point the agency has been un- The SocLal Security agency. wblch badplugs of operatthg computer equipmel$ outable to m€vt ttpIlnrye2inrge of getting never come that close to missing a deadlIne.of wall socketm and turn off lr-oondiUon1ngchecks to 3 million beneficiaries by th third was prepared to meet this one by simply re-systems,causIngvaluable machinery toof each month. But these is so iucb the running the June payment tepes. tbereb'overheat. - computer cftnnot do .doesbadly. 8ome shortchanging some 30.7 million beueficir- PorMrs. Mancber, who ran the part cexamples: ies. But that drastic step was avoided. Thethe operation that makes benefit calcula- Just to Implement the noruaal cost-oI-Iv- checks, increases included, went out on thnetions snd assigns 80dM Security numbers,Ing tncTeases tbls year, SSA computer pro- although the amounts sent to Mrs. Branchthe constant threat of sabotage made hergrammers had to spend 20,000 t1our feed- and atleast one other beneficiary were.job impossib1e. Sbe resigned in June 1980 .*ing data into computers that wbtrred day rather odd. few weeke after a Baltimore te1evsioii st*-and nght for ear1y fthr months. With a Needless to say, nobody is happy with thetion got an anonymous threat that the com-Less unwieidly qtem. said Svabn. thM kind current situation of the computer system.puter program tapes at Woodlawn would beof operatJo oou1 bave bei compIted In "You can't change it, you can't maintain itdestroyed. two or three day&. - and you can't hire people to work on 1t, That threat meant, according to Mrs. Thetask of removIng eertain recipients of grumbled John A. Svahn, Social Security'sManther, that she and two skiiled supervithe so-caaled minimum benefit- from the new commissioner, In recent testimony be- sorshad to mike copies of the majoT pro-SSA roflz, Congress mandated this sum- tore Congress. gram tapes and bide them every night. Inmer, Is going to be tackled manually be- It wasn't always that way. The electronicthe morning they would compare th cop4e5cause, "Just to figtir, out bow to nialce On? age for Social Security began in the earlywith the tapes running the computers - tomp*atrs do It wou'd tske 18 months,' in lg6Os when executives from companle8 likemake sure that the little magnetic markethe' words o 8van. The manual process fl1 Prudential Insurance Co. and General Mo-controlling one of the government's mosttake six month8 ond cost $150 million. In- tors came to Woodlawn to marvel at the as-vital and basic functions ha not been tamp-cidentally, midway through the process. Con- semblage of new IBMmacnines,whirringered with. ess and the president are expected to re- away In their air-conditioned. hangar-like It was a rough few weeks. And Mrs.Btore he bene2. rooms. In those days, the Social 8ecurltyMancher and Mr. Prokop couldnt watch The computer backlog at the SM 1 euch computer system was considered the besteverything. Por example. WR th t1nthat tt can take months or . years—In one available. - in February 1980 when Jat E1beth SomewhereIn those early years, though,lee Blair, a 29-year-old neflt8 authorizercase, it took 15 years—before th SSA d1- the system became frozen. !t was a phenom- oo that & benefleiary has d1ed, maced, at Woodlawn, was accused of authorizing ota gpo. undergoneanyofthe other enon that nobody could put a finger on until$500,000 worth of disability cbecks for non-changes that caU for some alat1on Ln tb the early 1970s ivben Social Security omcialsexistent benefl1ar1es. Her fraud. CaU%t onlybenet ebeo7. Moreover. the 8A bBs fallen defined It as a hardware problem. What waswhen a sharp-eyedPhfladelpllla as far as three ye behind.hipy reczd- needed, they concluded, wan a new computerspotted tie strange accumulation o uto! of IflhlliOfl8 building filled with newe',inore sophisticatedresulted In 10 years in federal. prlsofl. ing the retirement con IBM machines. of Ameiican workers. Couress acceoted the building proposal— Italsoresulted In a growing feeling 1 tk' t1ne for t 1ogy to coma to the building is being completed—but a Iouseamong federal investigMors that not afl theueitriy pa. Twenty yeala ago at the committee balked at a new all-IBM Installa-11tehes In Ihe system are accidental. A $SA, the software system—the manner In tion. A Dlan was devised to split the computercording to a SocialSecurity 8pokesman,w11eh intructLons ze d into the c- system Into seven sections so that other oom-among the ,OOO Instances of benefit checks — ue t sdve.t p&nie could bid on the new eaulpn,ent. (Nobeing sent to dead people, there Is 'a small j years.,as the, d.maa4 on t1 y- final decision h88 been reached. At first, atgroup o cases .w11cli bave some tem tt1ed. theSM,rác4ed by any rate. the old ompnters will go 1nto -thethat could indicate employe Involvement." trotn more id b1ger c mutex. t the new building.) Both Mr. Prokop and Mrs. Mancher agreeproblem." says Sam. w1thot ovethauUig Meftnwhfle, the susoiclon grew n the Officethat ultimately the Bocial 8ectirtty computerthe softwe syteia to keep pe. of Management and Budoet that the roblemsystem maybave to be contracted outto a really wasnt lust a hardware problem. Some-private company that can understand andwork of 76 dIfferent softwa'e that thing had to be done, too, to 8tratghten outsupport large computeT operations. Incorporate variety o tchnoogien span- October 1, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE 8 11381 fling from the 19608 to the 1980s. "It's sort ofing Office to undertake a comprehensive The amendment (TJP No, 480) was like you started with a log cabin, then youreview and assessment of the manage-agreed to. added on .a wing made of framing lumber, then another made of brick and anothment efficiency, employee productivity AMENDMENT NO. 479 made of glass." said one systems auditor whoand technical capacity of the Social Mr, DOLE. Madam President, what is asked not to be identified. "Alter a while. iSecurity Administration and report thethe pending business? geta kind of hard to find your way around."results of its findings to Congress no The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ques- Worse, the architects of these various ad1i-later than 6 months after the enact- tions often failed to leave blueprints behind ment ofthe currentsocialsecuritytion recurs on the amendment of the "The documentation ha been terrible." saidlegislation, Senator from South Dakota, Svahn. who recently had to borrow a com- I want to make itclear, however, Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I have puter expert who had left BSA for private discussed this amendment, to some ex- industry becau&e he was the only one whoMadam President, thatitis not mytent, with the distinguished Senator understood the system he had designed. intent to have the General .Accountirg-from South Dakota, Senator PRE55LER, I Experts and watchdogs have been aware ofOffice in any way inhibit the social se-have also discussed the amendment with the SSA's computer problems for years. Thecurity system from putting its own housemembers of the Finance Committee staff, Oeneral Accounting Office has issued 32 sep-in order. I believe that the recent re-the Social Security Administration staff, arate reports eince 1974. The Department ofports about quality control problemsand others. Health-and Human Services has Its own re-that exist in many areas within the social view under way, aa does SSA and the Gov- I want to make several points clear ernment Operations Committee on the Housesecurity system merit an outside review.,about the amendment offered by the of Representatives. However, any improvement that couldSenator from South Dakota. As I under- But alas, the experts don't always agree.be made from within the agency itselfstand his amendment, it would not pre- In 1979, after 8½ years of study the SMwould be welcomed. vent Congress at some later date from crné up with a "Future Systems Plan" that I understand that this amendment haSmaking a shift in the date when the cost- Supposedly would be the plan to end allbeen discussed with the majority and plans, the road map fo? the next decade. of-living increase would be made for so- the minority and I hope that it will cialsecurityrecipients o making a Within months, a new team came in to headaccepted. SSA, and they ditched the plan. change in the cost-of-living adjustment Most studenta of the problem agree that Mr. DOLE addressed the Chair. formula. That is the way the Senator people are at the heart of the computer mess. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-from Kansas interprets the amendment. SSA has had a history of hiring ita computerator from Kansas. I think that was the way it was inter- specialists f.rom within, and Prokop notes Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I havepreted by the Senator from South Da- that by doing so, SSA has cut itself off fromdiscussed the amendment with the dis-kota. If, in fact, the Senator from South the bern minds in the computer fleld. tinguished Senator from Rhode Island Upgrading the technical aspecta of ne Dakota does disagree, perhaps he could sy8tem without bringing In new people toand also with the Senator from Newindicate that. work on it would be, Prokop says, like "givingYork (Mr. MOYNIHAN). I have not had a I would also like to make clear that the an aircraft to an apprentice chauffeur." Ofchance to discuss it with the SenatorPressler amendment would not affect the coure recruitment is made difficult by thefrom Hawaii. minimum benefit changes included in more attractive salaries in the private sector. The Senator from Kansas has no ob-this bill. We are in the process of re- Svahn Is busily working on his own pln tojection to the amendment. It would seemstoring the minimum benefit to 90 to 95 address these long-term problems, but. mean-to make a great deal of sense. I would while there are more immediate concerns. percent of the eligible recipients. urge its adoption and will do what I can, I might add that itis,in fact, the Tile SSA is moving Its entire computeras chairman of the committee,! to urgePresidingOfficer's amendment. I am operation frOm ita headquarters in Wood-the GAO to move very quickly because, lawn, outside of Baltimore, to a new building pleased that she is present at this time. a mile away. Svahn says the new buildingas the Senator from Rhode Island has We are considering the restoration of the 'looks nicer" than the old one, but worriesindicated, there have been recent pressminimum benefit because, by and large, that it will be outdated by the time the movereports that are a little disturbing. Theit is patterned after an amendment that Is completed next year. American people are a little bit concernedshe suggested. I understand she will be On the other hand, there is this silver lin-about this system, in any event. Thisspeaking to that later today, ing: With a Btate-of-the-art uninterruptedmight reassure some of those people that So it would not affect any minimum • power supply at the new building. "we won'tthey know that we have done everything • have to worry any more about a good stiffpossible to make certain that te man-benefit changes included in this bill or thunderstorm knocking out our computersagement is efficient and productive andfuture reductions in the student benefits for a couple of hours." That's been anotherthat we are doing the very things thatenacted as part of the Reconciliation Act. problem. are in the amendment. Moreover, I would like to make it clear Mr. PELL. In my view, these are ex- I certainly am willing to accept thethat the amendment would not preclude amples of quality control and efficiencyamendment. Congress from enacting changes in social problems that are swiftly dealt with Mr. PELL. The amendment, as yousecurity benefits that apply on a pros- in private industry. These Inaccuraciesknow, calls for a study to be preparedpecttvebasis:thatis,changes that within a 6-month period. would not reduce the dollar amount of must not and cannot be ignored when benefits currently received by the recipi- they occur in one of our most imnortant Mr. DOLE. I might say to the Senatorents. i think that is clear in the amend- public programs. The social security sys-from Rhode Island, if, in fact, the taskment, but, as a matter of legislative his- t.em has always had an excellent ad-force is appointed, this study will betory, I would point out that this is a ministrative track record. It is for thisavailable to the task force, depending onsense-of-the-Congress resolution. I can reason, in addition to the American peo-the reporting date, and it might be veryunderstand the concern of the Senator ple's reliance on social security, that anyhelpftl to them. from South Dakota; what he is con- cases of declining efficiency in this pro- Mr. MATSUNAGA. Madam President,cerned about is that somebody getting gram ought to be nipped in the bud. Ifwe have no objection on the minority$200 a month this mQnth would have Congress ignore5 the reports of reducedside. As a matter of fact, I deem it to bethat amount reduced to a lesser figure productivity and mechanical inefficiencya very meritorious amendment. One ofthe next month. I have no quarrel with within the system, our citizens will be-the biggest complaints I have heard averthat. I can understand the feelings of come very concerned about the abilitythe years that I have been in Congresshis constituents in South Dakota. I think of the system to continue to process anhas been the delay in the issuance ofhe has performed a valuable service in increasing number of claims over thechecks to those who have qualified foroffering the amendment. long run. social security benefits. This amendment The only qualification the Senator The social security system ought towill definitely tend toward eliminationfrom Kansas would have is that we do have the best managers, the latest com-of that problem. We heartily endorse thenot want to lock ourselves into a posi- put.er capacity and the most up-to-dateamendment. tión. In the event that we continue to technology in order to maintain the high Mr. PELL. I thank my colleagues very standarth that have always existed in find the system In trouble and the trust much indeed. - funds,particularly the OASI trust fund, the administration ot this program. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is therein deeper difficulty, we may have to make It is for th1 reason, Madam Presidentfurther debate? If not, the question issome changes. That has been the thrust that I am offering an amendment todayon agreeing to the amendment of theof the debate so far today, that Congress tha't would direct the GeneralAccount.Senator from ode Island (Mr. PELL).must, soonez' or 1aterand generally, S 11382 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— SENATE October 14,1981 with Congress, it is later, although itbecause it is such an emotional, contro-difficult and, in many ways, extraordi- should be sooner. We must face up toversial, sometimes political. issue. nary job, in putting together some leg- our responsibilities-and address the sol- It frightens Members of Congress, 1islation which will give us some time to vency In the long term of the social secu-might add, for someone to go on teleaddress the longer-range issues that we rity trust fund. Then we can assure thevision, whoever it might- be, Republican,must face regarding social security. present beneficiaries, and the 115 mil-Democrat, or soineone else, saying, "Con- Mr. President, few Federal programs lion Americans, who are working andgress is about to cut your benefits;" Thatcan approach social security in terms paying into this system, that when theyimmediately creates a lot of well-foundedof the number of lives they touch. In ad- retire there is going to be a benefit there,concern among beneficiaries. But I thinkdition to the 35 million Americans who But I see nothing In this amendmentitis fair to say that we have a gravedirectly benefit from it, countless more that would prevent us from doing whatresponsibility. To thIs Senator, about thelook to it as a future source of support Is necessary to make certain that themost inefficient and dangerous way wefor themselves and their families. fund does survive and that we are ablecan serve present and future benefici- It therefore comes as no surprise t.iat • to make the benefit payments, That isaries is to do nothing. the financial problems now plaguing the certainly in line with the Intention of That is the point made by the Sena-system are viewed with more than casual the Senator from South Dakota, as Itor from Hawaii, as I understand it. Theinterest. The financing package before have discussed it with him, amendment Is not binding. It does ex-the Senate today addresses two of the So, on that basis, the Senator frompress the concern of the distinguishedconcerns most frequently expressed to • Kansas is certainly wffling toaccept theSenator from South Dakota. I do notme by my constituents. amendment. It. is my understanding thatquarrel with that concern, but there Is First, it reallocates the percentages of the Senator from South Dakota woulda larger problem out there, or could bethe payroll tax assigned to each of the

• like a rolicall on the amendment. If thatin the foreseeable future, that we maythree social security trust funds and per- is the case, then I would hope that wehave to address. If that is the case, thenmits borrowing between the old age and could ask for the yeas and nays, set thewe would have to override even a sense-survivors insurance (OASI) and the dis- amendment aside and call it up tomor-Of-the-Senate resolution. ability insurance (DI) trust funds. In row at some appropriate time and have - Mr.MATSUNAGA. Madam President,the absence of these actions, it is esti- the vote, in fact, I agree with. the amendment tomated that the OASI trust fund reserves I think that meets the concerns of thethe extent that I even ask unanimouswould fall below the level necessary to manager on the Democratic side. Is thatconsent that I be included as a cospon-pay benefits at some point in 1982. Thus. sor of the amendment. • correct? these corrective steps deal with the im- Mv, MATSUNAGA, Madam President, Mr. PRESSLER. I am very honored. mediate cash flow problem facing the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without we have no objections to setting aside system. - the vote until a later time, objection, it is so ordered, - Second,this measure partially restores As I understand the amendment, it is Mr.MATSUNAGA. We have no objec- the minimum benefit to current recip- merely to express the sense of the Con-tion to the amendment. ients. Taking an approach which I pro- gress, and it would not be absolutely Mr. PRESSLER. Madam President, I - posed in July, the legislation considers binding on the Congress in any event.askfor the yeas and nays. thp availability for other pension income While this Is a fine amendment, as far The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is therein determining eligibility for the mini- as I am concerned, and we do fully en-a sufficient second? There is not a suffi mum benefit, Approxmately 85 percent dorse it on this side of the aisle also,dent second, - - of current minimum benefit recipients a question would arise as to the effect Mr.DOLE. Madam President, I su'-will continue to receive it. -Thus,we will of the amendment in the event that thegest the absence of a quorum. avoid the situation of forcing older per- Congress should subsequently decide Jo The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cle"l:sons—largely women—onto welfare rolls reduèe benefits. That is a question whichwill call the roll. for the first time in their lives. At the might be- raised as to the binding effect The legislative clerk proceeded to cclisame time, we assure that those with of the resolution being offered as the roll. adequate outside resources do not con- amendment. Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I asatinue to receive -overlygenerous benefits I would take it from the statementsunanimous consent that the order forirom a financially strapped system. The made by the chairman, the Senator fromthe quorum call be rescinded. trust fund savings which are forgone as Kansas, having discussed the matter - ThePRESIDING OFFICER. Withouta result oJ this action would be made objection, it is so ordered. - with the author of the amendment, that Mr.DOLE. Madam President, I reup by extending the social security pay- • this is merely a-n expression of the sensenew the request for the yeas and nays onroll tax to the first 6 months of sick pay -of the Congress and not something whichthe Pressler amendment. and by lowering the maximum family would be binding to the effect that it The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is therebenefit for OASI recipients. may interfere with actions of the Sen-a sufficient second? There is a sufficient Although these steps are certainly ate which may be necessary in the future,second, important ones, they fall short of dealing Mr. DOLE. If the Senator from Haw&ii with a third major concern; namely, the will yield, that is the understanding of The yeas and nays were ordered. long-term solvency of the social security this Senator. In my discussion with the Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I sug-system. Merely juggling accounts will not Senator from South Dakota, I believegest the Pressler amendment now bebe sufficient to guarantee the availability he wants to underscore that itis thetemporarily laid aside so other Membersof benefits at a time when the ratio of present intention of this Congress notmay offer amendments, hopefully. retired to active workers is much less to cut- benefits for, current beneficiaries. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withoutfavorable to system finances than is the I think everyone is In agreement withobjection, it is so ordered. case today, The American public is well that basic idea. It Is also hopefully the - Mr.DOLE Madam President, I sug-aware of this situation, as evidenced by gest the absence of a quorum. intention of this present Congress o thedecliningconfidence. of - younger come to grips with the serious problems The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cl&kworkers that any social security benefits of tocia1 security. I am not so hopefulwill call the roll, will be available to them when they

- on-that. The legislative clerk proceeded to callretire, - - the roll. I do not criticize the Congress because Themeasure before us today buys us so far the system has- worked fairly well Mrs. KASSEBATJM. Mr. President, Isome time to truly come to grips with the and everyone has received their benefits,ask unanimous consent that the ordermost serious problems facing socialsecu- But I suggest,' based on statements byfor the quorum call be rescinded. rity. We have the opportunity to consider nearly everyone, regardless of party, re- The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.long-term solutions outside the crisis gardless of philosophy, that we need toPRE55LER), Without objection, itis soatmosphere which has characterIzedre- do something to shore up the system,ordered, - cent debate of the issue, It Is absolutely not just in a short run, which we are Mrs.KASSEBATJM. Mr. President, .1essential that we begin now to develop doing today, but also In the long run, a rise to speak to the fact -thatI believeschedule for implementing the changes - and very quickly. This will not be easythe Finance Committee has done a very neededto assure support for future re- October 14, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 11383 tirees. We would do a disservice to thoseeconomy in the next several years turnsfound to the social security problem. reaching retirement age after the turnout to be correct, the trust funds will notOn the contrary, we may even be putting of the century by postponing action untilbuild up enough reservesto cushionoff the day of reckoning to a time when the trust funds areall but depleted.against a simple downturn in the busi-we must enact a solution that will not be Providing younger workers with a clearness cycle. The amendment also doesas sound as a solution that we might en- idea of what they can expect from socialnot address the long-term deficit of $1.6ct now. security will allow them to make retire-trillion. For the second time in as many Madam President, I suggest the ab- ment plans without the fear that thoseyears, we are using the trust funds tosence of a quorum. plans will be disrupted only a few monthsbuy time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk before their actual retirement. As the Finance Committee considered will call the roll. We now have the chance to offer thesocial security's financial difficulties It The legislative clerk proceeded to call leadtime needed to make orderly plansbecame clear to me that some very basic tho roll. for the future. I applaud the decision ofdifferences exist among members of the Mr. LONG. Madam President, I ask the President to form a task force ex-committee. We had dIfficulty in agreeingunanimous consent that the order for prcssly for this purpose. It is my hopeon which set of economic assumptionsthe quorum call be rescinded. t1iL the recommendations of this groupto use, which led us, in turn, to disagree The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without will move us away from the crisis-to-on the extent of the short-term financialobjection, it is so ordered. crisis approach toward social securitydifficulty. We could not agree on what Mr. LONG. Madam President, earlier financing, restoring confidence in a sys-constitutes a prudent level of reserves.this year, the administration proposed tem which ha served as an importantWe even disagreed on the nature of theeliminating the social security minimum sourceofsupporttogenerationsofretirement fund. So, what we finallybenefit not only for future ber,eftciarie Americans. agreed to do was to disagree. That is thebut also for those already on the benefit Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I thank mynature of the committee amendment; itrolls. Althouth I supported the Presi- colleague from Kansas. As I indicatedis an agreement to disagree. The more Ident's overall efforts to reduce Federal earlier, the minimum benefit provisionthink about it, the more I think we Re-sr'ending, I considered this proposal to came substantially from a bill authoredpublicans on the Finance Committeebe unwise and inappropriate. I did not by my colleague from Kansas, and themade a mistake in not moving ahead onbelieve it was either necessary or desir- provision now In the committee amend-a social security reform proposal. able to cut benefits for people who have ment, with one minor exception, is due As we all know, retirees' benefits un-already been getting these payments for to her efforts in large part. der social security are paid for by work-many years, many of who are very old. I I am certain that the 2.7 million Amer-ers and employers In the form of a pay- offered and supported amendments in icans, when they have this restoration,roll tax. Put another way, a substantialcommittee and on the floor to restore may not understand the genesis of theportion of pension income In this coun-that benefit. I was unsuccessful at the action, but I indicate for the record thattry is dependent upon the willingness oftime. but I felt certain that the decision the final committee package contains theworkers and employers to continue toto cut those benefits would ultimately be amendment authored by my distin-support the social security system. I amreversed. I am pleased that the adminis- guished colleague (Mrs. KASSEBATJM). concerned, therefore, when I read thattration and the Finance Committee have Mr. President, I suggest the absence of73 percent of all workers between thenow recognized that we should not be a quorum. ages of 25 and 40 have little or no faithcuttinR these benefits. The amendment The PRESIDING OFFICER. 'e clerkthat funds will be available to pay theirfrom the committee does not go cuite as will call the roll. benefits when they retire. far as I had previously recommended in The legislative clerk proceeded to call Over half of those same workers arerestoring benefits for those now oi the the roll. taxed more heavily by the social securityrolls, but it does go most of the way Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, Ipayroll tax than they are by the Federaltoward achieving that objective and I ask unanimous consent that the orderIncome tax. And yet, at a time when wehorse the Senate will aporove it. for the quorum call be rescinded. are reducing the income tax burden, the The committee amendment will restore

• The PRESIDING OFFICER(Mrs.payroll tax burden is expected to In-theminimum beneft. without underm1n- KASSEBAtYM). Without objection, it is socrease substantially. I am not certainin the budgetary situation or the situ- ordered. how niuch longer American workers, ination in the trust fund. It does this by Mr. GRAS5LEy. Madam President the absence of decisive action by Con-incorporatingotherchangeswhich the Finance Committee amendment togress to bdng about social security re-achieve offsott1n savings but whtch do H.R. 4331 restores the minimumbenefitform, will allow themselves to be taxednot adversely affect the benefits of peo- for all U.S. recipients ellgtble for bene.to support retired Americans. ple already on the benefit rolls. fits before November 1981. It also pro- We cannot agree to disagree forever. The committee amendment also in- vides a dollar-for-dollar offset of theSocial security's problem will not gocludes provisions for transferring funds minimum benefits of persons receiving a away if we put them off. We cannot wishamong the three trust funth supported pension from Government employmentthem away. Because social security is aby the social security payroll tax. This not covered by social security. In ordersensitive issue, I hope that Republicanreallocation is necessary to assure that that recipients may continue to receiveand Democratic Members can reach abenefits can continue to be made until their benefits in a timely manner, thebipartisansolution.But, when pushthe Congress and the administration are amendment also allows borrowingcomes to shove, leadership must comeable to determine what additional ac- among the three trust funds and man-from this side of the aisle. If there is dis-tions may be necessary to strengthen the dates a reallocation of the payrolJ amongagreement, so be it. If social security isfunding of the social security program. the three trust funds so that the OASIused against us. so be It. Our respon-These programs are highly sensitive to fund receives a greater portion of thesibility as the majority party is clear.economic changes. Conseauently. what payroll tax. Finally, in order to offsetWhatever the consequences, we mustand how much will needth be done in the the cost of partially restoring the mini-thrash out social security reform and wenext few years will depend strongly on mum benefit to current recipients themust do it soon. how well the economy responds to the amendment extends the disability maxirn I am a political realist. I voted to re-present economic program. Adopting the mum family benefit to retirement andport this amendment from the Financecommittee provision wi1l allow us to act survivor cases and extends the social se-Committee because I realize that it is theafter we have had a chance to see how curity payroll tax to the first 6 monthsonly way we are going to be able to makethat economic response is developing. of sick pay. payments next year on a timely basis. IbelievetheFinance Committee I believe that the Finance CommitteeDespite my reservations, I intend to voteamendment addressesthe immediate amendment is more notable for what itfor adoption of this amendnient when itneed to restore the minimum benefit and does not do than for what it does. In thecomes to the floor of the Senate. to assure that the funds can continue to short term, it does not provide a prudent However, in no way would I like thismeet their obligations over the near level of reserves. In other words, even if,to be Interpreted as meaning that thisterm. I urge approval of the bill before our best guess at the performance of theSenator feels that a solution has beenthe Senate. S11384 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE October 14,1981

AMENDMENTNO. 582 any proposal affecting social securitypaperwork. We were not certain whether (Purpose: To provide for a special statementrevenues or expenditures be the subjectit would tell us more than we already of requests for new budget authority, esti-of a separate reconciliation bill, sepa-know. mates of outlays and revenues, and esti-rately voted on. Lreserve the right to of- The unified budget ard the midsession mates of deficits or surplus for the Federalfer such an amendment at another time.review, to my understanding, already Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust The parliamentarysituationbeingcontain reports on the trust funds and Fund, the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund, and the Federal Hospital In-what it is today, however, I will contentunified budget a a whole. surance Trust Fund) myself with the modest amendment now In addition, the Board of Trustees in at the desk. its annual report publishes the financial Mr. EAGLETON. Madam President, I Very simply, the amendment requiresstatus of the trust funds and includes call up my printed amendment numbereda factual report which will contrast thecurrent estimates of the shortrun and 582. revenues, expenditures, and surplus orlongrun actuarial balances in each fund. The PRESIDING OFFICER.Thedeficit situation of the social security In 1981 the trustees' report did, in fact, amendment will be stated. trusts with that for all other functionsset forth the economic assumptions un- The assistant legieslative clerk read asand activities of Government. Most im-derlying the projections and provided a follows: portant,the amendmentrequiresameans of camparing those assumptions The Senator from Missouri (Mr. EAGLETON)statement and explanation of the eco-withtheadministraion's budgetas- proposes an amendment numbered 582. nomic assumptions behind the numbers.sumptions. Mr. EAGLETON. Madam President, II believe that if we are going to have a Notwithstanding that, I will say to the ask unanimous consent that the readingunified budget, we should have a unifiedSenator from Missouri, I believe the of the amendment be dispensed with. set of economic assumptions behind it,amendment offeredbytheSenator The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withoutand not one set for social security and awould be helpful. I am certainly willing objection, it is so ordered. completely different set for other partsto try it again on the House side. If it of the budget. By highlighting the facts,issatisfactory with the distinguished The amendment is as follows: this report may move us toward basicSenator from Loui.iana, if he is prepared At the appropriate place in the bill insertconsistency in this matter. to accept the amendment, I will do the the following: The President has called for a bipar-best we can in cc,nference. SEc. .SEPARATEACCOUNTING Fon SOCIAL SE- CIJRITY TRUsT FUNDS tisan approach to the social security Mr. EAGLETON. Madam President, It For each scal year beginning after Sep-problem, a sentiment I am sure all of usis perfectly acceptable to me. I am grate tember 30, 1982, the President shall transmitendorse in principle. But, the fact is, weful for the comments of the Senator to the Congress, at the time he transmfts thewill not be able to objectively discussfrom Kansas and the tacit acquiescence Budget under subsection ('a) of section 201solutions until we can first agree on aof the Senator from Louisiana. and I of the Budget and Accounting Act. 1921. andcommon set of numbers and assumptionshope we can prevail once this bill goes at the time he submits the midyear amend-as to the magnitude and duration of theto conference. ments and revisions of such Budget underproblem. ThePRESIDING OmCER. The subsection(g)of such section. a special statement summarizing requests for new For all its merits as a tool in elevatingquestion is on agreeing to the amend- budget authority, estimates of outlays andthe impact of Federal activities on thement of the Senator from Missouri. revenues, and estimates of deficit or surpluseconomy, the unified budget does create The amendment (No. 582) was agreed (stated both separately and in the aggregate)confusion about the extent to which so-to. for the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insur-cial security trust funds are separated Mr. ELETON. Madam President, I ance Fund. the Federal Disability Insurancefrom other budget revenues and ex-move to reconsider the yote by which Trust Fund, and the Federal Hospital Insur-penditures. Since the inception of thethe amendment was agreed to. ance Trust Fund. The special statement re-unified budget in fiscal year 1969 there Mr. DOLE. I move to lay that motion quired by this section shall include a com- on the table. parative summary of the aggregate total re-have been charges that unnecessary quests for new budget authority, estimatestrust fund surpluses Were beingengi- The motion to lay on the table was of outlays and activities of the Governmentneered to disguise the true deficit inagreed to. (other than such Trust Funds). Such spe-other parts of the budget. That same AMENDMENT NO. 581 cial statement shall also Include an explana-charge is being made today with regard(Purpose: To establish a trust ftmd which tion and analysts of the economic assump-to the social security system. So long as is financed from revenues from the repeal tions on which the requests and estimates for Islittle of section 602 of the Economic ecovery such Trust Funds and the requests and esti-that dispute continues, there Tax Act of 1981 and which is used as a mates for such other function of the Gov-prospect for bipartisanship on this issue. reserve for the social security trust ftnd. ernment are based. Most of the information which this and for other purposes) (b) The special analysis required by thisamendment would cause to be assem- Mr. EAGLETON. Madam President, I section shall be transmitted to the Congressbled In a single and separate report is in a sepa1ate volume from the Budget of thealready available, but scattered through-call up my amendment numbered 581. United States or the midyear amendmentsout the budget and reports of the social The PRESIDING OmCER. Without and revisions of such Budget, as the case maysecurity trustees. The objectiveistoobjection, the amendment will be in or be. bring this information together in oneder, and the amendment of the Senator Mr. EAGLETON. Madam President,place and to require, in the same place, afrom South Dakota (Mr. PRE55LER) will this amendment is identical to one I of-full explanation of the economic assump-be temporarily laid aside. fered to the Economic Recovery Tax Acttions involved. The amendment in no The clerk will report. and which was adopted by the Senate onway changes the present unified budget The assistant legislative clerk read as a roll call vote of 97 to 2. Unfortunately,process. It merely adds a new elementfollows: the provision was dropped in conference.which should help explain the condition The Senator from Missouri (Mr. EAGLETON) I believe it is needed to reassure the pub-and interrelationship of social securityproposes an amendment numbered 581. lic as to the integrity of social securityand other Federal funds. financing—and perhaps other trust fund By itself, this amendment will resolve Mr. EAGLETON. Madam President. I financing as well—from our delibera-none of the substantive problems withask unanimous consent thatfurther tions on the rest of the budget. I know allthe social security system. But, it wouldreading of the amendment be dispensed the arguments in support of the unifiedbe a small step toward clarifying basicwith. budget. But, I also know that more andfacts and assuring the public that social The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without more Americans are coming to doubtsecurity will not become a political foot-objection, it Issoordered. that the benefits they are paying for andball. The amendment is as follows: being taxed for will be there when they Mr. DOLE. Madam President, as theViz: At the appropriate place, insert the (01— retire. Somehow, we have to assure theSenator from Missouri correctly indi-lowing new section: SEC. . (a)Section 602 of the Economic public that. social security will not be-cates, this amendment did pass by a 97-.Recovery Tax Act of 1981 (relating to reduc- come a political football. to-2 vote earlier, and it was discussed Intion in tax imposed on newly discovered oil) One way to do that, without doing yb-conference. It was the feeling at thatand the amendments made by such section ence to the unified budget concept attime that the am€ndment, although wellare hereby repealed. the same time, would be to require thatintentioned, Would simply require more (b) Title U Of the Social Security Act Is October 14,1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 11385 apply amendedby inserting after eectlon 201 theneeds of the Trust Fund and shall bear in- (2) (A) Subsection (a) shall to all following new section: terest at a rate equal to te average markettaxable years andperodato which the pro- yield (computed by te Managing Trusteevision repealed by subsection (a), ad the "SOCIAL SECURITY RESERVE TRUST FUND on the basis ot market quotations as of theamendments made by such provision, would "SEc. 201A. (a) There is established in theend Of the calendar month next precCdir1have applied.. Treasury of the United States a trust fund tothe date or such issue) on— (B) The Internal Revenue Code of 1954 be known as the Social Security Reserve "(i)all marketable interest.bearing obli-shall be applied and administered a If the Trust Fund (hereinafter in this section re-gation of the United States then forming aprovision repealed by subsection (a). and ferred to as the Trust FundS) which Shallpart oC the public debt, the amendments made by such provision. consist of amounts transferred to the Trust "(ii)all marketable interest-bearing obli-had not been enacted. Fund under this section. gations which are not obligations of the "(b)(1) The Secretary of the TreasuryUnited States but which are guaranteed as to Mr. EAGLETON. Madam President, I shall transfer to the Trust Fund each fiscalboth principal and interest by the Unitedask unanimous consent that the f 0110w- year an amount equal to the increase in rev-$tate3. and ing Senators be added as cosponsors to enues for such fisca' year which results from "(iii)all marketable federally Sponsoredamendment No. 581: Senators DODD, CAN- the repeal of sectiOn 602 of the Economicagency interest-bearing obligations that areNON, METZENBAUM, and MITCHELL. Recovery Tax Act of 1981. except that thedesignated in the laws authorizing their issu- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without aggregate amount appropriated to the Tru8tance as lawful investments for fiduciary and Fund undor this paragraph for all fiscal yearstrust funds under the control and authorityobjection, it is so ordered. shall not exceed $50,000,000,000. of the United States or any officer of the Mr. EAGLETON. Madam President, so- (2) The amount required to be trans.United States; cial security faces its own "window of ferred under paragraph (1) shall be trans-except that where such average market yieldvulnerability" (to use a favorite Reagan ferred to the Trust Fund by the Secretary of is not a multiple of one-eighth of 1 per phrase) as we embark on the unmarked the Treasury at least quarterly on the basiscentum. the rate or interest of such obliga-and potentially hazardous trail of Rea- of estimates made by the Secretary. Propertions shall be the multiple of one-eighth ofganoniics. adlustmeut shall be made in the amounts1 per centum nearest such market yield. There is no problem with social security subsequently transferred to the extent prior "(C) The Managing Trustee may purchasefinances in the period from the late estimate6 were not equal to the amounts re-otherinterest.bearingobligationsoftheeighties through the year 2010. In fact, rlu!red to be transferred. United States or obligations guaranteed as to "(c) There is created a body to be knownboth principal and interest by the Unitedthrough most of that time, the trust as the Board of Trustees of the Trust FundStates, on original issue or at the marketfunds should enjoy large surpluses. (horeinafter in this section called the 'Boardprice, where lie determines that 8uch pur- According to the latest Congressional o Trustees') the members, Managing Trus-chase is necessary to secure the maximumBudget Office estimate, there is not even tee, and Secretary of which shall be the in-possible interest yield, commensurate witha short-term problem assuming moder- dividualsservingas members. Managing Trustee, and Secretary of the Board of Trus- the safety or the Trust Fund, and that suchate economic progress and authorization tees created under section 201(c). The Boardpurchase is in the public interest. of interfund borrowing. CBO projects of Trustees shall meet at least once each cal- "(D) The Managing Trustee 8hall securecombined trust fund reserves will be such equipment and enlist the Services ofabove 17percentofyearlyoutlays endar year. Jt shall be the duty of the Boardsuch experts as may be necessary for the of Trustees to--— purpose of allowing the Board to make in-through 1990 and above 21 percent in 7 "(1) hold the Trust Fund; vestments which will secure the maximumof those 10 years. The minimum accept- "(2) renOrt to the Congress not later thanpossible interest yield. able reserve according to most experts is the first day of April of each year on the "(2) Any obligations acquired by the Trustabout 15 percent. oeratiOn and status of the Trust Fund dur-Fund (except public-debt obligations issued This CBO report is encouraging, but in the preceding fiscal year and on its ex-exclusively to the Trust Fund) may be soldnot without a red flag. If the economy nected oeration and status during the nextby the Managing Trustee atthe marketshould perform worse than CBO antici- five fiscal years: price, and such public-debt obligations maypates, then additional congressional ac- '(3) report immediately to the Congressbe redeemed at par plus accrued interest. wbenever the Board of Trustees isof the "(3) The interest on, and the proceedstion could be required as early as fiscal Oplnon that th amount of the Trust Fundfrom the sale or redemption of, any obliga-year 1985. If things should really go sour, i' unduly small: and tions held in the Trust Fund shall be cred-we could be back here even sooner. (4 review the general Dolicies followed I do not know of many economists or in managing the Trust Fund, and recom-ited to and form a part of the Trust Fund. mend changes in such Dolicies, including "(e) The Secretary shall transfer. Out offinancial analysts who put a great deal necessary chnes in the provisions of theany amounts in the Trust Fund, to the Fed-of stock in forecasts these days. law which govern the way in which theeral Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust As a matter of fact, I read somewhere Trust Fund Is to be managed. Fund, the Federal Disability Insurance Trtmstthat a lot of economists are copying Fund. and the Federal Hospital Insuranceweathermen in assigning a degree of The report provided for in paragraph (2)Fund such amounts as may be provided by shall include a statement of the assets of.appropriation Acts.". probability to their forecasts. You know and the disbursements made from, the Trust (c) Subparagraph (B) of section 102(c)(1) what that is worth. How would you like Fund during the preceding fiscal year. anof the Crude Oil Windfall Profit Tax Act ofto be told you have a 40 percent prob- esUmate t,f the expected payments to, and19B0 is amended— ability of receiving your social security disbursements from, the Trust Fund during check next year? each of the next fivefiscalyears. and a (1) by striking Out the period at the end statement of the actuarial status of theof clause (ii) and inserting in lieu thereof The Reagan economic program has Trust Fund. Such report shalJ be printed as plus", and never been tried before. There are no a House document of the session of the Con- (2) by inserting immediately after clauseguides, but there is plenty of apprehen- gress in which the report is made. (ii) the following new clause: sion about the inherent contradictions "(d)(l)(A) It shall be the duty of the "(iii) any amount transferred to the Socialinvolved in cutting taxes by $750 billion, Managing Trustee to invest such portion ofSecurity Reserve Trust Fund under sectionincreasing defense to $1.6 trillion and the Trust Fund as is not, in his judgment,201A(b)(1) of the Social Security Act.", trying at the same time to balance the required to meet current withdrawals, and (d) (1) Section 201 of the Social Security such invcstmnts shall be made so as toAct Is amended by adding at the end thereofbudget and maintain a tight money sup- secure the maximum possible interest yield,the following new subsection: ply. coinniensurate with the safety of the Trust "(I) There shall be transferred to the Fed- I do not think we ought to leave the Fund. Such investments may be made onlyeral Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trustsocial se'curity systen teetering on that nintcre3t-bearing obligations of the UnitedFund and to the Federal Disability Insur-edgeof uncertainty We need some Stnte ortiiobligations guaranteed as toance Trust Fund Such amounts as may be both principa' and interest by the Unitedappropriated for such purpose from the So-greater margin of safety and security States. For such Durpose such obligationscial Security Reserve Trust Fund.". than is provided by the otherwise com- may he acquired (i) on original issue at the (2) Section 1817 of the Social Security Actmendable bill before us. issue price, or (ii) by purchase of outstand-is amended by adding at the end thereof the Not long ago, I offered an amendment ing obligations at the market price. following new subsection: to the debt ceiling bill which would have (B) The ptirposes for which obligations "(j)There shall be transferred to the of the Un1te1 States may be issued-under thTrust Fund such amounits as may be appro-repealed most of the special tax breaks Second Liberty Bond Act, a amended, arepriate1 for such purpose from the Socialgiven the oil industry by the 1981 Tax hereby extended to authorize the IssuanceSecurity Reserve Trust Pund,". Act. The amendment provided for a at par of public-debt obflgations for pur- (e)(1) Except as provided in paragraphtransfer of that $33 billion to the social chase by the Trust Fund. Such obligations(2), the amendments made by this sectionsecurity trusts where they would be he'd issue'l for purchase by the Trust Fund shallshall apply to fiscal years beginning afteras a reserve against unforeseen economic have maturities fixed with due regard for theSeptember30, 1981. adversity. S 11386 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE. October 14, 1981 That amendment was defeated, In part As that record 8hows, there is nothingf exploration, and production. •ThlB In- I suspect, because of the concern of manynew about my amendment to earmarkcentive Is more ample In my opinion. 011 Members of the Senate about the burdensome small part of the windfall tax forcompany revenues are at 8taggerlng of the windfail tax on small royaltysocial security. In fact, my poposai is alevels. The drilling Industry Is operaUng owners and indeiendent stripper wellgood deal less than the measure which,at maximum ospacity, and even 80, oil producers. according to Senator ROTH and Senatecompanies are investing lees than half Therefore, the amendment I am of-Finance Committee staffers, was sup-their Income in new production and only fering today would leave the royaltyported by every Republican member ofa small percentage In research on al- owners and stripper well provisions ofthe Finance Committee 2 years ago—ternative or synthetic fuels. the Tax Act as they are. Senators ROTH. DOLE. PAeICWOOD. Dvi- It was only a week or so ago, that some The amendment I am offering todayFORTH, WALLOP, CHAFEE, HEINZ,andflu-In this Chamber were bewailing the mon- repeals only the tax breaks given to so-RENBERGER—and the measure was sup-strous, almost unimaginable trillion dol- called newly discovered oil. It Is esti-ported on the floor of the Senate by alllar national debt. A trillion dollars— mated that between 70 and 80 percent ofbut Senator WALLOP. truly a staggering figure. I remember this oil is produced by the top 50 oil com- If using the windfall tax revenues forsomeone on the other sIde of the aisle panies for whom the tax break is a pleas-social security was right In 1979, It Istelling us how many times that trillion ant, if gratuitous, bonanza. even more right in 1981 when the systemdollar debt would encircle the Earth If By eliminating that totally unjustifiedfaces potential problems makIng endslaid end to end in dollar bills. If anyone change in the windfall tax, we would addmeet. needs a reminder of how much the deci- an estimated $14.2 billion to the Treas- In almost every major respect, the twosion to decontrol oil prices meant to the ury through 1990. My amendment pro-measures which enjoyed such hearty Re-oil Industry and cost consumers, just poses, as it did before, to transfer thesepublican support In 1979 and 1980, arethink of that natIonal debt, because It is funds to social security. Identical to the amendment I have Intro-the same figure. At the time of Its de- I ask unanimous consent that a tableduced today. The only significant dif-control decIsIon the administration esti- showing these revenue gains be printedference among them that I can find Ismated It would mean at least $1 trillion in the RECORD at this point In my re-that the Republican-backed measure setto domestic oil producers through the marks. aside funds from general revenues of theyear 1990—enough to retire the whole There being no objection, the table wasU.S. Treasury, whereas my amendmentnational debt. ordered to be printed in the RECORD, asseeks to recover funds which were unjus- follows: Now, the windfall tax took only about tifiably rebated to the treasuries of top•22 percent of those added revenues—.$227 Repeal of reduction In tax for newly dis-oil companies. That is the only dIffer-billion—and even that amount some covered oil: ence. want to give back to the oil companies. Revenue gain from Eagleton amendment I do not know how Senators are going How can we vote to cut social securIty fIn billions of dollars to vote today or how they are going tobenefits by $2 billion, as we have, and Calendaryear: explain to their senior citizens backclose our eyes to this absolute gift to the 1981 home that it is one thing to help socialoil companies? 1982 0.1security out of Government funds, but 1983 .8another if it means taking back some- There is no question of using gener1 1984 .6thing from the oil companies. I do notrevenues for social security here. These 1985 1.0know what kind of rationale they areare not general revenues. They are lost 1986 1.8going to construct to justify that aprevenues—giveaway revenues that serve 1.987 2.1parent switch. But. I do know this—theno purpose other than enrichment of 1988 2.4issue before us today has nothing to dooil companies already so profitable they 1989 2.8 do not know where to spend it all. 1990 8.1with philosophical objections to usIng general revenue for social security. That That Is the issue posed by my modest Tot1 revenue gain 1981 through is a smokescreen pure and simple, andamendment. At this time of hand wring- 1990 14.2.the record I have just recited proves It.ing over the budget and scarcity of rev- Per estimates of the Joint Committee on Nor does the issue have anything to doenues, it presents a simple choice. Is this Taxation. with compromising the administration's$14 billion better spent to fatten profits economic program. The tax breaks givenof a few oil producers or is there a Mr. DURENBERGER assumed thethe oil companies were not part of thegreater need to give our 36 mIllIon social chair.) Reagan tax package and, in fact, it wassecurity recipients a small margin of Mr. EAGLETON. Mr. President, theopposed here on the Senate floor by Sen-safety against loss of their benefits? óistinguished Senator from Delawareator ROTH, the acknowledged coauthor I can understand some of my col- (Mr. ROTH) reminded me in an earlierof the supply-side tax bill—the Kemp-leagues'concernforsmallroyalty debate, that there is nothing particularlyRoth bill. He said it was not needed. Itowners and independent stripper well original about my amendmerjt. In fact,was a giveaway. And, to his everlastingproducers. This amendment does not It is a far more modest proposal thancredit, he opposed it. touch the relief we granted those groups an initiative he himself made when the The choice we face on this amendment.earlier this year. It goes simply to the windfall tax bill was before the FinanceIs clear. Do we think adding $14 billionnew oil tax reductions in the Interest of Committee on October 19, 1979. to the already swollen profits of majorbuttressing the beleaguered social secu- According to the Senator from Del-oil companies Is more important than rity system. I hope my colleagues will aware his proposal would have used all ofproviding a small margin of security forhave comparable concern for the mil- the windfall revenue for social security.our senior citizens? There is no otherlions of social security recipients who The Roth amendment was defeated on aissue. depend on those benefits. b-to-btie. butevery Republican mem- The Republican-led initiative in the In conclusion, Mr. President, I will er of the Finance Committee at thatSenate Finance Committee—backed byask to have printed in the RECORD three time was recorded in favor of earmark-all committee Republicans—puts to restletters which we have received support- ing windfall revenues for social securitythe notion that using outside revenuesing the amendment now before this body. Including, I might note, the distinguishedfor socia' security is somehow a liberalOne is from the National Caucus and floor manager (Mr. DoLE). Democratic program. To the contrary, tCenter on Black Aged. Inc.. addressed to Notwithstandingthatdefeat,theis an approach which has had strongme. The address of the Nationa' Caucus windfall bill reported by the committeebipartisan support in the past and whichand Center on Black Aged, Inc., is here and passed by the Senate contained aenjoys wide pubuc support today. n Washington, D.C. The letter is sighed watered-down version of the Roth pro- Mr. President, the adoption of the re-by Aaron Henry, chairman. posal. Specifically, it reserved $18.7 bil-duced tax on domestic production of new The next letter that I *ill ask to put lion of the windfall revenues in a specialoil was a senseless squandeling of taxin the RECORD is from the American Fed- taxpayer trust fund for possible futureresources, Th whole premise of oureration of Labor and Congress of Indus- use in connection with social security.agreement to decontrol oil prices with atrial Organizations. It Is on the letter- Unfortunateiy,that provisionwastax on excessive, unearned profits whead of Mr. Lane Kirkland. It is entItled dropped In conference. that it would provide ample incentIve"Legislative Alert!," dated October 14, iS 11387 October 14, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD SENATE $749 billion by the end of FT '86. The Eagle.Oildoes not start flowing, but the juices 1981. today. It Is signed onbehalf of theton amendment will simply recoup a smallstart flowing about how we can get some AFL-CIO by Mr. Ray Denlson fraction of that amount from those firmaof that oil money. But I am not going to, The third and final letter Isfrom thethat have benefited most from the tax pro-discuss that in any great detail. National Retired TeathersAssociationgram and decontrol of oil. I might say that this Is one provision end the American Associationof Retired The AFL—CIO urges that you vote for the Persons. It, too, Is addressed to meunder5agleton amendment to H.R. 4331 as anin the big tax bill, lowering the tax on this date end IsIn support of thisequitable means of providing a guarantee ofnews oil, that Is truly supply-side be- amendment. It 10 signed by Peter W.stability to the Social Security program andcau It reduces the tax on newly dis- Hughes, legislative counsel for the Na-peace of mind to America's deeply concernedcovered oil and provides an incentive for andworking people and retirees. more discovery. But we have been tional Retired Teachers Association Sincerely, through that debate. the American Association ofRetired DAY DENISON, The question Is whether or not we Persons. Virector, Vepartment 0/Legislation. Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- want to use general revenues in the so- sent that these three letters be printed In NATIONAL RETIRED TEACHERS Asso- cial security program. The three letters CIATION. m AMERICAN ASSOCIA- just inserted In the RECORD come from the RECORD. TION ow RETIRED PERSONS, those who want to fund social security There being no objection, the letters October 14, 1981. with general revenues. Now that Is their were ordered to be printed In the RECORD,Hon. THosss EAGLETON, right. I do not believe that Is the correct as follows: U.S. Senate, way to go. I have just notified my col- THE NATIoNAl. CAucus, Washington, D;C. AND CENTER oN BLACK MED. INC., DEAR SENATOREAGLETON: NRTA—AARPleagues in the Appropriations Commit- Walhington. V.C.,October14,1981. strongly support your amendment (No. 581)tee that If they really want to open a SenatorEAGLETON, to repeal the recently-enacted tax break pro-can of worms, they will vote for this Dir)csen SenateOfficeBldg.,. vided for newly discovered oil and earmarkamendment. Then they are really going Washington, V.C. those funds for the social security trustto have appropriations problems. Dzsa SENAToR EAGLETON: TheNationalfunds Once you start funding the social se- Caucus and Center on Black Aged strongly Economic adversities have drained' the supports your amendment to repeal the taxsystem's combined trust fund levels to pre-curity system and set aside the par- cut on newly discovered oil and apply thiscariously low levels. Our Associations areticipatory plan we have now, the appro- revenue to strengthen the Social Securityconvinced that the pooling of assets from allpriations process Is really going to be in trust funds. It is our understanding that thisthree trust funds (through Interfund bor-great difficulty. Social security will be change would make. $14.2 billion of addi-rowing or reallocation schemes) will not becompeting up and down the line with tional revenue potentially available for So-sufficient to carry the system through thisevery other program. I Just suggest that cial Security through 199O decade. that Is not the way to go. We support your amendment because it By not seeking to.provide additional rove- At this point, I.woukl also like to cor- would (1) help to strengthen Social Secu-nue for social security at this time, Congress rity's financing, (2) make the financing morewill be setting the stage for making deep,rect an Impression about the so-called progressive, (3) prevent Increases In payrollprecipitous benefit cute that would seriouslyunanimous committee vote. I read a re- taxes for worker and their employers, andendanger the elderly's already declining In-lease put out by the chairman of the (4) make further benefitS cute unnecessary.come security. A more reasonable strategyDemocratic National Committee.. Mr. NCBA urges your colleagues In the Senatefor dealing with social security's short-termMazlatt, in which he indicated that all to approve this much-needed proposal. financing problems would be to buttress in.the committee Republicans had voted for

• With warm regards. tertund borrowing or reallocation with lim-the Eagleton amendment and now we • Sincerely, ited and temporary Infusions of general rove-are going to retreat. AARON HENRY, •nues. The general revenues should be uSed Chairman. only to assure with some safety that belie- If that is the case, then all the Demo- fia will be paid as they come due. In ordercrats voted against tht Eagleton amend- to avoid frustrating efforts to balance thement, and I assume we are going to see LEGIsLATIvE ALERT budget, adding revenue to social security willsome of those retreat. I will read the AMERICAN FEDERATION OP LABOR AND entail having to reduce other governmentnames of those who voted against this CoNGRESs or INDUSTRIAL ORGAN!-' - • expenditure or utilizing revenue from non- ZATIONS, fantastic amendment: Senators LONG, • payroll tax sources—such as the oil windfall TALMADGE, RIBICOFF, BYRD, • Washington. V.C., October 14, 1981. profits tax. NELSON, Dxaa SENATOR: The AFL-CIO is strongly Having provided for the short-term finan- BENTSEN, MATSUNAGA, -MOYNnrAll, BAT- In support of the Eagleton amendment tocial stability of the system, Congress mustcus, and BRADLEY. There are two Demo- H.R. 4331. currently under consideration onmove decisively to phase-in fundamentalcrats who voted for the amendment, the Senate floor, as a fair, timely and respon-changes In social security that will help itSenator GRAVEL and Senator BOREN. sible means of insuring financial stability ofaccommodate the future demographic shift I want to Indicate for the RECORD that the Social Security system. and eliminate its very seriOus long-termsome of the proponents have indicated The AFL-CIO does not share the views ofImbalance. that the Eagleton amendment is similar alarmiats who see the demise of the Social For now, however, the choice is simple: Security program; instead, it is our view thateither Congress provides additional revenueto an amendment offered by Senator Interfund borrowing—backed by a fund re-for social security to protect it from in-Rorx In the Finance Committee about serve—can provide the solution to the pro-evitable downturns In the economy or it can2 years ago. gram's need through' the end of this cen-deal with the Bystem's financial problems by The allegation has been made that tury without cutting benefits. cutting benefits, a strategy that will hurt anthe committee Republicans who voted The Eagleton Amendment provides thisalready vulnerable segment of society—thefor Senator Rorn's amendment in 1979 fund reserve, and from a most appropriateelderly. • and who now oppose this Eagleton source, the windfall profits of those who • - Sincerely, have benefited from our energy crises. amendment have somehow fllpflopped Specifically,theEagletonAmendment • PETER W. HUSHED, on the issue. would repeal' Section è02 of the "Economic Legislative Counsel. Let me say for the RECORD that Is Recovery Tax Act of 1981" which reduced Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I wonder Ifnot the case. That Is wrong. It is one the tax rate on newly-discovered oil fromI might just respond for about a minute. 80 percent to 15 percent. Estimated revenue more attempt to take political advan- would be $14.2 billion by 1990—the life ofThere are a couple of amendments thattage of the plight of social security and the windfall profits tax. The amendment Dro.we could accept, If It Is all right withthe fiscal needs of elderly Americans. vides that this $14.2 billion would be tralis..'the Senator from Missouri to lay his What was the Roth amendment we •ferred to the So(1a1 Security trusts where it• amendment aside temporarily. Also thevoted on in the committee on October 19, would be held as a reserve against unforeseenSenator from Pennsylvania wants to1979? DurIng the markup of the so- economic difficulties. The Eagleton amend-make a brief statement. called windfall profit tax, which is really ment thus would provide a margin of safety an •excise tax, Senator ROTH offered an and security for thoie millions of Americans • First, I would like to just make a brief dependent on a healthy Social Securitycomment on the amendment. Mr. Presi-amendment to freeze for 1 year the System. dent, I would say that the vote will comesocial security payroll tax increase that The Administration has admitted that iton this amendment tomorrow. I knowwas scheduled. to take effect on January miscalculated the revenue effects of its mas-that It Is particularly attractive to some1, 1981. Senator Romi argued that this sive tax bill enacted Just last August. It isto just mention the word "oil" on hestep was necessary to give tax relief to estimated that the revenue loss will be aboutSenate floor and the juices start flowing.working people. S 11388 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE October 14, 1981 inorder to offset this 1-year payrollwho supported the Roth amendmentthey are the ones who are footing the bill. tax freeze, Senator Rons proposed thal voted against general revenue financingThey are the ones who are paying the higher the Increased Income tax revenues re-of the HI fund when the issue was spe-energy prices, paying the higher taxes, suffer- ing from inflation and, I might say also mss- sulting from oilprice decontrol—notcifically addressed In the Finance Com-sive tax increases, and frankly. I do not think 'windfall profit tax but oil price decon-mittee. itis fair that the working people be left trol—be placed in the hospital insur- Frankly, most Republicans voted forout in' the cold ance trust fund The Roth amendmentthe Roth amendment because of partisan Mr. Chairman, we have basically two types did not increase the windfall profit taxmaneuvering to deny Senator ROTH aof windfall. One Is the windfall for oil pro- nor did it earmark windfall profit taxvote on his amendment. ducers, the other one is for the Federal gov- revenues in any way. Finance Committee Republicans whoernment. Most of 'our discussions have been oppose the Eagleton amendment havedealing with the windfall profits tax. It ad- Iask unanimous consent to have dresses the oil producers windfall, but unless placed in the RECORD the vote on thatno more "flip-flopped" on the generalwe act, the Federal government stands to amendment. 'I also ask unanimous con.revenue, financing Issue than pro-Eagle-gain billions of dollars in windfall profits sent to have printed in the RECORD howton Democrats (such as Senators Mor-from the increased revenue resulting Solely this present amendment offered by theNIHAN and BRADLEY) who voted againstfrom decontrol. Senator from Missouri differs from theRoth n 1979. I do not beUeve the Federal government Roth amendment. The Finance Committee voted 16 to 1should be allowed to benefit from oil price There being no objection, the material(Senator NELSON opposed) to impose nodecontrol any more than the oil companies. I think that we must act, and I think that was ordered to be printed in the Rzcoiw,windfall profit tax on newly discoveredwe must act now, to return this government as follows: oil. Does this mean that any Financewindfall to the working people who will be Tuz yorE ox vxz Rorx AMENDMENT Committee Senator who voted for a newpaying higher prices under decontrol, After a Ribicoff motion to defer a Vote Ofloil exemption and who now votes for the Therefore, 1 am proposing that we freeze .the Roth Amendment was tabled by a 10 toEagleton amendment has "flip-flopped"the Social Security tax increases for theyear 8 Vote, the Roth Amendment failed to passon the proper taxation of newly discov-1981 and do not permit the projected in- ona 10 to lOvote: ered oil? creases to go Into effect that year. Under For: Senators Dole. Packwood. Roth. Dan- I suggest that the Roth amendment ispresent law, the already high Social Security forth. Chafee, Heinz, Wallop, Durenberger,no precedent for the Eagleton amend-taxes are scheduled to increase Verysub- Gravel, and Boren. ment. In fact, the Finance Committeestantially In 1981. The tax rate willgo up Against: Senators Long. Talmadge, Ribi-voted 16 to 1, Senator NELSON opposed, tofrom 8.18 percent to 8.65 percent. - coff,Byrd,Nelson,Bentsen,Matsunaga, The wage base will jump to $29,700. Moynihan, Baucus. and Bradley. Impose no windfall profit tax on newly ,I might point out, Mr. Chairman,that the discovered oil. . wage base is now $22,900; it willgo up in How THE EAOLEION AMENDMENT Dn'rszs Sothis was aFinance Committee ac-'80 to $25,900, but because the fiscalyear FROM THE Rovx Aszzrmaxzwr tion on newly discovered oil, 16 to 1, one,hasstarted,itcannotbe changed. My The Eagleton Amendment would increasenegative vote, the theory being that youamendment would freeze the tax rate at 8.13 and earmark the Windfall Profit Tax oncannot have a windfall tax on somethingpercent and the wage base at $25,900, reduc- newly discovered oil; the Roth Amendmentnot yet discovered. We have been-throughing the maximum Social Securitytax by Would have made no change In the Windfallthat argument. The question today is a $887. Profit Tax and would have earmarked in-larger question. I suggest if you want to Very frankly, if we do not do something creased income tax collections expected from now, we are deuvering a one-two punch' on decontrol. vote to start funding social security withall Americans. The Roth Amendment was primarily de-general revenues—I know the Senator I point out that the Congressional Budget signed to provide tax relief by one-year freezefrom Missouri does' not agree with that—Office has pointed out that my proposalwill of social seáurity taxes; the EagletonAmend.this Is an opportunity. If you want tohave a positive impact on the economyre- meat proposes no tax reliet start putting' more pressure on generalsulting in less inflation and more job8. Ac- 'The Eagleton Amendment seems primarilyrevenue funds, more pressure on thecording to CBO. the amendment willreduce intended to provide general revenuefinanc-ApprOpriations Committee, and less pres-the inflation rate by .3 percent. That is in- ing to' the social security system; theRothsure on the Finance Committee, it wouldflation,.3 percent, Amendment would have madeno net ad- It will lower the Unemployment rate by certainly ease our burden to find some.2 percent and prevent the loss of 250.000 ditions to the social security systemandother way to finance social security than disclaimed any Intent to affect theretire- jobs. ment or disability trust funds. 'the present plan. But the present plan So it has a beneficial effect on the economy has worked. We have never had generalboth from' the standpoint of inflation and Mr. DOtE. The Eagleton amendmentrevenue financing In the general system.unemployment. would Increase and earmark thewind-It would seem to this Senator that none According, to the CBO, the direct budget fall profit tax on newly discoveredoil;is needed now. cost of my proposal would be $11 billion, the Roth amendniept would havemade We' will be going into this I assume inbut because of the increase in the number no change In the windfall profittax of taxpaying jobs and the reduction of un- andmore detail tomorrow morning. employment compensation 'spending, CBO would have earmarked Increasedincome I ask unanimous consent that a tran-estimates it would have a budget cost of tax collections expected from decontrol.script of the full committee proceedings$8.8 billion. The Roth amendment was primarilyof October 19, 1979, be printed in the This payroll tax freeze would be financed designed to provide tax relief by1-yearREcoiw. I would caution my colleaguesby transferring a portion of the billions of freeze of social'securjty taxes; theEagle-and the public that this is an uncorrecteddollars in increased revenue from decontrol ton amendment proposesno tax ielief.transcript of a committee markup; to the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund. The Eagleton amendment The Social Security Advisory Council 1979 seems pri- There being, no objection, the tran-report endorsed the approach of financing marily intended to provide generalreve-script was ordered to be printed In thepart of the Hospital Insurance Trust Fund nue financing to the social securitysys-RECORD, as follows: - from the -generalrevenue. By earmarking tem; the Roth amendment wouldhave UNCORRECTEDTRANSCRIPT OF SENATE FINANCE these special funds from decontrol, we can made no net additions to the socialse- — C0MSrrrrEEix Exzcv'rivE SESSION, OcTO- ipsure the stability of the trust fund. curity sYstem and disclaimed any Intent BER 19, 1979 I think 'it is Important to point out that to affect the retirement or disabilitytrust Now, let us take the Roth amendment.my amendment—again, to repeat, would roll funds. -Mr.Roth Is recognized for ten minutes. Theback the, payroll tax increases scheduled for THE ROTH AMEND555r 15 HO PRECEDENTPOE other side wiU have five minutes. '8i ,by putting the Increased revenues from THE EAGLETON AMENDMENT Senator RoTH. Senator I'ackwood hopesdecontrol Into the Medicare trust fund. We' In view of the differences outlinedthat my arguments are not twice as bad.are not propbsing to use general revenue Mr. Chairman, as I mentioned yesterdayfinancing for the retirement program either - above, the Roth amendment to freeze theafternoon, this committee has been concen- thepension plan itself or the disability trust payroll tax cannot be fairly describedastrating on big oil companies, independents,fund. being "similar" to the Eagletonamend-conservation tax credits and the poor. Could Those would not be affected In any way. ment. I have the attention please? What my amendment deals with is the As one who voted for the Roth amend- The CHAIRMAN. Let us have order, please.Medicare trust fund. As Isaid, this has been ment, I did not view it at the time Senator Rovx. The one group that we haveendorsed by the Social Security Advisory orreally paid very Uttle attention to is theCouncil; by Robert Ball,' former Social Se- now as a vote for general revenue financ-Working people of this country. curity Administrator: and Joseph Peckman ing of social security. Most Republicans I might point out that they are paying—Cf Brooklngs Institute, as Well as a growing October 14, 1981 CONGRESSIONALRECORD—SENATE S 11389 bipartisan group of Ways and Means Coin-ary on the whole question of Social Securitywe run a real danger that it will be very dif- mittee members. and it3 whole8ituation. ficult to give the kind of relief to the work- Mr. Chairman, I do not think there is any I read the fact sheet, and I think I see, Iing people that both liberals and conserv- question, any question, that Congress willam not exactly sure, but I think I see whatatives have endorsed and endorsed strongly. block the 1981 tax increase, but if we waitapproach Senator Roth istaking, but I Senator NELSON. Mr. Chairman? until next year to do it, right before thethink, Senator, we really ought to have hear- Senator RXBXCOFT.Mr.Chairman? election, these revenues may have alreadyings first. It Is far too complicated for me to It could very well be that the Finance been spent, and then a rollback raises somemake a decision of this dimension, person-Committee will adopt the Roth amendment, serious problems. ally, as to where I would go. I am not sayingbut I do have respect for the position of Oil price decontrol will raise a tremendousI am (or it or against it. the Chairman of the Subcommittee, Senator amount of revenue over and above whatever Since we are going to have hearings any- Nelson. windfall profits tax Is enacted and I thinkway, it is in the jurisdiction of the Suboom- I would move to defer action on the Roth it Is only fair that we earmark now—andmittee and I will get them on, if not laterproposal uatil hearings are held by Gaylord we want to emphasize now—a portion ofthis fall, at least in January or early Febru-Nelson's subcomlttee with the understand- these funds for the Social Security freeze. ary, so we have plenty of time aM I woulding that those hearings would not be later I will point out that this committee hasbe happy to have you as a witness at any timethan 30 days after we resumed session in already taken action to he'p the poor in 1981you choose, the first witness if you want. January. which I strongly support as necessary, but I But I think it is so complicated and we Senator ROTH. In due deference to my think it is also Important that we tell thehave gotten into so much trouble in the pastesteemed colleague from Connecticut, Mr. working people of America that they, too, areby doing this stuff on the Floor off the topsChairman, in accordance with our practices, going to benefit. of our heads—I do not mean to suggest thatI would like an up and down vote on my I 'pointed out that a number of differentyou have not given this a lot of thought. Theamendment. groups have come out in support of this ap-problem is, I have not and neither has any- The CHAIRMAN. I think in fairness to those proach, Mr. Chairman. According to a CBObody else. of us who find a lot or appeal to the amend- study, a reduction in Social Security taxes I would much prefer if you would with-menrt and might want to be for lit, that we will be reItively easy to implement, wouldhold this and we will schedule hearings, asought to let it be considered in an orderly lead to a lower rate of price increase, wouldwe have intended to all along. I just havefashion and it seems to me that it ought to reduce the adverse impact of high energynot gotten around to selecting a date, andvote on Senator Itibicoff's amendment. prices almost immediately. ,then hear you. We may agree or we may dis- Senator RoTu Mr. Chairman, as I have Dr. Walter Heller. on numerous occasionsagree, but you will not be barred from takingsaid, we have taken action on behalf of the and again just yesterday, has urged Con-action. oil companies. We have taken action on be- gress to reduce Social Security taxes in order Senator ROTH. Let me point out that, num- half of the inidependents, we have taken to reduce inflation and to offset the recession.ber one, we have voted $30 billion of aid toaction on behalf of the poor, we have taken According to Heller, payroll tax cuts arethe poor which I voted for. I think it isaction on behalf of the conservation, but all tailor-made to fit the needs of an economyhighly desirable. There were no specific hear- of a sudden we say, well, let us wait and see badgered by both inflation and recession.ings on that. with respect to the working people. He believes .that a payroll tax will increase I would also point out that on a number Again, I cannot emphasize too greatly that take home pay, reduce business costs and .ofother things hearings were held. I reallythis is a group that is suffering, in many help offset the OPEC oil price drag. do think that we are leaving the workingways, the greatest because they are paying Mr. Chairman, I would point out that onpeople out in the cold if we do not giveout of blieir ean1ngs the higher energy June 5, 1979 the Washington Post editorial-them some assistance now. prices. They are also suffering from inflation ized if Congress uses the oil tax money to To me, to say to wait until the Prei-and, as I pointed out, the tax increase, the cut payroll taxes as It ought to do—let medential year means that the tax proposal istax burden on them, during the next two read that again. "If Congress used the oilgoing to come forth to help the politicianyears is very, very substantial, well over $900 tax money to cut payroll taxes, as it oughtrather than the working people. There isfor the median family. - to do, it will both hold down inflation andnothing that dimcult, that complex, in all Andthese people, just like the poor, are soften the impact on consumers. The burdenscandor, in my pr3posal. There is plenty ofhaving trouble meeting their bills. I can tell o decontrol can be mitigated by careful pub-money in the additional corporate tax toyou, come December and January, it is going lic policy." make up what I am talking about. to be a very tough time fo these working I know there are going to be people who We went right ahead and spentthispeople. are going to argue, why do we not wait? Whymoney in other ways. But, for some reason The local newspaper at home said, a couple do we not do it sometime later? Mr. Chair-the blue collar Workers, the small business-of days ago, when the Senate turned down man, the same question could be raised bymen and the otiers, are being left out inthe Javits amendment the first time—which some of these other provisions, the cold. I voted for—thait the poor were left out in As I have already mentioned, we have taken One of the real problems with our econ-the cold. a number of steps to help the poor, whichomy today is that we need to create some Well, I regret to say, Mr. Chairman, that is essential, but I think there is somethingstability and certainty. I think that is exactly what we are doing wrong with this committee. U we are unable As I mentioned, this propcsal would save,today if we do not do some relief to the to take action now to relieve this burdenaccording to CBO, something like 250,000working people. on the very people who are paying the in-jobs. The beneficial impact of my proposal The CHAIRMAN. This is not a. Social Secu- creased cost of oil, who are paying Increasedwould be much greater if we act now so thatrtty bill, Senator. I will be glad to have this taxes—I want to mention again that thebusiness people can foresee what is going toidentified as the Roth amendment when we average medium working family will pay anhappen, but in any event, Mr. Chairman, Ivote on it. It seemB to me that we ought to additional over $900 in taxes in 1980 and '81just see no sense—and why, when it comesmove in the orderly legislative process. because of the increase in Social Securityto the working people, it is politics for de- You are talking about repealing a tax that taxes and becausof inflation-induced taxes.laying action for helping them out. We arewould go into effect 15 months from now. It is over $900; $921, I believe, is the figurehelping everybody else. We are helping bigWe could at least take time to 106k at it in for those two years. oil companies. We are helping the independ-connection, after we had had a hearing and It is about time that we pay some atten-ent oil companies. We are helping the poor.looked at it in oonnectlon with other mat- tion to the working people who are payingWe are promoting conservation. ters. both the higher prices and the massive tax But what we are saying—and what every I discussed it this morning with Senator increases and I urge the adoption of myperson who does not vote for this proposal isMuskie,Jhairman of the Budget Commit- amendment. in effect saying is that the working people aretee, he said that would give them all kinds Senator RXBXCOn'. The Chairman is notnot entitled to any consideration, that weof problema with the budget process. here. I would just make a briet comment. Ihave to delay it until tomorrow. Senator RoTH. Mr. Chairman? am sorry that Gaylord Nelson is not here. I think you are right. There is no question The CHAIRMAN. They think that this ought Oh, here he is. but that this will be delayed to some timeto be considered in coimetion with the vari- Gaylord, under the Chairman's ruling, younext year, but I think that is a problem. Atous other things that will have to be done have five minutes to respond. this very moment, we are telling everybodyfor the economy and that it ought to be Senator NELSON. Five minutes to respond?else w1at we are going to do but for politi-next ven.y' h11nsR. Senatoa ROTH. Or to join. cal reasons— I am not referring to you, Gay- SenatorDOLE. Did we not already amend Senator NELsON. I guess I am better re-lord—that we are waiting to next year wherethe Social Security Act with aid to the poor? sponding to something I did not hear thanthe real danger is that those who wanted to Mr. STEEN. Those are amendments to the something I did not hear, so I do not teelspend these mornes—Mr. Chairman, this isSocial Security Act, yes, sir. handicapped. the only amendment I know that has any Senator Doi. This would not be any de- Some time ago Senator Roth, a couple oflimitation of time, so I do object to any timeparture. weeks ago, brought this question up which Ilimit, but I will lust point out thatwhat is Mr. STERN. They do not affect the Social think may very well be a creative approachgoing to happen that with the hard timesSecurity tax. to a serious problem. I said to Senator Rothupon us, there is going to be a great desire Senator DOLE. We are. talking about the at the time, let me think about it, that wefor other groups, other committees, to spendAct. Dave planned to have hearings early Janu-this money to make commitments for it, and The CHAIRMAN. The welfare part, and for S 11390 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— SENATE October 14, 1981 thepoor, is Title I! of the Social -Securitythe benefits of the retirees for inflationIII, if this inflation rate COt1nue8, I do not Act and SSI is Title IU of the Social Securityotherwise, when they retire in ten years.know whether the present tax rate will hold Act, I suppose. We do not have anythingthey have enough to live on; they are bank-for 980 and I think we ought to have hear. Bbout the Social Security tax in there. Werupt and on welfare in five years or less. ings before we make decisions about putting just have a provision in there for the poor.. We adopted a tax rate effective for 1980.$11 billion into H!. Senator DOLE.Ithink we have probablyIn 1981, based upon the actuarial as$ump. If my figures ae right, HI Is better off now used more than our time. tion that the Inflation rate win be 5.5. Wethan any prt OZ the fund—I do not have it Senator NELSON. I think it Is an importantare now hitting into a disa8trous situation in front of me—it Is gaining and in a year or matter. I do not think we ought to be cutwhere it is 14 percent and the retfrees are.two going up, more income than outgo, in off by time. pulling out of the fund money that we hadthe next four, five or six years, is it not? Senator BoTH. Mr. Chairman. I would justassumed would only be pulled out for that Senator ROTH. This comes down to a mat- point out that yesterday we voted over $1purpose at the rate of the Inflation rate ofter of judgment, of course. As I pointed out billion for a darn In Alaska, which had itb5.5 percent. earlier, one of my concern8 that other com- hearings; on numerous other occasions—- So when we were looking t this a monthmittees and other committee goals, afl of Senator DOLE, flat was aid to the poor. or two ago, we decided It would be better towhich are meritorious, w1U seek to use these Senator Ro'rH. We have taken action with-have some hearings early next year pull infunds. So I think it Is important for the out hearings. the actuaries and take a look. same reason we are allocating these windfall I notice that our good Chairman of the I would hope that no such situation arisee.profits for the poor and other people that Budget Committee went ahead and votedWe may be stuck with having to take thewe allocate this additional corporate tax to for the aid to the poor, despite the unusualmoney Senator Roth is talking about andhelp out the working people. procedures so that what I am asking here isputting it in the fund for 1980 or raise the To me, it Is just a question of equity and not unusual or unique. Other times, we havetaxes again. fairness. even stopped, these hearings or these pro- -Ihave no notion. I think it is a dangerous The CHAIR1AN. Let me make one point ceedings to hold hearIngs, so whatever hear-situation. here. You have an awful lot of people in ings were necessary could be held and then When we levied our taxes as high as theythis country Concerned on how you are going we could vote on it. are, 5.5 was the inflation rate. We are now ut to finance Social Security—the workers, the fle point I am trying to make. I think it14 percent. beneficiaries, the employers who are paying L important in a bipartisan way that this I respect the work Senator Roth has donehalf of the money in the fund, and they have Committee shows that it also has some eon-on this. He may be absolutely correct, blata right to be concerned about it. All of those cern about the working people. we may make a disastrous mistake by pro-people have a right to be heard. They have You mentioned this does not take effectceeding now wtthout having comprehensivea right to think about it, they have a right until '81. Neither does our program for thehearings on the mo8t important social pro-to study it, they have at least a moral right poor take effect until '81, but yet we pro.gram that this country ever adopted, affect-to communicate about it.. ceeded on that. So that there is adequateing more people -thanany other program And after they have had a chance to give precedent. that this country has got. it due consideration to communicate to the What I would hope Is that we could all I will say to the Senator. Senator Ribt-Congress. agree that, by giving this relief now, it gives coff's motion was made saying within 30 days This Is something that does not take place us Bome time in the future to take a moreafter we began this session. I think I canuntil January, 1981. AU we are suggesting careful look, in a non-election year, as tomeet that ea&ily enough. Aa a matter of fact,is that we give ourselves time and give the what needs to be done. I can get togethe' with staff and select theAmerican people time and everybody, every But I would just like to read to you againhearing date, clear it aild be ready easily,responsible and every irresponsible group what the Washington Post said, because Ihave hearings on this propoGition within 30that has a way of thinking about these thinkitissignificant. fley pointed outdays of our return, po68tbly even later thisthings time to think about it and time to that, "if Congress uses the oil tax money toyear. If we gt out of here—which I do nottalk about it and let themselves be heard cut payroll taxes, as it ought to do, it wiflthink we will—but if we get out of here bybefore we vote on this. both hold down inflation and soften the m-the end of November, I would be happy to Here is a bifl to put a windfafl profits tax pact on consumers. fle burdens of decontrolhold hearings in -December. on, And we talked about Credits using for can be mitigated by careful public policy." Senator ROTH. Let me po1n out two things.energy and urban transit in connection with First of all, my proposal in no way affectsit and I know the Senator indicated he I just think that the time has come forthe trust fund for the pension. M I men-planned to offer an amendment of this sort us to show that we have some real concerntioned earlier, it in no way—the same per-early in the game. As a practical matter we for the people who are paying the bill. centage will be paid on my amendment to'will be voting at the last minute, without Senator NELSON. Mr. Chairman? that pension trust fund that would currentlyhearings, on a major bill to overbaul the fle CHAIRMAN. Senator Nelson. go into effect. Social Security program. Senator NELSON. I Said early on, I know Senator NELSON. Let me ask a question. I It just seems to me that that is ot the that Senator Roth has given a lot of thoughtwas confused about that for ailother reason.responsible way to do it. to this. I may very well end up, when I un- You are earmarking this? Would the Chairman of the Budget Com- derstand it better, voting for it.I do not Senator Rorn. flat Is correct. fle fundsmittee complain about that approach, would know. from the decontrol would go into HI. Wethe Chairman of the Subcommittee that I do know, as Chairman of the Subcom-would, in no way, affect the disability trustdeals with Social Security saying that he mittee on Social Security who ha8 held hear-fund or the pension trust fund, both ofwould like some time to hold some hearings ings over a period of years, I found itenor-which are based upon the contributions thaiand let people be heard and think about it. mously more complicated than I thought it are made to it. Senator DOL]. Aa I understand it, we finish was. I saw that we mo4e many mistakes in 1 agree with you that the most important'this bill today. We meet against next week. the past that we would not have made ifwe program that we have in effect Is the Socialflen there will be a ten-day period before understood them and some of those mistakesSecurity pension plans and we arenot touch.It goes to the Floor, Maybe we could have I voted for. They were dead wrong, and theying that In anyway. the hearings between now and that time and wer3 damaging to the fund. What I am propo6ing is that these adcli-agree to offer it as an amendment on the We did it because we did not have carefultional corporate taxes go into the hospitalFloor. enough consideration. fund that is ba6ed upon need, rather that The CHAIRMAN. It will be offered on the There are several problems here. Of course.contribution. And, of ooure, a I pointeaFloor, anyway. if this needs to be done, we can do it for the out, many people have come out in support Senator Dou. Maybe by Senator Kennedy working peopie prior, because it does notgo of removing that, o supporung that in gen-or somebody who has an interest in working into effect until 1981. The reason on theen-eral revenueL people. ergy assistance to the poor is that we are Senator NasoN. I want to say to the Sen- The CHAIRMAN. If it is going to be offered acting Zor 1981 is that we have alreadycov- ator, I got beat in this Committee in 1977on the Floor, I would prefer Mr. Roth to oer ered 1980. We have had an energy assistanceon a motion to move HZ out of the Socialit on the Floor. As far as I am concerned, if to the poor 'program for quite some time. Security fund and go into the general fundthe Ribicoff motion Carries—I am not seek- flere is another major, I think, dangerousso that, by 1985 or 1986—I have forgotten—.ing to deny the Senator recognition for his problem confronting us at the time, and ImwQuldbe a genftal fund function, sinceamendment. All I am suggesting is that we am worried about it, and that is why. I haveit is not wago related. Neither disability orJust do it in the orderly legislative process decided that we would have hearings a long HZ are wage related. I think it wa8 a mistake Senator ROTH. Mr. Chairman, we didagree time ago. We will have hearings early nextto put it iii there. yesterday that we would have an up and year because of the inflation question. I got defeated on this committee in 1977down vote on my amendment today. If it I would like to point out I hope everybodyon that precise point. I am not disagreeingwere possible to hold the hearings and to will take—I do not want to say it until Sen.in principle about moving HI to some otherhave a vote on it before we finally 'report etor Roth can hear—everybody will give ftkind of suppoTt. I think it is necessary to dothe bill out, that would be an alternative, some careful thought. so. If we ever do have a health insurancebut otherwise I think we ought to go ahead One of the most expensive things in theprogram, it will be a pare of that programand have an up and down vote now on my ftgram, but it is Correct, is that we indexin one way or the other. But if this goes intoamendment.. October 14, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— SENATE S 11391 Senator ByRD. May I ask a question? Is Thatis a $2 billion chart there. day and we dlacussed voting on It today and this a one-year deferment? The CHAXRMAN, Let me see. The yeae, aslagreedwith you. Isald Iwould. Senator ROTH.Yes,sir. of now, the yeas are ten and the nays are I feel I played very open and fair and I Senator BYRD. What happens at the endfive. mentioned several weeks ago thst I waa go- of one year? Senator CHAFEE, Could you Inform us wboing to offer this amendment, So I really feel Senator ROTH. It would go into effect asvoted how, Mr. Chairman? that there should be an up or down vote on otherwise scheduled to do so now. It e a Senator BENTSEN, I would be glad to saymy amendment, one year freeze. that i am one who voted aye. Let me make a The CHAZEMAN, Senator, I think you have Senator BENTSEN. I do not know If, youpoint, as long aa this has cone up. made that clear. It is a matter for the Com- can vote up or down on it. I want it clearly Senator CHATEE, if I could finlah? mittee to decide and the Committee can understood that I may end up finally being Senator BENTSEN, if I may— either vote the motion up, or they can vote for this after appropriate study. U you do The CHAIRMAN, All the Republicans votedthe motion down, have an up or down on it, want that inter-no. Senator Doz, Mr. Chairman? I mov, to preted is that I am opposed to ultimately Senator B.NTSEN You are going to have atable the Ribicoff motion, seeing that we delay the raise. judgment of the marketplace on thoee reve- The CHAIRMAN, Let's vote on that, The CHAIRMAN. Prankly. that Is why Inue bonds a to whether or not that is a Ftne, Let's vote on that, Call the roll, It ia feasible project and there waa some judg-not debatable, think we ought to have a vote on 8enatorment behind that vote and it waa discussed, R.tbicoff's motion. Mr. StzaN, Mr. Talmadge? Senator ROTH. Mr. Chairman, it is alwaysThe question of whether you are going to (No response). the practice to give people an up or downhavo Federal appropriations o you are going Mr. STEEN, Mr. Ribicoff? vote. I would like an up or down vote onto ziav a tax free bond, 8enator Rmzcopr, No, my amendment, as agreed to yesterday. if i is not a feasible project. obviously the Mr. SN, Mr. Byrd? The CHAIRMAN. Senator, I asked that wemarketplace would not fund those kiuda of Senator BYRD, No, put this matter over until yesterday. I didbonds, Mr. 8TERN, Mr. Nelson? -SenatorRIBxCo'F. There is another prob- Senator NELSON. No, not think I was foreclosing anybody fromlem, We were dealingwith theGravel deferring consideration of it. amendment on the problem of how do you Mr. STERN, Mr. Gravel? Senator ROTH. As you yourself have saidproduce more energy which was germane to Senator RoTH, Aye, by proxy. during these sessions that it has never beenthe legislation that we now have, Mr. 8izitN. Mr. Bentaen? our practice to try to avoid votes on an in- The CHtN, I am going to rule that we Seflator BENTSEN, No, dividual'samendments byparliamentarywill vote on the Rlkicoff motion, Mr. STEEN, Mr. Mat5unaga? procedures. I think that has been a very Call the roll, (No response). sound policy and, for that reason I would Mr. STERN, Mr. Moynihan? Senator ROTH. Mr. Chairman, that Is the (No response), respecuuily insist that I do have a vote. first time in the years that I have served on Mr. 8N, Mr. Baucus? Senator RI8xcoi. Itis up to you. Mr.this committee where a vote on a member'e Chairman. I agree with Senator Bentsen. Senator BAVCV5, No, amendment has been avoided, Mr. STERN, Mr. Boren? My feelingisthatif we deferred this The CHam!w, Senator, that does not Senator B0aEN, Aye. and the Nelson Committee had hearings, Imean it has been avoided, We have a motion Mr. SN, Mr. Bradley? would vote for Mr. Roth's amendment afterto postpone consideration of it after we hold Senator BRADLEY, No, hearings by Senator Nelson because I thinkhearings, That has not been avoided, Mr. STN, r. Dole? that there is a basic problem here, but I Senator RoTa, That is not what I am say- Senator DOLE, Aye. would vote no today because my feeling ising, Mr. Chairman, I have a specific amend- Mr. STw, Mr. Packwood? that the points made by Senator Nelson arement proposing this freeze taking place now Senator PACKWOOD, Aye. absolutely sound and there are complica-and obviously that is what we are avoiding. a Mr. STEaN, Mr. Roth? tions inthis whole Social Security fundvote up or down aa to whether or not there Senator'R0TH, Aye. and I think maybe we should be on the wayshould be some relief given to the working Mr. STERN, Mr. Danforth? for restructuring the entire 8ocial Security people. Senator DANFORTH, Aye. program. I think I am entitled, just as the other Mr. STERN, Mr. Chafee? I do not know what inflation is going togentlemen—I have tiever objected to anyone Senator CHAPEE, Aye. do for potential unemployment with theelse's ever having a vote on his proposal, no Mr. SN, Mr. Heinz? viability of the fund, and I think on thematter how embarrassing it might be to me, Senator hEINz. Aye, side of responsibility, with no reflection onand I think I am entitled to that right, Mr. TZRN. Mr. Waliop? Senator Roth—because I do not think there Senator NELSON, Let me say a word on that, Senator WALlop, Aye. is a more responsible Senator Roth. He is a Mr. Chairman, Mr. STERN, Mr. Durenberger? constructive man with good ideas and I M Chairman of the Social Security. Sub- 8enator DVRENBEEOELAye. think we has a good idea here. committee, I do not really understand his Mr. SN, Mr. Chairman? But I would be a lot happier if Gaylordamendment and I read it for the first tune The CHAIRMAN, No, Nelson had those hearings within a monththis morning. I think it is quite a bit to ask The yeas are ten and the nays are seven. after we returned, or maybe before, if hethat you make a decision involving $11 bU- Senator NELSON, What is the vote? can do so. lion a year, the whole 8ocial Security sys- The CHAXRMAN, The yeas are ten and the Gaylord Nelson is not the type of man whotem, without any hearings at all, We have anays are seven, Not voting are Messrs. Tal-. stalls and tries to repress things. subcommittee for that purpose: I am guar-madge, Matsunaga, and Moynlhan, Senator BENTSEN. Mr. Chairman, the prob-anteeing the hearings. Mr. Moynlhan, I have his proxy. I will call lem you run Into when you vote like this, I do not want to be in a position that vot-call that no. Ten to eight, in effect, for a cut on whatever was goinging against Senator Roth's proposal, I might Senator DOLE. Now the vote Is 'on the Roth to be increased and you do that by itaelf.be for it. My point Is I can not make an in-proposal, there are things that we may have .to doformed judgment after reading a brief memo- Senator Ro'ni, I move, with the Social Security system that will notrandum this morning. I just could not, I do be as pleasant and when you cannot put thenot want to be in a position of saying I am The CHAIRMAN, Let's have a vote on th whole paôrae together you may find it veryagainst it. I say very well be for it, and weRoth amendment, Call the roll, difficult to accomplishthe things that arehave plenty of time, Mr. SRN. Mr. Talmadge? distasteful. (No respànse.) So I think I agree with the motion by Mr. STERN, M. Ribicoff? If you have some of the sweet with a pack- Senator P.tbicoff, Senator RXBTCOT, No, age like this, you can accomplish it. I am The CHAIRMAN, Call the roll. Mr. SN. Mr. Byrd? not concerned about just doing what i Senator ROTH, Mr. Chairman,arewe Senator BYRD, No, politically po?ular and not doing some of thechanging the practice of this conunittee? Mr. 8N, Mr. Nelson? more difficult things we have to do at the The CHAIRMAN. We are voting on Mr. Ribi- same time in restructuring the Social Se-coff's motion, Senator, Senator NELSON. No, curity system. Mr. SrzaN, Mr. Gravel? Senator ROTH, This came up, Mr. Chair- 8enator Roix, Aye. by proxy. SenatorCHAFEE. Mr.Chairman,thereman, two weeks ago, and I have always played Mr. STERN. Mr. Bentan? seems to be a good deal of concern aboutvery fair with this committee and at that Senator BENTSEN. No, hearings and yesterday, that was raised intime there was an effort made to avoid a vote Mr. STERN, Mr. Mat8unaga? connection with another matter, the so-on a particular amendment and I believe (No reepon8e,) called Gravel amendment, an amendmentthe Chairman himself came out and ex- Mr. STEEN.Mr.Moynlhan? which nobody knew anything about, neverplicitly said we never use procedurea to avoid ,,The CuAmN. No, even heard of before it was raIsed yesterday a vote, Mr. Si,iaii.r. BaucuB? It 8eems to me that those who are so con- Now, tern asking—in that time, accom- Senator BAVcVB, No. cerned about hearings—how did that votemodation was made, I think at your instiga- Mr. SN, Mr. Boren? come out yesterday on the Gravel thing? tion, and I feel very strongly that we should Senator BOREN, Aye. Could you run down who voted aye? have an up or down vote on this amendment. Mr. STERN. Mr. Bradley? Senator Doz.E. We had a chart on theAs a matter of fact, when we raised it yester- Senator BnDzEY, No, board. day you asked me U I Would watt until to- Mr. SmN. Mr. Dole? S 11392 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATB October 14, 1981 SenatorDoLe. Aye. Mr. LONG. I ask for the yeas and naysDI back into HZ to help strengthen the Mr. STERN. Mr. Packwood? on the amendment. HI fund against the expected operatthg Senator PACKWOOD. Aye. The PRESIDING OFFICER. There isdeficits which will occur at the end of the Mr. STERN. Mr. Roth? 1980's.Interfundborrowing between Senator ROTH. Aye. no order as to the time for convening the Mr.'STERN. Mr. Danforth? Senate tomorrow. OASI and DI has the effect of combining Senator DANIORTH. Aye. Mr. LONG. I ask for the yeas and naysthese two funds. The combined OASDI Mr. STERN. Mr. Chafee? on the amendment. fund gaIns tax revenues under the real- Senator Ciu. Aye. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is therelocation plan between 1982 and 1985 and Mr. STERN. Mr. Heinz? a sufficient second? There is a sufficientloses revenues in 1990-2004. BeginnIng Senator HEINZ. Aye. second. in 2005, OASI gets more revenues than Mr. STERN. Mr. Wallop? under current law and DI less, although Senator WALLOP. Aye. The yeas and nays were ordered. !fr. STERN. Mr. Durenberger? Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, if it is sat-the combined OASDI and the HI fund Senator DURENBEEGER. No. 1sf actory, we will follow the outline Ini-get the same tax rates after 2005 as are Mr. STERN. Mr. Chairman? tially offered to acccept amendmentsnow scheduled under current law. The CHAIRMAN. No. from a couple of Senators, amendments This combination of reallocation of The yeas are ten and the nays are eight.which will be accepted, and then go totax rates and interfund borrowing be- Absent are Messrs. Talmadge and Matsunag the Senator from Pennsylvania. tween OASI and DI was designed to pro- We will ask the absentees to record them- Mr. HEINZ. The Senator from Penn-duce approximately the same combined selves. However they record themselves, thatsylvania would really like to offer histrust fund balances for OASDHI as If is how the vote will go. statement on the bill. I have been wait-interfund borrowing were allowed among Mr. DOLE. The Senator from Dela-ing for quite a while. all three funds. But since borrowing from ware was talking about decontrol of Mr. BENTSEN. will the Senator useHI has been ruled out, the real concern prices, not about windfall profit tax. Thehis microphone? Unless it is a privateis about the trust fund balances under Senator from Delaware was talkingconversation, will the Senator use hisOASDI and HI, separately. about freezing for 1 year the proposedmicrophone so we can hear him? Experts agree that the OASDI trust increase in social seQurity tax. That Is The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-funds should remain at least at 13 to 14 not the case today. ator from Pennsylvania. percent of annual expenditpres in order The Senator from Kansas Is doing his Mr. HEINZ. Mr. President, I rise toto maintain a reasonable margin of safe- best to get oil production In Missouri andpresent some comments on the bill. Ity, and that reserves below 12 percent are other States where they really do nothope I will not take too much time fromcertainly Inadequate to guarantee the understand the benefits except when iteither the Senator from Texas or theuninterrupted flow of monthly benefit gets cold, or when they want to startSenator from New Mexico. checks. their car. As the Senate proceeds to vote on the While this bill may get us beyond the I have prepared a couple of amend-social security changes recommended byimmediate hurdle of 1982, the steps tak- ments, one being on the production ofthe Finance Committee, I think it is im-en will not be adequate in the short term automobiles. They do a lot o that Inportant to set down, for the record, howfor at least three reasons. Missouri. Maybe we will have a little taxmuch has been accomplished in alleviat- First, Mr. President, I. wish to submit on the production of automobiles, oring social security's financial problemsfor the RECORD the following Social Se- maybe a little tax 'on coal, to put Into—and what remains to be done. curity Admkilstration estimates. I ask the social security trust funds. The Sen- I find it necessary to emphasize theunanimous consent that they be printed, ator from Kansas does not propose tolatter point, because although most of usMr. President. offer those amendments because I be-would agree on the need, as this bill does, There being no objection, the material lieve it would be a mistake to start downto reallocate the payroll tax rates, allowwas ordered to be printed in the RECORD, that path of general funding or generalinterfund borrowing and restore the asfollows: revenue financing of the social securityminimum benefit, the legislation before system. us today is not a complete solution to TRUSTFUND RATIOS UNOER SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE I do not quarrel with the Senator from PROPOSAL AT BEGINNING OF YEAR (BASED ON ALTERNA. either the short-term or the long-term TIVE II-B OF 1981 TRUSTEES REPORT) Missouri; I just hope lie does not havefinancing problems. enough votes. We will find that' out Despite the tax rate reallocation and tin percent.calendaryearsl $ometilfle tomorrow. Interfund borrowing, and despite the I urge my olleagues who may read thesavings athieved through the Omnibus OA$ DI OASOI HIOASDI-HI RECORD, or who may not be able to avoidReconciliation Act, the financing of so- listening to us in their offices, to lookcial security ta extremely risky in the 1981 18 20 lB 41 23 very carefully at the precedent we would 1982 13 13 13 58 21 short term. The long-term financing 1983 11 20 11 31 19 establish by the adoption of this amend-problems of social security have yet to 1984 11 25 18 51 18 meit. It is not the right way to go. Even 1985 14 21 15 13 14 be addressed in a comprehensive way. 1986 12 19 13 21 14 if you look at it from the oil standpoint,And given the inadequacy of the short- 1981 11 19 12 23 14 in the opinion of this Senator this Is the 1988 10 20 11 20 13 term steps and the absence of a long- 1989 8 21 9 .14 10 oe provision in the tax bill that istermsolution,the Americanpublic 1990 6 21 8 3 7 supply side, we do reduce the tax on—workers and beneficiaries—are being newly discovered oil. We do provide In-asked to tolerate continued uncertainty Source:Office 'of theActuary,Social Security Admin. centives for those who want to exploreabout the future of social security, at a lstration, Sept. 29 1981. for newly discovered oil. time When their confidence in that pro- Mr.HEINZ. According to these projec- I would hope that in the ensuing de-gram is already at a historic low. tions, OASDI balances decline during the bate we canaddressthisissueas OUTLOOK POR 1982—86 decade even after the proposed adjust- squarely as we Should and that we can The next 5 years pose the possibilityments will have been made. Leaving aside make an objective judgment. I wouldof the social security funds, combined,the critical, question of whether the un- urge my colleagues that we not adoptrunning out of money. We all refer toderlying assumptions are reasonable or this amendment. I will do that again to-this as "the short-term problem." It iseven credible until later In this discus- morrow. It is my understanding thatimportant to understand that the Fi-sion, the fact is that, even under this set the Senator does not want to vote beforenance Committee bill before us respondsof assumptions, the balances after 1985 noon. to the short-term financing problem onlybecome low—in my judgment danger- Mr. EAGLETON. I was hoping some-by shifting tax rates among the threeously low in the mid-1980's and disas- where around 2 o'clock. I do not knowtrust funds and permitting interfundtrously low by the end of the decade. what time we are coming in. I thoughtborrowing between OASI and DL The re- Reserve ratios of 9 percent and 8 per- we were coming in at 11. allocation of the tax rates among OASI,cent In 1989 and 1990 are certainly In. Mr. DOLE. The Demo%rats will haveDI, and HI is designed to increase reve-adequate to maintain a smooth flow of their caucus tomorrow. nues to OASI by shifting revenues fromchecks to beneficiaries. The SSA esti- Mr. EAGLETON. Mr. President, do weDI and RI between 1982 and 1985, andmates above also show that the HI trust know whattimethedistinguishedfrom DI between 1986 and 1990. fund balances will decline dramatically najority leader will bring 1 the Senate? In 1990, revenues are also shifted fromduring the 1980's—reachIng 3 percent of October 1, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 11393 expenditures by 1990. In order to bail outcated that even with the use of interfundbet, with the consequences of losing that the old age and survivors fund, this billborrowing among the three trust funds,bet no less than financial chaos for social In fact accelerates the demise of the HIand the savings realized through the Om-security recipients. fund. nibus Reconciliation Act, the margin for Mr. President, at this point, I wish to The second reason we should harborerror is extremely slim. introduce into the RECORD the Congres- no Illusions that this action is adequate In fact, the CBO said that if the econ-sional Budget Office's pessimistic f ore- is that the projections above leave noomy followed an only slightly more pessi-cast. I ask unanimous consent that it be margin forerror. The Congressionalmistic path, the trust fund reserves, un-printed at this point. Budget Omce, in the testimony of Di-der interfund borrowing, would become There being no objection, the material rector Alice Rivlln before the Joint Eco-insufficient as early as 1984. At best, wewas ordered to be printed in the RECORD, nomic Committee on September 22, mdl-are placing no better than an even moneyas follows:

TABLE 2.—PROJECTIONS OF SOCIALSECURITY TRUST FUND OUTLAYS, INCCMES, AND BALANCES, UNDERPESSIMISTIC ECONOMIC ASSUMPTIONS BY CALENDAR YEAR (In billions of dollarsi

1989 1990 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988.

Old age and Survivorsinsurance: 141.2 156.0 170.4 185.4 201.5 218.9 236.9 257.5 279. Outlays 126.9 262.2 122.7 128.7 139.2 149.9 167.6 181.5 195.7 211.2 227.0 Income1 —165. $ 18.7 6.1 —10.7 —31.3 —49.0 —69.1 —92.2 —117.9 —148.5 Year.end balance —24.3 —31.6 —389 —45.8 —53.2 Start-of-year balance (as percent of outlays) 18.0 13.2 3.9 , —6.3 —16.9 Disability insurance: 33.5 19.8 20.7 21.9 23. 3 25.3 27. 1 28.9 31. 1 Outlays 18. 1 69. 3 23. 1 25.8 28.5 36.0 40. 3 44.9 50.0 55.4 Incotne' 16.9 144.4 2.4 5.7 10.9 17.6 30.3 45.3 63.2 84.2 108.5 Yeir-end balance 119.8 167.5 218.7 270.8 32.4.3 Start-of.year balance (as percent of outlays) 20.0 12.3 27.8 49.9 75.4 Hospital insurance: 34.4 39.6 45.4 51. 8 58.9 66.9 76.0 86.2 97. Outlays 30. 1 79.6 38.9 42.7 46.4 52.0 60.0 64. 8 69.6 74.2 Income' 35. 1 7.9 —10.4 18.7 23.2 •26.3 27.3 27.4 28.5 26.3 20.0 Yearend balance: 45.5 42. 5 34.7 23.2 8. 1 Start-of.year balance (as percent of outlays) 45.7 54.4 58.6 57.9 52.6 Combined OASI, Dl, and HI: 314.9 410.5 175.1 195.5 216.3 237.7 260.5 285.7 312.8 341.7 Outlays 356.5 411.0 174.7 190.7 207.7 224.8 255.6 281.8 305.4 330.7 Income' 13.6 8.6 4.7 —2.7 —13.7 —32.0 —31.5 Year.end balance 39.8 35.1 26.5 3.0 . 1.5 —08 —3.7 —7.8 Start.of-year balance (as percent of outlays) 23.0 20.4 16.2 11.1 5.2

$ Income to the trust funds Is budget authority. It Includes payroll tax receipts, Interest on Source: CBO. Based on pessImistic economic assumptions. Indude the effects of the omnibus balances, end certain general fund transfers, reconciliation bdl of 1981. Note: Minus sign denotes a defict. Mr. HEINZ. Mr. President, as youlong-range problems of the system with Any changes have to be introduced examine these statistics, please bear inthe 1977 legislation, despite its intent togradually, and extend over a long period mind that this bill, because it prohibitsdo so. This year Congress has failed toof time. That is why its essential to begin borrowing from the HI fund, would makeeven try to take the necessary steps toaddressing the long-term problem as considerably less money available forput social security on a fiscally soundsoon as possible. Although the changes basic social security benefits than is im-basis. in benefits under the Omnibus Recon- plied by the bottom line of this table. Under the intermediate Il—B assump-ciliation Act of 1981 reduce the long-term The third reason we must recognizetions in the most recent trustees report,social security deficit by 0.17 percent of the inadequacy of this response is thatlong-range forecasts once again presentpayroll under intermediate assumpti.ons, all the economic forecasts—whether byan adverse picture for the OASI and DIthis only lowers the average 75-year SSA or CBO—make the usual but totallyprograms. Social security actuaries pro-deficit under intermediate U-B assump- unrealistic assumption that there will beject that under intermediate Il—B as-tions from 1.82 percent of taxable pay- a smooth development of the economysumptions, the OASDI program needs 12roll to 1.65 percent. Mr. President, it. and that we will experience no cyclicalpercent more in financial resources thanshould be obvious to all that much re- reversals and downturns, such as theit has under current law In the 2006—3mains to be done. recession that we now find ourselves in.period, and 36 percent more in the 2031— LOSS OF PIYBLIC CONFIDENCE Even with trust fund reserves, as high as55 period. Under pessimistic assumptions, The fact is, Mr. Président, that the 13 to 14 percent, these margins will notthe OASDI program needs 41 percentpeople of this country are very much be sufficient If the economy goes throughmore in financial resource in 2006—30aware of both the short-term and the any significant dips or valleys of the kindand 105 percent more in the 2031—55long-term problems. we seem to be expcriencing with increas-period. The worst problem of all, Mr. Presi- ing frequency. The sharp increase in costs reflects thedent, is that the recurring news of social In short, those who believe this bill willchanging demographic structure of thesecurity's financial problems has eroded solve the short-term financing problempopulation. The ratio of the beneficiariespublic confidence in the ability of social of social security are making a bad bet.to covered workers is projected to risesecurity to meet its future commitments. The committee bill, though helpful indramatically as the post-World War IXWhile most Americans support the goals the short run, is far from a completebaby boom generation begins reachingof the social security system, many who solution to socialsecurity's financingretirement age after 2010. At that time.are paying social security taxes now are problems in the 1980's. Arid the risk isthe working population will be of the lowdoubting whether it will be around to that if the economy fails to Improve tofertility generation that began in thepay their benefits when it is their turn the levels assumed by the intermediatelate 1960's. The ratio of contributors toto retire. There are even those who be- Il—B forecast, that the fund balances willbeneficiaries is projected to decline fromlieve the situation, is so hopeless that become insufficient well before the end of3.2 to 1 in 1981 to 2.0 to 1 In 2030. we should simply throw in the towel and the decade. It is worth noting that the We have the time now to seek creativescrap the whole system. so-called pessimistic assumptions, undersolutions which may, at least in part. "A 1979 Study of American AttitUdes which a crisis occurs in 1984, are in fact.reverse the trends contributing to theToward Pensions and Retirement," com- more optimistic than our actual experi-deficits. But any long-range restructur-missioned by Johnson and Higgins and ence of the last 5 years. ing of social security benefits and taxconducted by Louis Harris and Asso- LONG-TERM FINANCINO PROBLEMS OF levels requires ample leadtime, to giveciates, 'Inc., found that more' than 8 out SOCLAL SECURITY people fair notice about the changes Inof 10 current employees have "less than Even under the most optimistic fore-retirement rules, benefits or tax rates, sofull confidence" that social security will casts this bill can only postpone the socialthat they have the opportunity to make• ray thom benefits to which they. are en- security financing problem for the nextappropriate adjustments in their per-titled when they retire; 42 percent have several years. Congress failed to solve thesonal plans, "hardly any confidence at all." S 11394 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— SENATE October 14,1981 "ANationwide Survey of Attitudesretired Americans, who have sufferedIwould remind those people that the Toward Social Security," prepared forthrough a summer of alarm and uncer-opposite may also occur, that Is, the the National Commission on Social Secu-tainty about their benefit checks alongunwelcome severe and sudden benefit rity by Peter D. Hart Research Asso-with older working people who are plan-cuts, on the order proposed by the ad- ciates, Inc., found in 1980 that 61 percentning for their retirement In a few years.ministration last May. In my judgment, of thenonretiredhave little confidence The widespread lack of public confi-neither general revenue financing nor thatfundswill be available to pay theirdence in social security is not a failure ofsevere benefit cuts are the correct ap- retirement benefits. These doubts werepublic relattons,so to speak. It is an in-proach. Furthers it Is certainly not ad- expressed by almost three-fourths offormed public reaction to the short-termvisable to adopt any policy toward social • those between ages 25 and 44. and long-term financing problems ofsecurity that is tiriggered literally by the The National Federation of Independ-social security which I discussed earlier.default of the system. ent Business commissioned a survey of The only thing that will really improve Mr. President, today I call upon my 1,500 voting age adults between April 2public confidence is the assurance thatcolleagues n the House and the Senate and April 8,1981. Overall, the studyCongress has acted responsibly to put theto address seriously the real problems we found "a serious lack of confidence insocial security program on a fiscallyface in social security. the retirement program 'acrossallsound basis. To date Congress has not We must take action—and take action segments of American society." Nearly 7done so, and this bill does not providesoon—to restore the confidence of the out of 10 Americans—68 percent—recog-that assurance. American people in the future ability of nize that the social security program is in Let me emphasize that even the short-social security to pay promised benefits. financialtrouble.Two-thirds of theterm repair measures undertaken in this Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. President, the adults surveyed—.-67 percent—are wor-bill—Its short-term financing proposal3Senator from Missouri is proposing that ried about their retirement Income. Onlyto reallocate the tax rates and permitwe come in through the back door and 28 percent expressed confidence In thepartial interfund borrowing—still leavemake some very significant, dramatic, future and say they are unconcerned.•the program In an extremely vulnerableand ill-advised changes in the way we Confidence in the program shrinks sig-condition in the short term. And this billfinance social security. Perhaps Senator nificantly among younger age groups. does not even attempt to address theEAGLETON senses the advent of Halloween, More recently, the New York Times/long-term deficit. for he has attempted to cloak his amend- CBS poll of 1,467 adults conducted In If Congress, In the near future, doesment in a Robin Hood disguise, claiming June 28—July 1, 1981, found that a major-not get down to meeting its public respon-that it would take from the rich and give ity of the American people—54 percent—sibility, we are going to have the people Into the poor. In his scheme of things the no longer believe that the social securitythis country believing that we are totallyric'h are the big, bad oil companies who system will have the money available toincapable of acting responsibly, until weare somehow responsible for America's pay them the full benefits they would behave not only a problem but also a crisisenergy problems. The poor are those who entitled to at retirement. The age break-of such magnitude that not only do weare entitled to social security benefits. down of those who doubt that socialdeal with it too late, but also, we find Mr. President, It is not a difitcult thing security will provide full benefits forthat we do not know how to deal with itfor a senator from a nonproducing State their own retirement Is also Instructive.effectively. to stand on this floor and deliver mi- NEw Yóiuc TIMES/CBS Pou. I believe that the Senate Finance Com-passioned speeches againstoil com- Percentage who doubt that socialsecurity mltt.ee would like to deal with socialpanies, I suggest, however, that when it will provide full benefits for their owns resecurity at the earliest possible dates butcomes to issues as important as energy tirement: - I am not always convinced that all theand social security, this country would National Members of Congress—not just on thebe well served by less passion and more Under 25 years Senate side but on the House side asreason. - 25—34 years well—are willing to address this issue. TheSenator Isproposingthat we 35-44 years 64 I understand what politics isallabout.change the rules and start taxing newly 45—54 years 58 discovered oil and gas at full windfall 68—64 years 34I understand the pressure in election 85 and over 13 years. They come every 2 years on theprofit tax rates. That Is an idea that House side and every 6 years in the Sen-simply makes no sense. It is unfair. It This poll confirms earlier findings thatate on the average. will diminish the incentives for domestic the confidence problem is serious, and Although I support the committee billenergy production and increase our de- more acute among younger and middle-as the most that can be accomplished inpendence on OPEC. It is also an inade- aged workers. But it also demonstratesthe current political c1imate I feel thequateill-considered,jerry-riggedre- that roughly one-thirdof those ap-obligation to point out to my colleaguessponse to the very real problems we wifl proaching retIrement, 55 to 64 years, andthat there is more to be done. The failurefaceinthe area of socialsecurity 1 out of 8 of those 65 and over also haveof the Congress to finally resolve thefinancing. serious doubts. There is simply no reasonsolvency Issue leaves beneficiaries and Now, Mr. President, let me just take to doubt the failing credibility of ourthe working population in a chronic statea few minutes to explain why the Eagle- citizenry in this, the most needed, of ourofuncertainty about future benefits.ton amendment is poor energy policy. programs. Postponing responsible action too longPerhaps we should begin by asking a I believe that the worst problem facingmay lead to dangerous and unforeseenvery basic question: What was the pur- social security Is the massive loss of pub-consequences. We simply should notpose of the windfall profit tax? I am an lic confidence in the system's ability togamble with other people's social securityopponent of that tax but I think oppo- deliver future benefits. The loss of con-benefits. Maybe If Members of Congressnents and proponents can all agree that fidence is genuine cause for alarm be-were under the social security system,it was designed to prevent oil companies cause the whole social insurance systemrather than our own little, modified Fed-from realizing the full benefit of decon- rests upon a compact across generations:eral employee benefits system, the Mem-trol of existing reserves. No one, as far Younger workers pay taxes to finance thebers of Congress would begin to feel someas I am. aware, has ever suggested that benefits to retired and disabled workersof the uncertainty and anxiety that ourthe windfall profit tax was designed to and their families, with the expectationsenior citizens and working people nowapply to.energy that had not yet been that the younger generations of thefeel. Maybe the way to get the attentiondiscovered. future will do the same for them whenof the people on both sides of the Capitol Zn fact, the whole point of decontrol It is their turn to retire. Growing. doubtsIs to suggest that Members of Congresswas to provide new incentives for Anier- about the future of social security threat-should know what it is like to be theica's energy producers to go out and take en to undermine workers' willingness togoose, not the gander. I do not know whythe risks, spend the millions of dollars support the payroll tax on which the en-there Issomuch reluctance to act. to drill the deeper wells necessary to find tire system rests. I suspect that some of those who wouldnew oil and gas necessary for the energy Further, although the crisis of con-deny socaI security's financial problems1ndeendence of this country. fidence among younger workers Isnowsecretly believe that If the system does, It I were writing a textbook about how welldocumented,fewpeoplehavein fact, fail, there will be no other re-our free market system responds to in- focused on the heightened anxieties ofcourse than to use general revenues. Butcentives for production,I would use October U, 981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— SENATE S 1i35 energy as my first case study. Decadespracticein social security financing mustthe major oil companies. The tax has of hobbling our domestic producers withbe carefully and thoroughly considered.thus diverted substantial drilling rev- regulated, artificially low prices for their We have had subcommittee hearingsenues into administrative overhead ex- product stiffied the search for energy inon social security financing In the Fi-penses, further reducing an independ- this country and brought us to a dan-nance Commlttee, and I am confidentent's ability to compete. The reliei pro- gerous dependence on imported sourcesthat we will have full committee hear-vided by the Economic Recovery Act will of energy. But then we finally took offings. We will have an opportunity—theenable the small producers to keep a nec- the shackles of regulation and offeredSenate will have an opportunity—to giveessary part of our crude oil resources In the incentive of fair market pricing—the problem the careful consideration itproduction. and look what happened. Todaythereso clearly deserves. The proposal of the Senator from are 4,300 rigs operating in the United But to lurch all of a sudden in theMissouri is also undesirable because It States—nearly 1,200 more than at thisdirection of financing from general rev-fails to solve the problema confronting time last year. There are more thanenues as part of an effort to strike atthe social security system. twice as many rigs at work today as inAmerica's energy producers makes little It is important to realize that there are 1977 whenregulation was the rule. sense and I think it endangers the futurebetter ways to alleviate the social secu- Let me give some other numbers withof social security. rity's short-term problem than the pro- respect to energy production and en- Mr. President, I urge the defeat ofposal now before us. The use of wind- ergy utilization in this country. the Eagleton amendment. fall profits tax revenues to finance social Back in 1977, we Imported an average Mr. BOREN. Mr. President,Irisesecurity benefits would be, at best, a of 8.8 million barrels per day. In Aprilin opposition to the amendment by thestopgap measure which would be of of this year, we were down to 5.4 mil-Senator from Missouri which would takehelp to the social security system oi1y lion—and that Is a reduction of almosttaxes raised from the natural resourcesfor a short time. The immediate prob 40 percent in imports. of several States to fund the Federal so-lem facing social security, however, has Mr. President, that is the kind of pay-cial security program and would rollalready been effectively addressed by the off you get from decontrol, and that Isback tax efforts passed just a few shortSenate Finance Committee. Just last the sort of incentive Senator EAGLETONweeks ago as part of the President's Eco-week, in fact, the Finance Committee threatens to eliminate. Let me also pointnomic Recovery Act. unanimously agreed upon a package de- out that, contrary to much of the rhet- In the Economic Recovery Act, inequi-signed to keep the system afloat through oric on thIs Issue, the primary victimsties of the crude oil excise tax were ad-the next few turbulent years. Any pro- of the Eagleton amendment would notdressed. Necessary relief was provided Inposal that is acceptable to every member be the major oil companies he is so fondthe form of a reduction in the tax rate onof the Finance Committee should cer- of criticizing but America's 12,000 in-small royalty owners, new oil producerstainly take precedence over queetiou- dependent producers. It is the independ-and independent producers of stripperable,untestedproposals,particularly ent producer who brings 9 put of 10 ofoil. Support of these changes was bipar-those that legitimize an unfair and un the new field wildcat wells into produc-tisan and in the countA7's be6t interests.necessary tax like the windfall profits tion in this country. He accounts for over The publicinterestIsbest servedtax. 80 percent of the significant discoveries.through government policies that pro- For the long term, the utility of ha They are the ones who have respondedmote continueddevelopmentof ourproposal now before the Senftte Is even so dramatically to the carrot of incen-scarce natural resources. Otherwise, ourmore limited. Revenues from the wind- tives. They are the ones who are goingNation will never achieve the energyfall profits tax are expected to diminish to suffer under this amendment and areindependence we need in order to free usover time, just about when the social going to have their cash flow cut down.from reliance upon unstable, foreignsecurity system reaches real financial They are putting back 105 percent ofsources of oil. Recent tragic events in thedifficulty. The solution of the long-term what they bring out of the hole backMiddle East have surely increased ourproblem facing the system cn be found Into new production. awareness of the dangers of such de-only through changes within the system So I think it is relatively easy to es-pendency. The reduction in half of theitself. No extraneous, irrevelant proposal tablish that this amendment would havetax on newly discovered oil is importantsuch as the one currently before us will a severe, negative impact on our abilityto encourage development and additionsbe sufficient to guarantee the payment to find and produce more energy reservesto our national resource base. The wholeof social security benefits well Into the in this country. It is a one-way ticketrationale for the windfall profits tax has20th century. to Increased OPEC dependency. been that it would be.a tax on inventory Mr. President, this propoeal is offen- The amendment is equally unimpres-profits. But there can be no profits taxsive; it would be ineffective, and it shou1 sive as a response to our problems in theon something that has not even been dis-be defeated. area of social security financing. Socialcovered yet. • Mr. DURENBEROER. Mr. President, security is an issue of vital concern to The reduction in haU of the tax onI certainly share Senator EAGLETON'S 150 mIllion persons, to every retiree, ev-new oil provides necessary incentives forconcern over the financial security of ery wage earner in this country. independentproducers.Independentt1ie social security trust fund. But The Senator is proposing general rev-producers play a major role in the pro-way this amendment approaches the Is- enue financing for social security. Thatduction of new oil as the "wildcatters"sue represents a step backward, and I is what it amounts to. It would be a sig-of the industry. Indpendent producersam afraid it signals a return to the politi- nificant change of the past 50 years inaccount for 90 percent of new field wild-cal infighting that has prevented an' the way that the system has been fi-cat wells, 80 percent of significant newreal progress in preserving the soundness nanced; And the Senator is proposingdiscoveries and in 1980 were responsibleof the Trust Fund over the last 10 that we take that step here today. for 85 percent of successful oil well com-months. Mr. President, there are some toughpletions. Now, more than ever, independ- The most encouraging development decisions facing us on the future of so-ents need the extra incentives that the-onthe social security issue lies in the cial security. As a Senator and as a mem-new oil tax reduction will provide them.fact that after months of disagreement, ber of the Finance Committee, I am pre-The cost of drilling an average well hasthe President, Speaker O'NEmLand rep- pared to face up to those problems andrisen over 350 percent since 1970. It isresentatives from both political parties help find some of the solutions that makecurrently costing approximately $10 mil-have agreed on a bipartisan approach to the best sense for America. But we arelion to drill a 20,000-foot well in Okla-resolving it. A Presidential commIssiOn, not going to look for the easy answers.homa. At the same time, the cost of.evenly divided between Republicans tnd We are going to try to find the rightcrude oil is leveling off or in some casesDemocrats, is being created to explore answers. decreasing. every aspect of the system's problems, It may be that after a thorough study The windfall profits tax has,..ln addi-and examine all possible solutions. The of the problems and the options avail-tion, created a tidal wave of complexcommittee will report its reooinmenda-. able to us, financing from general rev-new crude oilregulations that havetions no later than January 1, 1983. enue will be one of those seriously con-swamped thousands of smaller opera- The Eagleton amendment seeks to sidered. But the point I want to maketors, who are without the battalioniofshortcut the bipartisan process that we is that any dramatic break with pastaccountants and lawyers employed byhave all worked so hard to estab'ish. S 11396 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE October 14,1981 There may well be some merit to the VP AMENDMENT NO. 481 ernments. However, the present concern Senator's suggestion that some of the(Purpo8e: To prDvlde Zor the release of in-is that court challenges will be made as tax benefits granted the oil industry be Zonntion neceatocarry out the pro-to the validity of the regulations and recycled Into the social security trust visions o section 223 relating to the pro.that the problem will be with us for fund. In my judgment, many of those hibitlon of paymente to prisoneTs) some time. tax benefits are indefensible, particu. Mr. DANFORTH. Mr. President, I send The amendment that is now pending larly at a time when dollars are beingan amendment to the desk and ask thatdoes two things. First of all, it makes Cut from so many domestic programs.it be stated. clear in the statute that the Federal Pri- And I hope all of my Colleagues will re. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Thevacy Act is inapplicable in this case and member that many of these benefitsamendment will be stated. that the Social Security Administration originated In the Democratic-controlled The assistant legislative clerk read aswill be allowed access to prison records. 1ouse, not in the Republican Senate. follows: second, the amendment would preempt But the bipartisan commission is the The Senator fromMissouri(Mr. DAN-State privacy laws to make it clear that body that should be considering this pro-roam), for bmself, Mr. Cimjs, and Mr.the Social Security Administration can posal, along with the many other olu- BENTSEN, PYOPO6anunprinted amendmentget the records for its purposes. tions that have been offered to the socialnumbcred 481. This axnendmeit, Mr. President, has security problem. This effort to shortcut Mr. DANFORTH. I ask unanimousbeen cleared with both the chairman the bipartisan commission by forcing theconsent that the reading of the amend-and the ranking minority member of the amendment directly to the Senate floorInent be dispensed with. Finance Committee. I believe that It Is threatens to unravel the agreement that The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withoutacceptable to both of them. created the commission, and return usobjection, It is so ordered. Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. President, the to the political infighting that has char- The amendment is as follows: amendment has been cleared with the acterized the Issue throughout this ses. At the end o the bill add the Zollowingminority members of the committee, itd sion of Congress. new section: I Congratulate the Senator from Mis- I cannot support that approach. I sup- INFORMATION WITH RESPECT TO PRISONERS souri. So often when we pass legislation, we do not get around to doing the house- port the process we have established, and Sec. . SecUon 223(Z)of the Social Se- curity Act Is amended by adding at the endkeeping matters necessary, urge my colleagues to do likewise. thereof the Zollowing nw paragraph: I wish to be added as a cosponsor, if I It is also essential to bear in mind that "(3)NotwIthstanding the provl8ions oZmay, to the amendment. the interfund borrowing provisions con-section 552a oZ title 5, UnIted 8tate Code, Mr. DANFORTH. Mr. President, I ask tained in this bill are essential to insureor any other provision of Eederal or State that those entitled to benefits continuelaw, any agency oZ the United State6 Oov-unanimous consent that Senatoi BENT to receive what they earned during theernment or oZ any State (or political sub-SEN and Senator SA55ER be added as co- next year and a half. The more we amenddivision thereof) shall make available to thesponsors, and also I wish to note that Secretary, upon written request, the nametheSenatorfromFlorida,Senator the bill and depart from the Financeand social security account number oZ anyCHILES, is aLso a cosponsor. Committee consensus, the harder itisindividual confined in & jail, prison, or other The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without going to be to get this bill through con-penal in&titution or corectiona1 ZaciUty tin-objection, it is so ordered. ference with the House. There are mil-der the jwladtction oZ such agency pursuant Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, the Senator lions of retirement-age Americans whoto his conviction of an offense which consti- need the reassurance that passage of thetuted a Zelony under applicable law, whcbfrom Missouri is correct. This has been Interfund borrowing provisions will pro-the Secretary nmy require to catry out thebleared. It Is a good amendment. It win provisions of this subsection.". simply facilitate the efforts of the Social vide. To jeopardize those benefits by in- Security Administration in carrying out termixing the social security Issue with Mr. DANFORTH. Mr. President, apthe wishes of Congress in the 1980 legls- tax Issues, energy isaues and other con-proximately a year ago Congress enactedlation as the Senator poInted out. troversial matters is indefensible. the so-called Son-of-Sam amendment to In order to suspend the payment of The approach suggested by my distin.the Social Security Act. The Son-of-social security disability benefits to pris. guished colleague from Missouri is at bestSam amendment was intended to denyoners, as enacted in 1980, the Social Se- a piecemeal approach. In the very short-disability Insuraflce payments toin-curity Administration (SSA) requires in- run, it would replenish part of the trustmates In penitentiaries. The reason forformation from the Federal Bureau of fund deficit by diverting revenues fromthe Son-of-Sam amendment was clear inPrisons and from States to identify the the windfall profits tax. But the revenueathat obviously the purpose of disabilityrelevant prisoners. Under various privacy from that tax will steadily decrease overinsurance is to permIt those who are un acts, this Information cannot be released the next decade as the "windfall profits"able to work to have a means of provid-without tile consent of the prisoner. resulting from oil decontrol graduallying for their food and shelter. disappear. This amendment would effectively ez Inmates In penal Institutions obvious-empt the Federal Bureau of Prisons and With the number of retired. Americansly have all of their food and shelter pro-the heads of State and local governments Increasing steadily, we cannot afford tovided for them and, therefore, disabilityfrom the Privacy Act for the purpose of link the future of the social security trustinsurance for them Is not necessary. transmitting the information required fund to a steadily decreasing source of It is estimated that about 3,200 prison-by the Social Security Administration. revenue. At best, this approach providesers throughout this country have been The pertinent Information would be a small part of the ultimate solution.Thereceiving disability insurance. names and social security numbers. I bipartisan conunittee is. the best forum The Son-of-Sam amendment denyingcertainly am willing to accept the amend- to determine how it should be combineddisability insurance payments to prisonment. with other elements to insure a perma-inmates was enacted by Congress nd The PRESIDING OFFICER.The nent solution to the problems of the so-was signed into law a year ago. However,question is on agreeing to the amend- cial security trust fund. a technical problem arose between thement of the Senator from Missouri. I urge my colleagues to put politicsBureau of Prisons and the Social Securi- The amendment (UP No. 481) wu aside on this issue, and reject the Eagle-ty Administration, in that the Bureau ofagreed to. ton amendment. The retirement securityPrisons took the position that inforrna- of millions of Americans depends on thetion as to who was in the prisons could Mr. DANFOR'rH. Mr. President,I actions we are about to take. It is a timenot be made available to the Socialmove to reconsider the vote by which for all of us to act responsibly, not p0-Security Administration under the Fed-the amendment was agreed to. Iitically.• eral Privacy Act. In addition, a similar Mr. DOLE. I move to lay that motion Mr. DANFORTH. Mr. President, I askproblem arose with respect to State pri.on the table. unanimous consent that the amendmentvacy laws. The motion to lay on the table was of Senator EAGLETON be set aside tempo- To a larger extent that proceduralagreed to. rarily and that an amendment that Iproblem has been worked out by regula- AMENDMENT NO. 581 will send to the desk be in order. tions Rnd by arrangement between the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Th The PRESIDING OFFICER. WithoutSocial Security Administration and thequestion recurs on the amendment of the objection, it isoordered. Bureau of Prisons and various State gov.Senator from Missouri. October 14, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— SENfl1 S 11397 Mr. LONG. Mr. President, I oppose thepoint forward It would be just one more There being no objection, the menio- Eagleton amendment because I believeprogram In the Government adding torandum was ordered, to be printed In the It would tend to make a welfare programthe huge deficits tending to undermineRECORD, as follows: out of the social security program. this Government's solvency and tendingEAcIa2roN AsammMmv No. 681 To H. 4331: Mr. President, since the beginning ofto reduce the ability of this Government USE OF OIL TAx REVENUES FOR 18001aL SECT.. the social security program, the purposeto make good on any commitment It RITY RESERVES. was to set up a program where workingmade to anybody. DESCRIPTION OP THE AMENDMENT people would contribute to the program. The financing of the social security The Eagleton amendment would Increase The more they made, the more theyprogram is based on a sound principle.the tax on newly discovered oil and set aside would pay into the system. And whenPeople can criticize the fact that there isthe proceeds of the tax Increase In a new they retired, they would have benefitssome doubt that we will have enoughtrust fund. The tax rates applicable to newly larger 11 they paid more Into the fundmoney coming In to meet the payout re-discovered oil under the "windfall profit" during their working years, and smallerquirements durIng the next few years.provisions of the tax code are as follows: 11 they paid less Into the fund. There are also some doubts that after un percent I

Now, It is not entirely an insurancethe year 2015 we will have enough , Present Eagleton program, because the Federal Govern-money coming In to meet the demandsYear: law amendment ment Is not really In the Insurance busi-on the program, ness. It Is for that reason that the Fed- But, Mr. President, the social security 1982 27.5 30 1983 25.0 20 eral Government chose to levy a taxprogram is not broke, It is not bankrupt. 1984 22.5 50 rather than attempt to assess a premiumIt is the one program that has continued 1985 20.0 *0 to pay for the social security benefits. to pay for Itself. It is different from the 1986 and after .___15.0 But, Mr. President,the Insurancegeneral fund of the Treasury which has principle Is carried out In the social se-run up a deficit now of more than a 1Until tax phases out, starting about 1990. curity program and It Is for that reasontrillIon dollars, and which caused us to The Increased revenues from the above that we are justified In paying largerraise the debt lImit recently to borrowtax change would be deposited In a newly benefits to those In the middle and up-more money from citizens to financeestablished reserve Thist Fund. The amounts per brackets than we do to those In lowerother activities of Government. so deposited could be subsequently brackets. So, Mr. President, It is the view of thisferred to the social security trust funds to The amendment seeking to tax so-Senator that the way the program Is fi-the extent so provided In subsequent appro- called "wIndfall profits" levies a tax onnanced Is sound. We should continue topriations acts. the producer. We have discussed thisfinance It that way. We ought to finance MAJoR ARGUMENTS AGMNST TUE AMENDMENT subject before. There Is no doubt about 1. Changes self-supporting nature Of social It with a payroll tax. There are a num-security program.—Sociel Security enjoys S It—this Is not a tax on the consumer.ber of reasons why we ought to do that.special degree of support compared with The windfall profit tax Is an excise tax One reason is that those who wish tomany other government benefit rograma on the producer of the product. Thepay out more and more social benefits,because itIs self-supportIng. Beneficiaries price of the oil Is fixed by world marketsome people who have very good inten-can consider themselves to have earned their conditions. The oil Is sold In competi-tions toward their fellow man but whobenefit rights because they supported the tion with oil produced elsewhere aroundmay not be concerned with fiscal respon-program during their working years through the world. The American producer getssibility, want us to pay more nd morea tax on their wages. Adoption of the amend- less for his oil because the tax Is sub- ment Is a major step towards changing this benefits and they do not want to raiseprogram into just another welfare program tracted from the amount that he wouldthe taxes to pay for them. When theyfunded by general government revenues. otherwise receive. come wanting to pay more benefits for 2. Severs, relationship between wages and So this Is a case of taking a tax thatthe sick, for the retired, for the disabled,benefite.—Social security benefits are con- has nothing whatever to do with socialor others, those of us In the Congresssidered an earned right because the benefits security to help finance the social secu-can say to them, 'Well, we might be ablean Individual receives at retirement are re- rity program. The Senator would au-to provide you some help In what you arelated to the wages on which taxes were paid thorize an appropriation to use theseseeking to do, but 11 you want to do thisover the Individual'S working lifetime. The funds. amendment would end the relationship be- under the social security program, thosetoeen social security revenues and the wages Mr. President, to a considerable de-who benefit will have to pay a tax Inupon which benefits are based. gree this Is the same proposal as the oneorder to pay the cost of It." 3. Proposed revenues unrelated to social made by those who say that we should That tends to dampen the ardor ofseourlty.—There Is no particular reason to finance social security out of generalthose who want to vastly expand theuse a tax on oil to support the social secu- revenues, or finance It out, of the deficit.benefits. M has been pointed out Inrity system. Given the desirability of vari- The Government already has a veryother debates about this program, theous benefit increase proposals, this amend- large deficit, and It appears that It islong-term estimate is that the programment could be a significant precedent for going to continue to have a deficit forcould be short by a trillion dollars orany number of other taxes which seem to som years to come. If we see fit to levymore. We will have to make our plans toaffect a limited segment of the economy a. additionaltaxesthat have nothing a means of financing benefit liberalizat.lona. see that there wIll be enough money to 4. Makes social security compete with other whatever to do with the social securitypay out the benefits. general fund programs In the budget proc. program, then those taxes should be If we cannot raise enough money withess.—The amendment proposes a specific tax used to reduce the deficit that this Na-a payroll tax to pay for this program,Increase to fund the social security system. tion faces rather than to make a wel-then we should seriously consider trim-But this means that the socail security pro- fare program out of the social securityming back the long-run cost of the pro-gram would be dependent upon a segment program. gram, recalculating the way we arrive atof what are really a part of general govern- mental revenues unrelated to the program Mr. President, when former Presidentthe benefit of those who go on the rolls atitself. This places the social securtiy pro- Jimmy Carter was In the White House,some time In the future so that we cangram In direct competition with appropri- the Idea did find some appeal In ad-live WithIn the revenues that will flowated fund programs In the budget process. ministrationcirclestouse"generalInto the fund, just as an Insurance com- 5. Makes the continued payment of s.clal revenues" to finance the social securitypany would have to do lilt had sold pro-security benefits subject to the annual ap- program. The Senator from Louisianagrams and was taking In premiums andpropriations process.—The amendment does at that time was chairman of thefound that the revenue available to It wasnot increase the assurance that benefits Finance Committee, and he told thenot adequate to pay all the benefits. Theywould continue to be paid, since the in- President of the United States that hewould have to trim back and pay what Itcreased revenues would be available for pay- ing social security bene5ts only when sub- would not support any such proposalcould With the revenues It had availablesequent appropriations acts so provide. As as that. In fact, he said he would vigor-for that purpose. a result, the security of benefit payments ously oppose It, because It was the feel- Mr. President, I have had prepared awould be made subject to approval In annual ing of this Senator that once we startedmemo to discuss the various argumentsappropriations acts which might, for exam- financIng by so-called general revenues,against this proposed amendment. I askple, be vetoed or otherwise delayed because the social security program would loseunanimous consent that It be printed Inof reasons having nothing to do with 600181 Its Insurance connection and from thatthe RECORD at this point. security. S 11398 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE October 14, 1981 ThePRESIDING OFFICZR. The Sen-after they died. In fact. In one case we have not heard from on social sec- ator from New Mexico. was a rather deplorable situatton beity. They havi not complained about re- Mr. DOMENICLFirst, Icommend thecause. as a matter of fact, one of the k4nformof the program, I will say that. But distinguished Senator from Louisianaof the deceased had been using theItIsa multirnlUion-dollar 1o that for his remarks. I hope to talk a littlemoney for 14 years. When it was dis-should be recovered. bit about this issue tomorrow. It cer-covered, it retilted In some anguish and Senator Doaxiofs amendment will tainly seems to me with the kind of def-a lot of family disputes. Ultimately. Itserve a real purpose, especially In light icits we are running, and those whichended up In suicide. of recent newspaper accounta. I have a we will be confronted with over the nest Basically, we know now that as a re-couple here. One says, "Mililons of Dol- several years, if they want to use thesult of these very cursory reports thatlars In benefl; Up to 10,000 Dead Mailed general tax revenues they ought not put8,000 deceased were receiving benefiwChecks." They were mailed checks.. it there. We ought not put general rev-for substantial periods of time after th"y There Is also an arUIe entttled, S8 enues Into solving the long-term prob-had already departed and left this world.Aims to Recoup Fimds Paid to Dead." lems of social security. It seema to this Senator that at theI ask unanimous consent that they be Mr. President. a parliamentary in-minimum, while we are concerning ourprinted In the Rcoaji. quiry. living social security recipients a)xut the There belng no objection, the material The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-solvency of the fund, we ought to dowas ordered to be printed In the RECORD,. ator will state it. whatever we can to see to it that thisas foUows: Mr. DOMENICI. Is the amendment ofsituation th changed. Mauoz ov DOL.LAIS fic DtnTrs; U o the Senator from New Mexico in order My amendment Is a simple one. It 10,000 DzD MLu. cza merely orders the Secretary of Health WASInNQTON. —GovernmentInv.etlgfttore at this time? and Human Services to report withinhave uncovered at lesst 8,500 cases in 'Which The PRESIDING OFFICER. The90 days to the Congress telling us whatSocial Security benefita are still being paid pending business Is the amendment ofactions they are going to take to putto people who ire listed am dead on Medicare the Senator from Missouri. Into the social security computer systemrecorda, omclsLs eftid Wedneedsy. Mr. DOLE. I ask unanimous consent Social Security CommIoner John A. Sv- evidence that exists In this country whenMm Baid the Ivestigation, which Is sUll to temporarily lay aside the amendmentpeople have died, and to give us a reportunder way, ay find that aa manyu 10,000 of the Senator from Missouri so that weon how they are going to try to makedead people are Bull being 8ent monthl7 can consider the amendment of the Sen-sure that they have the best systemSocialSecuritychecks tnvoaying up to $00 ator from New Mexico. possible to see to it that this does notmillion in Overp$ym.fltL The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withoutcontinue. The longeot period of undue psymena dli- objection. It Is so ordered. covered u0 fir datee bsck 16 yei to 1966. I have run this amendment by bothwhen Medicare was begun by former Press- VPAMNDMNT NO. 4t2 the majority floor manager and thedent Lyndon Jobnaon. (Purpose:To require the Secretary of Healthminority floor manager. I believe they 8vm Mid he found the payment abuses and Human ServiceB to report to the Con-aa.'e willing to accept the amendment. '&stoundlng.' gress with respect to screening of social Mr. President, the Social Security Ad- "The thing thkt amaze. m the moot is security paylnent8 to prevent payments tministration has been contInuing bene-that no on ev& thought about It—no one deceased lndivlduala) fits to 8,000 deceased recipients. In theever did anything &bout it." bssaid. The. Department o Health snd ifumin Mr. DOMENICI. I send an amend-last15 years deceased persons wereServices. Inipector General'. Offic.. using a ment to the desk and ask for its Immailed benefits accruing to more thanmany ss 80 nvost1gatora to match computer mediate considerition. $60 million. lists ndtrce the money, turned up 8.518 The PRESIDING OFFICER. Te It Is n1zIng to me that no one atcases in which Medicare reporta ahowed s amendment will be stated. the Adm1nstraUon thought this type ofperson wM dead but 6Oo1ft Security beneta The leglslattve clerk read as follou:fraud or abuse was occurring and that awere not 8topped. TheSenatorfrom New Mexico(Mr.systematic check has not been thlUated. With reviews completed on 1.290 csae. au- DoMrcx)proposesan unprlnted end- In many cases friends or relativesthorities have determined at Ietet 1,100 were ment numbered 482. actually dead and 190 were ailve but repot.d cashed the checks for their own use.dead by recording erroi. Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I askThere Is also the po6sibillty that un- Among the 1,100 deceased beneflciarea, unanimous consent that further readingscrupulousemployeeswhomonitorpayments versging $292 per month have of the amendment be dispensed with. death notices have allowed payments tocontinued for in average of 444 months The PRESIDING OICEE. Witho'itcontinue, diverting them to their ownsince the peion died. objection. it Is so ordered. account8. Richard Kuseerow, Inspector geneZ o Mr. President this amendment Is veryHHS, BMd tho.e Improper psymeita amount The amendment sasfollows: to about $13,000 per caae. Total taxpayer At the end of the blfl sdd the foflowingsimple. It requires the Social Securityco8t wu $14.3 mdlUon. He Mid the govern- iew section: Administration to report to the Congressment expects to recover most of the known withIn 90 days how it propos to elimi-overpayment!. REPORTTOCoNOEsS nate payments to deceased recipients. 'in uome inatsncee It's our fault because SEC. .TheSecretary of Health and Ru.In this age of computers there must bepeople have notified us that someone has man Services shall report to the Congrsa simple. Inexpensive method of crosspa8sed ftway and we have not terminated WithIn 90 dayB a8er the date of the enact-checking lists and immediately haltingtheir benefita." ment of thI8 Act with respect to the actions Checks for the 1.100 conflrmed dead people being taken to prevent payment8 from beingoverpayments. Iunderstand that Inwill be stopped effectIve Oct. 8, the next date made under title II of the Social Securitymany cases citizens vluntarlly notifyfor Social aecurlty payment8, Svahn said. Act to deceased indlvidualB, Including to thethe Administration when someone hasRenceforth Medicare death records will be. extent possible the use of the death recordspassed away and benefits still continue.checked against the SOdlal Security rolI. he available under themedicareprogram toThere Is no qution that this manager-said. screen the cash benefit rolls for such de-ial blundering swhatwe promised the Kusserow eald Investigators also are look- ceased IndIvlduas. American people we would ferret out. Iing Into the possibility, that unEcn1pulou Social Security employees who monitor death Mr. DOMENICT. Mr. President. In re-will eagerly await the proposal of thenotices have allowed paymenta to conUnue, cent days there has been a series')fSociaI Security Adminhtration. diverting th€m to their own accounts. articles which obviously caused great I yield to the distinguished Senator "We know from exrertence that this type. concern to many Americans while wefrom Kansas.. of fraud nd abuse exista," he aaid.• discussed the solvency of the social se- Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I thank the He also said that In wine cases relatives curity fund. It has become obvious thatSenator from New Mexico. simply eaved benefit checks—for up to 10 the Social Security Adm1nstration does Mr. President, it may seem strange toyears—and returnedithem when confronted by Invectigatora. not have a system to assure that whensome, but this happens. When we are "Xt's absolutely amazing to me it has been beneficiaries die we stop paying. This italking about millions of dollars in ben-allowed to exist," Svahn said. But he indi- not a question of whether or not we areefits being paid to people who left nocated it was Just the latest of several em- changing benefits. As reported, they haveforwarding address, it Is a problem andbaraaaments linked to what he ha5 called recently found some deceased where theI thank the Senator from New Mexico.Social Securlty'a archaic computer system. check has been going on for 14 yearsIn fadt, they are about the only people O.thor problema Include continuflng pay- _____

October 14, 198! CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— SENATE S11399 ments to afleni deport'dDcmthis countryIen4 a èertan sense or urgency to theSocial security card w intent to ie11 or anddlsabflitybenefits still goXng to prison-Social Security Administration's contin-alter it; or". ers. which Congree outlawed last yeaz, beuing efforts to update beneficiary rec- (b) Section 308 of Such Act igamendedin aid. th. matter following 8ubsection(h)by ords so that benefits will be terminatedstriking out "shall be guilty of a misde- SB AiMs To Rzcovp FUND8 PA!D TO Dzan on a timely basis when appropriate. meanor and upon conviction thereof shall be WASHINGTàN.—JOlifl Henry 8yd1or of Bal- Mr. Presideit, I certainly will acceptftned not more than P1.000 or imprisoned for timore died on May 81, 1977. but as in thethe amendment. I think itIs a goodnot more than one year, or both" and insert- cases of about 8.000 other dead people, hisamendment. The amendment has beenIng In lieu thereuf "3ha1 be guilty of a lel- Social Security benefits kept flowing—total-discussed with the distinguished Senatorony and upon conviction thereof shall be ing $14287 over four years. from Loüsana, asfarae I know, andfined not more 'than 5,OCO or imprisoned Overall, deceased petsons were hiailed ben-he has no objection. for not more than 1ve yeaze, or both". efits—for up to 15 years—accrulng to more Mr.DOMENICI. Mr. President,I (C) The amend1nenta made by 8ub6ections than $60 million. Investigators believe thethank Senator DOLEfor (a) and (b) shall be effective with respect to money was pocketed by friends, relatives or his concernviolations committed after the date of the about the issue that I have raised .aidenactment of this Act. even Social Security employees. for his willingness to accept this amend- Social Security Administration chief John PENALTIESFokMXStTSEOF SOCIAL Svahn aays he i "astounded" by the costlyment, which will mandate the Secretary SECVI1I'rT NVMBEES blunder, which was disclosed Wednesday. to come up with the admIn1stiatIve and "The thing that amazes me the most Ismanagement package and give it to the Mr. BATJCTJS. Mr. President, earlier that no one ever thought about it; no oneSenate through the Committee on -thIs year, I introduced, along with Sena- ever did anything about It," Svahn said. Dancewithin 90 days. I think it Is un-tors HARRY BYRD and MOYJIDIAN, a bill Richard Kueserow, Inpector general of theperative, if we are going to gain the con-to provide penalties fcu the misuse of Department of ealtb and Human Services,fidence of our people, that while we aresocial security numbers. Today, I am said he will pre fox Crim1na and civil offering that bill (5. 179) as an amend- penaltie8 against anyone wo haa improperlyworried about solvency and about such caa1ed benefit cheek8 deposited in the ac-thbigs as the unearned social securityment to our social security reform legis- øouE.ts oX dead people. benefit situation, we assure them that aslation. flie government expects to recoup much of•to the millions of dollari going to the Simply, Mr. President, this amend- the money, he 5atd. deceased, as Senator DOLE has indicatedment would make it a felony to misuse Sydnor'8 BOfl John Henry Jr., a respectedheretofore, we have a way of mlnizniz-or counterfeit a social security number. 82year-old photographer, took his life lasting it if not elinilnaUng it in toto. Thischange Is long overdue and will en- week, just hours after an FBI agent (tsked Sydnor ftbout his depoalt of his fatherB Mr. President, I yield beck the re-hance the Integrity of the social se- monthly benefit checks in his bank account.nialnder of my time. I yield the floor,curity system by reducing the misuse Investigators surmised the younger SydnorMr. President. of social security numbers. Buccunlbed to the temptation created by the Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I move the We aU know that a social security gOvernment bungle—and was overcome byadoption of the amendment. number Is as common as a driver's 11- the damage the episode would do to his The. PRESIDING OFFICER. Thecense. You need one to get a job, to pay reputation. question Is on agreeing to the amend-taxes, to open a bank or savings accoun6 In another instance, agents o the !npec- and for many other things. However, tor genera office at the Department ofnient. ka1tb and Buinan Servfces found $63,000 in The amendment (UP No. 482) wasIncreasingly social security numbers ae cbeck were sent to relatives of a deceasedagreed ta being used illegaily to obtain jobs and 'a1 Security bene&iary over a 14-yesr Mr. DOMENICI. I move to reconsiderbenefits. Although we do not know ex- period. the vote by which the amendment wasactly how much this costs each year, ederal proseciltous hz New Ycrk, Chicago,agreed to. ciimes based onfalseidentification L08 Angelea and other ma4or cities now are • which often include social security cards, picking up the piece8 considering criminal Mr. DOLE. I move to la, that motion charges against those who capitalized on theon the table. cost American taxpayers more than $50 error nd kept the payments, now averaging The motion to lay on the table waa million every year. p374 a month agreed to. Last year, at my. request, the GAO The 8518 cues reelewed o far involved investigated the misuse of social security Medtcare's death records through Mazcb VP IIMNDMENT NO. 483 cards and numbers. Their findings re- i81. Svahn Baid that brtnging the Investiga-(Purpo8e: To provide penalties for the mis- veal that the fraudulent use of social se- tion up. to date may turn up a total ot use of 5ocial security numbers) curity cards to gain benefits ox jobs is 10.000 cas€s. Mr. BATJCUS. Mr. President, I send growing lznmenaebr. Of the ftmt 2.858 cases, investigators foundan amendment to the desk and ask for at1est I,OO wereactually dead and 190 One recoinniendation of the GAO was were still alive. Its immediate consideration. to make the counterfeiting or altering Pym.ents to the 1,100 deceased bene- The PRESIDING OCER. Theof social security cards a felony punish- ciaries averaged 1292 per monthforan aver-amendment will be stated. able by a fine of $5.000 or imprisonment age of 44 months ater death. In these The legislative clerk read as follows: for 5 years. cases alone, the ovórpaymnts amounted to The Senator from Montana (Mr. Bavcvs) My amendment simply adopts the rec- $14.8 million. on behalf of him8elf, Mr. Crni.Es, and Mr.ommendation of the Génerai Account- Checks for the 1,100 confirmed dead peo-HARRY P. Byan, JR., proposes an unprinteding Office. p!e will be stopped effective Sftturday, theamendment numbered 483. nxt date for 8ocia Security payu1ent. Mr. President. adoption of this amend- &vahn said. Mr. BATJCTJS. I ask unanimous con-ment will send a stroxig signal to the Svabn contended the Reagan admlnistm-sent that further reading be dispensedAmerican public that we, intend to take tion sbould get the credit for curbing thewith.. necessary eps to restore confidence tn waste o taxpayer dollars, but it could not be The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withoutthe integrity of the social securitysys- learned whose idea it actually wa to zntchobjection, it Is so ordered. tem. I urge my colleagues to adopt this the computer lists. The amendment is as follows: proposal and press for its immediate en- Laura Genero, an RHS spokeswoman, said aetment. the iuccesa of atch1ng The 118t6 "vindicate! At the end of the bill add the following our w1ole effort to cia match governmentnew section: Mr. President, as our live* become recorda to root out waste, fraud and abu8e." SEc. .(a)Section 208 (g) of the Socialmore complex and the Boctal aecurity Security Act is amended— system becomes a greater part of our Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I thinkthat (1)in the matter preceding paragraphlives, particularly as the uze of soea1 15important. What I think the Senator(1), by In8erting "or for the pUrpome o ob-securitynumbers beconie mce and fr(*n 'New Mexico )za. in mind I to maketaming anything of value from any person,"more Important to t as AznerIcns, certainthatthereIs someprocedtne Inbsore or for any other purpo.."; d the Social Security Ad Instrat1on for (2) by adding Xter paragraph (2) the fol-Ainericans who pay payroll tsxei and, dent1fy1ng benefltm that 8bould be ter-lowing new paragraph: aI8o, Anier1can who are on retirement, min&ted. "(3 knowingly, alters a social securityIn addition to Amerlcan8 who pay in- I undentand that the admhijstratjoncard is8ued by the Secretary, buys or Mus acome taxes, who app'y for drivers' 11- oard that is, or purport8 to be, a card censea andwhatnot,socialsecurity Is alresdy movfng to end thfs problem.sued, counterfeita a social eecurity ca. ornumbers are a very prom1nent feature 8enator DOMENICZ'8 amendment willpoaes8es $ eoclal 8ecurity card or cowiterfeitin our lives. S 11400 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE October 14,1981 Accordingly,I think it is importanttheir amendments to the floor, we can that we do what we can to preserve themove quickly to dispose of this bill. integrity of social security numbers, that Having said that, Mr. President, I we do whatever we can that is possiblethink that will terminate any activity to prevent abuse of social security num-on the bill this afternoon. bers. There has been counterfeiting of numbers. The GAO has recently come up with a report that shows about 37 mIl- lion cases of fraud through use of coun- terfeit social security cards for identi- fication. My amendment provides gener- ally that it is a felony to misuse a social security number for purposes of one's unofficial gain through counterfeit of social security numbers. It is something that has come from GAO. I think It is a feature that should be part of this bill. Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, this is a good amendment. As I have indicated to the Senator from Montana, it is one we should accept Tie has indicated that it would increase the penalties for mis. using, altering, counterfeiting, buying, or• selling fraudulent social security cards. That Is now a misdemeanor. The Sena- tor's amendment would make it a felony. This Senator believes it will be useful In clamping down on the fraudulent use of social security cards. We have had an amendment by Sena- tor DOMENICI. People may think, how can these things happen? Why would they continue to make payments to the de- ceased? It has happened. This amend- ment goes In a different direction, but some must wonder, when we are talking about reform of the system, why we do not provide more severe penalties for the misuse of social security cards. This amendment addresses that problem. I am certainlywillingtoacceptthe amendment. I assume it has been discussed with the distinguished Senator from Lou- isiana. •Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I have discussed it with the Senator from Lou- isiana and he is agreeable to it. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ques- tion is on agreeing to the amendment. The amendment (UP No. 483) was agreed to. Mr. DOLE. I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was agreed to. Mr. BAUCUS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, as far as the Senator from Kansas knows, there are no further amendments to be of- fered on this proposal. There is the amendment of the distinguished Senator from Missouri (Mr. EAGLETON). There are other amendments that are at least listed as possible—amendments by Sen- ators LEvIN, Senatci CRANSTON; a col- loquy with Senator MITCHELL, a col- loquy with Senator LEVIN. Hopefully, thatwillbe enough.It ought to be enough. But if there are others, we hope to dispose of all amendments and finish action on the bill by midafternoon to- morrow. I hope that Senators are in their offices listening. If. we proceed to debate this bill further—li o'clock to- morrow morning is my understanding— if those Senators having amendments will give us their attention and bring S 11472 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— SENATE October 15, 1981

CONCLUSION OF MORNING BUSINESS The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time for morning business has expired.

RESTORATION OF MINIMUM SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, what is the pending business? The PRESIDING OICER. The pending business will be stated by title. The legislative clerk read as follows: A bill (HR. 4331) to amend the Omnibus Reconcj1iaton Act o 1981 torestoremini- mum benefits under the Social Security Act. The Senate resumed consideration of the bill. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ques- tion is on the amendment of the Sena- tor from Missouri. Mr. EAGLETON. Mr. President. I sug- gest the absence of a ouoruin. The PRESIDING OFFICER, The clerk will call the roll. The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it s so ordered. Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President. while I have consistently voted to end the cur- rent minimum social security benefit provisions, I intend to support the cur- rent bill to amend the social security Jaw. Here is why: H.R. 4331 as reported out by the Senate Finarce Cournittee makes several extremely useful changes in so- cial security which will enable the retire- inent fund to meet benefit payments in the near future in addition to restoring most beneficiaries currently receiving the minimum social security benefit. The committee amendment to reallo- cate the social security taxes among the three trust funds and allow ititerfuz

October 15, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 11473 borrowing provides welcomed flexibilitythe fund because the sociftlsecurityemployees or have a private pension plan and confidence to the system. fund would not lose $1.3 billion in 1982.or have other sources of Income and do In addition, the proposal to restore$1.4 billion in 1983. and $1.5 billion innot, and should not, qualify for SSI the $122 a month minithuni benefit ex-1984, which it will if you continue thebenefits. However, we are making an ex- cludes those retfred Federal, State, andminimum payment, Therefore, if youception for retired Government workers loca1 government workers whose Gov-abolishthe minimum payment thatIn the case of this legislation. We are ernment pensions exceed $300 per month.fund would be sounder and those peoplesayllig that they are going to get the Of course, even those individuals receiv-who rely on the social security fund tominimum benefit if their other income s ingsubstanitialGovernment pensionsgive them a pension they have earnedless than $300 a month. would still be entitled to receive thosewould be in a position of not having that So, in conclusion, Mr. President, I sócia1 security benefits they were actu-pension reduced on the ground that thefavor making certain that every person ally entitled to based upon their earn-fund was inadequate. who needs and Is dependent on the so ings paid into the system. That is why I took theposition I tookcial security minimum amount suffer no What I am saying here is that evenin the past, which is that we shouldloss. though the sOcia1security minimumremove the minimum social security pay- But I also favor having a social se-V benefits would not. be available to retiredment because, as I say, Ifeel verycurity trust fund pay only that part of Federal, State, and local governmentstrongly that the social security fundthe rnlnimuzn which the person earned. workers who have pensions exceedingshould be protected, so we would not beThe rest should be paid from general $300 a month, they would still get aforced to reduce pensions to those whorevenues or other sources. benefit that would be say $115 or $100earned them. As I say, this Is not Just a matter o or $95, or whatever. It would not be $122, Now, let me run down the effect onbookkeeping. Some people say, "Well, but it would be what they earned. Whatthe various beneficiaries who now receivewhat difference does it make? It all the minimum social security benefit doesthe minimum social security If we hadcomes out of the same pot." It does not Is to provide that no social security re-eliminated that. all come out of the same place. cipient will get less than $122. This Of the 3 million people who now get If you are going to preserve the social legislation before us today, as I under-the minimum benefit about 200,000 ofsecurity fund and save, as I say, $1.3 stand it, would provide that people whothem earn the minimum benefit and,billion in 1982, $1.4 billion in 1983, and have Government pension income highertherefore, would continue to get it. In$1.5 billion in 1984 and subsequently, than $300 a month might get less thanaddition to that, about a millionarethen you should have these additional $122, but in no case less than what theydually qualified, They have aspouseamounts paid by SSI, which is from gen- were entitled to under the law. who now gets social security. Whatevereral revenues and not out of the limited Mr. President, I believe that a verythey lost by having their minimum bene-social security fund. But this legislation important fundamental issue concerningfit reduced, their spouse would get backwe vote on today does not take us down the nature of the social security trustdollar for dollar In increased matchingthat path. fund was at the heart of the initial de-benefits. There would be no loss to the Nevertheless, we are following a path bate and I would like to briefly review itcouple. They,would get exactly thesamewhich does, to some very limited extent, at this time. amount. The spouse that does not gethelp the social security trust fund and What was proposed was that the mini-the minimum benefit would getmore, awhich, I suppose you could argue, does mum social security benefits now beingdollar-for-dollar match on what theprovide less confusion and more sim- received by about 3 million people be re-spouse with the minimum benefit wouldplicity for those who receive the mini- calculated. People above the minimumlose. mum social security payment. would get what they had earned. Many There would be an additIonal 500,000 I think it would be better to face up people below the minimum now get morewho would get a dollar-for-dollar matchand recognize that the difference be. than they have earned from the amountsbecause, they now getsupplementaltween what people earned and what they they have paid in and the number ofsecurity income and they would havewere getting from the minimum benefit years they have paid in. their supplemental security income in-payments was a welfare payment and The purpose was to help make thecreased by the, exact amount they lost social have it paid by the general revenues, as securitytrustfundsactuarilyin the minimum benefit, And thenyouI say, and preserve the social security sound. Many people, some with large in-have a substantial number, 600,000peo-trust fund. ThIs legislation will not do comes from other sources or other pen-ple, who, in losing the minimum benefitthat. sions, get a minimum payment whichdo not get SSI,now, and would lose. $10 Historically, what has happened is the they did not earn. My view was and stillor $15 or $20, or perhaps more, whatever.social security system has been asked to is that the social security system andThe difference between that minimumpay for programs which are clearly not funds—like any good Insurance pro-benefit of $122 and what they werea part of the social security system. That gram—should py benefits based onactually entitled to. They would be ableIs one reason why reforms In the system what is paid in and earned. Also, thoseto apply for SSI and they would get itmust be made to keep it so•und. in need must be taken care of. But addi-and they would get it in full, what they I will vote for this bill, but the more tional amounts should be paid to thoselost in giving up their minimum benefit.fundamental issue raised must still be who need the money from the general In some cases, these 600,000 peoplefaced. And I hope some way and some- revenues. who get the minimum benefit and whohow we find in the future that we can 1 want to make that point very clear,had not applied for the 881 would getmeet this problem without permitting Mr. President. more than they get now but they wouldthe social security system to bear a bur- If the minimum benefit payment hadnct get less. den that it should not have to bear. The been rescinded, as I voted and as others The point o all of that, Mr. President,social security system should be retained voted, it would not have meant that any-Is that these funds would come fromin all its Integrity as a system which pays body in need wou1d have gone in need.SSI, which Is the general revenues. Notthe people what they have earned. It would have meant that those in needfrom the social security fund. Let me I think the overwhelming majority of would get what they need from the sup-repeat. That additional amount to helpsocial security recipients that I have plementalsecurity income(so-calledpeople who are needy but had not earnedtalked to in my State—and I am sure 551). what they needed, they would get thatthis must be true nationally—agree with The result of that would be that theout of general revenues and not out ofthat. They do not want to see their social security fund would not be usedthe social security fund. So the social se-money spent for other purposes. They as a welfare fund. You would not draincurity fund would not be used as a wel-want it to come back as they earned it the social security fund by eliminatingfare payment. It would be used to payand as they deserve it. the minimum benefIts. In the first place,people what they earned. It would pre- Mr. President, I yield the floor. if you abolish the minimum social secu-serve the integrity of the system, and It Mr. CHILES addressed the Chair. rity payment, you would still take carewould save literally billions over the The PRESIDING OFFICER(Mrs. of those who are needy because theyyears for the social security fund. HAWKINS). The Senator from Florida. would get what they needed out of SSI, Of the remaining 800,000 people, a Mr. CHILES. Madam President, the but you woUld also keep the Integrity oflarge number are retired Governmentsocial security amendments which have S 11474 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD SENATE October 15, 1981 been adopted by the Finance Committeesocial security trust funds during theMr. DANFORTH, to the bill currently under are a victory for those of us who havenext few years. This is the short4ermconsideration. The amendment removes tried again and again during the pastperiod of difficulty we have all been hear-a technical obstacle to the implementa- few months to get an interfund borrow-ing so much about. The effect of thistion of a law which I sponsored In the ing amendment passed on this floor—proposalIsthe same a the earlier96th Congress. I am referring to the and tried five times to restore the mini-amendments we offeredto authorizeprohibition on the payment of social mum benefit for current recipients. interfund borrowing. security disability benefits to incarcer- Each time we offered these amend We will all be watching the perform'ated felons. ments, they lost by a very close vote. arice of the economy very closely during The Privacy Act presents a potential Thefirst few times we tried to restorethe next few months and years-.-.but unobstacle to the enforcement of the law. the minimum benefit,the argumentless all the experts are wrong and weThe act limits access by the Social Secu- against us was that the benefit was nothave a very bad performance Indeed—rity Administration to the social secU- necessary—it was going to people whoacceptingthisinterfundborrowingrity numbers of Federal prisoners. This did not need i—eliminatlng it would notamendment should put an end to all theinformation is under the control of the hurt any of the truly needy—the Presi-horror stories about social security goingFederal Bureau of Prisons. dent had proposed that the minimumbroke in the next few months or years. It is estimated that there are almost benefit be eliminated for all current and Let us vote for this bill. Take care of3,000 prisoners in State and Federal future recipients and he had assured usthe short-term social security problem,prisons receivingsocialsecuritydis- that anyone with very low incomes wouldrestore the minimum benefit, remove theability benefits. The cast to the trust not be hurt—they would be able to applyatmosphere of crisis surrounding socialfund is about $16 million annually. Mr. for welfare. security, and get on with a reasoned conPresident, we cannot continue to provide And then we began hearing more andsideration of the problems we know arethis windfall to individuals who certainly more about .a lot of people who would bestill coming in the next few decades. do not need or deserve the benefits. Pas- hurt by eliminating the minimum bené- Madam President, I suggest the absage of the Danforth amendment will fit—and the arguments against our ef-sence of a quorum. insure the effective Implementation of forts to restore it began to change. The PRESIDINO OFFICER. The clerkthe prohibition. people started to say that maybe wewill call the roll. I do have reservations about language should restore it for the tru]y needy. And The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.in the amendment which would preempt more and more truly needy were found. Mr. BAKER. Madam President, I askState privacy laws. The bill which I had Then even the President said he wouldunanimous consent that the order for theIntroduced several weeks ago only af- ask us to restore the minimum benefit.quorum call be rescinded. fected the Federal Privacy Act. All but Even though it was the administration's The PRESIDING OFFICER.. Withoutone State have assisted in identifying original proposal—.-and Insistence—thatobjection, It is so ordered. - prisoners in State prisOns. it be eliminated for everyone. RECESBUN?IL1:30P.M. Mr. President, I do not feel that this Three weeks ago, I offered an amend- Mr. BAKER. Madam President, it hassection is needed, and I recommend that ment-for the fifth time—to restore thebeen brought to my attention that athe conferees look carefully at it before minimum benefit for all current recipi-number of Senators are involved in aadopting t and perhaps they will see fit ents. That has always been my position.caucus meeting today, which no doubtto adopt the provision on the State pri- We lost again by a very close vote. will address itself, in part, at least, tovacy laws in conference. The Finance Committee provision wethe pending amendment to the bill be- AMENDMENT NO. 881 have before us today would restore thefore the Senate. Mr. EAGLETON. Mr. President, the full minimum benefit for current recipi- Itis the opinion. of the leadershipSenate is once again back to considering ents—except for a very small propor-that to recess the Senate at this timethe amendment which was laid down tion—about 15 percent-who also receiveuntil the hour of 1:30 p.m., in order toand debated briefly last evening. Before fairly substantial public pensions in ad-facilitate the consideration of those mat-I yield the door to other speakers who dition to the social security mmimumters in caucus and permit other Sena-wish to speak in support of the amend- benefit. tors to confer on the further course ofment, I want to take a few minutes to These recipients would stillreceive this legislation during the balance ofrespond to some of the statements made whatever social security amount they arethe day, would be useful. in opposition to my amendment by the entitled to based on their social security Madam President, for the reasons justdistinguished floor manager (Mr. DOLE). earnings record. But any minimum bene-assigned, I ask unanimous consent that Itis the contention of the Senator fit amount now received in excess of whatthe Senate stand in recess until thefrom Kansas that there is a great dif- they are actually entitled to would behour of 1:30 p.m. ference between the Roth amendment, reduced—dollarfordollar—forthe There being no objection, the Senate,which he and all the other members óf. - amount they receive in other public pen-at 12:24 p.m., recessed until 1:30 p.m.;thecommittee supported in 1979 and sions over $300. whereupon,theSenatereassembledagain in 1980 in somewhat watered-down People with small pensions would stillwhen called to order by the Presidingform. As supposed proof of that asser- be able to receive the full minimum bene- Officer (Mr. WALLOP). tion, he noted, for example, that my fit. People with larger pensions would The PRESIDING OFFICER. Themaamendment would earmark a portion of have some reduction in the minimumjority leader is recognized. the windfall tax revenues for social se- benefit—the larger the public pension, Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I believecurity, whereas the Roth amendment the higher the reduction. But no onethat the managers of the bill and thethat he and the others voted for would would ieceive less social security thanpending amendment will be available tohave earmarked a portion of corporate they are entitled to, based on their earn-begin debate on this issue in the next fewtaxes for the same purpose. ings record. moments. For the time being, I suggest I concede to the Senator there is a If we are to restore the minimum bene-the absence of a quorum. distinction,but I challenge him to tell fit for this group of people too, I think The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerkus where there is a difference. The Sen- the best way to do that now Is in a Housewill call the roll. atordefinestheIssuebefore us as and Senate conference on this bill. I do The legislative clerk proceeded to callwhether it is wise to use general revenues believe, however, that the Finance Com-the roll. for social security. But he does not and mittee acted in good faith and that our Mr. WALLOP. Mr. President, I askcannot tell us why it Is any less sharing concerns about those beneficiaries whounanimous consent that the order for theof general revenue to use corporate taxes would be hit very hard by the elimina-quorum call be rescinded. than windfall taxes. tion of the minimum benefit have been The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. MAT In truth, there is no difference. addressed. TINGLY). Without objection,itIsso During yesterday's debate, the Senator We also tried very hard to get Senateordered. from Kansas put In the RECORD a tran- approval of interfund borrowing. TEZ PRIVACY ACT script of the committee's proceedings on This bill authorizes interfund borrow- Mr. WALLOP. Mr. President, yesterthe Roth amendment. I am glad he did ing—and gives us enough flexibility today, the Senate approved an amendmentthat, because I was prepared to read por- adjust to imbalances among the threeoffered by my colleague froRn Missouri,tions of that transcript in this debate. October 15, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 11475 As it Is. I will read only a few passagesassurance they will be entitled to Its NATIONAL CouNcu. or SENIox CrrIzzNs. from Senator ROTHS own arguments inbenefits in their retirement years. But, Washington, D.C.. October 13, 1981. support of his amendment, so that weSenator DOLE and the administration Hon. ThoMAs F. EAGLETON. U.S. Senate, can weigh those words against the insist-want to change that contract. They sayWashington, D.C. ence of the Senator from Kansas thatwe have to cut benefits for the first time DEAE SzNAToa EAGLETON: On behalf of all the Roth amendment was not bringingIn the history of the program—an abso-Social Security recipients, we urge you to general revenue Into social security. lute precedent.—.because that is bettersupport two measures, H.R. 4331 and Amend- On page 13 through page 15 of thatthan the other precedent of using somement 531. to prevent a-loss of benefits and transcript dated October 19. 1979, Sena-of these windfall profits to shore up theto provide more secure funding of the Social tor ROTH made very clear what the pur-system. - Security system in the short term. pose of his amendment was. He said: AnySenator who wants to carry that HR. 4331, which 'would restore the Socill Security minimum benefit eliminated by the This payroll tax freeze would be financedcase back to working people and the re-Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1981. would by transferring a portion of the billions oftired people back home has that choice.both restore income to recipients and patch dollars in increased revenue from decontrolBut do not try to sell your case to people to the Hospital Insurance trust fund. a broken promise. It would enable recipients' The Social Security Advisory CounciP3 1979who are losing benefits on the argumentsto retain the level of benefits for which the report endorsed the approach of financingbeing peddled here today by the able'Social Security Administration declared they part of the Hospital Insurance trust fundfloor manager. They do not wash. were eligible when they retired. from the general revenue. By earmarking In the past day or two. I have heard HR. 4331 would preserve the level of bene- these special funds from decontrol we canthe Senators from Kansas and Texasfits upon which recipients depend and to insure the stability of the trust funds. and Louisiana noting that it is easy forwhich they are entitled. To not restore the I think it Is important to point out thatme to propose tapping some of theminimum benefit would be a Clear breach o my amendment—again, to repeat, would roll faith by the government. back the payroll tax Increase scheduled forenormous oil windfall taxes for social The Amendment 531 proposed by Senator 1981 by putting the increased revenues fromsecurity' because I do not have any oilEagleton Is a positive step in the effort to decontrol into the Medicare trust funds. production in my State. meet the short-term funding needs of te They are almost totally correct. WeSocial Security system. By repealing ' tax All the Members of this body have tohave a modest amount of oil productionbreaks granted for newly discovered oil, this do is read the transcript and the plainbut not much. AU I have are oil usersamendment would provide an estimated $14.2 words of the amendments sponsor. Sen- billion to the Social Security system. -It who pay for those profits. All I have arewould also provide a greater margin of safety ator ROTH. I do not know what trans-elderly citizens who have to steal fromand security to the trust fund than we now cript Senator DOLE is reading, but I thlnktheir food budgets to pay their heatinghave. Members of the Senate can understandbills. I do not have fat cat oil companies We urge you to consider the million of plain English. The Roth amendmentIn my State. but I will wager this: Ifelderly people who depend on their Social openly proposed to earmark general rev-these Senators from the oil belt take aSecurity, income. Please support them by enues for one of the social security trusts,look around, they will find that even theysupporting HR. 4331 and Amendment 531. and that amendment enjoyed the sup-have a lot more senior citizens and work- Sincerely. port of every Republican on the commit- WILLIAM IL Htrrron. ing people concerned about social secu- Executive Director. tee, including some of those who now sayrity than they have people profiting from it would be a dangerous precedent. the tax giveaway they are trying to Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I shall speak You can paint the word "horse" on thedefend. briefly, because I know others want to side of a cow, but it is still a cow. AU the That Is the issue here—plain and sim-speak. I should like to move on with thin Senator's protestations notwithstanding,ple. Are we going to use this $14 billionand other amendments and finish action he cannot rewrite legislative history. TheIn tax funds to further enrich a few,on the bill early this afternoon, fact is that the amendment the Senatoralready incredibly profitable oil corpora- There have been votes in the past is now arguing, would be a "dangeroustions or use it to shore up a seriouslyabout general funding of social security. precedent" is in every essential respectthreatened social security system? I believe the record will indicate that the same as the amendment he and other If we reject this approach of-' usingmost Republicans and many Democrats Republican Finance Committee memberssome part of the unearned windfallare opposed. to using general revenues to supported in 1979. and it follows theprofits for social security, we will be.finance the social security system, for same approach as this body approved incommitting ourselves irretrievably to thetwo very good reasons. 1980. course urged by Mr. Stockman and Mr. First of all It would violate a long. If the Senator wants a "dangerousSchweiker and that is to make massivestanding precedent' whereby the em- precedent," let him follow this adminis-cuts In benefits nd probably on an emer-ployee and employer participate equally. tration's approach tosocialsecuritygency, rescue basis. Make no mistake Second. we do not have any general whichcanbesummarizedintwoabout it. If you reJect new increases inrevenues. That is why we are trying to words—cut benefits. That is his answer.social security taxes, which most of usfigure out ways to cut the budget. and that is the Only choice we will bedo. and you turn your back on this pro- It is easy to stand on the floor and say. leaving ourselves if we reject this amend-posal, then you have committed your-"Let us take it out of oil profits." .1 could ment. I do not care how many Presiden-selves by your vote to future benefit cutssay, "Let us take it out of somebody elses tial commissions you appoint. If you rulein social security. If and when that sadprofits.' out a payroll tax increase as most of usday arrives, those who said "no" to this The fact is that a lot of people now do, and if you reject this amendment asviable alternative, which was recom-receiving social -security benefits may Senator DoLE would have us do. thenmended 2 years ago by the Social Secu-have worked in the oil industry. If social there is only one possible answer to therity Study Commission and supported bysecurity action is going to hinge on what acknowledged financial problems of so-every Republican on the Senate Financehappened October 19. 1979, in the Senate cial securiby and that Is—cut benefits.Committee. will have the responsibilityFinance Committee, it is well to lay the As my friend from Arkansas, Senatorto answer to the voters. committee amendment on thetable BUMPERS, likes to say. "You don't have to One further item: Yesterday. I putright now. be broke out in brilliance to understandinto the RECORD three letters I had re- Very seldom in our committee do we that." The American people understandceived from organizations in support ofhave partisan differences. I say that that, and that is why they are solidly be-this amendment. I now ask unanimoussincerely, because under the chairman- hind the approach lam advocating. Thatconsent to have printed in the RECORD Rship of Senator LONG, we operated under is why my approach was recommendedfourth letter, from the National Councilmore or less a consensus theory. I be- by the Social Security Advisory Councilof Senior Citizens, dated October 13.lieve we pretty much do the same now: in 1979. 1981. addiessed to me. signed by Wifflambut in this one' instance (October. 19, Let us get back to dangerous prece-R. Hutton, executive director. That orga-1979) we had a partisan difference, dents. How about breaking faith withnization endorses the amendment before In 1977. the Carter administration the working people of this country whothe Senate. recommended—I am not sure how cer- thought they had a contract with the • There being no objection, the lettertain Senators may have voted—that we Government? Through their workingwas ordered to be printed in the RECORD.take' care of social security by doing a lives, they pay into social security on theas follows: number of things, including Imposing S 11476 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE October 15, 1981 six tax increases on working men andwell understood that one way or theof the most Important reasous we should womenandtheiremployers.Thatother it was funding socia}security withavoid general revenue financing: general revenues. It was the RepubU— In my opinion. thIs would deetroy the sy.- -passed—notwith this Senator's vote.— in 1977. Two of those tax Increases havecans' purpose to Indicate that we want-tern as w• know it. Althougb thiuaeof euch ed to get a vote for one of our Repub-funda might be modest to begin with, experi- taken effect, and four more are coming ence tells 113 that the temptaton to use moTe between now and 1990. lican colleagues. I do not believe thatof these fundi would be overwhelming to & We were told by the Democrats, whosome of the Senators listed, even the twopopularly elected Congres d we would then controlled the Senate, and by theDemocrats who voted with us, under-eventually reduce oca1 secur1t to another President, who was then a Democrat,stood it in any other way. form of welfare. that this was how to save the system— I do not have any quarrel with the Senator's amendment except I just do I also Indicate, aa I did yesterdy, It to increase the taxes on the workingnot think it is a precedent we wish toIs not just the Republican pOGition to people, on small businesses and on all stand up and oppose flnancthg th13 57$- the other people who pay social securityset, certainly it will find support. It will taxes. We were told that If we passedfind support amojig the media—If youtent with general revenues, as you will thai legislation, we would not have tomention oil they print headlines. It willnote from the above commenta. catch the attention of the right people, I even daresay that aa to some who niaS worry about social security until the yearmaybe not the right people but peoplesupport this amendment because It hap- 2030. In other words, we• were going towho write, put it that way, and maybepens to deal with oil, U we were talkthg have 50-some years without concerningothers who report But as for the socialabout other general revenues produced ourselves about social security. Theresecurity system. it does not do much forin their States they would stand here would be plenty of money for checks;the social security system. As for the ap-In oppoistion. But I understand the and we would not have to worry aboutpropziations process, it does very littlegreater attraction to some. Xlweare cutting the benefits or doing anythingfor the appropriations process. going to take It out of milk we might to the program in the future. I have said to my good friend, the dis-have a different response from New York. I believe that was well intended. I dotinguished chairman of the Approprta-It we are going to take it out of 8ome- not suggest that somebody said thattions Committee, Senator HATFIELD, "Ifthing else we might have a different re- knowing that something else would hap-you think you have problems now withsponze from Ohio. pen. But the fact is—that has not beenappropriat1os, just wait till we give you But I underatand that three-letter the case. social security from the Fthance Com.word does attract a great deal of In- So we are back here today—and I hopemittee. You itart genezai fuidth.g of 80-terest, I might say, that In the one sup-. we will be back later this year, if notclal security, and let us say thia tax ex-ply side provision we adapted with ref- early next year. with real reforms—pires In 5 or 6 years and you have to finderence to oil, loWering the tax ci newly trying to patch up a sick system. all this money, whatever It Is, $13 or $14discovered oil, it would be a mIstake to Now we see an effort to say, uLet billion in some other area, where are yourepeal that provtston whether we are take some of this oil money." There 1.5going to go then?' taiking about sodal security or not. something about oil money, as I said It seems to me to be a very dangeroua Let me quote the foimer DemocatIo yesterday, that starts the juices flowingprecedent. chairman of the House Ways and Means for some in this body, particularly Sen- I cannot support the aniedment. ICommittee, Al Ulhnan, who opc€ed use ators from non-oil producing States andstress that the Roth amendment was noof general revenu to keep 8OCI] secu- where they do not totally understand theprecedent for what we seek to do hererity8olvent. To quote Congressman industry. today. But In any event on October 19, 1979 Mr. EAGLETON proposes to repeaI sec- We mwt ma1ntin the lnteg?tty of the Senator Rorn was trying to freeze 1 yeartion 602 of the 1981 EconomIc Recoverytrust fund concept: wheh w* 1ncTe.e bene- of that new tax that President CarterTax Act and divert that revenue Into aftta. we must &lso incTeae tsu.. ThtpoIng and the Democratic Congress gave us.special social security trust fund. general revenues, even In psrt. would leM One year of that tax he wanted to freeze. I might also add it is the first effort toto a feeling of 8oca1 security as w.)lsr$ Ue said, "We cannot Impose additionaldisma2ltle the tax reduction package.rather than a matter of payment snd, right taxes on working men and women andThere has been a lot 01 conversation The Congresstonal Budget Omce, in on small businessmen and women." about what we are going to do with theits February, 1981, study on funding op- In an effort to frustrate that vote, andtax cut bill that just passed. I suggesttionsforsocialsecurity,accurately I suggest that this is one of the rarewe are probably going to do very little ifpoints out the flscal danger OS uslnggen. times in the Finance Committee whereanything. Some say we should defer theeral revenues for social secuzity: we had a partisan difference, Senatorcuts on the personal 8ide. Some say we Finally, whether fund. from outstdo the Ribicoff moved to deter the vote on theshould take a look at leasing. Some say8ystem were transferred on & loan baals or Roth proposal and I moved to table thewe shoul4 open It aU up. Some say weas outright gr&nt.. the thvltabls .ffeot o Ribiccif amendment. I prevailed by ashould forget about the thIrd year orborrowing would be either s reduction In vote of 10 to 8. Then the Roth amend-stretch it Into 4 years. the siunt Of moiey availabi. for other ment failed to pass on a 10-to-jO vote. - federalprograma or en expans1o of the The Senator is right. Every Repub- Some of these arguments may bedeficit. In the past, the Oongre has found lican voted for the Roth amendment.sound down the road. t doubt it. Theyit difficult to slow Increase! In expenditures, so did two Democrats, and every othermay be sound, but certainly not at th1.since a large trcton ot federal ouUays (in- DemocratvotedagainsttheRothpoint. chiding wcial security) are regarded a Tel. amendment. This would indicate, I as- I think the facts are that the Issue isatively "uncontrollable". If other tedeza sume, that those Democrats who votedwhether or nOt we are going to ado* aprogram3 re not Cut accordlng)y, tbs ld- fundamental change In the finazicingeral deficit would grow. in turn triggering a that way in 1979 will certainly vote rise In the price )eveL This could came so- against the Eagleton amendment todayphilosophy of social security. With thiscial security expendituree to r1e Still fur- and, according to the Senator fromkind o iundamental change under con- ther. If 8uCh en outcome were to be avo&e4 Missouri, then thcse Republicans whosideration It is important to note thatwtthout other federal progrsm C%LtS. th Con- voted for the Roth amendment shouldthe Eagleton amendment is unlikely togress might have to turn to other eourcea fos vote for the Eagleton amendment to-deal with the potentially huge short- andsocial eecurlty revenues. day. long-term deficits faced by social aecu- Use of general revenues would rev- But everyone knows that s speciousrity. ocably change the essential character nd that the vote was a part1an maneu- As Dr. June A O'Neill, former chief,of the program. Pressure could become ver on behalf of both sides, not. justHuman Resources Cost Estimate Unite,aImct irresistable to emphasize the wel- Democrats or Republicans. Both Repub-CBO, wrote in her article, "Future Fi-fare aspects of the program, further Un- licans and Democrats were trying tonancing of the System": derznIn1xg the link between tax payments seize the initiative on a very contro- Reliance on transfers fromgeneralrev-and beneflts. versial, delicate area of social security.enues could make it more difficult to keep Social security expenditures already So I think we can Just set aside theprogram expansion withinbounds. account for 28 percent of all Federal ex- so.-a1Ied Roth amendment. Whether it J. W. Van Gorkom, president of thependitures. Allowing even limited thfu- as decontrol or windfall profits, It IsTrans Union Corp., puts hisfingeron onesions of -general revenue will Increase October 15, 1981 • CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S 11477 that percentage andfurtherexpand thatnues are derived from variou8 taxe8, some ofworking men and women who want to portion of the budget considered un-which are progressive (such as the incomereceive benefits in the future touchable and uncontrollable. tax) and others of which weigh relatively are going leavier on low-income persons (such as cor•to insist that Congress stand up and do Finally, there is no doubt that anyporation taxes, which are passed along inwhat we should do. Congress must stop general fund financing could ultimatelythe price 8tructure). backing away from this problem. lead to unfinanced benefit expansions, The net result quite possibly i8 that the The Eagleton amendment is no way to could result in means-testing certainfinancial impact of any general revenue8 i8approach the real problem we have in benefits—or even all benefits—and couldabout the 8ame as that o the payroll taxe8._social security. only add to the size of the Federal defi-The big difference Is that the payroll taxee Mr. METZENBAUM. Mr. President.I cit. re direct and quite vIsible. Injecting gen-listened with great interest to my friend Adoption of the Eagleton amendmenteral revenues into the financing oi OASDIfrom Kansas talking about the fact that will only delay meaningful financing re-or IIIi8, at best, misleading the American public a to the cost of the program. Wethere is some question about whetherwe formof the system. should have 8umcient economic maturity toshould be dipping in to generalrevenues Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-display the cost of the program out In thefor the purpose of lthancing thesocial sent to have printed in the RECORD testi-open where all can clearly ee It security system. mony by Dr. Robert ICaplan and an ar- Even if the expansiont8ta now say that As I understand his argument, we have ticle by Robert Myers opposing generaltheir only goal tu u8ing general revenues i8not done it before and thereforewe revenues. to do so for Hi, I am certain that, in brightershould not do it now. There being no objection, the mate-economic days in the suture, when OASDI ie I think there is some value and valid- rial was ordered to be printed in thein better financial ehape, they will be backity to having consistency whenwe act in REcORD, as follows: advocating the same for OASDL If thi8 i done, benefits can be expanded apparentlyvarious ways in our Government. But TESTIMONY BY D. ROBERTKAPLAN painlessly with no increase in the visible,I do not think that is sucientlyper- OPPOSING OXNR&L REVENVES direct payroll taxe8. suasive for us to fail to support the The infusion of general revenues to the A telling argument against the use of gen.Eagleton amendment, which I am proud ocialsecuritysystem doee nothing to ad.eral revenues to finance partially OASDIto be a cosponsor of, because it relates dress the lubstantlal problems of unintend-and/or HI is that currently there arenoto a problem that zeroes in and touches .4 beneflt jncreaaes that have crept intogeneralrevenue8available.Thefederalso many millions of Americans, Boclal eecurlty. General revenus flnanclngbudget 18, and for many years has been, in I believe it provides an answer in would ma8k these problems. ft serious deficit 8ituation. Where will t1e a More serlouly, once the link wa brokenmoney come from for the so-called govern.very fair and 'equitable way. I think if between beneflt Increases on the one hand,ment contribution? Will new taxe8 be levied,there are any words that have not been and the need to finance them with payrollor will the federal budget deficit be in.used much so far this year, theyare the taxea on the other hand, I believe the fl8calcreased? Th latter merely means printing.words of "equity and being equitable," di8Cipllne of the eoclal Security system wouldpress money with accompanying inflation.'being fair," and "being just." be seriously compromised. Now, it is a recognized fact that when There are constant preuures to Increase Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I havegreat Social Becurity benet8 and one of the fewrespect for the Senator from Missouri. Ithe President made his speech on tele- ways we have of continuing them Is the vision on September 24, he stated that: link to finance these increases by increa8ingjust suggest that there are an adequate It was never our intention to take this payroll taxe8. number of Democrats and Republicanssupport away from those who ruly need it. 1avIng the opportunity of Increasing ben-who are going to focus on reThrm ofthe eflts ju8t by Increasing the deficit In thesocial security system. Now, the fact is, when you look at the Federal budget would not be a healthy de- I also say that one area weare notrecord, when the Office of Management velopment forsocial ecurlty and, moregoing to discuss very seriously is theuseand Budget submitted its official list of broadly, for the country at large. of general revenues. There isno supportcuts to Congress in April, it specifically for the use of general revenues. Tobeprovided for the elimination of the mini- AN UPDATE ON SOCIAL SECIJRXTY FOR NA- able to say we are for it because it in-mum benefit payment. TX0NAL ASSOCIATION 0? LIFE UNDERWRITERS volves oil might be worth 25 or 35or 40 And on page 176 of the Blue Book, the OPPOSING OENRAL REVENES votes, but I suggest if we were facingthe0MB said: (By Robert Myers) question head on— The security trust funds can no longer at. For more than four decade8 of operation Mr. MOYNIHA.N. Forty-one, ford these low priority payments. of the OASDI8ystern,It ha8 been financed Mr. DOLE. I just heard 41, so maybe on long-range eelf-aupporting basi8 by41. As a matter of fact, on that same page it indicated that the proposed change eclual employer-employee payroll taxeB. The In any event, we get down to theques- same Situation also prevail8 for the lit sys-tion of true reform of the program. was the following: tem. In each of the8e programa, there have I an Pay social security recipients only their been some small amount of general revenue8,not certa!z just when that will takeearned benefits, no longer giving an aitthcial but thie ha only been done with respect toplace. But I hope that it is before theminimumamountabove theirearned small, closed groups of personR, such a1982 election. Then we could certainlybenefit. military veteran& The supplementary Medi-consider the use of general revenues and cal Insurance portion of Mecflcare has beenmaybe even something along the lines As a matter of fact those of us who financed 8ubstantially from generalrevenueasuggested by the Senator from Missouri.are in the minority have consistently (currently, about 71 percent of total in-I would not support that, but at least itcpposed this cut in the minimum social come). However, thIs 18 a different matter.could be considered. If weare going to&curity benefit. A number of Senators because no payroll taxes are Involved,butstart looking at general revenue fundinghave offered amendments to add funds rather only enrollee premium8. back. Senator RIECLE, if my recollection Th08e who advocate partial general-reve-we should look at all the general rev- nue financing of OASDI and/or HI presentenues. I wonder if the Senator is goingserves me right, I believe that the dis- many different reaon and justication8 forto do this and If we do continue will wetnguished Senator from New York, who 8uch action. However, the realreason, inhave a priority list of which programsi on the floor, Senator MOYNIUAW, an1 my opinion, i that this diverts criticismwe will cut? How do we make up the dif-I think Senator CHILES have all ad- from what 8ome believe to be the highcostference? So for the reasons stated, and Idressed themselves to this issue. and heavy impact of the currentpayrollhope they will be persuasive in the final On September 24, the same day that taxes and tho8e scheduled for the future,letanalysis, I hope that the Senate mightPresident Reagan went on television, the slone those which would benecessary tore'ect this amendment, We must goSenate, controlled by the RepublicarA finance expan8ion of theprogram. ahead and pass this little band-aid to At present, some seek toalleviate the re-majority, voted against the motion by 8hort-rtjn flflancial problemg byfinancingstore the mlntmunj benefit for the mostSenator CRILES to restore the benefit. part of HI from general revenuesand divert-part, reallocate taxes, permit interfundThe vote, after a good deal of arm twist- ing the re8ulting reduction in theIi! tax toborrowing. At least then we canassureing, was 46 to 44. OASi)I, ThIs "doing it withmirrors" tech.those who now receive benefits that they Now we see the Republican Senators nique is "justified" on theground that, be-are going to be protected through 1983,turning around on this issue. And I am cause the HI benefits are not earningsre-maybe even through 1984, with luck. happy to see them turn around. I am lated, but rather are uniformor all insured Sooner or later the beneficiaries in persons, itIs inequitable to financethem happy to see that they have seen the completely by payroll taxes; the this country, the 36 million people wholight. Eut I would hope that they might general reve.receive benefits, and the 115 millionalso see the light In conxlection.—Mr. S 11478 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE October 15, 1981 President, may we have order on thetake out of that $33 billion, not all of it,Eagleton amendment Is similar in pur- floor of the Senate? just $14.2 billion of it, something ap-pose to an amendment I offered in, the The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen.proximating 40 percent of it. Let us takeFinance Committee 2 years ago when the ate will be in order. the tax break on new oil—80 percent ofwindfall profit tax was first considered. Mr. METZENBAUM. I would hopewhich benefits the 50 largest oil com- However, as the distinguished chair- that they would see the light and undopanies. And let us use those funds, whichman of the Finance Committee pointed the error of their ways which occurrednever should have been repealed, to helpout, my amendment, offered in October when thetaxbill was passed. and inthe senior citizens of this country, to1979, did differin specifics with the which was included these unbelievablekeep viable the social security systemEagleton amendment. At that time, I giveaways to the oil Industry. in this country and to help us in an effortproposed to use part of the additional The giveaways to the oil industry justto make this system as strong and viablerevenues generated by the decontrol of did not make sense. I think the Nationas we all want it to be." crude oilprices to fund the hospital vas calling for a tax cut. And I do not The social security system is criticalinsurance fund. The amendment also think that most Members of Congressto this Nation's credibility with its ownwould have postponed the scheduled in- would really oppose a responsible taxconstituents. The basic fact about thecrease in social security taxes for 1981. cut. But there arises in these legislativeminimum social security benefits is theMy amendment proposed to freeze the halls either a sense of enthusiasm or aaverage payment Is what? A pittance—social security tax rate and the wage base sense of being able to get all that is pos-$122 per month. Three million peopleto pre-1981 leve1 for 1 year. sible to be gotten. receive minimum benefit payments. Earlier in the debate in conunittee, I think it is timely that we refresh our The people who really receive theseindicated my intent to use not only de- recollection a little bit about the wind-benefits are very old peop'e. Fu11y a mil-control revenues but also part of the f all profit tax. The fact is it was enactedlion of them are over 75 and 25 percentwindfall tax itself for the social security when there was a Democratic Congressare over 80 years of age. Almost 65 per-system. Hcwever, the amendment finally here. And in the very first tax bill thatcentof the beneficiaries areelderlyproposed and voted on in committee the Republicans bring forward, what dowomen. But who cares about them? TakeInvolved only decontrol revenues. The they propose? The bill comes out of theaway their minimum benefits. amendment was defeated on a tie vote of Finance Committee with a $20 billion These people do not want to go on10 to 10, with 8 Republicans and 2 Demo- repeal of that tax, a giveaway to the oilwelfare. They have paid their funds overcrats voting for it and 10 Democrats vot- industry for no reason whatsoever. Anda period of years into the social securitying against it. then some people come to the floor ofsystem, and we owe them an obligation And so I say to my colleagues on the the Senate and they recognize, "Hey,to give them the minimum benefit incommittee, whether you voted for or this is a heyday around here. Let's getorder to retain their pride and to fulfillagainst my amendment in 1979, I do not going. If we can get 20, I think we canour promise. believe they should be constrained ba, Cutting the minimum benefits wouldtheir vote on that amendment. - get a heck of a lot more." Butlet me make it clear that I will And so they come to the floor of theadd costs to other programs in supple-vote for the Eagleton amendment. As Senate. The distinguislied Senator frommental income and in medicaid. As aearly as 1977, I first proposed to use New Mexico offers an amendmentto cutmatter of tact, it should be noted that back an additional amount from the•less than one-half of the dollars wouldenergy taxes to help fund the social se- windfall profit tax. Then the distin-actually be saved. curity system. The realities of the situation are that When the Carter administration in- guishedSenator from Kansassays, roduced the first severance tax proposal "Well, if you are going to go part of thetheEagleton amendment shouldbe way, you may as well go all the way." Ifpassed. It makes good sense. It imposeson oil, the so-called crude oil equaliza- my recollection serves me correctly, heno burden on the oil industry. tion tax or COET, I proposed to use part offered an amendment to the Domenici Everyone in this country recognizesof the revenues from the tax to fund amendment, so that the total amount ofthe oil indastry is not hurting. This issocial security. The proposal was de- tax benefits to the oil industry at thatnot an additional tax on the oil industry.feated both in the Finance Committee point would have been not only the $20This is the windfall profit tax that wasand on the Senate floor. But it estab- enacted by the Congress as a conditionlished the groundwork for my later pro- billion in the bill, but an. additional $2 posal relevant to the windfall profit tax. billion, as well. to the President having decontrolled the Some of us felt that that subject mer-price of oil. It was part of the deal. But In short, I started down the road that ited extensive debate. And after a con-then in the first Republican adininis-Senator EAGLETON is traveling on more siderable amount of debate, an efforttration to get control of the Senate, inthan 4 years ago. It was a lonely road at was made to table the Senator's ownthe first tax bill that they have an op-the time and I am therefore gratified motion. As we all know and recollect,portunity to act on, they zero in andto see so many converts joining with me the motion to table barely carried. reduce those taxes by $33 billion. today in support of the concept of using Now we are asking to take back $14.2windfall oil revenues for social security That was a test vote to see whether purposes. or not we had su11cient votes on our sidebillion, approximately 40 percent of that to continue the debate. When it was ob-$33 billion. We are asking for a repeal As I said to the distinguished Senator vious that there were not going to beof the tax break on new oil—a tax breakfrom Missouri last month during the de- sufficient votes to cut off debate, thethat overwhelmingly benefits the majorbate on the debt limit bill, if he had been amendmeit was taken down and theoil companies. They never should havea member of the Finance Committee In Senate bill left this body with only thegotten that break in the first place. We1979 my amendment might have carried are asking for this repeal for a justifi-the day. I welcome his support today and $20 billion in it. And $20 billion was notable, a reasonable, and a just cause. Iurge my colleagues to join with us in exactly hay. think the EagletOn amendment shouldvoting for the amendment. The bill then went to the House. And Mr. MOYNIHAN addressed the Chair. again the oil companies demanded thatbe adopted. they get their share, and a little extra Mr. President, I suggest the absence The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- of a quorum. ator from New York. as well. And when it got to the House Mr. MOYNIHAN. I think the Chair. and the President could npt get the votes The PRESIDING OFFICER(Mr. that he needed from some of the Demo-EAST). The clerk will call the roll. Mr. President, I rise briefly to state my cratic Congresspersons, if you please, The assistant legislative clerk pro-support for the amendment of the Sena- he made a deal with them. He made aceeded to call the roll. tor from Missouri and to say that during deal to give them $28 billion more—$28 Mr. ROTH. Mr. President,Iaskthe Finance Committee's deliberations billion more—of the windfall profit taxes,unanimous consent that the order forof the bill now before us I offered sub- up to $46 billion. And in the closing daysthe quorum call be rescinded. stantially the same amendment. It failed of the session, in the conference commit- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withoutof adoption in the Finance Committee. tee, that was reduced to $33 billion. objectin, it Is so ordered. It may be that on further considerations Now, the Senator from Missouri offers Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I supportthe larger group in the Senate will ap. an amendment, which I and others haveand intend to vote for the Eagletonprove it today. I hope they will. cosponsored, and we are saying, "Let'samendment. The general thrust of the This will give us $11.78 billion in the • October 15, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— SENATE S 11479 years 1982to1986. Those are the figures Thiswould be a form of revenue en-Washington Post be printed at the con-

• that my proposalalsoenvisaged.Ithancement. Tax Increases are bad butclusion of my remarks. seems to me it s very much in the rangerevenue enhancement is good. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without of the possible shortfall that could occur, Shall we do It again? Tax increasesobjection, it is so ordered. givenvery bad breaks n economicare bad but revenue enhancement s (See exhibit 1.) development. good. This s revenue enhancement. Mr. EGLETON. Mr. President, if the Remember, it s all money In the Think positively as you will have to1981 tax bifi remains in full force and Treasury and surpluses In that sense,on more than one occasion in espousingeffect as now written between now and are fungible. If this money were notmore than one such enhancement on thisthe year 1984, you can kiss goodby any needed, it would on paper offset deficitsfloor belore this fiscal year s out. remote notion, even the most far-fetched elsewhere. If it turned out it would be OurdistInguishedcolleaguefromnotion, of a balanced budget by 1984. It needed, then Congress to do what itDelaware, a man noted for his forward-s impossible, and Henry Kaufman knows should do, to provide from general rev-looking views about the possible usesit, Wall Street knows it, and even more enue funds. of revenues, will 'oin U in this matter.and more corporate America, originally The distinguished Senator from Dela- I thank the Chair and I congratulateaccelerated by the 1981 tax act but now ware has just Indicated that he. who 18my friend from Missouri. seriously disturbed at the revenue drain not noted for his extravagance In these Mr. EAGLETON. Mr. President, I havecreated by that bill, the worst legisla- matters, has been advocating such a pro.about 3 mInutes of remarks and then Itive abomination in the history of the posal all along. am prepared to vote, U that be the de-U.S. Senate, knows It. For the record, and for those In thesire of the Senate. That s a strong statement, Mr. Presi- Chamber, I would like to make a simle Mr. President, my amendment hasdent. considering that an awful lot of point. That s that when the wIndfallthree motivations behind It. abominable things have come out of profit tax was adopted, the conferees, Motivation No. 1, the self evident moti- this body through the years. But nothing and I was a member, set aside 25 percentvation, $14 billion taken out of the cor-n modern history will do as much to kill of the anticipated revenues of the fundporate treaswies of the oil companiesthis American economy as the 1981 Tax over the period of the tax, over the pe-and put Into the social security system.Act. A $750 billion revenue drain over Hod of its life, for low-Income assistance.Fourteen billion dollars Is a not signifi-the next 5 years, as Mr. Kaufman points It was further provided that, shouldcant amount Of money and It would helpout, Insures continued deficits of stag- the revenues from the fund reach athe Social Security Trust Fund to havegering amounts and insures high-interest higher level than anticipated In thethat kind of an addition. rates as the only throttle to stifle those early years, this assistance should, In Motivation No. 2 was to rectify adeficits. fact, be 33 percent. giveaway that was part of the 1981 tax Kaufman predicts that interest rates The 25 percent was to be divided, Inact and to undo part of that giveaway,will climb to 24 or 25 percent and that turn, between assistance to reciulents ofto recapture $14 billion that hould notthey will remain at unacceptably high the aid to families with dependent chil-have been given away In the first place.levels throughout the lifetime of that dren and supplementary security In Motivation No. 3• s a motivation oftax cut,especially the next 5 years come and a program of emergencywhich the Senator from Kansas accusedthereof. Then he points out that when energy assistance for other low-Incomeme, and to which I plead guilty. It is myyou factor In indexing—that was con- persons. endeav.or to begin the dismantling of thetained in the act, to take effect in 1985— This money is now being collected and1981 tax act. andindexFederalpayment—social it s In a special fund In the Treasury. Mr. President, the 1981 tax act s asecurity, military retirement, civil serv- In fiscal 1981, some $3.1 bfflion was putmillstone around the neck of this coun-ice—on the upside going out and index Into that fund. In the present fiscal year,try. That s not just the observation oftax revenues on the downside corning the Congressional Budget Officeesti..ToM EAGLETON, 'awyer from Missouri.in, that Insures Federal deficits into mates $3.69 billion will be put Into thatThat s the observation Of perhaps theperpetuity, everlastingly, forever. fund. It will be running up to $5 billion,most singlemost respected, the single- So this s my thtrd motivation on maybe more. most distInguished, the singlemost lis- Not 1 penny of this money ha.s gone to this vote, Mr. President. The first, as I the purpose that the law designates. Nottened to economist in the United States,said, is to help the beleaguered social a fickle of the windfall profit tax hasHenry Kaufman. When Henry Kaufmansecurity trust fund. The second is to gone to beneficiaries under the Socialspeaks, E. F. Hutton listens. recapture moneys taken out of the Fed- Security Act. I make the point that the Henry Kaufman has been speakingeral Treasury and put in the treasury of AFDC program and the supplementaryloudly and clearly since April 22 of thisMobil, Texaco, Exxon, Conoco ifItis security income program are part of theyear when he gave hs now famousstillalive, and to• capture back that Social Security Aot. market rattling speech before the Na-which unjustifiably and unjustly en- The windfall profit tax had a quartertional Press Club. Five days later, onriched the oil companies. of its revenues allocated to these pur-April 27. 5 days after hs speech, the Third, and by no means least, is the poses but none has gone. market peaked, Dow Jones at 1024, anddismantling, at least the partial dis- The amendment of the Senator fromit has been downhill since then, with themantling, of the 1981 Tax Act. I know, Missouri does not more than follow themost serious depression in the marketfrom talking to my colleagues on the precise intent of the windfall profit taxoccurring during the month of August,Republican side as we whisper in each and Instead of repealing the tax, as weduring the month immediately followingother's ears riding over on the train or did in July, allocates a portion of it tothe President signing the tax bill. hanging around the periphery of the an excellent purpose, one along the line Henry Kaufman spoke again this Mon..Senate Chamber, many of them have of Congress original intent. day. Let me quote a portion of Henrystated that there was overkill in the In my view, Mr. President, this is aKaufman's speech In the press account1981 Tax Act; that when the President legitimate use for that money. of it from the New York Times. of the United States and the chairman Mr. President, there s one last thing Mr. Kaufman again criticized Presidentof the House Ways nd Means Commit Reagan'e three-year tax cut package, which, that I feel I have to bring to the atten-he said, was responsible for the United Stateetee, Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI, got In the un tion of the distinguished Senator fromTreasury's huge cash needs. He estimatedholiest of unholy bidding wars and when Kansas. that Treasury borrowings of up to $65 billionthey started giving away sweeteners and It is alarming to me that he has notin the next six months and $85 billion inplayed the old radio game of "Can You revealed to the body what in fact Ithe next fiscal year ending September 80.Top This?", when they threw in tne have every reason to believe he knows: 1982, would put upward pressure on interestsweeteners for thoroughbred racehorse That in the new parlance of the ad-rates In every maturity. "A noose is nowvotes and when they threw in the oil m1nstration we no longer talk of tax in-tightening around the credit markets," Mr.to get the comfort of the oil State Sen crease. We talk of revenue enhancement.Kaufman, said. ators in Congress, and when they threw Revenue enhancement, as Mr. Stockman I ask unanimous consent that the pressin this and that to get this group of put it before the Budget Committee thisaccount of Mr. Kaufman's speech asgypsy moths or that group of boll weevils morning. carried In the New York Times and theor whatever clique they were trying to S 11480 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE October 15, 1981 pander of 18 percent prune and try at least to There is a conflict between tight money to, the net result of what they and loose budget policies, Kaufman said, tl'iat did, Mr. President, was to give away thegive some small- and middle-sized busi-has resulted in difficult robiems for every- U.S. Treasury. nesses a chance to survive. one needing credit. Long-term financing is That bill, In essence, eliminates cor- Exmarr 1 difficult to obtain and is expensive, forcirg porate income taxes about 3 years out.(From the Washington Poet, Oct. 13, 19811already strapped companies to borrow their That bill, In essence, eliminates FederalKAUFMAN: Rzacas POLICIES WILL Do MoREmoney for months at a time rather than Inheritance taxes for all practical pur-HARM—ECONOMIST CITES EFFECT ON CREDITyears. poses 3 years out. And, rest assured, (By James L. Rowe, Jr.) State and local governments are having a more evil Is yet to be done. Because they hard time selling their bonds, while banks, NEW YoaX, October 12.—Henry Kaufman,although seemingly faring well, are not in only gave to the oil companies $33 bil-the highly respected Wall Street economistgood shape for the long haul. Housing con- lion. That Is all they could get their mittswhose dire predictions have vexed the ad-struction has sputtered to a standstill. Auto on at one time. But rest assured, thereministration, said today that President Rea-sales are sluggish. will be other tax bills with other gim-gan's policies will weaken the nation's credit The widely followed Wall Street economist micks, with other sweeteners, with othersystem further and "In turn, our economysaid the recent slowdown in growth of one bidding wars. Then they will try to grabwill experience a greater deterioration." of the key monetary targets (called Mi—B) the whole darned bundle of the windfall Kaufman, chief economistof Salomonthat the Federal Reserve tries to influeice, Brothers Inc., said under current conditions,may convince the central bank to ease up on profit tax. "we must regard it as an achievement if our Thatbillisamillstonearound its policies and that as a result short-term economy continues to sputter and spurt,"interest rates might fall for a while. America's neck and Itis a millstonelurching from recession to recovery, but with In recent weeks the Federal Reserve has around the neck of President Reagana sustained period of economic growth orappeared less hard-nosed about its policies. and the Republican Party. They havelower inflation and interest rates. and a key interest rate, the so-called federal painted themselves into a Catch 22 from "To expect more would be downright un- realistic," Kaufman said in a speech here tofunds rate, has dropped from the 16 percent which they cannot extricate themselves.the Financial Executives Institute. The Rea-range to less than 13 percent. As a result, the And the time will come—this may notgan administration has been angry that Wallprime lending rate has dropped from 20 perU be the time and the hour when we begin8treet—as evidenced by a declining stockcent to 181/2 percent at many major banks. the dismantling process but, as certainand bond market—has not been more enthu- Kaufman said he anticipates the prime as I am standing here, some time duringsiastic about the' Reagan administration'srate, the key banking rate for short-&erm the Presidency of Ronald Reagan, heeconomic policies. loans to businesses, will fall to 16 percent or will have to come back to this body and But predictions o continuing inflation17 percent soon, but that rates will clilnb say the Federal Government has to haveand high interest rates' by economists likeafter that when the Federal Reserve finds Kaufman have made investors wary aboutitself forced to tighten its purse stl'ingu more revenue. the future. They worry, like Kaufman does,again. Senator Moxmazq refers to it as rev-that budget deficits will be higher than the Kaufman said that he agreed with Reagan enue enhancement. By whatever namePresident wants and predicts and that thethat defense expenditures need to be in you want to call It,it is more moneyresulting Federal borrowing will crowd outcreased. However, Kaufman said, then "the going into the Treasury, it is more taxesprivate companies from the debt market. tax cut should have been viewed as a dis' acquired in some form, Way, or shape. Meanwhile, the chief economist for thecretionary decision and would have been And he will have to come back becauseConference Board, a research group spon-prudent only if the resultant budget were when this' year's deficit, projected bysored by business, said the second U.S. re-in reasonable balance." the President at $42.5 billion, comes Incession in as many years appears to be under way. - (From the New York Times, Oct. 13, 1931) at $60 to $70 billion-plus, and when AlbertT. Sommers said te recession was KAT.TFMAN SEEs NEWHIGHSFOR RATES the net deficitIs way out of rangetriggered by high interest rates, but that (By Michael Quint) and when 1984's deficit approaches $100once a progressive weakening in the economy Interest rates will rise to new highs in the billion, then the President will have tohas started, it "runs on its own internal en-next six months, Henry Kaufman, a promi admit that that which he signed withergies. Even reversalsIn theoriginatingnent Wall Street economist, warned finan- great glee and 'acclaim In early Augustcauses—in this instance, a reversal into acial executives here yesterday. of 1981 has inflicted grave economic painsignificantdeclineofinterestrates—are In the stock market, which was open for on this country and has created theseunlikely to have much effect for a consid-trading during the Columbus Day holiday, erable period." Mr. Kaufman's forecast made some traders Intolerably high interest rates that are Sommers. in S biweekly ldtter, noted the wiping out middle- and.small-sized busi- nervous, oven though It was not, funda- sharp increase in unemployment in recentmentally different from the one he hac been nesses and farmers by the hundreds—.months—it increased from 7.2 percent inmaking all year. Trading volume was light. every day, every week, every month. August to 71/2percentlast month—as evi-and the Dow Jones industrial average fell It is in the same prediction that If youdence that a recession is under way. But he3.52 points, although, over all, gaining stocks look at the last quarter of this year,said there is no reason to think an economicslightly outnumbered declining stocks. (Page calendar 1981, the rate of bankruptciesslowdown need be "severe or prolonged." D12.J will be double what they were the last The tax' cut, which earns Kaufman's criti- In the previous two weeks the Dow aver- quarter of calendar 1980, and the samecism, will help moderate a slide. The reduc-age had increased almost 50 points on the tion, Sommers said, "which appeared far tooexpectation that interest rates would con- prediction for the first quarter of 1982large in the circumstances of just a monthtinue their recent decline. Mr. Kaufman, the viz-a-viz the first quarter of 1981. ago, will look a lot less undesirable as reces-chief economist at Salomon Brothers, an in. Mr. President, I plead guilty to thesion proceeds ifl the forth quarter." vestment banking firm, predicted that those Senator from Kansas. I do have a mo- Kaufmans scenario, which hecallsadeclines would last for several weeks but not tivation over and above trying to getCatch-22 situation, is one of conflicting pol-through year-end. these moneys into the social securityicies that will result in successive recessions In the weeks before Mr. Kaufman's speech system and trying to get them back fromand halting recoveries. "Escapes, if any, areto the 800 ranking corporate financial officers the oil companies' treasuries. If thisvery few and hold real problems . .. Into-attending the Financial Executives Insti.. amendment carries, then this Senateday's predicament, as in all Catch-22 traps,tute's 50th annual conference at the New the best-intended decisions may produce theYork Hilton Hotel, the financial markets goes on record as saying we know wewrong results; measures of relief for somehave occasionally been buffeted by rwnorc made a mistake in the 1981 Tax Act andmay produce unanticipated pain for others."that he was about to change his funda- we ought to begin now to rectify those Kaufman has been a persistent critic ofmental interest rate forecast. For 'several mistakes and take this noose—those arePresident Reagan's policy of trying to achieveyears Mr. Kaufman has been one of Wall the words of Henry Kaufman—take thisbudgetary balance by cutting, civilian spend-Street's most respected voices on interest noose off the American economy. ing and relying upon a tight monetary policyrates, and his prestige is now especially high So, Mr. President, I hope that mywhile at the same time sharply boosting de-because he was one of the few economists colleagues will support this amendmentfense spending and lowering tax rates. who correctly foresaw this year's economic The high interest rates that have made itresilience and higher interest rates. for all three motives that I have ès-so difficult for the economy to resume a SPVTTERS AND SPURTS poused. If you only like two, vote for itsteady growth after last year's brief recession In his speech yesterday, Mr. Kaufman Said because of 'two. If you only like one, voteare in large part the result of the stringentheavy demands for short-term credit would for It because of one. But vote for it inpolicies maintained by the nation's centralcontinue in an economy characterized by any event, because it is an amendmentbank, the Federal Reserve, which has tried to"sputters and spurts." Along with John F. that could have some significant raniifi-slow the growth of money in the economyMcOillicuddy, the chairman of Manufac- cations in trying to get this country outby making it both expensive and scarce. turers Hanover Trust Company, who followed October 15, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD S 11481 him In yesterday's program. Mr. Kaufmanmarginal capital requfrement8 on nac utry compared to warnedtheassembled trea8urers and finan-Institutions and encouraging et ©f American economy? Merrill cial vice prestdents that the nation's credttturities. Lynch iot known to be a Democratic ma7kets were strained and could be the "Ifwe can sputter and spurt ©gi, iaakes this assessment th their source of unpleasant surprises. - years without undcnninlng th crdt ' Incoming weeks, Mr. Kaufman said, long-kets."Mr. Kaufman said CP1fl report of the American petroleum term rates could come down "a bit," whilethen the big military spending wil b dUSt7. They state: the bank prime rate might fall to 16 or 17hindus and the energy problem will b Given tesO high oil prlaea ($32 per brre1 percent s overnight rates for loans in the"Perhaps then we can rea'ize th ndGryJ te w2Ed1afl profits taxes) and natural gas Federal fund3 market drop to 12 percent orstrength of the eonomy,' he coc1ude1. Q' p 1O or deep gaa) prlcea,: new oil 13 percent. Currently, the prime rate Is 18y2 Some of Mr. Kaufman's trnDt cver ail coats n six to nIne or 19 percent. while Federal funds have beenwere reserved for bustzese iCp ep atuxQ1 gas d2scoverlee trading mostly between 14 and 15 percent.tices, which have evolved *nto flp c py ut lena than 12 months. ThIs oom- By the last half of this quarter, however, Mr.cedented" reliance on short-term bOW1npwt three to five year payoutip!jor to Kaufman said lntere8t rates might turn uprather than bond or stock nncg. h t OPEC prc. Increase in. 1974 Such pay- as the money Bupply begins growing rapidly Mr. McGIllicuddy of Manufactw probably make the oIl exploration buss- and the Ped starts making credit less avail-over echoed some of Mr. fmi wr u orprofithb1e than ny other segment able. Ings. He said that Ptu1 A. Voickor, ch ©f duty. Mr. Kaufman's comments come at a timeof the Federal Rea3rve Board. wa eozice when corporate treasurers and lnvestor8 amenough about the low captt&izatao o 1g ©W wou'd like topoint outto my col-. perplexed nd alarmed by the persistence ofbanks that it "might well en that t wa Merrill Lynch's an- high Interest rates. Short- and long-termbanks will be coming under gwig t "w oil discoveries"—that. rates have dropped recently, but so far thesure to restrain their encthig cttvtte. od oil—can recover all costs declines have not been great enough for After his speech, the Now orL bak many industrial companies to sell long-termsaid, "I waa Impressed that .Vo1ek bonds and repay their mounting short-termsuch emphasis on the capita! o great deal about how debt. though so fai the Fed "a ot be neecieci. In the last Today'sschedulefortheconference,boning tho banks to cut fr I heard about the new whichlast8through tomorrow, includessaid that "corporate treaaurer © b1Ic oeomLos. Now we also have presentations by Alva 0. way, president ofhavefirm bank end1ng agreemet 1 liZ1g1Z!Gt1C8—a tax loop- the American Expres8 Company, and Johnought to be thinking about t" "incentive"to, S. R. Shad, chairman of the Securities and Concerning Interest rt* M. I n Exchange Commission Tomorrow, Felix Ro-cuddy said that "rates Will b vry @t1ck, hatyn, partner at Lazard Frères & Company,thedownslide," especially tho to ask ny colleagues—do - Is scheduled to talk about bakruptcies andrate where niore of the ozce.4ow.coa th ©1 ©©p1es need more thcentives bailouts. sumer deposit8 are being h1ftd © © anew oil well with the Commenting on the recent decline In rates,cost tax-exempt saInga certhict jfl pay• back In 6 to 9 Mr. Kaufman said ater his speech that"themonth money-market 8av1ng etctj. it Federal Reserve Is trying to avoid a reces- "I see little In the outlook t Ob?1ou1yey do not. Let me give you sion and has a better-than-even chance oftrigger another ftfiattonary pir1" . doing so." However, In his 8peech, he madeOillicuddy said, adding that ntere8 Thepress has been filled t clear that success In avoiding a recessionwould declIne gradually ae the the overthrust but. These raises the risk of "more dangerous economicministration convinced investor that fit told about hol risky ad and financa1 consequences" as borrowersmoving towardbalanced uget. veft Is to explore In this area, rely excessively on 8hort-term financing from What hv ve not emphasized sthat banks or the commercial paper market. Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Predortt, ie1ds were worth deve1op Mr. Kaufman again criticized Presidentin support of the amezmet o th with much lower oil prices. Let Reagan's three-yea7 tax cut package, which,Senator from Missouri. I agree witJ th he said, wa8 responsible for the UnitedSenator that this amendinen ovid avi Work, exploration chief States Treasury's huge cash needs. He esti-an unprecedented opportunity for tb Oil of Indiana. mated that Treasury borrowings of up to $65 p.jCe we ppreoiably lower billion In the next six months and $85 bil-American people to test the pioit thday, (this field) wouli have lion In the fiscal year ending Sept. 30, 1982,this body. 'ej1 worth 2eveloping. This field Ia would put upward presaure on rates In every We have a choice—vote fér jg jtnogiaut3. It's the biggest thing In maturity. vote for social security. ThIs mend th United 8tat iince Prudhoe Bay. "A noo6e Is nw tightening around thewill not affect royalty owner8, !)AVy ©1 credit markets," Mr. Kaufman said, addingor any of the special categorle8 ©? Iso argued that the wthdfafl that the time waa nearIng when it 'wouldemptions from the tax specially des!g © nel oil is depressing exploratory choke other sectors of the economy in addi- offorta. That is a preposterou8 tion to housing. f or independent producers. It °Y light of the huge Increases In Mr. Kaufman stressed that the financiafects new oil, production. ep1orato drilling that have occurred markets were faced with a welter of para- New oil production Is heavily dom doxes that would cause problems despite thenated by the big oil companies. AcCod iiau profit tax was passed. best Intenttons of economic policy makers.Ing to the annual oil and gas CUiVy © t me quote from Petroleum Inde- He described several "Catch 22" Bituations Inthe Commerce Department, the top ©pendnt, the magaZine of the Independ- the financial markets. oil companies own 82 percent of all crudeent Pto1euxn >roducers Association: For example, the tax-exempt savings cer- More encou?ag2ng than the general activ- tlflcates will Btrengthen savings Institutions,oil production. These big oil companjelty gain is the fact that pure exploration— he said, but "will have adverse ma7ket re-receive 80 percent of all crude oil rev.the drilling of iew field wtldcats—Is $0 per. percusions," as certificates means less moneyenues. They control 74 percent of all bilcent ahead of last year and that, desptte the Is available for financing short-term busi-and gas field properties, and, most lm-Increase, 18.7 percent of all new field wUdoat ness loan demands. Likewise, he said ac-portantly they control 94 percent of completions esuIted In Bome sort of dii- counting changes that make t easier foroff shore properties which will b covery. thrift Institutions to sell devalued securitie3source of almost all the big new oil finds. could mean extra pressure for lower prices So more tax oopho1ea are not only and higher yields. The President of the United Statesunnecessary,they are a waste of the Besides warning of the perils facing theaddressed the Nation Just a few weekstaxpayers' money. financial lnarket8, Mr. Kaufman offered sev-ago and asked for cuts and belt-tighten- Two months ago on the Senate floor eral euggestlons to economic policy makersing in education for the children of t1JjI moved to recommit the 1981 tax legis- during and after his speech. The executivecountry, in cutting back programs thatlation because it was my conviction that branch of Government, he said, might scalewill affect the elderly, on 2mmun2zatlon back the tax cuts, look for ways of spending it was unsound energy policy and unfair less on defense and "enforce competitiveprograms that will protect the health oftax policy to give away ten of billions wage and price agreements" next year. the American people. Tighten the belt, he told all of those individuals, of dollars 2n new oil tax loopholes. I be- MORE FLEXIBLE FED iteved that by fricreásing the exemptions The Federal Reserve, Mr. Kaufman said, Now, on this vote on the Eagletonfrom the windfall profit tax we were should be more flexible In putting monetaryamendment we are going to ask the oilbreakingsolemn promise to the Amer- policy Into effect. He said the Ped shouldindustry to tighten its belt just a littleIcan people. consider ways of regulating theflow ofbit, too. When we decontrolled the price of oil, credit In the economy, perhaps by Imposing The question I must ask Ia bow de w promised the American people that S 11482 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE October .15,1.981 we would at least recover 50 percent ofthat were conceived in political expedi-anus funds (income, w4v.Mfl profits and- excl tax)be'cith.rapproØlatadcr the windfall tax. But the tax bill weency and enacted in Irresponsible haste."loaned" to help resolve the 5u1ng of the passed In August cut the windfall reve- One of the principal reasons that theSoc —TrustPunds nue by 15 percent..—almost $12 billion indeficit will be so high Is that over the This is to repeat for the record ibIs M— revenue between now and 1986 and aboutnext 5 years those oil tax breaks willministration', strong oppoSition to any such $33 billion over the decade. give away $11.8 billion In windfall rev-action. Our posItion 1. grounded on twO Since that ill-considered legislationenues and $33 billion over the next 10prlmaryiasuea: was passed, it has become clear that theyears. I said at that time that it did not First, the Infusion of general revenues jute make sense to me, and I do not believethe Trust Funds by any rnac)n1 would deficit in 1982 will be billions of dollars break the 46-year-old discipline of the That more than originally expected. Theseit makes sense to the American people,Funds which has, to date, ensured that the new estimates are causing many to re-to cut school lunches, student loans,CongreSs, Social Security beneficiaries mid think their position on that legislation.transportation for the blind and handi-taxpayers alike sra kept nilndtãl that visi- in that context, I believe it is importantcapped at the same time we were In-ble, earmarked payroll taxes must b equated' to understand how new oil tax breakacreasing by billion of dollars the loop-with a benefit structure those tozs were enacted last August. holes for windfall profiti for the oiltended to support. companies. We believe that to break that disciplIne Even though the President, as a can- would ultimately lead to breaking other didate, had stated his unequivocal op- As I have already pointed out, mostlong-standing principles of th. Social 5.cU- position to the oil windfall tax, he re-new oil Is discovered by the big oil com-rity system, including the most beaio prin- quested no changes In the windfall taxpanies. But I still hear pleas that weciple of .11: that Social Security Is an earned In his economic recovery tax package.1ust oppose this amendment bec$sseltbenefit that a worker Is entitled to. régird- The scores of special interests whowIll hurt the independents. less of his or her level of retirement Incom4 wanted special tax relief were promised I think my colleagues should also im-The Infusion of general revenues would in- that a second tax bill would follow. Thederstand that these independents thatevitably lead to Intense pressures to requl*s administration counseled those specialwe are trying to take case of and pro-retirees to undergo means testing, In effect Interests that revenue for new specialtect are many, many tImes larger thanprogrconvertIng Social Security Into a eUtre tax relief would be produced by renewedthe average U.n. company. In fact, the Second. at a time when we are facing a. economic growth. Income of the average oil and gas com-deficit of more than $40 billion In the scr- Virtually every special Interest heededpany in the .Unltied States was 12 tImesrent fiscal year, there simply are not general. the President's advice—except one—thelarger than the income of the averagerevenues available to' earmark Zor Social oil Industry, In its greed It demanded— Bee urity or any ether program. U.S. company for the most recent year. Thus any general revenUe dollar diverted as a price of Its support of the tax pack-But, of course, my colleagues' have ar-to Social Security would have to be taken age—billions of dollars in tax relief. gued "Well, we're not talking about thefrom some other program or directly from It demanded this relief despite theaverage company because that data Isthe taxpayers' pockets in Increased general fact that oil decontrol and OPEC hadskewed by the fact that these are sometaxes. Short of deepening the dsfloit, these combined to produce one of the greatest would be no Other chOice. transfers of wealth in the history of thevery rich, big oil companies." They as'- Wó fully share with you and other Mem- world—all in one direction—from thegue: "We're talking about exemptions forbers of the Congress the conviction that. w pocket of the American consumers to thethose small guys, the small entrepre-must act soon to ensure that the Social coffers of the oil companies. The Kion-neurs that are out there-those Indi-Security system is restored to. solvency and dike gold rush looked like pocket changevidual, one owner companies," to the high level of public confidence that Wdll, I have also looked at the tax datathe system has hIstorically earned.. in comparison. The oil business—In all torically earned. itselements—has become Immenselyfor those companies. Those small one- But we strongly hope that you share our profitable. From 1956 through 1972 oilowner oil companies are 2 3 times moreequally deep conviction that whatever steps Industry profits rose at an average of 2.6profitable than the average small Ameri-we may take toward that end must not lead percentperyear.Then, from1973can company—25 times more profitable.the system ultimately astray as woukibe the through 1980, the Industry's soared toIt Is hard for me to understand why weease where we to. abandon the discipline of 20.8 percent a year—almost 10 tImesneed to give those companies more ex.-the Trust Fund principle. more profitable than the prevIous 16emptions from the taxes when they are Sincerely, years. already 234 times more profitable than JomA. dvainc. During the same period that oil profitsanyone else. But that was the justifica-• Mr. WALLOP. Mr. President, the were advancing at this incredible rate,tion for the billions we gave away. amendment under consideration wQuld the growth in personal income was one- In summary, I support the efforts oftake us on a dangerous course. The pro- thIrd less than from 1956 to 1972. Letthe Senator from Missouri to end specialposal Is to provide funding for the social me quote the senior economist at datatax breaks for the oil companies that aresecurity program out of Federal general. resources: 12 times as profitable as the averagerevenues. Passage of this amendment You have a huge Increase In profit growthAmerican business. would create an Illusion of secuiity. So- for the oil Industry and a sharp decline in I believe it Is unfair to the millions ofcial security would be no more solvent real personal Income. That shows the clearelderly Americans to threaten cuts Inafter passage of the amendment than shift of wealth. social security benefits when we are giv-beforehand. The only difference Is that In spite of a tenfold Increase of itsing tens of billions to the oil companies.a mythical entity known as general reve- profits, in spite of the fact that [he oil I urge support of the Eagleton amend-nue would supposedly protect the pro- Industry Is 12 times more profitable thanment. gram from bankruptcy. It Is an act of bad the rest of American Industry, it de- Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unan-faith by those who portray themselves as manded and received special tax relief. true defenders of social security. There imous consent that a letter by the Com-are no general revenues for social se- Now as the cool winds of fall are re-missioner of Social Security, Mr. Johncurity, or for any other purpose. That Is placing the heat of August, the admin-Svahn, be included in the Rxcoss- It ex-why we have had to cut the growth in istratlon is being forced to face the coldpresses the administration's oppositionFederal spending this yeas'. The Treas- economic facts—In the words they haveto the use of general revenues for theury Is not only empty, It Is In the red. so often thrown at us Democrats—thatfinancing of social security. The proponente Of the amendment there Is no free lunch—that they can- There being no objection, the letterargue that they will IncreasO general not drastically cut business taxes andwas ordered to be printed In the REcoRD,revenues by Increasing the tax on newly begin the most massive arms buildup inas follows: discovered oil. But., even their own eo- human history—and also balance the Tim COMMISsIONER nomic assumptions predict that the tax budget. Not voodoo—not black magic— OP SOCIAL SECUUITT, will collect about $14 billion Over the not astrology can repeal second grade Baitimote, Md.,October 1, 1981. arithmetic, Hon. ROBERT,?. DOLE, next few years. The projected short- Chairman, Senate FinanceComnUttee, U.S.range social security deficit Is anyWhere And so now the President ha pro- Senate,Washington, D.C. from$11 billion to $111 billion. The $11 posed increasing taxes by ending special DEAR SENATOR DOLE: As you know, therebillion figure. whIch Is close to the rave- tax breaks. f say let us thke him at hishave beei several suggestions from withinflue pickup through the amendineflt, Is word. Let us repeal the oil tax giveawaysand without the Congress that general hv-based on the most optimistic assurnp-' October 1, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 11483 tions that could be made about theecon Mr; President, I am going to continueso far, we have managed to finance the oiny.Noone acceps this prediction. to press for efforts for more oil drillingprogram and we have managed tokeep it

The $14 billion will not keep socialin the State of MIssouri. :1 thInk that Is , soundby not going outside and taking security solvent But, it Is a means tothe only thing in this bill, to. discovergeneral revenues, not taking revenues of open the door to further general revenuemore oil in Missouri and a few. otherpeople who have, nothing to do with the financing for social decurlty. Since theStates. But in the meantime, we are go-purpose of the social security program, budget is in deficit, we would have toing to continue to send you enough oilbut financing it on the theory that those turn, on the prlnting presses. The resultto keep you warm in winter, or to keepwho are going to get the benefits will pay is 'more Inflation and lower real economicthe automobiles running in Missouri. Wefor it and they Will receive benefits in ac- growth. are not going to suggest a tax for allcordance with what they pay. I should also point out that the as-the automobiles produced in Missouri. I say to the Senator that he is support-

sumption that the tax will raise $14 bil-We are going to suggest a tax on coal . ingthe same position as those who have lion is overly optimistic. Every revenuethat may be produced in other States. Inmaintained .this program down through • assumption regarding the windlallprofitKansas, we have this great oil produc-the years and had the courage to vote for; tax has been too. high. The tax is antion. The average is three barrels per,— the taxes to. pay for it, andlam pleased

• . . erraticsource of Income, and it would beday for each well. . to'support. the Senator'8 position on this..

irxésponsible to rely on such an uncer- Mr. LONG. Will the Senator yield at - Mr.DOLE. I thank the distinguished

tain source of revenue to protect retire-that point? . Senatorfrom Louisiana. nett bethefits.•. Mr. DOLE. Yes, Mr. President. All this talk about revenue enhance- When the Committee on Economic Se- Mr. LONG. Mr. President, may I sayment reminds me of an old story. Several curity drafted the original Social Secu-to the Senator that one mistake we didyears ago in this Chamber, one of my rity. Act, Pre1dent Roosevelt rejectednot make during the Carter administra-liberal colleagues was beating the table, any suggestion that general revenues betion was to try to finance the socialabout ready to wind up his speech, and • used to fiance the program. He Insistedsecurity out of the deficit. What we didhe said,. "Now, gentlemen, let me tax that the borarn be self-financing; Thisin those years, even though some reë-your memories." Some of the liberals • principle has been maintained for theommended otherwise, was to insist thatjumped up and said, "Why haven't we past 45 years. The last time the Senatethe social security program would have 'though of that before?" [Laughter.) voted on using general revenues was Into be paid 'for by those who expected to Thatis essentially the fix we are in to- 1967, and the motion was defeated by abenefit from it. We put enough taxes 'onday. We have taxed just about every- vote of 62 to 6. The Congress win con-to keep the social security program sol-thing that moves or wiggles around here, • sider proposals next spring on preservtngvent and to pay for its benefits, and now we are trying to take some of the fthanclal stability of social security. Some protested that approach, but upthe taxes and put them into the social We will develop a. sensible program atto now, we have not gone to generalsecurity.problem. that time. rhls is not the time to try tofund financing of 8octal security. We I do not have any quarrel with the use nonexistent general revenues for thehave worked on the sound basis thatSenator's amendment, so long as I have social security program.• those who are going to benefit from theenough votes to table it, and I will find Mr. DOLE.. Mr. President, I under-program ought to be paying for it andout now if I can do that. [Laughter.) stand the Senator frnn Missouri has nothey ought to be paying in a proportion Mr. President, I move to table the. more requests for time on that side. In amendment, and I ask for the yeas and about 2 minutes, I shall move to. tablerelative to the benefit they expect to have from it. By following that ap-nays. , . • the amendment. - proach,we have kept The PRESIDING OFFICER.1s there a Mr.MOYNIHAN. Will the Senator this program soufld. ' ' ' sufficientsecond? There is a sufficient from Kansas allOw me just 20 seconds, to The general fund we are talking aboutsecond. observe that the revenue enhancementhas an accumulated deficit of more than The yeas and nays were ordered. language is that of the Director of the$1 trillion because it has not been paid The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ques- Office of Management and Budget. I re-for. May I say to the Senator that Iftion is on agreeing to the motion to table ported it to this body as having sur-you ant to keep the social securitythe amendment. On this question the faced, as they say, at about 11:30 thisprogram solvent and If you want to keepyeas and nays have, been ordered, and morning. I am sure we shall see more ofthe Nation solvent, you should insistthe clerk will call the roll. enhancement. that we continue to pay for this pro- The assistant legislative clerk called Mr., DOLE. Mr. President, it is a termgram through those who expect to getthe roll. that has been around a while, but I amthe benefits contributing to it, and not Mr. STEVENS. I announce that the sure we shall see more of it—at least thedo it on the basis that we will give youSenator from Idaho (Mr. MCCLURE), the term.' the benefits but we are going to tax theSenator from Alaska Mr. MTJRKOWSKI) Let me say finally that I heard thisother ru andtheSenator from Idaho(Mr.

same speech from the Senator from Mis- • 1 can recall whenthe program got intoSrmxs) are necessri1y absent. souii about the race hozes. That amend--trouble. fl was when Wilber Mills ran I also announce that the Senator from ment came from that side, I might add..for President of the United States HeWashington (Mr. GORTON) is absent due We tried to work it out; I thought it hadsent us a wire during the New Hamp-to Øeath in the family. some merit. shire primary tehing us to increase so- I further announce that, if present and Mr. Presiderit the Senator from Mis-cial security benefits without increas-voting, the 'Senator from Washington sOuri is honest in his convictions. Heing taxes. We were supposed to b ble(Mr. GORT0N) and the Senator from voted against tax relief for the Ameri-to do this by changing from, the so-Idaho (Mr. SYMMS) would each vote can people. The vote was 89 to 11; 11called static assumptions to dynamic'yea." Members out of 100—10 voted with theassumptions. Mr. CRANSTON. I announce that the Senator who voted against tax relief for Mr. President. if there is not enoughSenator from Hawaii (Mr. IN0UTE)is the American people, against tax reliefmoney being raised by the social securitynecessarily absent. for Ame1can business. It is easy, onpayroll tax, then we can try to find a way The PRESIDING OICER (Mr. the 15th day"of the program—it did notto stay sound by making some changes.COHEN). Are there any other $enators in take effect until October 1—to stand onIn this bill the Finance Committee rec-the Chamber who desire to vote?

• the Senate floor and cry gloom and . ommendedthat we tax sick pay as well. The result was announced—yeas 65, doom. We are workIig our way out ofas regular pay, and then shaving down nays 30, as follows: the Carter years. It takes a little time.some of the benefits certain future bene- IRolican Vote No. 312 Leg.1 You cannot do it overnight. What Presi-ficiaries will receive so as to keep the cost

dent Carter did in 4 years, makes the re-Inside the revenues. May I say that so • covery process slow. We are doing thefar,that approach has been successful.Abdnor BO8chWitz DeConcint It has been successful since, the programAndrew8 Amg urdtcIt 1)enjto best we can. We can wrap this debate in Chafee • flftoii . oil and we can all cry together, butwas started. • Chiles ' Dole flaucuB . Coch.mn Domenc sooner or later, we are going to have to It is true that we have some projec-Ben D'Arnsto Durenbetger address the problem of social security. tions that give us cause or concern,' but Danfth East ______

S 11484 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE October 15, 1981 Exon Eurnphrey Pryo ofsuch reductions, and the provisions o law Ford Jep8e Quayie with re6pect to. entitlement programs whichfor fiscal year 1983 and $44 billion In Gain Johntcn' Rdo1ph must be changed in order to carry out suchunidentified cuts for fiscal year 1984. Gleim Kaebaum Basser As of the time that the September ieduction. - OOdWt& Kasten Schmitt budget revision was submitted by the ad- - Gra8sley Laxatt Bimpscn Mr. Ear Long Stafford ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President,ministration, there were $10 billion in Hatch Lugar 8tenn1a Iask unanimous consentthatMr.additional unidentified cuts in the "1 u- Eatfield Matsunaga Steveins DECONCINI, Mr. CANNON, Mr. MATSUNAGA,ture entitlement reform" package and Hawkins Mattlaigly Thurmond Mr. SASSER,Mr.RIEGLE, and Mr. LEvm Eayekawa Meicher Tower there was an additional figure of $11.7 Heftin N1ckle Wallop be added as cosponsors. billion in "unidentified cuts," making a Heinz Nuns Warmer The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withouttotal of $51.7 billion in unidentified cuts - Eem Packwood Zorthky objection, it Is so -ordered. for fiscal year 1983. And in that same Huddleston Percy Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President,September budget submission, there Is a NAYS—SO in short, this amendment requires thatfigure of $15 billion in the reductions in Bden Eollings Proxmire not later than November 15 of this yearthe future entitlement reform package Bmdley Jackson Riegle the 0MB Director shall prepare and Bumpers Kennedy Roth and an additional $23 billion in uniden- Byrd, Lhy Rudman transmit to the Congress a full and com-tified cuts, making a total for the uniden- liarry F., Jr.Levin Sarbaies plete list of all of the so-called unidenti-tified cuts in fiscal year 1984 of $82 Byrd, Robert C. Matbias Specter, fied cuts that appear in the budget for Canmon Metzenbauln Teongas billion. Cohen Mitchell Weicker fiscal year 1982, 1983, and 1984, the cuts Mr. President, I think the American Cranston Moynithan Williams that he determines are necessary to in-people have a right to know what the Dodd Pelt sure that the deficit for fiscal year 1982administration has in mind insofar as Eagleton Presaler does not exceed $43 billion; that the def i-the so-cafled unidentified cuts are con- NOT VOTINO—8' cit for fiscal year 1983 does not exceedcerned. I believe that Congress is entitled Oorton Mcclure Symin $22.9 billion; and that the budget forto know, also, what the administration Inouye Murkowskl fiscal year 1984 Is a balanced budget. has in mind as far as unidentified cuts So the motion to table Mr. EAGLETON'S In preparing that list, the Directorare concerned. amendment (No. 581) was agreed to. would have to be specific with reference If the administration itself does n.it - tothe programs and the appropriationknow what is included in the$82 billion AMENDMENT NO. 585 accounts in which reductions have to be Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD addressed the in unidentified cuts for fiscal year 1984, made, the exact amount of such reduc-and if the administration itself does not Chair. tions, and the provisions of law with The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ques- know what is in the $51.7 billion in un- respecttotheentitlement programsidentified cuts for 1983, then the "bal- tion recurs on amendment No. 585. which must be changed in order to carry Mr. DOLE. May we have order? anced" budget that the administration out such reductions. has been talking about for fiscal year • The PRESIDINGOFFICER.The Sen- I ask unanimous consent to include in ate Is not in order. Those Senators in the 1984 is nothing more than a piece of aIsles please take their seats or removethe RECORD, at this point, a table showingpaper. spending cuts, revenue increases, and The President promised a balanced themselves from the Chamber. "unidentified cuts" for fiscal year 1982, The Senator from West Virginia. budget by fiscal year 1984, and we here in fiscal year 1983, and fiscal year 1984. the Senate continue to hold a balanced UP AMENDMENT NO. 484 (TO AMENDMENT There being no objection, the, table wasbudget as one oI our important goals. NO. 588) ordered to be printed in the RECORD,as (Purpoee: To require the Director of the But If the administration does not know Office of Management and Budget to sub-follows: wht is in the unidentified cuts amount- - mit a 'ull and complete list or reductions REAGANBUDGET CRISIS (BASED ON ADMINISTRATION ingto $82 billion for fiscal year 1984, in budget authority and outlays an in- BUDGETARY AND ECONOMIC ASSUMPTIONS) then, as I say again and repeat, the bal- crea In revenues to the Congre) anced budget of the administration is Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, IDoflai amounts in blIions1 nothing more than a piece of paper And Isend to the desk an amendment to the if the administration does indeed know amendment by Mr. PRESLER and ask that Fiscal year-- what is included in the unidentified cuts, 1982 1983 1984 ftbe stated by the clerk. - then it should tell the Congress, It should ThePRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk let us know In advance, and it should let will state the amendment. Administration's deficit (—.)f sijr- the American people know in advance of pIes (+) projections: 1983 and in advance of 1984. as to what is The legislative clerk read as follows: March -—$45.0—$22.8 The Senator ftom West Virginf a (Mr. RoB- July —42.5 —22. 9 +. included in those unidentified cuts. ERT C. BYRD), or hbnself, Mr. DECONCINI, September —43.1 —22.9 'One of the most disturbing questions Mr. CANNON, and Mr. MATSUNAGA, proposes an Administration's September pro- posal: in the minds of older Americans is: Will unprinted amendment numbered 484. Deficit reduction 16.0 40.0 58.8 the budget ax fall on their social security To the aznendmemt offered by Mr. Pressler. Spending cuts (13.0) (20.3)(24.8) benefits? And our older- Americans have strike all after the words, "It.18" and insert Revenue Increases '(3.0) (8.0)(11.0) the ollowing the purpose of this section Is - Unidentified cuts (11.7)(23.0) seen one conflicting signal after another. toassure the American people that the M yet — (I) —30.0—44.0 Social security was to be included n the "unidentified savings" included in the budget July unidentified cuts so-called safety net. It was a sacred cow. requests most recently &ubmltted to the Con- September additional cuts: But in May, the administration an- Defense spending —2.0 —5.0 —6.0 gress for scai. years 1982, 1983, and 1984, will Nondefensespending (12 nounced a proposal that would cut so- not, be. achieved by reductions in budget percent across-the-board).. —8.4 —5.3 —3.8 cial security benefits by $88 billion over authority and outlays for 8ocial Security Future reentitlement reform a 6-year period. And again in July the programs. package —2.6 —10.0—15.0 (b) Not later than November 15, 1981, the More unidentified cuts —11.7—23.0 administration included $19.6 billion n social security cuts from fiscal years 1982 •Drectoro Office o Management and Budget Subtotal, September cuts. _—13.0 —32.0—47.8 shall 'prepare and tranBmit to the Congress a through 1984 in its mid-session review full and conpletelistOall reductions in Total, July and September of the budget. cujts —13.0 —62.0—91.8 authority and outlays and increases - budget Total ujnidentitiedcuts —.2.6 —51.7 —8.0 In September, the administration pro- in revenues or fiscal years 1982, 1983, and posednew budget cuts and claimed that 1984which he determines are necessary to it had restored social security cuts in- Insure that the deficit for fiscal year 1982 doe3 I Amount not identified, estimated $15 billion. - 'not exceed $43,100,000,000, that the deficit ror cluded in the July budget. But if we look fiscal year 1983 does not exceed 822,900,000,— Mr..ROBERTC. BYRD. Mr., President,at the column labeled unidentified cuts 000, and that outlays do not exceed revenuesbased on the administration's budgetaryin fiscal year 1983, and if we look at the by the first day of fiscal year 1984. In prepar-and economic assumptiqns—not on thecolumnlabeledunidentifiedcutsin ing the list required by the preceding sen-assumptions by the Congressional Budget1984—cuts amounting to $51.7 billion for tence, the Director &hall only utilize catego- for fiscal ries of reductions in budget authority andOffice, but based on the administration's• fiscal year 1983 and $82 billion outlays which explicitly specify the programsown economic assumptions—as of theyear 1984, respectively—these are not and appropriation accounts in which suchJuly budget revision, the midyear review,cumulative cuts. These are cuts for each reductions are to be made, the exact amountthere were $30 billion In unidentified cutsfiscal year—$51.7 billion, unidentified, October 15, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 11485 in fiscal year 1983, and then in fiscal yearbalanced fiscal year 1984 which has beenit wants to cut are for small business, 1984 an additional $82 billion in uniden-promised so often. housing, and agriculture, which are just tified cuts. Mr. CHILES. Will the Senator yield? the parts of the economy which are being If the administration is unwilling to Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I yield. devastated by high interest rates. identify the unidentified cuts, then how Mr. CHILES. I think the amendment The administration has not told us do we know that the administration isthe minority leader is proposing is some•what allthose other cuts are going to be. not Including social security cuts in thatthing that is essential, for the CongressYet I asked Mr. Stockxnan today, on his designation of unidentified cuts? and the American people. We must haveappearing before the Budget Commit- Has the $19.6 billion social security cutthis information if we are going to betee, ithe CBO figures were correct. We assumedintheJulybudgetdisap-able to deal with the economic andhave found that they have always been peared? Where are these cuts? If socialbudgetary problems the Nation faces. Incloser to being correct even though they security cuts are not Included In the un-fact, it now looks as if the further we getusuallyunderestimatetheirfigures. identified savings assumed in the 1984along the more elusive the picture seenisThey have been closer to being correct budget, what cuts are included? Can weto be of where we are actually going tothan any of the Presidential figures we assume that if the total of the cuts can-cut and what the programs are goinghave had since I have been on the Budget not be identified the slack will come fromtobe. Committee and since I have been watch- social security? As the distinguished minority leadering it. That is true of previous Presi- The amount the administration has as-knows, when we left in August, we weredents, as well, including Ford and Car- suined for unidentified cuts has growntold that there would be some additionalter, and now President Reagan's admin- with each budget request. The only thingcuts proposed in 1983 and in 1984 thatistration. If those figures are correct we that has not grown is the informationwould be identified for us. But when weare looking for cuts of at least 36 per- as to what makes up the unidentifiedcome back in September, we find in ad-cent of the CBO figures across the board cuts. -dition to those cuts we are now told thatfor every agency. In the most recent budget request sub-there are other cuts that are not identi- If we are not to cut some of these mitted to Congress, as I have indicated,fied. agencies 36 percent, that means that there are $82 billion in unidentified or In listening to the President's address,some would have to be cut more. and undistributed cuts included for fiscal yearhe talked about three or four areas ofothers less. We are entitled to know what 1984. different cuts, some that he had given tothe administration has to say about it My amendment asks that Congressthe Cabinet and they were to come upor where we cafl make these cuts. We are simply be told and that the Americanwith some cuts beginning sometime nexttold that there is a safety net out there,' people be told, in essence, what theseyear, for the budget proposals next year.that the safety net will protect those cuts are. If the administration can as- We still have the cuts which were un-people who cannot protect themselves. sume that amount of money in balancingidentified in August when we left, andWe are also told that there is a lot of the budget, why can it not tell us hownow even part of the new proposals arewaste and fat. We need to know where it reached that number? How did itunidentified. Also unidentified is the $21that waste and fat is so we can cut it out, reach the number of $82 billion in un-billionoversome 3 yearsintaxso we can root it out. identified cuts for 1984? How did it ar-changes—I think they said the closing I think the longer we wait the mere rive.at that number? It must have someof loopholes or tax revenue moneys. Mostthe .creditmarkets are going to react information as to where the cuts willof us have to recognize those are taxbecausethere is uncertainty: One be made. If it ha8 that information, thenincreases. One mau's loophole is anotherBudget Committee witness, from a ma- Congress Is entitled to know about itman's tax increase. So there are somejor Wall Street investment house, told now, not to have to wait until 1984 to$21 billion there. us that 4percentof the current interest find out. Now. The American people are Altogether. we are talking about arate is a premium being paid for uncer- entitled to know now, not next year, nottremendous amount of the budget, espe-tainty. We do have this information, but in 1984, as to what those $82 billion incially in the numbers1 and, dependingwe need to get it if we are going to get, unidentified cuts are. As I say again, ifon if you use the administration's figures,on a clear path toward a balanced the administration does not know, thenit now looks as if we are talking about abudget and eliminate that uncertainty. the so-called balanced budget is a worth-deficit, with the new interest figures, of I congratulate the minority leader for less piece of paper. close to $80 billion by 1984. That moneyseeking this information. It seems to me The administrationclaimsthatitfor 1983 and 1984 is unidentified. If wethat it is something which is essential knows ways other than cutting socialuse the CBO figures, we are talking aboutfor the &ntire Congress to have and for security in balancing the budget andwell over $100 billion deficit. the American people to have so that we that it has included those ways In its The problem we face is extremely seri-can identify these cutS and know the di- budget-cutting plan. All I want to knowotis, but the administration istellingrection in which we are going. I am Is, what are these plans? can someonepeople just how serious it is. They are -delighted to see the Senator's proposal tell us? What are the plans? Eighty-twosayingthat If we just cut another 12 per-before us. billion dollars in 1984. Fifty-one pointcent, we will get a balanced budget. But Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I thank the seven billion dollars in fiscal year 1983.they are not telling people that we, woulddistinguished Senator from Florida. He That is a total of $133.7 billion in un-have to cut another $15 billion in entitle-is a member of the Budget Committee identified- cuts that the administrationnent programs, and they have not saidand is in a position to speak, with a great is counting on making. which ones they want to cut. They havedeal of authority on this subject. I very Cutting $82 billion from a budget Innot, told the people that they still needmuch appreciate his comments and his one single fiscal year is a difficult task,$23 billion in other areas which theysupport of the amendment. and if the plan to achieve these cuts iscannot identify. They have not said that I now yield -to the distinguished Sen- in place, Congress should be told. Con-if CBO's estimates are correct, they willator from Montana. gress represents the ultimate authority.need another $52 billion to cut after all Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I thank Congress should be told what programsthat. This situation is awful, and thethe minority leader for yielding. will be cut and ought to be told now,people have a right to know that if we I believe this to be a very impressive and the American people ought to knowtake the President's numbers in defense,amendment. I say that because up until now. and exempt social security from cuts,last year when Congress has adopted I think what we have here is a Pan-then to balance the budget by 1984 webudgets, they have been on a yearly basis. dora's box. Do not lift the lid. Do notwill have to cut everything else by 36 per-The administration would come up with take a look at what is in that box ofcent, by more than a third, on top ofa budget, itemize various categories and unidentified cuts. Do not take a look toowhat we already cut. That means 36various programs, and the Congress early. The American people might bepercent for veterans benefits, for high-would scrutinize and analyze those pro- disturbed. ways, for education, 'and for law en-visions, trying to determine whether or If the cuts, have not been identified,forcement. not the budget was appropriate. Congress then, as I say, the budget submitted by The administration is not telling peo-would then pass the budget. the administration cannotlead to theple t1at the $21 billion is credit activities It has only been recently that we 1ave S 11486 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE October 15, 1981 cometo a new procedure. That is, wether requests for cuts in January or Are there going to be further cuts In have begun to project budgets into thethe early spring. So, what we see hereCoal research?. future. If we do that, it seems to me ifis a succession of requests for cut after Are there going to be further cuts in they are honest projections they have tocut after cut in the budget. water and sewer projects, education, and have honest figures. Mr. President, many of us on this sidehealth programs? This amendment very directly andof the aisle were under the impression Are there to be further cuts In flood precisely points out the administration'sthat the first $35 billion cut that wasprevention projects, farmers home loan projections or so-called budgets for therequested—although we opposed certainguarantees? future are really phonies because theyaspects of it and tried to amend the Where are the cuts going to be made? are not budgets in.any sense of the word. • package, most of us went along and sup-If the administration knows, then it They are just a wish that the totalported it once wefailed in our efforts toought to say. Otherwise the financial amount of spending be a certain figure.amend it—but many of us were undermarkets are not going to believe that the It does not say how they will get to thatthe impression that that was the eco-administration can be successfulin result, what the route will be. It does notnoinic package of budget cuts for fis-achieving the cuts that are wrapped into supply us with a roadmap. It is just acal year 1982. We were told that we hadthe designation of "unidentified cuts" wish. to give the whole package, the wholefor fiscal year 1984. This amendment basically tells thething—tax cuts, budget cutsamounting Where Is that balanced budget? Does administration to tell it 5ItIs, thatto $35 billion, increased defense ex-the administration know? Or does the it does have a budget. We in the Con-penditures—and most of us voted foradministration not know? If it knows. gress have the obligation to scrutinize theall of that. Now we find that, come Sep-then let It speak. legislation fully, an obligation to looktember, there is a request for an addi- The American people have a right to Into it and know what the figures are. tional $13 billion in nondefense cuts,know. They have a. right to know what I believe that we have an obligation toand additional cuts in defense expendi-the dimensions of this cutting exercise project the future so that we know whattures amounting to $13 billion acrossare going to be within the next 2 to 3 we are voting on. So far, we have un-the 3-year period. years. specified cuts of up to $82 billion in 1984 Mr. President, we undoubtedly will be And the Congress needs to know. How and we do not have a budget. It is justasked for more reductions. I do not be-can Congress proceed in a reasonable phony. It is phony in the truest sense oflieve the budget can be balanced sim-way to deal with the budget if it does the word. This amendment will helpply by the process of cutting the budget.not know where the cuts are going to be pinpoint the phoniness, the illusion, ofI think that is part of the process, ofproposed by the administration? the proposal sent up by the administra-course, and we have cooperated with So, Mr. President, I call on the ad- tion. I think it is a very good amendment.the President in that fashion. But I justministrationto open Pandora's box.

• The second point, Mr. President, as hasdo not think that to balance that budgetLet us take a peek. Just let us have a been mentioned by other Senators, isin fiscal year 1984 by budget cuts alone islittle look into this Pandora's box. Let that we were promised by the adminis-doable. I do not think the American peo-us see what is in there, in this box that tration that there would be no cuts inple are aware of the dimensions of theIs labeled "unidentified cuts." social security. Then, 10 and behold, thecuts that are yet to be made. Let us be assured that there will not President came up with social security There was quite a whoop and a hollerbe any cuts in social security. Let the old cuts totalling approximately $68 millionabout the $35 billion cut package thatfolks throughout this country be assured over 8 years. Now he has backtracked onwas enacted, a lot of celebrating of thethat there will not be cuts In social secu- that because the American public hasenactment of that package, and so on.ritv that are included in that $82 billion spoken out against social security cuts.Now we find, as I say, another $13 bil-in unidentified cuts for fiscal year 1984. We do not know whether the adminis-lion in requests. Let the elderly community of this coun- tration has in the back of its mind fur- But that is not all of it. We find, as wetry receive assurances that there will not ther cuts In social security. Maybe theyscrutinize the administration's budget-be cuts in that Pandora's box labeled 'are included In the unspecified cuts. arv assumptions, that there will be $51.7"unidentified cuts" that really are cuts Mr. President, if we are going to es-billion in unidentified cuts for fiscal yearIn social security. tablish greater certainty in the minds1983, and an additional $82 billion in un- Let the veterans be assured that there of senior citizens, in financial markets, inidentified cuts for fiscal year 1984. will not be further cuts in veterans' people who are affected by Federal pro- Mr. President, the full revelation ofhealth care. grams, then I think the administrationwhat these budget cuts are really going Let the administration speak and let has a very strong obligation to cometo mean is going to sink home in duethe financial community, the financial forth and tell us where the proposed cutstime. When the American people awakenmarkets, the business community of this are. If they do not do that, then we doto the fact that in order to achieve thiscountry know, that the administration not have a budget because 'unless theyso-called balanced budget in fiscal yearreally is on track, that it really knows can tell us their proposed figures for var-1984, the administration has crankedwhere it is going, that it really does know ious programs, the words are just smoke,in—cranked into the balanced budget—what cuts are going to be made, and that there is no substance. "unidentified cuts" amounting to $82it can achieve those cuts: or else the I think this is an excellent amendment,billion—what does that mean, Mr. Presi-financial ,marketsare not going to be Mr. President, I commend the Senatordent? Does that mean additional cutsconvinced that they can be made. from West Virginia for noticing this flawIn defense? Mr. President. my amendment t'ould in the budget, for proposing an amend- Does it mean that revenue sharing isrequirethatinformation.Truthin ment to help cure the defects In the.going to be eliminated? budgeting: that is what is needed. We budget and help establish a little sense Does it mean that there are going tohave heard of truth in lending, truth in in this budget process so that the countrybe some cuts in social security? this, truth in that. This Isthe"truth in has a better idea of what exactly is going Does it mean that there are going tobudgeting" amendment. on. I commend the Senator from Westbe cuts in veterans' pensions? I hope that all Senators, will support Virginia and I think him. Does it mean that there are going tothIs amendment. How can any Senator Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President,be cuts in black lung payments and rail-go home, how can I as a Senator—does I thank the Senator from Montana. road retirement benefits? the Senator from Kansas wish to be I shall not try to hold the floor at Does it mean there are going to be cutsadded as a cosponsor? length, Mr. President. in Federal retirement benefits? Mr. DOLE. No. Mr. President, I just just want to emphasize, for those Are there going to be further reduc-thought the Senator had stopped. Senators who may be in their officestions in synthetic fuels and energy con- Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. How can I, as listening, that Congress gave to theservation? a Senator, go home if I were to vote President his requested package of $35 Are there going to be further cuts inagainst this amendment, or if I were to billion in cuts prior to the August recess.mass transit? vote to table it, even? How could Isay to He has now requested additional cuts Are there going to be further cuts inthe old folks, "Look, I really did not want amounting to $13 billion for fiscal yearcollege loans, child nutrition, and schoolto know what those unidentified cuts are. 1982. It anticipate that there will be fur-lunch programs? It really did not matter to me whether or October 15, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— SENATE S 11487 not social security tuts were included. Sorevenue enhancement. If there is notdemands, accountability as to where I voted no, against the amendment"? Orgoing to be so-called revenue enhance-these addftiona budget cuts are going "I voted to table it." ment, then there is going to be devasta-to come from. Do I want to tell my people back hometionin entitlement programs for in- As the Senator from New York ha8 that it is of no Interest to me what is in-dividuals as we have known them. Notpointed out, we are spending about $100 cluded in the unidentified cuts? just in social security but also railroadbillion just to finance the national debt. Mr. MOYNIHAN. Will the Senatorretirement, black lung benefits, veterans We are spending over $200 billion onde- from West Virginia yield at this point? pensions. fense; we are spending over $400 billion Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Yes,Mr. Unless we get a straight answer, un.on entitlements and other uncontrollable President. certainty will loom as a threat to theprograms including social security and Mr. MOYNmAN. Mr. President,Ivery fabric of this society. The Senatorhealth care programs under medicare. want to say that the Senator has madeis quite right. We have not yet receivedThere are not the resources to make the an irrefutable case, in my view. I wouldone. $82 billion in cuts the administration like to offer, if I may, certain elemental With gratitude to the minority leader,Is asking for unless we are prepared to numbers which, I think, make as salientI will vote for hIs amendment. say to every parent in this country that as possible a case for his amendment. Let Mr. ROBERT C.BYRD. Ithank thethere will be no more school lunch pro- us go to the fiscal year 1984. That is notdistinguished Senator, and I yield thegrams, that we are abolishing every op- very far away, just 23 moØhs away.floor. portunity for young people to go to According to the Congressnal Budget Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, willschool under the guaranteed student Office—and we are honored to have onthe Senator from West Virginia yield? loan programs, that we are virtually the floor the distinguished chairman of Mr. ROBERT C.BYRD.I yield. abolishing the Older Americans Act, that the Budget Committee, who will confirm Mr. KENNEDY. 'Mr. President, I com-we are going to basically eat away and this—estimated revenues in fiscal yearmend the Senator from West Virg'niawipe out health care, lob training, hous- 1984 under the admiiistration's tax pro-for raising this point again. ing, and transportation programs. We gram will be $748 billion. If you take I believe the American people thoughtare not being honest with the American three items—defense, interest on thethat last August, after the budget reso-people. public debt, and existing benefits to in-lutlon had been considered and after the I believe that the Senator from West dividuals, such as -social security, rail-taxj bill had been considered, the budgetVirginia, in focusing on this issue, has road retirement, veterans' pensions—youcuts proposed by this administration hadreally provided an Important service. I, get $740 billion. That leaves $8 billionbeen adopted. But now we find we havefor one, join the Sthator in hoping that for all remaining operations of the Gov-a new message from the President the administration will provide us with ernment in fiscal 1984: $8 billion forthe United States, asking for new budg-their list as to what areas are going to the Department of Agriculture, the De-et cuts on the grounds that not enoughbe cut back, ao that the American people partment of the Interior, the Library ofhas been done and more is needed. Peo-will have a better understanding as to ple in my State of Massaôhusetts believewhose belt is being ttghtened and whose- Congress, the FBI, the CIA, the Coast belt Is being loosened. Guard, the White House staff, the Su-that Congress gave the administration Earlier this afternoon, the Senate re preme Court, and the staff of Congress.what it requested and many feel that wejected what I considered an eminently You cannot do that. You cannot get thegave too much. But over the summer,reasonable amendment by the Senator remainder of Government for $8 billion.after the President's program from Missouri that had been refined over I assume that we will continue to ayacted, interest rates skyrocketed and thea previous amendment the Senator had interest on the public debt, that we willprojections were for more of the same.offered. It was very close to the amend- not default on the Government's mostWhen we came back here in Septemer,ment i offered some time ago when we fundamental financial obligations. we heard that the answer to these in-tried to reduce the budget deficits by We have heard no one on this sideterest rates Is another new economicsome $33 billion, by abolishing the wind- or the other, propose to reduce defenseprogram—the second one in 6 months—fall-that would be granted tothe major much. Where can the money come fromand that this new program is for moreoil companies. That issue was clearly then, but from entitlement benefits forbudget cuts. focused—more profits for oil companies individuals? I believe the Senator from West Vir-or more benefits for the .elderly. People That th why an answer to the Senator's.ginia does a very tinrtant service inwill have an understanding of what the question will not be forthcoming. unlessasking theadmInistraonto detail forSenate was attempting to do on that Congress directs itto be. Ineluctablethe Congress and the American- peopleIssue, and we had a yea-nd-nay vote on logic indicates that it must come fromwhere theseadditionalcuts,willbethat. I regret that that amendment was benefits to individuals. Naturally the ad-made. Let us not forget that we hearddefeated. ministration does not want to talk abouttime in and time ou during the course Now the Senator from West Virginia this. of the last Presidential campaign, thereis trying to make the administration We warned them that the size of thatwere not going to be any cuts in socialaccountable to Congress and the Amen- tax biU in the out years was intolerable.security. Only waste and fraud were tocan people on the question of $82 billion We said that a great barbecue was takingbe eliminated. Then the administrationin additional cuts. The Senator does a place, and that a clean bill the Nationchanged its mind and broke its promise.servicetotblsbody. The American could afford was being turned into anCuts were made in social security. Firstpeople are entitled to the answers to his auction of the Treasury. They signedthe minimum benefit was eliminated,questions, and I commend him for rals- it anyway. Now we all must deal withAnd if that was not enough, the admin-ing this issue on the floOr of the Senate these numbers. istration then proposed to make an ad-this afternoon. I urge my colleagues to The chairman of the Budget Commit-ditional $88 billion in cuts. support Senator BYRD'S amendment. tee is in the chamber. Our revenue esti- It was only after the Senator .from Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. t -thank my mate in 1984 is $748 billion. The admin-West Virginia. the Senator from Michi-friend, the distinguished Senator from

Istratlon has a higher .number—$771 bil-gan, and others of us continued to pressMassachusetts (Mr. KENNEDY). - lion. That would give you $23 billion fortorestore the minimum social security SASSER. Mr. President will the all the rest of Government, and you can-payments, and the Senator -from New Senator from West Vfrginia yield? not do that. If the cuts are .ot going toYork offered in his proposal to allow Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I yield to the come from defense, arid we continue toborrowing for the funds, that we havedistinguished' Senator from Tennessee. meet our debt obligations, then where isbeen able, at last, to give some assurances Mr. SASSER. Mr. President, I com- the savings to come from—except fromto millions of senior citizens that theremend the Senator from West Virginia benefits to individuals, or from a mid-would not be a serious disruption of thefor offering this amendment this after-

course correctiGn in the tax program,fundamentai commitment that has beennoon. - - stretching out the tax cuts? madeto those who have paid into the What we have before us are the plans This morning I informed the chair-social security system. of the administration which will soon - martofthe Finance Committee that Mr. TheSenator fron West Virginia isbe translated into action, to make $82 Stoekman now refers to tax increases asentirely right when he asks, and reallybillion in unspecified and unident1ed 8 11488 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE October '15, 1981 budget cuts between now and fiscal yearport on the other side of the aisle for thisAct, Including unemployment compensa- 1984, in an attempt to balance the Fed-amendment. tion. I mean we are looldng at all these eral budget. I believe itis Incunibent Mr. DOLE.Wehave four r''sentees. Iprograms from thne to time trying to upon the administration to indicate tocan promise the Senator h ey wereferret out iome of the abusee. In effect, this body and to the American peoplehere they might be potential supporters,therewas n amendment offered yester- precisely where these budget cuts are' tobut we hope none of the present Mem-day which we accepted which Will, pe- be made. bers will support this amendment, notvent the Social 8ecurity Adminstrat1on It is only right that the 8enator fromthat it does not have some merit. We arefrom mailIng social security checks to West Virginia should offer this amend-trying to examine It now to find whatdeid people. ment today, in an effort to point outmerit there may be to this amendment. I am not even certain that If we took precisely where these cuts are to beSo far we have not found any, but therethis amendment we could even change made and to require the administrationmay be some merit that has not beenthat because stopping checks to dead to report back to this body on a datediscovered. people would be a reduction In social se- certain as to precisely how the admln- I think we should go ahead and askcurity benefits. Now those people are not htration intends to make these cuts. the President to outline his program fortomplalning,butIsuggest that we Mr. President, .1 believe some of usfIscal years 1985, 1986, 1987, and 1988,might violate the spirit of this amend- Iave proceeded far enough simply onsince it is probably a foregone conclusionment if we adopt it. I want to be vera' faithinthis administration and onthat he is going to be reelected and wecareful that I understand the full intelit faith in the President's program. We seeshould know his program through 1988.of the amendment of the distInguished now that we have passed a tax cut bill,I do not know why we want to let Presi-Senator from West, Virginia. at the urging of this administration,dent Reagan of! the hook just for- 1983 lam also told that we have had a quick which, over a period of 3 to 4 years, willand 1984 because I assume the Americanconversation with the 0MB Director, reduce Federal revenues by some $750people, for the most part, are hoping thatsince' he was singled out .for special rec- billion. Laid alongside are cuts so farhe is going to te reelected to save theognition He finds the amendment ob- which will aggregate, over the same pe-economy of this country. jectionable. He also indicates that the nod of time, between $130 billion and He is on the right track and, as I haveeffects' 'of this change are qi.lte sgnifl- $150 billion. This does not take intosaid earlier In the debate, it takes a whilecant. We are advised by Mr. Stockman consideration increased outlays that wintorecover from 26 years of Democraticthat the annual review by the President be made for defense and for defensedomination of the Senate and 4 years ofof the 0MB-proposed budget cuts takes readiness, which we all support. Jimmy Carter. We just cannot do it in aplace in December. That means that if The bottom line of. all this is that wematter of 6 or 7 months, but the Presi-0MB would cut a program, the agencies are looking, In the years ahead, intodent has made great strides. I 'cannot re-then . couldappeal that decision to the what appear to be bottomless deficits, call in the 20 years I have been In Con-President. . The Senator from West Virginia isgress, 8 In the House of Representatives Ifwe should adopt this amendment, quite correct in calling upon the ad-and 12½ in the 8enáte, where any neand Heaven help us, 8enator ROBERT C. ministration now to point ou preciselyPresident of either party, I might add, would have us send the 0MB for the American people where thesebecause this is not a partisan debate,budget tuts to Congress without time for cuts are going to be made, Quite frankly,has had such success in reducing Federaltheir appeal. This will give much more I say to my distinguished leader, thespending. I think it is dramatic. I thinkpower to 0MB and its. Director, and may- Senator from We8t Virginia, that domaybe we did not cut enough. If that isbe that is a good idea, He has 'had a not know how this administration canwhat is being suggested on the other side,pretty good track record so far, but I am make cuts of this magnitude withoutI certainly hope that we will have sup-surprised that such a suggestion would,. getting into basic programs that theport for further budget reductions. come from that side of the aisle. Axnerican people have come to rely on Tijis Senator was never under any 11- The effects could be dramatic cuts, for and depend on, such as social security.lusion that we were going to cut spendingexample, in the Appalachian Regtonal If these cuts can be made, without.once and that would solve all of ourCommission, EDA, REA, certain Energy getting into the social security programproblems. Department projects, all without, an ap- or other vital and crucial programs to The President has made it clear thatpeal to the President. I hope that is not the American people, then I think it isthere would be additional budget cuts,the thrust of the amendment. I also point incumbent upon the administration tobut what this amendment proposes toout that the information here requested point them out do now is to take away his fiexibUity, towill be available for fiscal year 1982; The So I wish to associate myself withsay, in effect, that the. President has toappropriations cuts have aIredy. been the remarks made earlier by the 8en-tell us by November, 15 what he mightsent up. The revenue package will be atér from West Virginia and commendwant to do next year or the next year. here before November 15. The entitle- him for introducing this amendment. The economy is going to change. Justment package wUl be sent up next week. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President,since the President's program took effectMaybe just the thought of this amend- I thank my able frtend from Tennessee2 weeks ago interest rates have droppedment hasttrnulated the 0MB DIrector (Mr. SAssR), and I yield the floor. 1/2 points. That is not bad In 2 weeks.to get all this material up here, and may- Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, i reluctantlyAnd if they continue at that rate, we willbe there is no ieed for the amendment must oppose the amendment. I think itbe down to a reasonable rate of Interestto be pursued. was drafted in good spirit during theIn a few weeks or a few months. Beyond that, I think it is fair to say Democratic Caucus during the lunch That is part of the thrust of the Presi-that the amendment would affect the hour. dent's program. Inflation is below 10 per-President's flexibility in fiscal years 1983 Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President,cent for the first time In many months,and 1984. I hope that we know that as will the Senator yield for a correction?and that is because of the leadershipdifferent estimates are made we will find Mr. DOLE. I yield. provided by President Reagan. out if the tuts made now are effective. I Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. No. The say to the 8enator from West Virginia amendment was drafted prior to the I do not have any quarrel with thethat we are in the Chamber today cor- caucus, amendment. On the other hand, I justrecting what may have been a mistake Mr. DOLE. Maybe it was discusseddo not know why It Is being offered—in reconciliation of eliminating the mini- during the caucus, well, I know why it is being offered. Asmum beneflt We are restoring at least Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I informedlong as we have the votes to table it, itmost of that benefit. We may be back is a good amendment. I have asked mywith other fine tuning of some of the my colleagues about this good amend-distinguished colleague from New Mex- ment during the caucus and theywere budget reductions. delighted to hear about it. ico, Senator DoNICz, ,to appear and Despite all this, I think I could accept discuss the amendment. As I understafld,the amendment if we couid add one more I wish to come to a Republican Caucusthe amendment. refers to cuts In socialclause that would indicate that we by to likewise inform my friends there, be-security programs, and I assume that In-this action we are approving any cuts cause I hope that there will be a lot of ' cludesmedicare, medicaid, aid to de-that are sent up. support on the other side of the aisle,aspendent children, or any other program Perhaps we cou'd get that little amend- a matter of fact, almost unanimous sup-that might be under the 8ocIal SeurLtyment adopted, just a 'little technical CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE • October 15, 1981 S 11489 amendment, that by this action there1981 budget and that we had done It aflus the outyear cuts. He told us there is would not be any further votes on anyIn the Reconciliation Mt. go:ng to be an outyear entitlement re- reductions, we would just take what the I hope the record is clear that thatform and he said it would not affect so- president suggested. Then I think In aresolution was clearly the first Install-cial security. He is sendIng those en- spirit of nonpartisanship and fair playmerit and there must be $30 billion uI-titlements up here very soon. Heis not and In an effort to expedite the process,ditlonal reductions n 1983 and $44 bil-even required to do that. we might be willing to accept the amend-lion additional reduot1on In 1984. He is asking us for the next Install- Now, the figures are In the resolution. • inent. ment on the outyear cuts that we have Anybody who thinks it is not, justgo • But beyond that we have a social se- to make. He has told us there is goIng curity bill before us. We are really try-read it. it Is in the President's budget.to have to be some revenue Increases ing to patch up the system and restoreIt IsInthe document that this Senateand he is goIng to send that up. the minimum benefit. We do it respon-passed by an overwhelming margin, The only thIng that is not identified sibly, though, by paying for that restora- The second thing that I have heard Isare some 1983 and 1984 savings he has tion. We have a bipartisan support. iequally amazing. If there is one thingtold us he is going to identify later, and make very clear the vote was 20 to onthat the d1stngu1thed Senator fromI assume he will. the Finance Committee. We are going toKansas and the disttngul&hed Senator Mr. ROBEftT C. BYRD. How much authorize the reallocation of the taxes Infrom Louisiana did on that tax bill onlater? the three different social security funds,the floor, they told us the numbers. They Mr. DOMENICI. I say to my good and we are going to authorize Interfundtold us exactly how much that was infriend, basicafly 1983 has to be up here, borrowing, so we can assure the sametax cuts. as he knows, in January and we have people, and I know the concern of the I just checked and I think that billto go to work in the various committees Senator from West Virginia. By this ac-passed 89 to 11. I cay to my good friend,shortly after that. In fact, we have to tion, though, we have taken a Band-Aidthe sponsor of thia amendment, the m1 produce a resolution, as the Senator approach. We will assure senior citizensnority leader, 89 to 11. We do not haveknows, that follows that very soon there- that at least through next year and hope-enough Members on our side of the aisleafter. fufly 1983 and 1984 they can expect to make that 89 to 11. Everyone voted But, as far as unidentified remaIning receive their checks In the full amount.for that knowing the extent of the taxcuts, he has done more In his second But I also Indicate, so the record willcut. phase to idenUfy them than most Presi- be complete, that we have a responsibility Now, perhaps they did not know thatdents would. He is makIng specific pro- In this Congress regardless of our partythere was goIng to be a deficit In 1982.posals and will identify the remainIng to address the long-term problems In Perhapsthey did not know that unlessreductions very soon. cial security. I know that many of my we made another big round of budget He has already given us $9 billion In colleagues on both sides feel stronglycuts, perhaps they did not knew therethe outyears. He has given us the de- about that. We hope that once we p waa going to be a deficitIn 1983 and 1984.fense numbers of $11 billion additional this legislation we might begin to addressBut, I giarantee you, when you look atreductions. He will soon give us $25 bil- the long-term problems of the social se-the resolution, that Is what it said.lion In outyear entitlements. He will give curity trust funds so that we can takeUnless you have $75 billion In addtiona1us $19 billion In outyear revenue en- positiVe action to make certain we pre-cuts, there will be a deficit. And we votedhancements. AU that will be given to us erye the system for the 36 million bene-89 to 11 tor the tx bill. X do not remem-this year when It affects 1983 and 1984 flciries and that we also preserve theber What the budget resolution passed by,budgets. • system for the 115 mIllion working menbut It was something comparable. In a very real sense, fully three-quar- and women who one day will be bene- Now, Mr. President, if this Presidentters of the Senaor's requests are liter-

• ficiaries. has been negligent In telling us whereally redundant, They are either here or I am not able to support a sweepinghis cuts are going to be as prescribedwill be here soon. amendment of th1 kind. It is unfair toand required by the procedures of this But, in the final analysis, I would say the President. I know of no President Incountry, I would be standing here sup-to the Senate that this President does either party who haa struggled so might-porting you. I say to my good friend.not need any prodding by some extraor- ily to balance the budget, to restore theBut ie has not. dInary resolution to identify cuts In economy. What thIs President wants to There is a law that says when he sendsthe budget. And if this President will not do for this country, its senior citizens, itsus budget cut6—and Itis not now.do It, then I do not know what kInd of veterans, Its farmers, and Iti workingCongrezs Is not to come along In thePresident we could ImagIne that would men and wDmen is to reduce Inflationmiddle of the yea and say, "We are nothave enough fiscal responsibility that and he is on the road to doIng that. He sure what you want to do in 19.83 andthis Institution would not feel that we also wants to reduce high Interest rte,1984. We are not sure that weare goingought to dictate that he produce out and he is on the road to doing that. Toto be able to support you." And perhaayear budgets ahead of schedule. reduce Government regulation and he Isthe minortty is saying that we in the. I think it is fair to say that he has al- on the way to doing that. It would seemSenate do not wish to prevent the Presi-ready proved he 15 willIng to cut budgets

• to me that this approach would not bedent from proposing these reductions.more than any President, ever; not in compatible with the efforts being madeRather, he iiaa no authorfty to cut thethe last 20 years, but ever. now by the 1resident. budget;we in the Senate have to. He already succeeded, with all of our • When everyone has an opportunity toTheief ore, we are entitled to an extraor-help, In cuttIng more In 9 months than speak to this amendment, I will move todinary budget process1 which is whatany President, ever. And now, we would table the amendment at that time andthis is. sit here and say he 'has conducted him- hope the motion to table will be passed. But let me tell you, In addition toself In 'such a way that we are fearful Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, willgivIng us a budget1 In additioü to tell-that thIngs are out of control and we

the Senator yield? • ingus there were cuts yet to be made,ought to take an extraordinary measure Mr. DOLE. I yield the floor, we ought to act on the list he gave us.here In the senate and tell him to come Mr. DOMENICI. Mr.President,iwe do not need axiother list. up front, 2 /3 years ahead of time, and join witti Senator DOLE In opposIng this The President told us, because of cer-tell us in detail how he Intends to finish ameixrnent. tarn economic conditions, because ofthe work. I am amazed. I have heard in thecertain changes in programs, we have The problems are tough In 1983 and Chamber today thfttafter thefirstto go at that second round of cuts early.1984. The deficit is bigger In 1982. We budget resolution and theresideflt'sAnd he has given us a 12-percent across-did our work, but it is bigger anyway. first package of budget cuts, It has sud-the-board proposal and sent every itemIt certainly is not the President's fault. denly dawned on people that there was up to the Appropriations Committees. • I do not think it is significantly our fault. &uppoed to be a second round. Some we do not need to ask him for thatwe effected $35 billion In cuts. we did are saying that the dramatic first andwhich he has already sent. He told usnot like the deficit to be $6G billion, but thought-by-many-to-be-Impossible firstthe defense slowdown and he told us theit is. round of cuts that was to be the onlynumbers, I say to the Senator, $2 bil- But I am absolutely sincere In sayIng roid; the President said it all In hislion In cuts in 1982. And he has giventhat I cannot believe that this U.S. Sen- S 11490 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE October 15, 1981 ate would adopt a resolution basedon On or aboutNovember 3,1982, there willIt is $82 billion. What makes up the $82 this President's performance that wouldbe thegreatest bankruptcy that theworldbillion? That is all we are asking. We say: hasever seen. are not asking the President to tell us, We need an extraordinary action on the That is what sent the shock waves ofbut we are ask!ng the Director of 0MB part of the 8nate to change. the budgetaryfear throughout the elderly communityto tell us. Let him tell us. He is the one process 01Presidentswhich we have acceptedof this country. who plays with these figures. This is for many years, ever since the Budget Act, But then, after all of those pledges,Mr. Stockxnan's budget, not mine.I because this President Is just not responsible'after all of those assurances, after all ofthink he should tell Us what is in the when it comes to budgetary matters. those promises that the old folks had$82 billion. People havethe right to Ihope the distinguished Senator fromnothing to be concerned about, no cutsknow. Kansas prevails. 'I hope that those whoin social security, what did the adminis- I should think that all Senators who are truly concerned about cutting will•tration do? In May of this year, theyfeel that under this system of Govern- not get caught up in this kind of a res-sent up a package to the Hill of cuts inment the American people have a right olution that will have little or no effect.social security amounting to $88 bil-to know what is In the unidentified cuts,

• It is what we are willing to vote on,lion over a 6-year period; $88 billion. because the American people are going I gay to Senator DOLE, by way of cuts What were some of those cuts thatto be affected, would want to support that is going to have an effect on 1983were being proposed? One was that any-this kind of amendment. and 1984, not the passing of another res-one who elected to retire at age 62 would I yield the floor. olution asking this President, tremen-take a 40-percent cut in his social secu- Mr. DOLE addressed the Chair. dous as he is In fiscal restraint, to tell usrity payment. In other words, instead of The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen.. what we have not a.ked any other Presi-receiving 80 percent of what he wouldator from Kansas. dent to do. ordinarily receive if he waited until 65 Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I am moved I yield the floor. to retire, he would only get 55 percent,by the rhetoric but not by the merits of Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President,this cut combined with other cuts pro-this amendment. I am not moved enough I have listened with great interest tQ thenosed by the administration would meanby the rhetoric to support it. very, eloquent statements that have beena 40-percent cut immediately. I think it is a good case. It will look made by Mr. DOLE and Mr. DoNICI. Well, we all know what happened ingood in all the kits they send out to the Each of theni is performing his duty asthat case. Mr. DOLE offered an amend-Democratic precinct people and others a very faithful and loyal and dedicatedment, that we on this side of the aislein the country who may be looking for Senator. I can understand how Mr. DOLEjoined in supporting. That vote was bi-ways to chip away at the President. would defend the measure before thepartisan, after my friends on the other Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Will the Sen- Senate against amendments. side had voted down an amendment thatator yield? But, the old song "Almost Persuaded"Mr. MOYNIHAN and I joined in offering Mr. DOLE. I will be happy to yield. does not apply here and now. My ques-to do the same thing, by a 1-vote margin. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. The Senator tion still has not been answered. Where But we all joined together in a bipar-brought up an interesting point that per- are the unidentified cuts coming from? tisan way to send a message out to thehaps ought to be gone into a little bit. The distinguished Senator from Newpeople in the elderly community thatThere are all of these kits we have re- Mexico.. said: How can we expect to askthat proposal by the President was notceived in West Virginia signed by Ronald the President, 2 /2yearsahead of time, togoing to be supported In this Congress.Reagan, asking for money, "How about tell us in detail how he is going to cut I think the vote was about 94 to 0, ormore money so we can defeat additional the budget? - some such. Senators, additional House Members?" I Asa matter of fact, we are asking Mr. Then there was the proposal to cut outsuppose we can take a lesson from some Stockman to do this—the 0MBwhIzkid.the social security minimum payment.of those kits. We are asking him not the President—toFive times in this Senate there was an Mr. DOLE. That is possible. tell us. amendment offered to destroy the social Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. We have not How can he arrive at a figure of $82security minimum payment. Five timesbeen sucôessful In raising money. billion In fiscal year 1984 if he does notthat amendment was defeated with the Mr. DOLE. The Senator from Kansas know the components of that $82 billionsupport of the 0MB on virtually a partydoes not know anything about that. I figure? He must already know. line vote, five times. But then the heatsent out some a couple of years ago but And U the administration can send usin the kitchen began to get a little toonobody sent anything back. I got the up here, 2 years ahead of time; a so-intense and we heard, to our pleasantmessage that my candidacy was not go- called balanced budget which shows thesurprise, the President of the Uniteding anywhere. My kits did not work. figure in it of $82 billion in unidentifiedStates address the, Nation by television In any event, I think the President has cuts, then it seems to me that it is notto say that that would be restored. done an outstanding job. I suuest it has asking too much of the administration not been a perfect experience but it has So we have heard these promises andbeen a new experience. to requfre it to present the details now asall of these assurances to the effect that to what makes up the $82 billion in un-social security will not be touched, the We are 2 weeks into the President's identified cuta. old folks can just rest assured aboutprogram now and I would hope we would We are not asking the administrationthat. "Go on to bed. Go to sleep. Do notgive him some opportunity to respond to to send up the cuts now. We are simply -theAmerican people. We can stand here, asking for information now as to whatwasteany time worryingaboutit.and we do a lot 'of that, and talk about There will not 'be any cuts in your pay-the plight of senior citizens, veterans, or is Included in the "unidentified" cuts.ments." Then, bingo, 2 days later some- Now, I think we also have the right tnone at the White House said there willfarmers. But we also have a responsibil- know whether or not there is includedbe a cut in the COLA paythents or a de-ity to worry about Interest rates, budget in those unidentified cuts any cuts inso-lay in the COLA payments. deficits, inflation, and Federal regula- cial security. We all know the trackrec- tions, with the Government too much ord of the administration on that sub- How can we be assured that in theseIn our daily lives. That is where the Pres- ject. It was said during the campaignfigures, $82 billion in fiscal year 1984 inident has shed some fresh air axid new and after the campaign wasover andunidentified cuts, and $51.4 billion hilight. after the inauguration that there would1983 in unidentified cuts there will not Notwithstanding that, I, and I know not be any cuts In social security. The'be further cuts in social security? Whatthe majority leader, would like to com- is wrong with telling us. What is wrong old folks could just sit back in theirwith letting the American people knowplete this bill today. Therefore, I will easy chafrs and watch television. Theywhat is under the lid of that Pandora'smove to table the amendment of the could just forget' any cuts. No problemSbox? That is all we are asking. We wantdistinguished Senator from West Vir- nothing to be afraid of. The Presidentto know now. Let the American peopleginia and ask for the yeas and nays. said that those people up thereon the The PRESmING OFFICER. Is there Hill are being cynically demogoglc_..theyknow now. We should know what makesa sufficient seond? There is a sufficient are creating fear among the Old folks. up the unidentified cuts amounting to $82billion. The administration mustsecond. ' But it was Mz. Stockinan whosaidknow. How can they put down $82 bil- Theyeas and nays were ordered. that: lion? Why not $80 bil1iox or $79 billion?. Mr. DOLE. As I understand It, the Sen- October 15, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 11491' ator from Nebraska wanted to speak. I intend to support the amendmentport of the amendment of the Senator Perhaps I cah withhold my motion. not because I am critical of what thefrom West Virginia. Mr. STENNIS. I would like to be rec-President of the United States is trying I think my colleague from Nebraska ognized for 1 minute, if I. may. to do. Indeed, many of my colleagues onis absolutely right: If we are going to The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-the other side of the aisle know that thisget interest rates down, indeed, If we are ator from Nebraska is recognized for 1Senator has voted in support of thegoing to bring down the inflation rate, minute. President's programs much more frequ-we must break the inflationary psychol- Mr. EXON. May I inquire of the Chairently than I have opposed them. ogy In this country. More Important where the Chair got the information that I think what we are trying to get atthan perhaps any other factor is the the Senator from Nebraska wanted 1with the amendment offered by the Sen-expectation of the American people about minute? I think the Senator from Mis-ator from West Virginia is simply towhat will happen to the inflation rate. sissippi wanted 1 mInute. I did not re-recognize that we are indeed in great The single most important indicator to quest 1 minute. I request more than that.difficulty these days with our economy,the American people of what will happen The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does theand I believe itis important that wein the future is the size of the Federal Senator withdraw the motion to table?start charting our course for the daysdeficit. If we are not able to reach a bal- Mr. DOLE. I withdraw the motion. ahead, longer than what is simply re-anced budget, by 1984, it will be a dev- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withoutquired by law. astating blow to the psychology of the objection, it is so ordered. I know that in some areas cuts havepeople in this country in terms of their Mr. STENNIS addressed the Chair. been made in the outyears, recommendedexpectations about the future direction The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-by the administration. But we say, "Ifof our economy. We have no choice, Mr. ator from Mississippi. you have identified some of the cuts, whyPresident. We simply must move to bal- Mr. STENNIS. Mr. President, I willcan you not identify all of the cuts?ance the budget and reduce the deficits not detain the Senate. I am sure thisWhat are these unidentified cuts?" as soon as possible. matter is well understood. But In defer- I say, Mr. President, we are in some Mr. President, I think it is incumbent ence to all and based on our experiencedifficulty today because the administra-on the administration to come forward here thIs year. it seems to me that wetion and those associated with it have de-now with the recommended areas where are certainly entitled to advance noticescribed the present situation, even whenfurtherreductionsandexpenditures and what we get now, identification ofit was not as bad as many of us thinkshould occur. I think it would b an these reductions that are so importantit is today, as an economic Dunklrk, asImportant step In restoring the confi- to the Nation as a whole, to those di-the Federal budget hemorrhaging. dence of our people and In reducing the rectly affected, and also to us. We are If that is true, and to a degree thoseexpectation that deficits will continue. the ones who have to make the finalstatements are true, then I think that allRecent polls have indicated that the peo- judgments the best we can, based on thewe are asking of the President in thisple expect large deficits to continue, that facts, the relative merits of requests forcase is to work constructively with us,the people are skeptical about the prom- reduction in view of the total amountnot only now but in the outyears to makeise of the administration to balance the of the programs, and in view of all thesure that we correct our course, hopefullybudget by 1984. programs puttogetheras measuredon a permanent basis. Therefore, they spend now, instead of against the probable income. I know that we have done many thingssaving and waiting until the items which By the way, a while ago, a formerlyIn this body. We certainly changed mostthey are now buying are really needed. active Member of this body who has notof the usual rules of the Senate when weThis continues to fuel the inflationary been here for several years came intoused the reconciliation process in thecycle in this country. the cloak room, stopping to say hello.manner that we did, basically to cut Mr. President, I think the amendment I told him of the work of the Senatordown what some of us felt were unneces-of the Senators from West Virginia is from Kansas and the work of the Sena-sary expenditures of the Federal Govern-timely. I think it is important. I urge my tor from New Mexico this year in work..ment to the tune of about $35 billion. colleagues to adopt it. ing on these budget resolutions, reduc- We used the reconciliation process for I yield the floor, Mr. President. tions, and everything else, and present-thatpurpose. We attempted, on an Mr. CANNON. Mr. President, as a co- ing them in such a fine way and that weamendment offered by the Senator fromsponsor, I would like to express my un- had made some headway. Colorado (Mr. ARMsTRoNG) that I wouldqualified support for the amendment be- That underscores, however, the burdenwant a very few on this side of the aisleing offered by the distinguished Senator that we have before us. to support, to take the usual proceduresfrom West Virginia, requiring the ad- I have learned more thIs year than Ito give the President nearly total im-ministration to identify programs that have ever known about the details, aboutpoundment authority with the right tomake up "future savings" in the admin- the operations, of a great many of theseveto it in this body. istration's budget through fiscal year programs and how they work at the What we are talking about, Mr. Presi- 1984. ground level because I went out theredent, is the fact that there has been a Millions of older Americans are en- and visited and learned. great• deal made out of the fact that thetitled to know if their social security In this way, I feel the need, and I be-success of the President's economic re-benefits are the hidden victim of $82 bil- lieve it is shared by most of us, to getcovery program is based upon. expecta-lion in unidentified cuts In the budgetary more advance information than whattions, itis based upon.the confidence thatand economic assumptions of the ad- we get now. the American people have in the pro-ministration. The unidentified cuts sug- In deference to time, I know that othergram. gested by the Office of Management and Senators wish to speak, I will not elab- All that I am saying, Mr. President, isBudget totaled $44 billion in July, but orate further. I yield the floor. that if we are going to get the confidence,have now exploded to $82 billiOn. Mr. EXON addressed the Chair. if we are going to have those expecta- The signs ominously suggest that this The PRESIDING OFFICER. Thetions be meaningful with regard to the$82 billion figure Is the distant—but dis- Senator from Nebraska. reduction of the ruinous interest ratestinct—call of yet another assault upon Mr. EXON. Mr. President, the Senatorwe are facing now; we have to take a stepthe Incomes of senior citizens. There is from Nebraska rises in support of the'toward charting our course farther downsupport for my fears, based, in part, amendment offered by my colleague fromthe road. upon testimony of 0MB Director David West Virginia. I say, Mr, President, it seems to meStockthan before the House Budget Com- I would think that those who cannotthat the amendment offered by the Sen-mittee on October 1. At that time, Mr. support this, and I suspect they haveator from West Virginia is indeed a con-Stocknian Indicated that basicsocial good reasons for not supporting it, thosestructive one, and I support it. security retirement benefits should not who find they cannot support this be- I yield the floor, Mr. President. be immune in future rounds of budget cause it is an attack on the President Mr. BOREN. Mr. President, I shall notcuts. The unidentified cuts of the admin- of the United States or any of his ap-prolong the discussion; I know the timeistration's economic assumptions for the pointees, seem to be somewhat off base,is growing short. I do want to add mynext 3 fiscal years would suggest that so- in my mind. -voice to those who have spoken in sup-cial security benefits may 'well be In- S 11492 CJNGRiSSIONAL RECORD—SENATE -• October15, 1981 cluded in those mystery dollars addingIs that the administration start talkingwe have order? The majority leader Is

. up to $82 billion. straight in the American people andspeaking. In a letter to my Nevada constituentsstart talking uow. Mr. BAKER. Mr President, I under- on October 1, I had predictedi what we lfr. OL1ll. Ifr. President, as I under-stand there Is another vote ordered now may well be seeing today with these unstand it, there are no other requests toon the Pressler amendment. identified cuts. In that coosmunlcatinu,speaLf I wish to make it a 10-minute rolicall, I stated: ll&r. 1dOYIThAN. The SenatorIs If there is no objection to that. What concerns me . hithat there correct. Mr. President, I ask uiianlmous con- likelihood after the 1982 elections that the llr. 3Oi.E. leased on my previous state-sent that the next vote on the Pressler Administration will launch another assaultments, X move to lay the amendment onamendment be a 10-minute roilcall vote. on Social Security beneftts. The A 1strthe table. X ash for the yeas and nays. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, tion's call for a task force to rscomrnasl reserving the right to object, will the solution to these problems by ananry, 195ZJ The PSmO OFFICER. Is there a comes Suspiciously right ulter the ilovunbor,suicient second? There Is a sufficientChair secure order In the Senate so that 1982,elections when the Administrationsecond Senators may hear the request? hopes to Increase its number of esate in ©on' The yeas and nays were ordered. The PRESIDING OFFICER. May we gross. Above all, while I went to help The REG OFFICER. The ques-have order in the Senate? President balance the budget. I em diemayedtion he on agreeing to the motion to lay Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, by this evident politicization of the Socialthe asleudment of the Senator from Westwill the majority leader restate the Security issue. Virginia on the table. The yeas and naysrequest? Now Is the opportunity for the adniinhave been ordered. The clerk will call the Mr. BAKER. Yes. Istratton to clarify these cuts for theroil. Mr. President, I thank the Chair and American public. Those older teaerlcans The assistant legislative clerk calledI thank the minority leader. living on social security today and thosethe rolL £MLNDMINT No. 550 nearing retirement are entitled to ieecw, hfr, ilTEVil, I announce that the Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- as a matter of decency and openness inSenator from Idaho (Mr. McCLuss), thesent that the vote on the Pressler amend- Government, whether they eon expectator from Alaska (Mr. MURKOVJSKI),ment which Is about to occur be 10 mlii- continuing attacks upon their livelihoods,and theSenator from Idaho(Mr.utes instead of 15 xplnutes. They are entitled to know'iZ they ©Ye11vIS) are necessarily absent. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without count on the Federal Government t© keep further announce that, If present andobjection, It is so ordered. Its part of the bargain; to honor the con'voting, the Senator from Idaho (Mr. (The name of Mr. DeCoxcnn was tract between workers and the retiredviurn) would vote "yea." added as a cosponsor of the amend- and the social security SYStSIfl. The PR,ESED]NO OFFICER. Are therement.) This information would also be reveai'any other Senators In the Chamber wish- Mr. DoLE. Mr. President, I yield to hg and critical for veterans, students,ing to vote? the distinguished Senator from South the poor, teachers, labor, minorities, and The result was announced—yeas 50,Dakota to make a technical correction many other segments of our society whonays asfollows: In his amendment before the vote. could be affected by these cute, 5o1lcelK Vote No. 318 Leg.J Mr. PRESSLER. Mr. President, my Should this amendment be tabled or amendment as printed In the RECORD defeated, there Is little interpretationAbdns OO2InB Packwood contains an error. The word "that" In that can be made, other than that the GoamiSy Percy the finalline should be "the." The rlnatrong Retch Preler amendment Is correct In the printed raid on social security will continue for Quayle years to come. Eorchwit3 Rewkins Both amendment. I urge my colleagues on both sides of Rey3awa Budman I ask unanimous consent that the cochran Rethz Schmitt change be made. the aisle to unite in their support for this R2 8lmpn Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, will important amendment. Dmato mmp the Senator use his microphone? We are • Mr. LEVIN, Mr. Presidents l would likenanfortli ,Yepsen 8td ssebeum Stevena not able to hear him. to give my strong support to the amen& Resten Thurmond Mr. PRES8LER Mr. President, my ment offered by the distinguished mIncr Le amendment as printed in the REcoeD ity leader, Senator Byes of West Vlr Luger Wallop ginia, to require the Director of the Of 11ets Wn contains an error. The word "that" In cern MattIngly Weicker the finalline should be "the". The fice of Management and Budget to idenGoldwater Mckbes amendment Is correct In the printed thy by November 15 the program cute • and revenue Increases which tim admin' RAYS—47 amendment. '°° liagleton Melcher I ask unanimous consent that this Istratton will be seeking in order to Eron Metsenbaunl change be made. achieve its goal of a balanced budget inlildan Pord Mitchell The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without fiscal year 1984. As of now, the adminis.' Boron Glenn MOylnthaai medley Nunn objection, it is so ordered. tration still needs to Identify about 82 Bumpers ResIn Peil The question Is on agreeing to the billion In future savings for fiscal yearBIch Roflingo Proxmlre amendment of the Senator from South 1982, fiscal year 1983, and fiscal yearByrd. Nuddilestca Po? 1984. Rarry 5., Jr.Inouye Bandoiph Dakota. Byrd. Robert C. Jackson magic On this question, the yeas and nays Many Americans are concerned thatcannon Jobnaton have been ordered, and the clerk will some of these cuts will come out of the Chflec Sasser 8teona call the roll. checks of social security recipients, Ef theDConcIi Levin Tsonas The assistant legislative clerk called administration's track record on otherDixon Long Williams the roll. elements of the social safety net is anyDodd letsunega Zoflnsky Mr. STEVENS: I announce that the indication, these concerns are justifl& - ROT VOTING—S Senator from Indiana (Mr. LUGAR), the Whatwe can do here today by supporting Rurbo Symans Senator from Idaho (Mr. McCLURe), the this amendment is either to alleviate -Senator from Alaska (Mr. MIIRK0WSKI), these concerns for good or to bring them lb the motion to lay on the table wasand theSenator from Idaho(Mr. to liglt now and prevent the adm1nistro'8.82eed to. Sms) are necessarily absent. tion from sandbagging the elderly some. Mr. DOLE and Mr. BAKER addressed I fuither announce that, if present time in the future. the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-and voting, the Senator from Idaho (Mr. The administration may soy that it SYMMs) would vote "yea. needs more time to formulate the cuts.ator from Kansas is recognized. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. But how is it consistent for the adminis Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, will theKAS5EBATm!). Are there any Senators in tratton to pledge with certainty that theSenator yield to me for a moment? the Chamber wishing to vote who have budget will be balanced bet wilt when Mr. DOLE. I yield to the distinguishednot done so? It comes to describing how it exactly Inmajority leader. The result was announced—yeas 96, tends to do It, All this amendment asks Mr. ilfOYNDIAN. Mr. President, maynays 0, as follows: October 15, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— SENATE 811493 Thissame report shows, Madam Pres-1ow1ng", 11 marketab'e fnteres beaithg tUOl1eU Vote No. 814 Leg.1 obligations which are not obligations of the TEAS—96 ident, that the social security trust fundsUnited States but whlch ae guaranteed asS Pod Mflchell In fiscal year 1981 earned only. 8.3 per-to both principal and Intere6t by the Uiited AndrewS Garn Moy]Than cent on its $47 billion portfolio. We allStates, and all marketable federally spon- Armstrong Glenn Nickles know that money market funds, whichsoredagencyinterest-bearingobligatlona. Baker Goldwater Nunn were Invested exclusively In governmentthat are designated In the 1&wa authorlzthg BaucuB Gorton Packwood Bentsen Oms1ey Pefl securities, earned 13.5 percent Or more.their Issuance M lawful Investments for fi- Bide Hart Percy A mathematical calculation shows that,duciary and trust funds unde; the control - Boren . Batch Pres1er if the social security trust funds, hadand authority of the United 8tates or any Bcchwit2 BatUeld Proxinire omcerof th, United 8tates" Bd1ey Hawklna Pryor done as well, $2 billion or 60 percent of (3) by striking out "which are not due, or Bumpem Hayakawa Quaye the calendar year 1980 social securitycallable until after thi expiration of four Burdick Beflin Randolph deficit would not have occurred. years from the end of auth calendar month". Byrd, Heinz Riegle HaiTy F., Jr.Belina Roth Thblow rate of returns on these trust (b) SectIon 1817(c) ofauthActtaamen4ed Byrd, RobertO.Boulngs Rudman funds was not by accident. It was byas follows: Cannon Budcflesto* SaTbancs design. The funds are managed by the (1) by striking out the flEt sentence d Chafee HumphreY Sasser Treasury Department, and it appearsinerting In lieu thereof the following: "It Chile8 Iuoue Schmitt shall be the duty of the BoaM of Tru3teeB Cochran Jackson St2np€on that. Instead of tryIng to maximize theto invest such portion of the Truat Fuiid Cohen Jepsen Specter return on the social security trust funds.aa Is not, in it judgment, required to meet cantOn John8ton Stafford they have acted In the interest of the DAmato Kaaaebaum StezmlS current Withdraw$1a, and such Investmen Danforth Ksten Stevens Treasury to try to mIriim1ze the returnshall be made so 88 to secure the tTh.Imum' DeConcini Kennedy Thurinond and thus reduce the interest on the na-poosible Interest yield. commenaurste with Dent L8xalt Tower tional debt. the safety of the Trust Funds."; Dixon Leahy These trust funds are dedicated for (2) by striking out "which are not due or Dodd Levin WaflopT callable until alter the expiration of 4 yesis Dole Long warner the payment of social security benefits,from the end of auch calendar month'. Domenict Mathias Weicker and those who hold and Invest them act (c) Section 1841(c) of auth Actisainended Durenberger Matsunaga n a fiduciary re]atlonMiip. As such, it is Eagleton MMtingy Zorinsky 88 follows: Eaat )&elcher essential,In my judgment, that the (1) by striking out the flr6t, aentefloe and Exon Metzenbaum funds be Invested so as to earn the max!-inserting. in lieu thereof e foUowbg: "It mum returnpossiblecommensurateshaUbe 'the duty,of theBOaxd oXTrate5 NOT VOTXNG—4 with the safety ot the funds. My amend-toinvestauch portion of the Tru*t Punde Lugar Murkowskt Symms ment would charge the trustees of theasIa not,In its judgn1efl r.qlitredto, meet Mcclure trust funds with the duty to maximizecurrent withdrawals, and such, Inveataflenta So Mr. PRESSLER'S amendment (No. shall be'made so aa to secure the maximum the return on the funds to the greatestpossible interest yield, commeneurte with 585) was agreed to. extent commensurate with safety. Frthe safety of the Trust Punde."; Mr. MOYNIHAN. Madam President,too much of these tust funds have been (2) by inserting Immediately tter Uthen I move to reconsider the vote by whichInvested n so-called Special Issues of theforming a part of the public debt" the fol- the amendment was agreed to. Treasury Department. In fiscal yearlowing:",allmarketable Interest besrln Mr. DOLE. I move to lay that motion1980, most of these special Issues carriedobligations wtlich are not obUg&tion oX the an Interest rate of 7 percent. Only $6.3United States but which are guarafltM4 U on the table. to both princIpa1 nd Interest by the Vnlted The motion to lay on the table wasbillion of the special Issues carried a re-States, and, all marketable federally epon- agreed to. turn In the 9 percent range. soredagencyinterest-bearingobligations Mr. DOLE. Madam President.IfI I sincerely believe that it Is manda-that are designated in the laws authoziEtng tory that the trustees of the social secu-.theirissuance a lawful tivestment for could just take 30 seconds, I think werity trust funds act as prudent business-fiduciary and trust funds undez the con- could expedite this. We want to move asmen and make every effort to Increasetrol and authority of the United 8tatea or quickly as we can. The Senator fromthe return on the social security trustany omcer of the United 8tates". Mississippi and the Senator from Cali-funds. (3) by strikIng out "whc1i are not due or fornia wanted to state a few words. We callable until after the expiratlop of 4 years are going to accept three amendments Madam President, as I said, it wouldfrom the end of such calendar month". and have final passage, as far as I know,have been $2 billion, according to my unless there are other amendments. research, In favor of the social security Mr. DOLE. Will the Senator yield? fund If it had been loaned for the last Mr. STENNIS. Yes, I yield. INTEREST ON SOCIAL 8ECJBITY FUNDS year as the amendment would provide. Mr. DOLE. I can assure the Senator Mr. STENNIS. Madam President, IStill, it is wortby of hearIngs. from MississIppi that there will be hear- thank the Senator from Kansas. Yesterday Senator PROXMTRE offered aIngs. I know the Senator has had a long-' Madam President, I have an amend-similar amendment. We were working onstandIng interest In this and we want to ment at the desk. It fs an amendment ofit without each other's knowledge. As Itry to accommodate that Interest. We some consequence relating to the fundsunderstand it, the chairman of the com-have assured Senator PROXMIR2 and we that are In the Social Security Fund make that same pzomIae to the 8enator which sometimes amounts to several bil-mittee said then that he thought it was Mr. STENNIS. I thank the Senator lion dollars being put out at interest.worthy of hearings and there would bevery much. Senator PROXMIRE and I are The provision of the amendment is thathearings. both Interested. We Just happened not it shall be put out at the usual market I will not offer my amendment, underto confer with each other about It. rate of Interest rather than a preferencethose circumstances, Madam President, Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I yield rate. but I will ask unanimous consent thatto the distInguished Senator from Call- Madam President,the amendmentit be printed in the RECORD. fornia. would require that all of the trust funds There being no objection, the amend- Mr. HAYAKAWA. I thank the d1stn- of the social security funds be investedment was ordered to be printed In theguished Senator from ICansas. in such Investments as shall secure theRECORD, as follows: Madam President, am concerned maximum possible interest yield com- At the end of thebill,insertthefollowing: SEC. 2.(a)Section 201(d) of the Socialabout the Fthance Committee's amend- ruensurate with the safety of the trustSecurity Act is amended as follows: ment to restore the minimum socIal se- funds. (1) by striking out the fir8t sentence andcurity benefit and to provide a stop-gap The reasonforthisamendment,inserting In lieu thereofthefollowing: "Itresolution 'to the funding crisis con- Madam President, Is that the• recordshall be the duty of the Board of TrusteesfrontIng the social security system. This shows that, on June 30, 1980, there wasto invest such portion of the Trust Funds aslegislationis not the proposal I had an aggregate total of $46845 billion Ini8 not, in its judgment required to meet cur- rent wlthdrawala, and such investments shallhoped the Finance Committee would the three social security trust funds—be made so as to secure the maximum possi-port, knowIng the serious cfrcumstances $23.56 billion for old-age ad survivorsble interest yields, commensurate with theof the system's financIng. It is, in fact. thsurance; $7.68 billion or disabilitysafety if the Trust Funct."; exactly what I hoped would not hppn: 1nsurance; and $14.6 billion for health (2) by inserting Immediately after "thenA return to the busInesa-as-uaui. short- Insurance, forming a part of the publio debt" the fol-sighted response to a long-term ci11& S 11494 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD SENATE 'October 15,. 1981 amextremely disappointed that( a sub-ployérs have argued that the committeedesk and ask for Its' Immediate conSIder. stantive bipartisan solution could not beprovision penalizes certain firms andation. - achieved. What we do have Is a tempo-falls to exact the social security taxes as ThePRESIDING OCER. The rary answer to social security's short-intended from others. amendment will be stated. term financing needs. It would be comparatively easy for the The legislative clerk read as follows: The provision restoring the minimumlarger employers with more sophisticated The Senator from New York (Mr. MoTH!- social security benefit comes less than 2accounting systems for handling payroll HAN)proposes an unprlnted amendment months after the Congress resolved toand related administrative matters tonumbered 485. . eliminate it. The minimum social secu-take advantage of the loophole. Thereby, Mr.MOYNIHAN. I ask inianlm i'lty benefit, as I understand it, Is not anthey would avoid paying the tax andconsent that furth5r reading of the earned benefit. It Is a minimum level ofproviding the added coverage for theiramendment be dispensed with. benefits paid to those who are entitled toemployees. By contrast, smaller employ- The PRESIDING OFFICER, Without social security, according to the formulaers, and those with less elaborate ac-objectlon ft Is so ordered. used to calculate every other recipient'scounting systems might not find it 'at all. The amendment Is as follows:• / benefits, at a level of less than $122. Thefeasible to take advantage of .the loop- Atthe end of the bill aug the fOllOwing minimum benefit Is the amount over and'hole. For them the avoidance of the taxnew section: above the benefits earned by the recipi-through revised bookkeeping methods I,I- BZCV*ftT CD5 ent to make a total of $122. would be mode difficult and costly. Baa. ,(a) Section205(c),L2) of the Social In the Omnibus Reconciliation Act of This amendment will perfect the óper-Security Act Is ainended by adding at tbe 1981, the provision eliminating the mini-ation of the provision and make Its ad-end thereof the following new subparagraph: mum benefit did not take aWay' earnedministration less burdensome to bus!- "(D) The Secretary shall issue a aooIl se- benefits. just those added on to raise theness. The amendment applies the socialcurity card to each Individual at the time security tax to all employer-financedof the Issuance of a social security account total; so recipients would not be deprived number to such Individual.,. The social, so-' of earned benefits if the provision weresick pay—in the first S months—exceptcurity card shall be made of banknote paper, allowed to take effect. I recognize, how-that paid as insurance. and (to the maximum extent practicable)' ever, that it is difficult to reduce bene- I urge my colleagues to accept thisshall be a card which cannot be counter- fits that individuals on fixed incomes re-amendment. feited.". ceive, and causes a hardship to them. Madam President, I know of no objec- (b) The amendment made by this section, I am pleased that the Finance Commit-tion to the amendment. It has beenshall apply with respect to ll new 'end re- tee chose not to continue the minimumcleared on both sides. placement social security cards issued more Mr. MOYNIBAN. Madam President,than 198 days after the date of the enact- benefit for future retirees, but merely ment of this Act, proposes to restore the minimum benefitwe very much support the amendment, (c) Within 90 days after the date of the for current recipients. That will insure The PRESIDING OFFICER, Theenactment of this Act the Secretary of that current beneficiaries do not haveamendment will be stated. Health and Human Servicei shall report to their benefits reduced, while future bene- The legislative clerk read as follows:the Congress on his plans for implementing ficiaries will receive only those benefits The Senator from Kansas (MI. DOLs) pro-the amendment made by this section, which are earned. poses anunprinted amendment numbered Mr. MOYNIHAN. Madam President, The stop-gap measure to temporarily485. this Is a matter the Senate has been get save the social security system—inter- Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I askting around to doing for some time; a fund borrowing—is not the panacea thatunanimous consent that further readingsmall but important matter, that at the some would argue. It will do little moreof the amendment be dispensed with. time of Issuance of the social security than transfer the burden of retirement The PRESIDING OmCER. Withoutaccount number, the Secretary shaU benefits onto medicare and disability. In-objection, it Is so ordered Issue. a social security card to each In- stead of coping with one trust fund going The amendment Is as follows: dividual that will be made of bank note bankrupt, we will have to deal with all On page 10 of the Committee amendment,paper and, to the maximum extent poe- three being depleted. beginning on line 28, strIke out "(but notsihie, shall be a card Which cannot be As I said earler, I would prefer a moreincluding any such payment that'ie made di-counterfeited. farsighted approach to restoring socialrectly to such employee from the regular Madam President, I will- not delay the security to a sound financial base. Thewage or salary account of 8uCh employer)" appointment of a task' force to look into,and insert in lieu thereof "(but including,Senate at this point, but I would lIke'to and make recommendations on, a longin the case of payments made to an employeeread one paragraph form a recent Gen- or any of his dependents, only (A) paymentseral Accounting Office study on this sub- term solution to this crisis Is a consola-made by an insurance company, other thanject. The GAO stated that: "While no tion, at least. I fear, however, that whatpayments(i)by an insurance companyreliable statistics are available on the we need are fewer task forces and morewhich 18owned,to a sub8tantial extent, byextent of abuse of misuse of social secu- action. the employer, and (ii) hr an insurance com-rity numbers and cards, crimes based on I have said that I am disappointed Inpany under an administrative-services-onlyfalse identification which frequently in- this legislation. Nevertheless, I will sup-contract which provides for 8uch company todude false or Illegitimate social security port It. I want to see a healthy social se-be reimbursed only for the sickness or acci- curity system as much as any one, anddent disability payments actually paid plusnumbers are estimated to cost the tax- the accompanying administrative expensespayers more than $15 billion annually." certainly do not wish to be viewed as anand profit, and (B) payments which are re- There are some .10 to 13 million cards opponent of a congressional effort to savequired by a workmen's compensation or tem-Issued each year. About 5 to 8 million are the system. However, I will support thisporary-disability insurance law) ". new cards and about 4 to 7 mIllion are legislation reluctantly. I say reluctantly replacements. because I believe we can, and should, do ThePRESIDING OFFICER, The ques- The Issuance of a bank 'note card will better. tion Is on agreeing to the amendment. cause a slight additional expense, but it Mr. DOLE addressed the Chair. The amendment (UP No. 485) was agreed to. will avoid, in many cases, the replace- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen- Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I movements, which are about half of those now ator from Kansas. to reconsider the vote by which theIsSued. ' -. VP AMENDMENTNO.485 amendment was agreed to. Ibelieve this to be a wise and prudent Mr.DOLE. Madam President, I send Mr. MOYNIHAN. I move to lay thatmeasure. a technical amendment to the desk and,motion on the table. I ask unanimous consent that an arti- while It Is at the desk,' I will explain it. The motion to lay on the table wascle on this matteras it appeared in. the It has been cleared with Senator LONGagreed to. Schenectady Gazette dated September 8, and others. UPAMENDMENTNO. 488 1981, be printed in the Rzcoan' at this' Madam President, it has been brought(Purpose: To require counterfeitproofsociaipoint. to our attention that there Is an unin- Security cards) There being no objection, the article tended loophole in the committee pro- Mr. MOYNIHAN. Madam President, Iwas ordered to be printed .in the RECORD. vision dealing with sick pay. Some em-send an unprinted amendment to theas follows: October 15, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE Sfl495 OG Socw ScuRrrY CARDS C*vsE roa In a much-publicized case in 1980, fivederstandhe has cleared this amendment, CONCERN persons—Including a former policeman, aas has Senator STAFFORD. court stenographer and a Social Security Mr. BENTSEN. I will say to the distin.. • (By Oegory Oordon) employee—were tharged with running aguished chairman that is correct. It is a WASHINGTON—SocialSecur1ty carda areclandestinewaxeilouaeoperationinLos commonly counterfeited or stolen for use byAngeles, where they printed 77,000 counter-simple extension of the Highway Trust illegal aliens and others to get jobs and col-feit BSA application forms. Fund. After conferring with Senator lect billions of dollars In undue benefits. With the help of the Social Security Ad-LONG and Senator RANDOLPH, I know of Government probers say corrupt federalministration employee the forms were fillectno objection. employees and private citizens, such as travelwith the names of illegal aliens and sent di- agents, are peddling the cards for up to $200rectly to the agency's cenra1 data base for Mr. MOYNIHAN. Will th Senator to thousands of undocumented aliens, whoprocessing, bypassing the district office. from Texas add me as a cosponsor? usually use them to get jobs. Three of the five were convicted in 1980. Mr. BENTSEN. Madam President, I Illegal8 also are known to be fraudulentlyTwo jumpect bail. ask unanimous consent that the Senator collecting unemployment and welfare checks 'It goes with the line of work," said Johnfrom New York be added as a cosponsor, and even food stamps and retirement bene-Schwartz. a Social Security Administration flt8. official. "They (travel agents) know who the The PRESIDING OICER. Without In addition, U.S. citizens are capitalizingcustomers are. The people who neect to getobjection, it is so ordered. on loose distribution of the cards by some-Social Security cards are aliens." The amendment will be stated. times collecting unemployment checks with In New York, prosecutors won convictions The legislative clerk read as follows: one card while holding a job under a setarateearlier this year against two men who claim- Social Security number. Sources say one re'ed to be prieste and counterfeited, immigra- The Senator from Kansas (Mr. DOLE), foi cent spot theck Bhowed three million person8tion documents, which they sold to aliens Mr. STAORD, Mr. RANDOLPH, Mr. SYMMs, and had two Soctal Security cards. along with Social Security cards. Mr. BENTSEN, proposes an unprinted amend. "Everything (crooked) you can think of ment numbered 487. to do with the cards, theyre doing," said Qne Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I have Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I ask investigator. "A Social Security card Is thediscussed this amendnent with the dis-unanimous consent that further reading key to the kingdom. To get any benefit, youtinguished Senator from New York. Iof the amendment be dispensed with. need a number." understand representatives of the Social The Genera! Accounting Office estimatesSecurity Administration may be opposed The PRESIDING OICER. Without the scandal costs taxpayers $15 billion a year objection, it is so ordered. in government benefits paid to unqualifiedto it. I fail to comprehend their opposi- The amendment is as follows: applicants using fake or Btolen cards. tion, however. In a natiowlde probe—called "Project I have Indicated to the Senator from TITLE .—EIGHWAY REVENUE ACT Baltimore" because the Social Security Ad-New York that I am cerVain]y willing to OF 1981

ministration is based in Baltimore—the gov-accept the amendment. Unless I have • SHORT TITLE ernment already has won convictions ofoverlooked an obvious argument, it ftiakes SEC. .Thistitle may be cited as the score8 of persons caught illegally issuing thesense to me. It makes much more sense"Highway P.evenue Act o 1981". •numbers. But officials at the inspectpr general's officeto provide for counterfeit proofing thanExTEN5!0N OF THE TAXES WHICH ARE TRANS- for the Department of Health and Humanto increase the jail term for tho6e who FRED INTO THE H!GRwAY TRUST FUND Services say most card cheaters ge undetecteddo counterfeit. We adopted that amend- SEC. .(a)GENERAL p.uLE.—The following because f lax procedures. ment yesterday. I hope the amendmentprovisions of the Internal Revenue Code of One federal prober, noting the Social Se-might be agreed to. 1954 are amended by striking out "1984" each curity Administration has only 120 investi- Mr. MOYNIHAN. I thank the Senator.place it appears and inserting In lieu thereof gators nationwtde, said: "Who's going to Madam President, Senators D'AIvtATO,"19a9": catch you?" (1)Section4041(e)(relatingtoratO In a Social Security field office, auditors re-HARRY F. BYRD, Jñ., and BRADLEY ask toreduction). ported, 'A stack of more than 1,000 blankbe added as cosponsors. (2)Section 4061(a) (1)(relating to lm. cards was found lying on the floor in an un- The PRESIDING .OICER. Withoutposition of tax on trucks, buse8, etc.). locked and well-lit area accessible to theobjection, it is so ordered. (3)Section 4061(b) (1)(relating to im- public." If there be no further debate on theposition of tax on parts and accessories). Health and Human ServicesSecretaryamefldment, the question is on agreeing (4) Section 4071(d) (relatIng to imposition Richard 8clweiker declared in May all blankto the amendment. of tax on tires, tubes, and tread rubber). card would be returned to the central office, The amendment (UP No. 486) was (5) Section 4081(b) (relatIng to imposition but blank cards remain in most of the agen- of tax on gasoline). cy'8 1,400 field Offices, which have authorityagreed to. (6) Section 4481(a) (relatIng to imposition to is8ue duplicate oard. Mr. MOYNIHAN. I move to reconsiderof tax on use of highway motor vehicles). An HES spokesman said, "They are underthe vote by which the amendment was (7) Section 4481(e) (relating to period ta.'c stricter lock and key measures now," but sev-agreed to. in effect). eral agency officials said privately the security Mr. DOLE. I move to lay that motion (8) Section 4482(c) (4)(defining taxable problem still exist8. on the table. period). Investdgators have found evidence of care- The motion to lay on the table was (9) Section 6166(e) (2) (YelatIng to Install- lees supervision of those who distribute ment payment8 of tax on use of highway rds; loose procedures for valldating appli-agreed to. motor vehicles). cat&ons and lilUe effort to trace individuals UP AMENDMENT NO. 487 (10) Section 6421(a) (relating to tax on fraudulently obtaining cards. Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I. sendgasoline used for certain nonhighway pur- An Inspector general's audit in New Yorkan amendment to the desk on behalf ofposes or by local transit syBtema). and Washinglon last year found nearly half • (b) AMENDMENT OF SEcTION 6412(a) (1).— the cards in those cities were issuect to alIens.Senators STAFFORD, RANDOLPH. SYMMS,Section 6412(a) (1) of suth Code (relating to About 20 percent of those were given to in-and BENT5EN, and ask for its immediatefloor stocks refunds) is amended— correotIy codect individuals; another 20 pee-consideration. (1) by striking out "1984" each place it cent went to aliens not authorized to receive I understand the amendment has beenappears and inserting In Ueu thereof °1989"; work-related numbers. cleared on this side with the majorityand An 'invetigator fo the Immigration andleader, and it has been cleared on the (2) by striking out1985" each place it Naturalization Service oomplainect that allother side, so Lar as I know. appears nd hiserting in lieu thereof "1990". Sooial Security cards look identical, although Under current law the 4 cent per gal- EXrENSION OF HIGHWAY TRUST FUND some are issued to aliens who dont have SEC. .(a)HIGHWAY TRUST FUND.—Sub- permiseion to work." Ion excise tax on gasoline and othersections (c), (e)(1),and (f) of section 209 ot He said cards are often issuect to aliensmotor fuels will expire on Ottober 1,the Highway Revenue Act o 1956 (relating to who say they need thepi to get insurance1984, and revert to 2 cents per gallon.the Highway Trust Fund 23 U.S.C. 120 note) Of put money in a bank' but use te card toThe .Highway Trust Fund into which theare amended— get.a job. highway taxes are placed will also ex- (1) by striking out p1984" each place it "AnVonecan gp down to Tijuana and buypire' on October 1, 1984. appears and inserting in lieu thereof "1990". any number of Social Security cards now," What this amendment wou'ld do is ex- said another INS official. (2) by striking out "1985" each place it Only two weeks ago, during a customstend te current highway excise taxesappears and inserting in lieu thereof "1991". check n Laredo, 'X'exaa, border agent8 dis-for 5 years to October 1, 1989, and ex- (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTSTOLAND AND covered a Mexican trying to enter the Unitedtend the Highway Trust Fund for 6 moreWATER CONsERvATIoN FUND.—Subsection (b) Statee had a phony birth certificate used byyears; to September 30, 1990. of section 201 of the Land and Water Con- three other persona. In his r, they found a I believe the Senator from Texas hasservation Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 4061— cache o Social security cards. had a long Interest Inthis matter.I un-11) Is amended— S 11496 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE October. 15,1981 (1) by striking out "1984" and inserting in• Mr. STA1ORD.. Madam -President. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without lieu thereof "1990"; and this- amendment would simply extendobjection, it is so ordered. (2) by striking out "1988" each place itthe highway trust fund and the existing Mr. DOLE. While Senator LEvIN is on appears and Inserting in lieu thereof "1991".excise taxes for 6 years. This amendmenthis way, the Levin amendment requires Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I askwould make no changes to the existingthat at least 7, but not more than 12, unanimous consent that certain state-tax structure or the tax levels, and ItState demonstration projects relating to ment be printed In the RECORD. This Is awould in no way preclude a comprehen--the training of APDC recipients as home simple extension of existing law andsive review of the highway trust fundhealth aides be established. does not preclude a review of the finan-structure and, excise taxes next year or The 1980 OmnIbus Reconciliation Act cial stucture or the excise tax levels ofany time in the future. requires the Secretary to enter into the highway trust fund next year or at The Senate Environment and Publicagreements with up to 12 States for the any time in the future. Works Committee ,recentlyreportedpurpose of conducting demonstration I 'also ask unanimous consent thatS. 1024. the Federal-Aid Highway Im-projects for the training and employ- there be printed in the RECORD at thisprovement Act of 1981. to the Senate.ment of APDC recipients as home health point a letter from the Secretary ofThis legislation provides authorizationsaides. Transportation. for the Federal-aid highway program The Department has been slow to lni There being no objection, the materialthrough 1986. The committee believesplement the demonstration projects not- was ordered to be printed In the RECORD,multlyear highway' legislation is abso-withstanding prodding In the 1981 rec- as follows: lutely necessary to provide the Statesonciliation conference report and a TxE SECRETARY OP TRANsPoRTATIoN, with a stable program for effective long-strongly worded bipartisan letter from Washington. D.C.. June 10. 2981. term planning. In order to enact multi- Congressman CONABLE and nine other Ron. ROBERT DOLE, year highway legislation, a simple exten-members of the Ways and Means Com- Chairman, Finance Committee, U.S. Senate,sion of the trust fund Is necessary.S mittee to Secretary Schwelker. To date Washington. D.C. The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there l)EAR BoB: One of the majortransportation It appears that the Department plans to issues to be considered by the Finance Com-be no further debate, the question Is onproceed with only 2 demonstration proj- mittee thissession relates to the extensionagreeing to the amendment. ects. although 14 States have submitted of the Highway Trust Fund. The Highway The amendment (UP No. 487) wasapplications. Trust Fund serves as the primary financingagreed to. CBO estimated that for minimal start- mechanism for the Federal-Aid Highway pro- Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I moveup costs of about $2 million, the follow- gram. It finances the Interstate and primaryto reconsider the vote by which theing savings could be realized In the AFDC highway system programs as well as manyamendment- was agreed to. and medicaid programs: others. In order to provide the necessary revenue for Increasing authorizations, Con- Mr. MOYNIHAN. I move to lay that (In millions) gress provided In the Revenue Act of 1986motion on the table. that highway user taxes be credited to the The motion to lay on the table was Medic— Trust Fund. The Fund has been financedagreed to. APDO aid through user tax collection since 1988, and Mr. DOLE. Madam President, we areFiscal year 1982 authority to Impose taxes currently existswaiting for Senator LEvIN with the onlyFiscal year 1983 5 9 through 1984. other amendment I know about. I amFiscal year 1984 8 13 The Administration's proposed highwayprepared to offer It on his behalf, If thatFiscal year 1988 7 18 legislation, 8. 841, provides for five year high.Is satisfactory. way authorizations to extend from FT 82— FT 88. The authorization levels are based on UP AMENDMENT NO. 468 Madam President, this was originally an assessment of changes in highway condi-(Purpose: To i'equirethat the statutorya Dole-Talmadge amendment, unanl. tions and performance since 1970, and an deadline for implementing AFDC homemously approved by the Finance Com- analysis of investments needed to maintain health aide demonstration projects be metmittee in 1978 and subsequently unani- acceptable levels of performance on our na- for projects In at least seven States) mously adopted by the House Ways and tion's highways. Title III of this bill retains Mr. MOYNIHAN. Madam President.Means and Energy and Commerce Corn-' the Highway Trust Fund as the mechanismon behalf of Senator LEvIN, I send anmittees as part of the Omnibus Recon- for Federal highway financing and extends ciliation Act of 1980. the Fund's existence for six more years toamendment to the desk and ask for Its September 30, 1990. The bill also extendsImmediate consideration. The amend- Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, my current excise taxes allocated to the High-ment .is offered on behalf of Mr. LEVINamendment deals with an issue with way Trust Fund for five years; that Is, theand Mr. DOLE. which the Finance Committee is qult rate reductions or -expirations of highway The PRESIDING OFFICER. Thefamiliar—the concept of utilizing MDC taxes now scheduled for October 1. 1984. areamendment will be stated. -, recipients as homemakers for the pur- deferred until October 1, 1989. Although no Thelegislative clerk read as follows:pose of providing medicaid recipients tax increases are proposed It is necessary to The Senator from New York (Mr. Moyxi-with a long-term care alternative to extend the Trust Fund and the current tax nursing homes. This puts AFDC recipi- allocations so that highway programs canHAN) on behalf of Mr. LEVIN and Mr. DOLE. be authorized beyond FT 82. proposes an unprinted amendment num-ents to work and provides services to the We would like to make c'ear that our pro-bered 488: medically needy and saves money on posed highway legislation,including the At the end of the bill add the followingboth AIDC and medicaid programs. The Trust Fund and tax extension proposals, Isnew section: program, after a brief Initial startup cost an integral part of the President's total pro- STATUTORY DEADLINE S'OR IMPLEMENTING AJ'DC of $2 million, will save as much as $25 gram for economic recovery. Our proposals HOME HEP.ITX AIDE DEMONsTRATION PROJ- million in fiscal year 1985 from both the assure that the Federal-aid highway pro- ECTS medicaid and AFDC programs. which is gram will achieve national goals and inter- SEc. . Thelast sentence of subsectionmore than the projected savings In sev- ests,. within acceptable budget levels. As you(0) (2) of section 966 of the Omnibus Recon-eral of the AFDC reforms advocated by know, Congress has expressed strong sup-ciliation Act of 1980 (as amended by section port for the President's economic program2156 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliationthe administration. and, in.the budget process, both Houses haveAct of 1981) is amended by Inserting "with Madam President, my amendment made clear their comintttnent-to the Presi-at least seven States" after "agreements".clarifies the intent of Congress on this dent's prograth. Now the time has come to issue by addressing a problem which has enact the specific laws that are necessary Mr. CHILES. Madam President,Iarisen as regards the number of projects to give life to the President's budget. Our -move adoption of the amendment. to be funded and date of Implementation proposedhighway legislation is an impor- Mr. MOYNIHAN. Madam President, Iof the program. It is my understanding tant part of this economic program, and wesuggest the absence of a quorum. that Senator DOLE, chairman of the look forward to working with you to achieve The PRESIDING OCER. The clerkFinance Committee and manager of the enactment of this legislation. will call the roll. The Omce of Management and Budget ad- bill before us. has no objection to the vises that the views expressed in this letter The legislative clerk proceeded to callmeasure and, In fact, is-prepared to ac are in accord with the program of thethe roll. cept the amendment on behalf of time President. Mr. DOLE. Madqm President, I askmembers of his committee. Sincerely. unanimous consent that the order for The amendment requires that the Dnaw. the quorum call b rescinded. statutory deadlIne. January 1, 1982. for October 15, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE 811497 Implementing AFDC home health aide Unfortunately, duringrecent corn-drawattention to the seriousness o the demonstration projects be met for proj-munications with the Health Care Fl-problem lacing the social security sys- ects in at least seven States. nancing Administration, it was learnedtem. When the social security program I will take a moment, Madam Presi-that HHS currently plans to proceedwas started over 40 years ago, a promise dent, to explain whythis amendment iswith only 2 of the 12 projects, evenwas made to the working men an necessary. though 14 States have applied for thiswomen of this country that when they Three years ago, the Finance Commit-demonstration project. These States areretired, social security would be there to tee unanimously incorporated the home New York, California, Michigan, Texas,•provide basic retirement benefits. Every- health aide demonstration project IntoOhio, South Carolina, Hawaii, Georgia,one knows that unless changes are made their medicare-medicaid reform bill as a NewJersey,DistrictofColumbia,we. will be unable to keep this promise result of a highly successful project InFlorida, New Mexico, Arkansas, andand I do not. believe Congress or Presie New Mexico. Further research by theKentucky. dent Reagan want to see this happen. Congressional Budget Office and another Madam President, my amendment I would point out to my co1league successful project in Michigan demon- •would require that contracts are signedthat many workers doubt whether or strated such potential for significant say-with at least seven States by January 1,not we will be able to make the necessary ings that the home health aide demon-1982, the current law statutory date. changes to insure the future of social strátion project was subsequently, unan-, Madam President, I thank the Senatorsecurity. In a poll conducted earlier this imously adopted by the House Ways andfrom Kansas and the Senator from Newyear by Lance Tarrance and Associates, Means Committee and Energy and Corn-York as well as their staffs for protectinga national public opinion research firm, merce Committee and became part ofthis amendment In the way they did. Iit was found that 68 percent of all Anier- the Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1980.am deeply indebted to them. icans believe social security is in finan' CBO estimated that for the minimal $2 Mr. EAGLETON. Madam President, Icial trouble and most of these people are million startup cost, the following say-move the adoption of the Levin amend-also worried about the adequacy of their ings could be realized in the AFDC andment. own retirement income. medicaid prograxns: Mr. MOYNIHAN. Madam President, If I believe the bill we are discussing to- lIninIllionsi it should transpire that ma very shortday will help to alleviate some of these while the Senator from Michigan wishesfears and because of this I plan to sup Medic-to make changes, I wish It understoodport this measure. But I want my col- AFDC aidthat I shall propose those changes in theleagues to understand that interfund borrowing and restoration of the social Fiscalyear1982 -$i $3 normal course of events. Fiscalyear 1983 5 9 The PRESIDING OFFICER(Mr.security minimum benefit will not solve Fiscalyear1984 6 13 WARNER). Is there any further debate onthe problem, it wil' only postpone the Fiscalyear1985 7 18 the amendment? If not, the question isday of reckoning. Short-term solutions on agreeing.to the amendment. / such as this are like putting bandaid During the conference on the Omnibus The amendment (UP No. 488) wason a gunshot wound. You have only ReconciliationAct Of 1980, the Houseagreed to. covered up the problem, you have not provision for no more than a 12-State Mr. MOYNIHAN. I move to reconsidersolved it. demonstration was overwhelmingly ac-the vote by which the amendment was In response to this need for long-term cepted and specific provisions were madeoeed to. answers,President Reagan has an in the conference repoit to have the S Mr. EAGLETON. I move to lay thatflounced the formation of a bipartisan retary of HHS issue regulations by Aprilmotion on the table.' task force to examine the situation and -1,1981, to begin demonstration projects The motion to lay on the table wasmake su1tble recommendations. I would by July 1, 1981. Th law stated that hope that this task force can act in a bi preference was to be given to States thatagreed to. • .JEPSEN.Mr. President, on Sep.partisan fashion. Politics has no place 1n had demonstrated active Interest andtember 25, the joint economic subcom-the social security debate. • support for the AFDC home health aide•mittee on monetary and fiscal policy If anyone needs any proof of the dam demonstration concept and seven Statesheld a hearing on the very issue we areage politics has done to the social secu were listed In the report as havingdebating today—the future of social se-rity system, compare it to any private showed interest. These States were Call-curity. Specifically, we exammnedhow so-insurance fund. To my knowledge, no fornia, Georgia, Hawaii, Michtgan, Newcial security benefits affect the decisionprivate insurance company has ever Jersey, New 'Mexico, and New York. to retire and the savings decisions madefailed to pay benefits because of a lack Earlier this spring, in testimony be-by working men and women in thisof funds. There is a logical reason for fore the House Ways and Means Com-country. In addition, we examined thethis, Mr. President. mittee,theadministrationindicatedproper relationship between public and thatInitialplanshad beenmade Private insurance funds are mnage for only 2. of the 12 mandated Stateprivate pension plans. In a fiscally responsible manner and axe demonstrations because of a scarcity of As chairman of this stibcomm.ittee, Inot subject to the political pressures w demonstration project startup money.was privileged to have a former col-have placed on social security. Unless we On March 18, 1981, a bipartisan groupleague of ours, Secretary Schwelker, pre-can remove the social security debate of members of the Ways and Meanssent the administration's viewpoint on.from a political arena to one where i Committee wrote to Secretary Schweikerthis issue. As one might expect the Sec-cn get the serious attention it deserves to reiterate their intent, and the intentretary was questioned at some lengthI am concerned that we may not come u of the House and Senate conferees onabout the administration's proposals forwith the necessary solutions. the Reconciliation Act of 1980, that theserestoring financial stability to the Social In closing, I would like to congratulate demonstration projects were entitlementSecurity Trust Funds. - Senator DOLE and Senator ARMSTRONG provisionsand, therefore,,startup money This is a very important Doint, whichf or bringing this bill to the floor in sucb to institute the 12 cost-saving demon-should not be overlooked. The adminis-a timely fashion. It is refreshing to se strations was readily available. trtion's proposals were made in order toa committee act in such a swift manner In an effort to make congressionalrestore financial integrity, to 'the Socialon an issue of such national importance intent perfectly clear, legislative and re-Security Trust Funds. This was notI trust this will continue e.stheCongress port language were included in thesomething thePresident did in order tocontinues debating social security.S Reconciliation Act of 1981 that clearlybalance the budget, as some people might• Mr. BRADLEY. Mr. President, I mo spelled out the 12-State ltznlt, the inten-have us believe. It was not de becausetendto vote for this bill which will eo tion that regulations and. guidelines of some desire to dismantle the social storethe social security minimum beneo published by October 1, 1981. and thatsecurity program. Quite frankly, if thisfit for most current recipients and pro agreements be entered into by Janu-was the desire of the administration,vide for necessary short-term measures ary 1, 1982. AdditIonally in the state-they could have simply left the programto assure the financial integrity of th ment of managers, it was emphasized S it was. social security system. that at least 12 States were to be as- Instead of questioning the motives of While I think these provisions are nec sisted by HHS to implement these dem-the President, I think we should beessary, I do not believe that they Er onstration projects. praising himforhaving the courage tosuiflcient. The minimum benefit shok S 11498 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE October 15,1981 be restored tq all current beneficiaries,these tougher limits for thefirst. timeundermine if we do not act affirmatively I have consistently opposed the adrnln-prospectively to retired and survivingon this proposal. We will also endanger Istration's drive to eliminate this benefitfamilies. In some cases, that means bene-the health and well-being of some three which Is crucial to so many older Amen-fits paid to widows with children will bemillionbeneficiariesnow 'dependent cans, Including a disproportionate num more than 20. percent lower if they be-upon the minimum benefit to help pay ber of elderly widows. I remain firm Income eligible in 1982 rather than In theforfood,shelter, and medical care. my support for full restoration, and it issummer of 1981. Without the minimum benefit, some of my iope and expectation that the Sen- This approach raised half the moneythese truly needy older Americans wifi ate-House conference will agree with me needed to paijiaily restore the minimumnot have, enough to eat. Others will not that cutting the minimum benefit pay-benefIt. However, taking funds from onehave, enough money to pay for heat ments was and is the wrong way to make. vulnerable group to keep promises tothrough the winter. Still others will have budget savlngs.• . anotheris also unjust. trouble just finding a roof they can af • Mrs. HAWKINS. Mr. President, today To raise the remaining funds, the com-ford to keep over their heads. the Senate considered changes in themittee also recommended, and the Seli- I am certain that all Qf us' have re- socialsecurity system to improve itsate agreed to, levying social security taxesceived: hundreds of letters from our con short- and long-term solvency, after pre-on the first 6 months of sick pay pro-stituents, urging us to restore the ntni viously passing a• Finance Committeevided under company ila.ns. While themum benefit. Even so, it is difficult for us amendment that partially restored thesick usually recover and therefore haveto put faces on the millions :0f senior minimum benefit. I voted for H.R. 4331a somewhat easier time adjusting tocitizens who will e aected if we fall to despite misgivings, lower assistance than those who have re-act. Let us not forget that of the three Under current law, specific percentagestired, this trade o is a harsh one, too.,million beneficiaries of the minimum of social security tax receipts are allo-' To conclude, the- Senate has chosenbenefit as it now stands, 750,000 are cated to the three Social Security Trustways to finance a partial restoration ofmore than 80 years old. The vast maJor Funds, the Old Age and Survivors Fund,the minimum benefit that only margin-ity of the remaining 2,225,000 recipients the Disability Fund, and the Hospitalally advances the equity of the system. Aare more than 70 years old. Thus, most Insurance Fund. better proposal would at least fully re-of the recipients are our very oldest Forecasts made by the Congressionalstore the minimum benefit for those al-citizens. Budget Office and Office of the Actuaryready retired and those without sucient Our statisticians tell us that up to 75 of the Social Security Administrationtime to make adjustments. percent of all senior citizens receiving predict that Old Age and Survivors Fund We should not demand new sacrificesthe minimum benefit are women, many will fall into deficit during fiscal yearfrom others also in need of• previouslyof whom are destitute. The m1n1mun 1982, although a combined surplus ofpromised assistance. Therefore, it lswlthbenefit is often• the only source of in over $40 billion will exist in the otherreservation that I cast my vote in favor ofcome they have toaireviate poverty two funds. H.R. 4331 as amended. - caused by many years of Job and wage

• Therefore, I agree with the Finance However, the emergency need to au-discrimination. Committee's recommendation to permitthorlze interfund borrowing plus the Unless we restore the' minimum bene the OASI Fund to draw support fromneed to keep our promises at least tofit, these 'women, along with other re this $40 billion pool during the next 10some who have counted on receiving thecipients, will be forced to depend upon years. minimum benefit provide just enoughrelatives or accept welfare. Many have By combining the financial strengthreason to support an affirmatiie vote.•no relatives able to support them. Others of the three trust funds, we can guaran-•Mr.DODD. Mr. President, I believealways refused to accept welfare or cha tee all social security benefits will be paidthe Senate should act affirmatively onity before. We do nobicnow if theywould until the 21st century, assuming the ad-the Finance Committee Amendment toapply for welfare even if threatened with ministration's economic projections ireH.fl. 4331. ThIs amendment is a packagestarvation. - accurate. - ofsocial security• financing proposals, Mr.President,I have reservations As part of the OmnIbus Reconciliationparticularly restoring the minimum ben-about the provision within thla amend. Act of 1981, Congress eliminated the so-efit. providing for interfund borrowingment which will eliminate the mtnlmum cial security minimum benefit not onlyauthority, and adjusting the share ofbenefit for those receiving pensions in for those who would receive it by retir-tax revenues available to each trustexcess of $300. Any changes In the 8ocia ing in the near future, but also those whofund. security system should not deprive those left the workforce many years ago. On May 20, by a vote of 96 to 0, thepresently on the social security ofls of I understand and agree with the needSenate passed an amendment to thebenefits they have rilied upon. i amalso to lower Federal spending, but cuttingOmnibus Supplemental Appropriationsconcerned that it will cost more ad.m1n benefits to those who objectively havebill expressing. its sense that Congressistratively to prevent these pensioners the least ability to absorb the dierencenot. reduce social security benefits. Byfrom receiving the minimum benefit by making up the dierence elsewhere actingaffirmativelyontheFinancethan it would to give them the benefit. is unfair and just plain wrong. Committee amendment, the Senate ful- As a member of the Committee on The committee amendment restoredfills the promise it made on May 20. Aging, I heard. the administration testi. the minimumbenefit for those who now Previous administration proposals tofy earlier this year that it would requIre receive it, but wrongly left out those whoreduce social security benefits, includingmore than 9,000 manyears merely to will retIre 2 months from now and be.the minimum benefit, violated our corn-identify alleged wlndfallers such as pen. yond. They too have long included themitment to older Americans and tooksioners receiving the minimum benefit. minimum benefit in their plans and arefrom those least able to sacrifice. SuchThe administration now asserts that depending on the Covernment to keepproposals broke the promise made to ourthey can Identify windfallers without its promises. senior citizens, weakening not only theirrelying upon the 9,000 manyear of To pay for this partial restoration offaith but also the faith of all Americanstheir employees, I sincerely hope that the minimum benefit, the committee rec-in the integrity of the social securitythe* can do so without entangling us in ommended new limits on benefits paid toprogram. wasteful, administrative knots. certain families of retired .or deceased The provision to eliminate the mini- The Senate did not make the proper workers. Currently, regardless of their mum benefit contained lthIn the Oni-decision in defeating an amendment to size, families receive assistance equal tonibus Reconciliation Act of 1981 jeop-establish a Social Security Trust Fund 150 percent of the amount of help thatardized the confidence which our olderwith revenues collected by repealing for disabled wQrkers would receive if he orconstituents had placed in Congress asnew leases only the 1981 reductions in she were single. well asthatof generations to come. To-the crude oil windfall profit tax. Alternatively, such families receive anday, we must act affirmatively to restore I regret that the Senate decided not amount equal to 85 percent of the aver-that confidence. If we do not, we mayto transfer revenues now lost to the Oov age wages they earned before disability,shake Americans' faith in theiz Govemernment to our Social Security Trust when adjustedforinflation,ifthisment irrevocalbly. Funds to ease their short-term funding method results in a smaller payment. Confidence and faith in governmentproblems. The committee amendment extendedare not the only things we will seriously These revenues will only be gravy for October 15, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S 11499 the 50 largest oil companies responsibleage 65 or older. Nearly half a tnflllon aretheold-age survivors thsurance tnist for producing new oil whereas theyOver age 80, and about 80,000 are over 90.fund. might have been basic meat and pota-Clearly, the elimination of themlnimum I strongly support this bill and hope toes for older Americans dependent uponbenefit for these individuals could onlythat it will be passed by a substantial their social security checks. . meanadditional hardship. majority of the Senate. Despite these regrets, I had no realls- I commend the Senate Finance Coin- Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I am tic alternative in terms of sound publicmittee for its efforts in devising thispleased today to see that so many of my policy in approving the Finance Com- compromise proposal which Is before uscolleagues from the other side of the mittee package. This package restorestoday. I believe the bill we are consider-aisle are now prepared to agree with the short-run solvency of the social s ing strikes a reasonable compromise be-those of us who have been saying for curity system by providing for Interfundtween the need to protect the elderlymonths that the administration's social borrowing authority and adjusting theneedy in our society, while lessening thesecurityproposalswentfarbeyond share. of .tn revenues available to eachdrain on the social security system. what is needed to solve the trust funds trust fund. I support this measure because it Isshort term problems. The adin1nistra According to a February, 1981 CBO Just and fair. Those who. have no othertion's plan to penalize early retl*ees and study, there are significant differencesmeans of support, and who rely heavilycut benefits for other senior citizens was in the projected future balances of theon the minimum benefit, will be totallynothing more than a veiled ,attempt to three Social Security Trust Funds. Whileprotected. Those with snlafl Federal pen-balance the budget on the backs of the the OASI trust fund was predicted toslons whoP are also heavily reliant onelderly. expect a positive balance of only 4.7 per.socialsecuritywillalsobetotally I just want to point out that I, along cent of outlays at the beg1ning of fiscalprotected. with the vast majority of my colleagues year 1983 and an actual negative bal- I believe this proposal is Just, compas-on this side of the aisle, have supported ance at the beginning of 1984—86, theslonate, and deserving of the support ofthe proposal to permit interfund bor- DI and HI Trust Funds were predictedthe Senate. I. urge the. adoption of therowing since the, day the administra- to enjoy balances of at least 24 percentbill. tion announced its ill-conceived cuts in in 1983 and over 50 percent In 1984—88. Mr. STENNIS. Mr. President, the billsocial securlty In .1986. the DI Trust Fund percentage' pending before us will have the bene. Senator M0YNIHAII, Senator CazLKs balance was predicted to enjoy a per-ficial result of restoring the minimumand I offered an amendment to author- centage balance of over 100 percent.sOCial security benefit for all personsizeinterfundborrowing. It was defeated Under interfund borrowing or realine-who are eligible for such benefits before51 to 54, with only one Republican vot-

• ment of tax rates, roughl7 $40 billionNovember 1981 and who are resident8ing with us. could be shifted from DI and HI to OASIof the United States. There are some We said that interfund borrowing for the purpose of protecting solvencyexception to thiswithrespect to thosewould address the Immediate short. through mid-1984. Proteting solvencyreceiving the mJnlmum benefit who alsoterm financing problem in the system in the shoTt run will give us the time tohave governmental peisions. There ha8and permit consideration ot the potential examine alternative ways of solving thebeen a great deal o confusion -duringlong term problems in a calm, delibera- longer term financing problems, the debates this year about the applica-tive fashion. Secretary Schweker, In. Mr. President, passage of thalegisIa-tion of and entitlement to flhlniniumtestimony before the Finance Commit- tion will renew our commitment to thesocial security beneftt8. Afl of the factstee, supported this idea. Four former Di- social security contract made with thehave now been developed, and, with theserectors of. the Social Security Admin- American public in 1935. We must con-facts before me, I am happy to supportistration supported it at a policy forum tinue to fnure that any future reformsthis bill. I held back in May when .the President of the social security system to ease I certainly believe that it would be aannounced his program. financing pToblems will be gradual andserious mistake for the Congress to leave Yet for the last 5 months the senior cquitable.• the situation in such a state that needycitizens of this country have been tolI Mr. COHEN. Mr. President, perhapssocial security retirees do not receive atthat the system was verging on collapse the most difficult and chailenging issueleast, the minimum benefit of $122 perand that the financial crisis required Un- facing the Congress this year is reform-month. This is a small amount which willmediate draconian cuts in. benefits. ing the social security system. . atbest.barely supply minimum food and The proposal before us aIo restores There is no question that Congress hasIodlflL - the. mizum benefit for most current aresponsibility to honor its commitment These people have worked and paidbeneficiaries. The President said in his to those who have retired or are nearingInto the social security ssyt.em for someaddress to the Nation 2 weeks ago that retirement. Moreover. Congress must in-period of time, although not for longhe was "asking" that the minimum bene- sure the long-term financial solvency ofenough to receive higher benefits Theyfit be restored, Implying that the Con- thesocialsecuritysystemsothatare certainly entitled to something and.gress was solelyresponsibleforits younger workers can claim their earneddespite the confusion which has some-'e11nination. benefits when they retire. . thnesexisted with respect to the mini- It is time to set the record straight. In order to do sà, Congress will have to mum benefits, I am glad to support them Just last March, ft was the President

pass reforms, many of which will gener-now. ' , . - who called for eliminating the minimum atecontroversy. Certainly no proposal In addition, Mr. President, the Financebenefit. has generated more controversy than the• Committee bill provides that the are- It was the President's Office of Man- - proposed elimination of the minimum gate tax rates for old-age and survivorsagementand Budget that characterized benefit. . Insurance,disability Insurance, and hos-the minimum benefit as an "obsolete, Past debate on the minimum benefitpital insurance remain, for the future, atunearned windfall and a welfare add- has focused on the need to eliminate the same amount as provided 'by presenton." called unearned benefits to those indi-law. However, the bill does provide that It was the Reagan adnilnistration who viduals with short work historiesinthe amount of tax allocated to old-agetold those senior citizens now trying to social security covered employment. Pro-and survivors thsurance be increased forsurvive on the minimum benefit that they viding a minimum benefit to many of1982 and thereafter and that the taxcould always go on welfare. these ndividuaIs over the years hasrate allocated to disability Insurance It was the President who wrote to placed a strain on the socialsecurity s should be reduced for 1982 and there-Senator BYRD last 'July and suggested tem, Whether we can afford to continueafter. In addition, the bill permits inter-that "opportunistic political manuver- thispracticeis the central Issue in thefund borrowing between the old-age andIng especia1y designed to play on the debate over the retention of the survivors insurance and the dlsall1ty in-fears of many Americans" lay behind

mum benefit. ' surancetrust funds in amounts and atinitiativestorestore'theminimum For a large number of elderly Amer-the discretion of the Secretary of thebenefit. -. icans, however, the minimum representsTreasury, who Is the managing trustee. Thepublic did not accept that ex- their sole source of income. Many of I believe that these are wise provisionsplaiation then and does not believe it these illdividuals—perhaps 85 to 90 per- 'and will help the short-termfinancialnow. Senior citizens know that It was cent—are women. Nearly 80 percent aresituation of the trust funds, particularlythe administration who wanted to cut S 11500 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE October 15,. 1981 benefitsand concerned Democratawhobenefit to which the recipient. would berecognized there are elderly person& who worked to restore them. entitled using the benefit computationnow receive the minthium social security On six separate occasions before to-formula applicable to aU other social se-benefit who at least feel that the mint-' day, Members o this body have had thecurity recipients. This formula relatesmum benefit Is something they or their opportunity torestore the minimumbenefits to actual earnings and FICA taxspouses have earned, and:they are ic- benefit. On each occasion, the majoritycontrtbutions under social security cov-luctant to apply for public assistance ofRepublicansvotedagainstthoseered employment. If, for example, thebenefits such as food stamps or 88!. amendments. standard benefit formula indicated thatThere are also some elderly minimum lam pleased that so.many of my col-a person had earned a monthly benefit ofrecipients, such as low income, retired leagues are now willing to change their$50 based on an abbreviated work history• farmers, who could not now qtLa1ffy for minds and their votes. under social security, the person would581 because of the strict limitation on Although I have reservations aboutnevertheles receive at least another $72—owned assets applicable to that program. certain elements f the Finance Com-total ot $122—in the form of an add-on,For these and, other reasons. President mittee's proposal, I will vote, for it. Iunearned benefit. Reagan and the Senate Finance Com- believe it offers a reasonable and.respon- In the reconciliation bill passed a fewmittee have recommendedthatthe sible solution to the financing problemsweeks ago, Congress did not wipe out allmnimum benefit be restored for most facing social security In he next fewsocial security benefits for current orcurrent recipients. I support this action. years. future recipients of the minimum pay- ThependingFnanceCommittee It is a significant departure from thement. Rather, only the unearned portionamendment would not restore the mini- administration'sdraconianproposalsof the benefit would be ..ended, and allmum .benefit to those persons who no and a sieniflcant victory for our Nation'seligible persons would then receive thelonger reside In the United States. Such senior citizens. Our actions here toda&amount of benefits to which they wouldIovatgn residents would only get the renews our Nation's contracit with thosebe entitled based on actual earnings un-amount of monthly social security bene- seniors who have paid into social secu-der social security covered employment.fits they have earied based on' previous rity over the years and now rely on thoseThus, it is Incorrect to state, as somesocial security covered employment. Also,. benefits. have, that minimum beneficiaries arecurrent retirees with governmental pen- Our action here today reaffirms thisbeing deprived of social security pay-sions would have their social security Nation's commitment to maintain aments which they have earned duringmtn.lmum benefit reduced dollar-for- financiafly. sound social security systemtheir working years. dollar for the portion of their govern- withoutcuttingbenefits. Our actionS In fact, the average individual receiv-mental pension above $300, but not below should reassure all those still workinging a minimum benefit would get $2,122the amount of' benefit to whlch their who doubt whether social security willsocial security In 1982, based on lifetimeactual social security éovered employ- be there when they retire. tax contributions to the social securityment would entitle them. Over the momths, my Democratic col-system of less than $355. For ai average' Members of religious orders who have leagues and I have argued that we can-couple receiving an initial minimumtaken a vow of poverty would cont1nue not allow a auestionable economic pro.benefit In 1982, their projected lifetimeto receive at least the minimum benefit gram to undermine and endanger thesocial security benefits of more thanforthe next 10 years. In the case of ali financial security of those citizens now$100,000 would be about 300 times theother future retirees, however, the mini- retired and those about to retire. I amamount of FICA taxes paid Into the sys-mum benefit floor would be eliminated pleased that today so many of my Re-tem during their working years. Clearly,and-insured persons would receive what- publican colleagues now see the wisdomwe are not speaking here of an "earned"ever amount the benefit computation of our arguments and will vote to pre-benefit. formula determines, based on their ac- serve the tntegrity of th social security Not only has there been a great deal oftual earnings record. system. erroneous rhetoric about what the mini- Mr. President, I believe the Finance Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, themum benefit is, there has also been muchCommittee proposal Is eminently fair legislation before the Senate pertainingmisunderstanding of the true incomeand reasonable In its approach to this to social 8ecurity has my support. Thissituation of the 3 million recipients ofhighly emotional Issue. I am pleased to proposal was reported unanimously fromthe minimum benefit. The fact is thatendorse this recommendation, the Senate Finance Committee. It would:many, if not most, of the mIn1mum ben- REALLOCATION OP FICA TAX AND ZNTEBrUND. First, restore the social security mini-eficiaries are not low income people. Ap- oaaowu'o mum benefit to most current recipients;proximately one-halfmillioncurrent Mr. President, in order to stave off Im- second, alleviate the short-term fthancialrecipients of the minimum also receiveminent bankruptcy of the old age and crisis facing the social security retire-substantial pensions from previous ca-survivors benefits. insurance trust fund, ment trust fund (OASI) by temporarilyreer government employment, or arethe Finance Committee hasrecoin- shifting tax receipts from the disabilitymarried to spouses who receive such pen-mended combination of temporary (DI) and medicare (HI) trust funds into••sions. reallocation of FICA tax receipts among the OASI fund and by authorizing lntkr- Another 300,000 minimum benefici-the three social security trust funds, plus fund borrowing; and third, recoup thearies have spouses who are stiU activelyauthority for Uiterfund borrowing. It cost of restoring the minimum benefit byemployed; 8ome 35,000 rec1pient cur-must be emphasized that this is only a making relatively minor changes in FICArently reside outside the United States;temporary, patchwork solution to the taxation of sick pay and by lowering theabout1.2mIllion are only technicalserious fthanclal problems facIng the so- cap on the maximum familybenefit paidminimum beneficiaries whose social se-cial security system. These are problems In retirement and survivor cases. curity checks would not be diminished bythat must be confronted and resolved In THE MINIMUM BENEFIT the recent change in the law; and somea responsible, bipartisan manner, so that Mr. President, within the last few500,000 current mlnlmwn recipients arecurrent and future social security recipi- months there has been much highlyalso eligible for supplemental securityents can count on receiving benefits they emotional debate about the consequencesincome. [SSI], which would increase dol-have earned. of terminating the minimum social secu-lar for dollar to offset any loss of social Obviously, there isno easy painless rity benefit, an action agreed to by Con-security after recomputation of regularsolution to the financial dilemma facing gress In the omnibus budget reconcilia-benefits. When a careful analysis is madesocial security. I do not pretend to have tion bill, which was signed into law onof those receithig the minimum benefit,all the answers, but I would like to take August 13, 1981. Evident in this debateit becomes apparent that termination ofthis opportunity to make a few observa- and In the eyes of the public is a wide-the minimum benefit is not a callous ac-tions about the approach I believe should spread misunderstanding of the naturetion that will devastate the poor. Therebe taken. of the minimum benefit and the incomeare various social safety net programs First,' I do not believe fui'ther Increases situation of most current recipients. available, such as SSI, food stamps, andin the social security (FICA)taxabove Fundamentally, it is important to un-medicaid, which can be drawn upon tothose areadyschedu1ed can,be tcerted derstand that at least part of the $122provide necessary protectionfortheby either eniplo&ees or employexs. The per month minimum payment is an "un-elderly poor. 1977 social security amendment8 imposed earned" benefit; that Is, ,4t exceeds the Nevertheless, Mr. Piesidént, it must bethe largest tax Increase n our Natloti'& October .15,. 1981 • CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 11,501 history. To futher boost the tax onNovember 15 legta]ation that would per-through the authorization of borrowing workers and businesses at this time wouldmit interfund borrowing among thebetween the retirement and disability beintolerable andcounterproductive tosocial security trust funds. That amend-trust funds. theeconomicrecovery plan upon whichment was adopted by an 89-to-4 vote This is clearly the most sensible ap- th1administration andCongress haveon July 24, 1981, and the Senate Fi-proaeh to correct the cash shortage con- embarked. nance Conunlttee has kept to its dead-fronting the retirement fund. Since the Second,I do notfavorusing generalline by it8 amendment to KR. 4331 todayother two trust funds will be running tax revenues to finance basic social 8ecu-that provides for interfund borrowingsurpluses, It only makes sense to trans- rityprogram8, the costofwhich haveand a reallocation of the tax rates amongfer revenues among the three trust been borne equally by employers and em-the three trust funds. funds. After earlier attempt6 by Demo- ployees &ince the beginning of the pro- I am also gratified that the Financecratic Senators to authorize interfund gram. Such a change In financing wouldCommittee has seen fit to restore theborrowing were rejected, the Republi- alter the philosophy underlying socialminimum benefit to current recipients.cans have finally recognized the value of security a an earned benefit and convertWithout this legislation, many elderlythis measure. It Into another welfare program. More-and dependent individuals, mainly el- According to the administration's eco- over, there aimply is no spare money inderly widows, would have lost social se-nomic forecast and that of the Congres- the Treasury to pay for these beneflt8.curity beneflt8 and have been told tosional Budget. Office, this action should Third, the approach which I believeapply for beneflt8 under the SSI program'be sufficient to prevent trust fund re- must be taken, Mr. President, Is to adjustor State programs of general weffare. Weserves from falling to levels that would thetype and amount of social securityknow that many of these individualsthreaten monthly penefit payznent& Un- program benefit8 in line with a reason-would have been lost" in the transitionfortunately, this conclusion Is very sensi- able projection of expected future PICAand probably would have just gone with-tive to the performance of the economy. tax receipt8, with aUowance for adequateout. They would have been the fronthne If the economy fails to perform, as reserves In the several trust funds. I be-soldiers in the ght against 1nfiatiorexpected by the &Iministratlon and CBO, lieve we need to Teaffirm the original pur-though their only "crime" would havefurther measures will be neee8sary. In 080 of the social security program—thatbeen to have been a low-wage worker, athis regard, I am d1appointed that the o providing a aupplemental source offarmer, a domestic, or the spouse of aSenate rejected the proposal to recap- Income in retIrement years based on theminimum-wage worker. ture revenues by repealing the recently actual earnings record of the Insured The House by a vote of 404 to 20 re-enacted windfall profit tax breaks and person—and return the program prilnar-stored the' minimum benefit on July 31.transferring them to the social security fly to that central role for which It wasThe Senate now takes similar action intrust funds. Intended. restoring the minimum beneftt. Finafly, the partial restoration of the This will necessarily mean that some Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. President, theminimum benefit included in the bill ad- of the "welfare-type" benefit8 thai havebill that the Senate Is about to vote ondresses another pressing social security been added to the basic 8ocial securityrepresent8 an Important first step inIssue. The elimination of the minimum system over the years will have to besolving the flnancLng problems of socialbenefit that was part of the reconcilia- scaled back or eliminated. Nevertheless,security. I believe that It is Important Intioii bill was a very unfair and unwise Mr. Pzident, I believe this Is the moreseveral respects. reduction in benefit8 that the poorest re- reasonable, respousible approach, and I First, paage of this bill is an implicittirees are currently receiving. I opposed hope we can proceed expeditiously in thisrejection of the harsh approach recom-this reduction throughout the budget- direction. - mended earlier thIs year by the Presi-cutting proce, starting in the Finance Thislegislation Is only a temporary,dent. This approach called for drasticCommittee and continuing on the Sen- band-aid solution, Mr. President. It buysbenefit cuts for new retirees, with theate floor. This bill is a good, although a little more time, which I hope will beheaviest burden falling on individualsbelated, move on the part of the Senate. profitably used to draft a responsible,who retire belore age 65. I am particularly pleased that this bill well-reasoned, bipartisan plan that will These proposed cuts were motivated byincludes my amendment to delay the insure the long-range solvency of thethe budget problems confronting the ad-termination o the minimum benefit for social security program. If this processministration. Pressed to find ways to re-members of religious orders for 10 years. begins soon and Is diligently pursued, Iduce the deficit, the administration of-I believe that this amendment adequatel' am confldent that any abrupt reductionfered a package that would cut socialaddresses the unique situation that mem- In social security beneflt8 can be avoided.security benefit8 by over $50 billion overbers of religious orders are in. Instead, beneficiaries will be able to planthe next 5 year8. Yet they recognized Mr. PERCY. Mr. President, for many for whatever adjustment8 might be nec-that Congress would not likely go alongyears, as a member of the Special Com- essary, and the long-range stability of awith using social security as part of amittee on Aging, I have followed closely worthwhile social security program canbudget-balancing plan, so the proposalsthis year's debate on the social security be maintained. were cast as a solution to the cash short-system's financing problems—a debate Mr.SASSER. Mr. President, I intendage facing the system. A set of extrethelywhich began last May when the Presi- to vote on final passage for HR. 4331pessimistic economic assumptions weredent announced his proposals for re- which provides for at least partial res-used to show sizable near-term deficitsforming the system. toration of the minimum benefit andin the trust funds, in marked contrast The Senate swiftly moved to reject which provides for interfund borrowingto the optimistic forecast8 used in thepart8 of the admnthistration's proposal among the old age survivors and insur-budget and tax plans. The administra-with a resolution that many of us spoli- ance (OASI) and disability insurancetion was apparenUy not bothered withsored because they would have taken (DI) trust funds. Interfund borrowingthis inconsistency. away benefit8 from persons planning to along with the reallocation of tax rates But those of us in Congress were notretire as early as next January. We that provides revenues for the three so-fooled by such a ruse. Although all of usthoughtthls was unfair and acted quick- cial security trust funds will help keepare committed to balancing the budgetly to reassure those who might have been the social security system aolvent duringas soon as possible, we recognize theaffected. Although we did not agree with the years ahead. Then the Congress cancentral role that social security has Inall parts of his proposal, the President turn it8 attention to addressing the otherthe retirement plans of the majority ofhd the courage to put the problems of long-term revisions that may have to beworking Americans. Earlier this year, thethe social security system on the table made in the social security sy8teln to keepSenate rejected the administration's ap-along with his recommendations to solve it operating in the 21st century. proach on a 96-to-0 vote. Our actions willthem. He got our abtention at the time, The Senate's action today fully rec-be based on a more realistic view of theand I for one appreciated what he did' ognizes that there are ehort- and long-short-term financing issue. because it made us address the problem. range problems affecting the social se- A 8econd important aspect of this billAnd it appeared as a result that a ma- curity system. This was my contentionis the transfer of funds among the threejority in Congress agreed that the sys- when I offered an amendment to the taxsocial security trust funds. This is ac-tem's problems were serious and that cut. bill that directed the Senate FinancecomplIshed through a realinement of thesomething ought to be done. Conunittee to report to the Senate bysocialsecuritybypayroll' taxand The Aging Committee under the dls- S 11502 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE October15, 1981 tinguished leadership of Senator HEINZ,be offset dollar for dollar by the amountthis amendment will go a long way to- Itschairman, and Senator CHILES, Itsthe pension exceeds $300. but In no caseward reassuring those retirees now re- ranking minority member, held a serieswill the social security benefit be reducedcelving social security benefits that Con- of hearings In the months that followedto a level lower than the amounts of thegress has no Intention of pulling the rug to explore all aspects of the social' secu-benefit based on actual earnings. Ac-out from under them. If we are not going rity system's problems, both in the shortcording to the Social Seourity Admln-to'take measures now to Insure this, the and the long term. All the experts whoistratton, 2.7 million of the 3 miltonleast we can do is give this kind of as- came before the committee agreed thatminimum beneficiaries would continuesurance to alleviate the many fears about there was an Imminent short-term cashto receive the full minimum benefit. the future of the soctal security system1 shoitage facing the Old Age and Surviv- So that this does not worsen the con-particularly for those elderly persons ors' Insurance (OASI) trust fund thatditton of the trust fund, the bill extendswhose lifeline is the social security check jeopardized the timely payment of bene-the disability maximum family benefitthey get every month. fits next year. formula to retirement and survivor cases There are other amendments which These same witnesses testified that afor workers reaching age 62 or dy1nI did not support. I did not support the few years later the problem was expect-after 1981. Additional revenues wouldamendment offered by the distinguished ed to spread to the other trust funds,be generated by a provision that remàvesSenator from Missouri (Mr. EAGLETON) assuming Congress authorized interfundthe exclusion of certain sick pay fromwhich would Increase the windfall prof- borrowing, unless the economy per-social security taxes during the first 6Its tax on newly discovered, oil and put formed a miracle. Under such optimisticmonths the employee is not workingthese revenues into a reserve fund for economic assumptions, the trust fundGiven the serious financial condition ofsocial security. I opposed the amendment ratios would. become critically low, butthe trust funds and the original purposefor two reasons. could get by and continue to make pay-of the minimum benefit to provide a First, the amendment would establish ments in the short term. But It was themodest floor of income to the elderlyfor the first time general revenue financ- consensus of our witnesses that this ap-poor who have no other resources, I be.ing of the social security system. I have proach was too risky, that further stepsIleve this provision Is equitable. grave reservations about this approach should be taken to shore up the system Secoüd, to address the short-termand fear that It would Irreparably darn- In the next 10 years. funding problem, this bill reallocates theage the Insurance nature of the system Because of the many concerns andsocial security tax among the tl)ree tt under which those who contribute earn fears expressed to me about the plightfunds. Keeping the overall social secu-benefits. of the social security system and Itsrity tax rate the same as under current Second, such a proposal could seriously ability to survive, during the Augustlaw, the OASI tax would be increased,jeopardize the independence of the social recess I conducted an Aging Committeethe disability Insurance (DI) tax wouldsecurity trust funds and possibly lead at 'field hearing In Evanston, In.Thepur-be decreased and the hospital Insurancesome future date to a needs-related sys- pose of the hearing was simply to let(HI) tax would be decreased throU$htern or efforts to reduce benefits beyond people In my State know the seriousness1985. then subsequently Increased, what is necessary to maintain the sol- of the system's problems and their cause Iii order to provide additional fiexi-vency of the trust funds. At the very bllity in meeting benefit obligations overleast, consideration of such a measure and to get their Input on how best to should be the subject of thorough review solve these problems. As one might ex-the next 10 years, the proposal wouldby the Finance Committee and part of pect, we did not reach a consensus thatalso give the Secretary of the Treasurythe more comprehensive reform package day. We had a very lively debate aboutauthority to borrow between the Congress will have to adopt sometime in the merits of different olutIons.'We did,and DI funds. This interfund borrowingthe next few years. however, agree that the social securityauthority would expire at the end of I also did not support the amendment problems were real and' that Congress1990 and It would involve only the twoto restore the minimum benefit to those had a responsibility, a commitment, tocash benefit funds. who receive Government pensions for the preserve the social security system, both So the bill solves two Immediate prob-reasons I cited before. for those now receiving benefits and forlems: It provides a much needed and Madam President, the bill before us those who are paying the taxes whichwidely supported mechanism for Insur-today, despite Its shortcomings, deserves support It. Ing the solvency of the retirement fund I came away from the hearIng con-In the near term and also restores' thethe support of us all. It does solve the vinced that even though there was a'minimum benefit In a fair way withoutproblem of the OASI trust fund next great deal of disagreement and that noworsening the condition of the trustyear and should reaàsure current retirees , thattheir benefits will continue. Most solution would be easy or painless, we Infunds. Important, It gives the Congress the time Congress would do a disservice to the The Senate has also adopted someto give long and careful study to the fi- American people by allowing the systemvery worthwhile amendments which nancing problems of the social security to struggle along year after year withstrongly supported. It has included asystem and to develop a lasting, biparti- the fear of bankruptcy hanging over themeasure to require the Comptroller Os san solution that will preserve the cor- heads of millions of beneficiaries, shat-era! to undertake a study of the Socialnerstone of this country's retirement In- tering the public's confidence in theSecurity Admh'l4ration to determinecome policy. world!s greatest social insurance system.the management emctency. employee Mr. MITCHL. Mr. President, the Pt- Like many other Senators, includingproductivity, and overall effectiveness ofnance Committee bill partially restores the very capable chairman of the Fi-Its operation. tho minimum payment for current retir- nance Committee, Senator DOLE, I am Another amendment requires the Sec-sea. Social security recipients receiving disappointed In the measure before usrotary of Health and Human Services tothe minimum benefit and also receiving because It only addresses a small part ofreport to Congress within 90 days aboutGovernment pensions will have their the social security problem. It only post-what actions are being taken to prevent minimum payment reduced dollar-f or- pones 'the short-term financing problempayments to deceased persons. Still 0th-dollar by the' amount of Government and means that we will be back hereers give the Government more authoritypensions received in excess of $300 per again In 2, possIbly 4years,debatingto enforce provisions already In the! aw month. how to avoid another Imminent fundingwhich bar certain payments to prisoners, 'It is my understanding that this offset crisis. Mid the bill completely Ignoressimilar to a measure I cosponsored, and cannot reduce a rectplent'sbeneflt below the long-term Imbalance that will occurSprovide stiffer penalties for the misuse ofwhat his or her earned benefit would be. In the next century when 'the baby boom'social security numbers. That is, It would apply only to the un- begins to reach retirement age. Perhaps, the most tmportant is theearned portion of the minimum payment The committee's measure, however,amendment which expresses the sense offor such recipients. does make two' very necessary and im-theCongressthatfutureleglslattve Is this also the understanding of the portant changes. First, It restores thechanges should not reduce the urrent' Senator from Kansas? minimum benefit to almost 'all Its re-dollar amount of monthly retIrement Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, If the Sen- cipients. Only persona with Oovernmentbenefits to which individuals are entitled.ator will yield, that is a correct state- pensions above $300 per month Will haveIn the absence of a more comprehensivement. That is my understanding and I their minimum benefit reduced. It' willsocial security financing reform measure, hope that we have made that clear., I October 15, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— SENATE S 11503 thank the Senator for raising it againwere ndt going to let the matter die a This reveals a lack of perception on because wEwant to underscore that thisvictim to OMB's knife. the administration's part regarding the is the intent of the amendment. The President's request came on theSenate's reasons for rejecting the May Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, If Ievening of the day that the Senate Fi-12 plan. The Senate rejected that plan may simply add, the chairman's andnance Committee unanimously voted tobecause it was precipitious:It would Senator MITCHELL'S understandingis restore the benefit for the majority ofhave pulled the rug out from under precisely mine. The matter is not ambig-Americans already receiving it. The re-many elderly Americans dependent upon uous. It is clear, but it is clearer becausequest came 2 months after the Housepromised social security retirement in- of the Senator from Maine having madevoted 404 to 20 to restore the benefit;come. The Senate rejected the plan be- these remarks. hardly what one would characterize as acause it went far beyond what savings Mr. MITCHELL. I thank the chairmanpartisan vote. might be necessary to insure the finan- and the ranking minority Member. Senate Democrats would have wel-cial health of the system. The Senate SOCIAL SECURITY comed Republican votes early on in ouralso rejected the plan because it re- Mr.ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President,fight to maintain the minimum benefittreated from the challenge of social last February the President promised the•for retired Americans, but partisan poli-security:to provide an adequate na- American people that his Federal budget-tics, directed from the Office of Manage-tional retirement safety net for elderly cutting plan would be humane because itment and Budget, resulted in partisanAmericans. would include a safety net of programs,votes time and time again. Other aspects of the President's recent includingsocialsecurityretirement, During the budget process when Senatespeech were equally troubling. The Presi- whose benefits would be preserved InDemocrats attempted to preserve thedent outlined yet another major round full—exempt from budget cuts. benefit, the administration wrote to con-of Federal budget cuts and he was very Theadministrationthenturnedgressional leaders on July 18, and ac-emphatic when he told us that this latest around and asked Congress to eliminatecused Members of Congress of "oppor-round of cuts would not be the last. One the social security minimum benefit fortunistic political maneuvering, cynicallyweek later, 0MB Director Stocknian both present and future retirees as partdesigned to play on the fears of manyreiterated before the House Budget Com- of its budget-cutting plan. Consequently,Americans." The White House wrote thatmittee that social security retirement the benefit was taken away from 3 mil-restorationofthepayment"wouldbenefits should not be Immune from lion retirees, and eliminated for futurejeopardize our economic recovery pro-future rounds of cuts. social security retirees in the adnainistra-gram so vital to the well-being of the The President backed away from his tion's August budget-cutting victory. Nation." impressive Augustvictories on large Two weeks ago, President Reagan ad- I regret that legitimate and stronglybudget and tax cuts—when the admin- dressed the American people for theheld policy disagreements were charac-istration proclaimed that its new pro- fourth time regarding the state of theterized in such a political and partisangram was now in place—by stating: fashion. In the euphoria aftei our budget bUl was Nation's economy. In that speech, the approved this summer, we didn't point out President asked Congress to restore the In the July 18 letter, the Presidentimmediately that while we did get most of social security minimum benefit for thepromised to confront the social securitywhat We'd asked for, most Isn't all. majority of -retirees already receiving it.issue head-on in a nationally televised The legislation being considered by theaddress. He promised to tell the Amer- Yet, for fiscal year 1982, Congress cut Senate today would meet the President'sican people the "facts" on social security$600 million morOin Federal budget out- recuest. "as soon as possible." lays than the President requested. When the President asked Congress to The President's speech of2 weeks When the White House circulated an restore the minimum benefit he told theago represents an administration re-official fact sheet to support the Presi- American people: treat from its promise of the "facts." Thedent's remarks, it explained that when It was never our intention to take awayfacts are that the draconian benefit cutsthe President said Congress had not this support from those who truly need it. proposed by the White House last Maygiven him all that he wanted, he was simply are not necessary to keep the so-talking about the social security cuts Yet, during the budget process whencial security system solvent in the shortproposed last May. Senate Democrats led a strong fight.term. The President seemed to recognize The Senate's action on the pending against elimination of the benefit forthis in his address to the Nation. Rathersocial security measure is a solid first current recipients, the administrationthan $88 billion in immediate benefit tutsstep to resolving the crisis of confidence had forcefully and consistentlyarguedas he originally requested, the Presidentsurrounding the fiscal health of the sys- for complete across-the-board repeal.recommended that Congress enact inter-tem. Solutions to long-term financing Is- During that time, 0MB releasedan offi-fund borrowing authority as an appro-sues can be found and the American cial administration statement describ-priate financing measure for the short-people expect us to find them. Demo- ing the benefit as a "pure 'windfall' forterm cash flow problems of the system. crats stand ready to work for a resolu- recipients," and saying that financially The legislation pending before thetion of the problems facing the retire- needy retirees would havea welfareSenate would meet the President's re-ment program. It may be that Demo- "safety net" to fall back on when theirquest. But as late as July, in the revisedcrats and Republicans will simply have hard-earnedretirementincome wasJuly budget, the administration con-different ideas on what the social secu- slashed. tinued to insist on the May plan of $88rity system should be. It seems clear that the administra-billion in benefit cuts over the next 6 Democrats want a system that pro- tion's change in thinking on restorationyears. The White House. publicly changedtects the financlal security of our Na- of the minimum benefit came onlywithits position from supporting those deeption's elderly, and we may find that we the realization that the Congress wouldcuts to favoring interfund borrowing au-can all agree on this. We will continue restore the payment regardless of Whitethority only after two Senate votes into look to the President for leadership House budget-cutting goals. support of borrowing authority, and onlyon this issue, and we will need an ad- The request for restoration came onlyafter the Senate Finance Committeeministration that speaks with one voice. after the Senate had already heldfivevoted unanimously for this course ofFor too long now, the President has said party-line votes on the question.. Theaction. - one thing on social security while ad- President's request came on thevery Inhis recent speech, the Presidentministration officials have acted to do day that Senate Republicans, by onlytold the American people: "Well we'reanother. a two vote margin, had prevented annot going to cut benefits." But, he again In his television address the President up or down vote by the full Senaterecommended the same cuts in socialsaid "Some nave suggested reducing on restoration of the payment. More-security formulated by 0MB Directorbenefits," but he believed that "thereare over, it was Obvious that the SenateStockman whieh the Senate promptlybetter solutions." The 'resident said this would have to vote again and againonrejected last May. The difference beingas if his administration had never asked the minimum benefit until the paymentthat the President appeared willing tofor the largest, deepest social security was restored. Senate Democrats, led byphase in these cuts over an uIspecifiedcuts In our Nation's history. Senators RIEGLE, CHILES, and Moywni1qz, To put this behind us, the President's time period. words and administration actions will 11504 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE October 15, 1981 have to mesh. It Is my hope that we haverug pulled out from under them and not gettee Subcommittee on Social Security, May 28, their check."—Ronald.Reagan, Debate with 1981. seen the last of administration effortsPresident Carter, October 2, 1980. "The social security minimum benefit is a to balance the budget by raiding the "First of all, obviously, the President isn'tpure 'windfall' for recipients."—OMB State- social security system. going to cut the entitlement of anyone whoment, July 19, 1981. Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-Is dependent upon social security. "I stated during the campaign and I re- sent to have printed in the RECORD the "I'm suggesting there are people receivingpeat now I will not stand by and see those administration's May 12 plan, a Collec'social security who might not need it."—.of you who are dependent on Social Security tion of Wihte House statements on socialTreasury Secretary Regan, Testimony beforedeprived of your benefits .... Imake that security, recent Correspondence betweenthe Senate Appropriations Committee, Jan-pledge to you as your President. You have uary 27, 1981. no reason to be frightened. You will con- myself and the administration regard- "It may well be that an actuarially soundtinue to receive your checks in the full ing social security, and a summary ofprogram should have been established fromamount due to you. In any plan to restore Senate social tecurity votes held thisthe beginning of the social security system, fiscalintegrity of SocialSecurity, Iwill session. with each generation's tax payments, pluspersonally see that no part of the plan will There being no objection, the materialinterest, sufficient to cover its own benefits.be at the expense of you who are now de- was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,Now, however, developing a social securitypendent on your monthly Social Security as follows: system that would become actuarially soundchecks.'.—Presideiit Reagan, Address to the Administration social security plan over the next 20 to 30 years would create In- NatIon, July 27, 1981. May 12, 1981 tergenerational problems. 'Now if youll permit me, I'd like to turn "Since it is safe to assume that the Fed.to another subject which I know has many In billions; positive numbers eral government will continue in existenceof you very concerned and even frightened. indicated Saving5 in perpetuity and has the taxing power,There has been a great deal of misinforma- Short-rangecharacteristics, and powers that a privatetion and for that matter pure demagoguery effect cal-pension plan or insurance company does noton the subject of Social Security. encieryearpossess, itis not technically necessary to "Well we're not going to cut benefits. , Item 1982—86 have an actuarially sound social securityPresidentReagan, Address to the Nation, Budget proposals: Social security mlii- system."—Treasury Secretary Began, WrittenSeptember 24, 1981. imum, student andlumpsum death Testimony before the Senate Appropriations Question. You would not regard early re- benefits cuts $35.5Committee, January 27, 1981. tirement as an earned benefit? Additional proposals: "Some of you have heard from constituents Response. .jisan earned benefit, but It Cover sick pay in first 6 months 2.6afraid that Social Security checks, for ex- is not a core benefit . .. "—0MBDirector Change computation points for average ample, might be taken from them. I regretStockman, Testimony before Senate Budget indexed monthly earnings from age the fear these unfounded stories have causedCommittee, October 8, 1981. 6atoage6s 1.3and welcome this opportunity to set things Increase bend points in primary bene- straight. fit formula by 50% (instead of "We will continue to fulfill the obliga- U.S. Ssrarx, 100%) of wage increases, 1982—87_....4.2tions that spring from our national con- Washington, D.C., May 1,1981. Benefit rate of 55% of primary benefit science. Ron. DONALD T. REGAIS, for retired workers (and 27½ % for Secretary 0/ Treasury, Department of the spouses) at ago 62 17.6 "The full retirement benefits of the more Treasury, Washington, D.C. Eliminate benefits for children of re- than 31 million Social Security recipients DEAR MR. SECRETARY: I have been informed tired workers aged 62—64 1.9willbe continued along with an annualthat the First Concurrent Budget Resolution Disability maximum family benefit ap- cost-of-living increase. Medicare will not bewhich the Senate Budget Committee will be plicable to survivor and retirement cut —President Reagan, Speech to thereporting tonight includes savings that re- cases 2.9Congress on Federal Budget-cutting Plansult from a change in the way many indexed Eiminate windfall portion of benefits and Safety Net, Feb. 18, 1981. federal programs are adjusted for inflation. for persons with pensions from non- "I think it would be wrong, especially for It is my understanding that the change in covered employment .6our elderly and retired population. ii youthe cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) would Require "medical only" determination weretolimitthecost-of-livingadjust-result in outlay savings of $590 million In of disability (i.e., exclude vocational ment ... youwouldhavesubstantiallyFY 1981, $7.9 billion in FY 1982, $7.3 billion factors) 77reduced the real purchasing power, the realin FY 1983, and $7.4 billion in FT 1984. Increase disability waiting period from standard of living of 33 million Americans These savings would be achieved by apply- 5.months to 6 months 1.4who are dependent on those benefits thatIng the lower of the Consumer Price Index Require disability prognosis of 24+ they have earned during their working life-(CPI) or the Bureau of Labor Statistics' In- months duration(instead of 12+ time. dex of Average Rourly Earnings of Total Pr!- months) 2.8 • it would be wrong and it would bevate Non-Agricultural Workers to the COLA Require 30 QC out of last 40 quarters unjust for us now to propose to solve theprovided under Social Security and Disability fordisabilitybenefits(instead of inflationproblem . . . byimposingevenInsurance, Railroad Retirement, Supplemen- 20/40) 10.0further burdens on those who are least abletal Security Income (S5I), Civil Service Re- Move date for automatic benefit in- toprotectthemselves."—OMBDirectortirement, Military Retirement, and Veterans creases from June to September (and Stockman, Testimonybeforethe SenatePensions. In addition to using the lower Of use 12-month average) 6.3Budget Committee, February 19, 1981. the two measures, the date of the adjustment Ruse retirement-test exemption for age "I've been wondering if you couldn't re-for 1982 is shifted from July 1, 1982 to Oc- 68+ to $10,000 in 1983, $15,000 In form the system in such a way that, it youtober 1, 1982. 19114, $20,000 in 1985, and eliminate Could prove you are providing for your own Because of repeated public comments by test in 1986 retirement, you could waive participating inAdministration spokesmen, it has been my Social Securlty."—President Reagan, Inter-understanding that the Administration was Total effect 88.3view, Philadelphia Bulletin, February 20,opposed to any, change in the method of com- SUMMARY OF WHITE HOUSE STATEMENTS ON 1981.. puting the COLA for indexed benefits. Socasi. SECURITY "The crisis is inescapable. It Is here. It is On April 1, 1981, during Senate considera- "it is essential that the integrity of allnow. It is serious. And it must be faced.tion of the Reconciliation Resolution, 5. Con, aspects of Social Security be preserved."—Today we move to face it head on and solveRes. 9, by a vote of 12 to 88, the Senate over- Ronald Reagan, Acceptance Speech, Repub- whelmingly rejected an amendment offered it. If we do nothing, the system would goby Senator Hollings Which was almost identi- lican Nomination for Presidency, July 17,broke as early as fall 1982, breaking faithcal to the proposal ordered reported by thO 1980. with the 36 million Americans dependingBudget Committee. "This strategy for (economic) growth doeson Social Security.. .Itis vital that we not require altering or taking back neces-make these hard choices—and make them In his comments on the Senate floor on the sary entitlements already granted to thenow. We cannot postpone any longer the day Rollings'amendment,Senator Domenici, American people. The integrity of the So-of reckoning for Social Security."—HealthChairman of the Senate Budget Committee, cial Security system' will be defended. by myand Human Services Secretary Schweiker,argued that the President "asked us not to administration and itsbenefitswill oncePress Conference Statement. May 12, 1981. consider it (the COLA issue) at this time." again be made meaningful."—Ronald Rea- "The questionbefore theCongressis Given the Senate's recent action on this gan, Economic Policy Address to the Inter-whether the 36 million Americans who cur-important policy issue, it is imperative that. nationalBusinessCouncil, September9,rently depend on the Social 8ecürity systemthe Senate understand the Adninistration's 1980. can count on any check at all in less thanposItion at 'this time. "What is needed is a study that I havetwo years hence .... Themost devastating If the Administration continues to oppose proposed by. a task force of experts... withbankruptcy in history will occur on or aboutadjustments in the COLA such as those as- the premise that no one presently depend- Nov.3,1982."—OMB Director Stockman,.sumed in the budget ordered reported by the ent on Social Security is going to have theTestimony before Ways and Means Commit-Senate Budget, Committee, theh it clearly October 15, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE' S 11505 has no chance of passage and should not beam writing to you to ask that we now bringsignedto play on the fears of many Ameri- assumed as a savings. that same spirit to bear on another issuecans, that some In the Congress are initi- On the other hand, If the Administrationthreatening our public welfare. ating at this time. These efforts appear de- does support the changes in the COLA as- As you know, the Social Security 8ystemsigned to exploit an issue rather than find sumed in this budget, the Senate miht en-is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. Overa solution to the urgent Social Security act these changes. the next five years, the Social Security trustproblem. They would also have the unfor- Therefore. I would appreciate your replyfund could encounter deficits of up to $111tunate effect of disrupting the budget con- to the following questions: billion, and in the decades ahead its un-ference and reversing the actions of a ma- (I) Does the Administration support thefunded obligations could run well into thejority of both Houses of the Congress. ilucl assumption in the budget ordered reportedtrillions. Unless we in government are will-a result would jepardize our economic o. by the Senate Budget Committee of outlaying to act, a sword of Damocles will soonCovery program so vital to the well-being 0f savings resulting from the change in thehang over the welfare of millions of ourthe Nation. COLA assumed by the Committee? citizens. In order to tell the American peo1 s the. (2) will the Administration support legis- Last week. Secretary Richard Schweikerfacts, and to let them know that I shell fight lation to change the COLA so as to generatepresented a series of Administration pro-to preserve the Social Security System and the COLA outlay savings assumed by theposals that we believe are sound. sensibleprotect their benefits, I will ask for time on Senate Budget Committee? solutions, both in the short and long term.television to address the Nation as soon as (8)Will the Administration recommendWe recognize that Members of Congress onpossible. this legislation to the Congress? If so, when?both sides of the aisle have alternative During this address. I will call on the I would be grateful for your response toanswers. This diversity is healthy—so longCongress to lay aside partisan politics, and these three questions by Wednesday, May 6.as it leads to constructive debate and thenjoin me in a constructive effort to put Social 1981, so I would have ample time to informto an honest legislative response. Security on a permanently sound financial my colleagues of your position prior to Sen- As Secretary Schweiker has pointed outbasis as soon as the 97th Congress returns ate consideration of the first budget resolu-on several occasions, we believe that all ofin September. tion for FT 1982. us owe an obligation to our senior citizens Sincerely. I have sent an identical letter to 0MB Di-to work together on this issue. This Ad- rector Stockman. ministration is not wedded to any single so- RONALD REAGAN. lution; Thank you for your timely assistance. this Administration welcomes the U.S. SENATE, Sincerely. opportunity to consult with Congress and Washington. D.C., July 21.1981, Rozrwr 0. BYas. with private groups on this matter. OurThs PRssxDzzrT. sole commitment—end it Is a commitmentThe White House. OwnCz OF MANAQEMENT AND Bvuo!T, we will steadfastly maintain—is to threeWashington. D.C. Washington. D.C.. May 6. 1981. basic principles: Da*a Ma. Pazsmssrv: This will acknowledge Hon. ROBERT C. Bms. First, this nation must preserve the Integ-receipt of your July 18 letter, expressing your Democratic Leader. U.S. Senate. rity of the Social Security trust fund andconcern for the 85 million American, who Washington. D.C. the basic benefit structure that protects olderdepend on Social Security for their llvelihood. DEAR SmesToR BYRD: Thank you for th op-Americans. I regret that you suggest in your letter that portunity to provide the Administration's Second. we must hold down the tax bur-any deviation from the Administration's pro- position concerning changes in cost-of-livingden on the workers who support Social Se-posals on Social Security is "opportunistic adjustments (COLA's) for income securitycurity. political maneuvering, cynically designed to programs adopted by the Senate Budget Finally, we must eliminate all abuses japlay on the fears of many Americans. .. Committee(theHollingsAmendment).the system that can rob the elderly of their YourAdministration'sproposedSocial These changes would: rightful legacy. Security cuts are a breach of faith with the Make COLA adjustments on the basis of It is clear that the half-actions of the pastAmerican people. Gloom and doom predic- the lower of the CPI or average wags in-are no longer eumcient for the future. It Istions for the financial solvency of the system creases, and equally clear that we must not let partisanare severe distortions of the problems faced Shift COLA adjustment dates beginning indifferences or political posturing prevent us by the Social Security trust funds. calendar year 1982 from July to October forfrom working together. Since the inception of the Social Security OASDI. Railroad Retirement, 55! and Vet- Therefore. I have today asked Secretaryprogram, no Administration has done more erans; from April to October for civilian re-Schweiker to meet with you and other leaders to shake the confidence of the American peo- tirement; and March to October for militaryof the Congress as soon as possible to launchple in the security of the Social Security sys- retirement. a bipartisan effort to save Social Security.tem. No Administration has ever before at- In response to your specific questions weI have also asked him to make the full re-tempted $o balance the budget, by educ1ng would offer the following guidance: sources of his department available for thisSocial Security benefits. (1) The President has opposed changingundertaking. And of course, you can count The "facts" are that the draconian solu- the current CPT-based cost-of-living adjust-on my active support of this effort. tions proposed by the Administration simply ment formula in Social Security as a budget None of us can afford to underestimateare not necessary to keep the system solvent savings measure. That position has notthe seriousness of. the problems facing So-in the short run. On July15,Senator changed. cial Security. For generations of Americana,Moynihsn offeredan amendment which (2) The Administration does recognize thethe future literally rests upon our actions.would have solved the foreseeable short-run Impending solvency problems of the SocialThis should be a time for statesmanship ofproblems of the system, and allowed for a Security Trust Fund. Significant savings arethe highest order, and I know that no onedispassionateanalysisofthelong-term needed and Secretary Schweiker has prom-shares that desire more strongly than you. problems which the system may face in the ised the relevant Congressional Committees With every good wish. next century. But the amendment which a package of reforms designed to maintain Sincerely. provided for borrowing among the three So- solvency of the Fund. As a practical matter. RONALD REAGAN. cial Security trust funds was defeated on these changes would reduce current law out- N0TE,—ThI5is the text of identical lettersJuly 16 by a party-line vote. lays in the income security function by aaddressed to Senate Majority Leader Howard We did not wish to make this a partisan magnitude sumcient to achieve the FirstH. Baker, Jr., Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr.. Speakerissue. We have welcomed Republican votes Concwrrent Resolution ceilings. of the House of Representatives, Senate Mi-in support of our efforts. But partisan poli- (8) For these reasons, we believe the out-nority Leader Robert C. Byrd, House Majoritytics, directed from the White Rouse and the lay totals in the resolution reported by theLeader Jim Wright. House Minority LeaderOmce of 0MB, have time and again resulted Senate Budget Comnlittee can be achieved.Robert H. Michel, and Senator Strom Thur-in a partisan vote on the Social Security We would therefore not support amendmentsmond of South Carolina. causing a net increase in the outlay levels Issue. provided in the resolution. I would gspectfully suggest that your Ad- Tnn Wnrrz Housi. ministration'srhetoricisresponsible Sincerely. Washington, July 18. 1981. for DAVID A. STOCKaSAN. Hon. ROBERT C. Byim, much of the fear and panic being experienced Di rector. Minority Leader. by the elderly. In recent testimony, David DoNAlD T. EncaN, U.S. Senate. Washington. D.C. Stockman. Director of the Once of Manage- Secretary 0/ the Treasury. ment sad Budget, stated that "The most DEAR SENATOR Bran: The highest prioritydevastating bankruptcy in history will occur of my Administration is restoring the integ-on or about November 3. 1982." Such fear Lvrvza TO CONGRESSIONAL LEADEBJa, • rity of the Social Security System. Thosetactics certainly do not contribute to the May 21. 1981 85 million Americans who depend on Socialcalm and reasoned atmosphere needed to SOCIAL BECURrrY TRUST FUND Security expect and are entitled to prompt.fashion a bipartisan solution to the problems DEAR : Over the past several weeks,bipartisan action to resolve the currentof the system. all Americans have been proud of the bipar,-financial problem. I would also suggest, Mr. President, that tisan spirit that we have created in working At the same time, I deplore the opportu-our elderly citizens were misled by campaign on the nation's economic recovery. Today Inistic political maneuvering, cynically do-promises to leave the Social Security retire- S 11506 CONGRESSIONAL.REORD—SENATE' October 15,1981 montbenefits unscathed by budget èuts. TheAmerican people which inordinately rewards 1PVNBaouowuso - frustration anger, and fear we are witness-the already-rich With huge tax cute which No.188 Baker motion to table Mo7nthsn, ing now from our senior citizens is a resultare partially financed by cutting the Socialetal, modified amendment to provide for In- of those broken promises, and of the exag-Security benefits of the Nation's elderly? terfund Social Security borrowing. Tabled 51 gerfition of the system's problems in order Sincerely. to 46 100 percent of Democrats voted nay; to stampede the American people into sup- RoBERT C. Bus. 98 percent of Republicans voted yea. (EJ. port for unfair and ill-reasoned cuts. Bal- Re.. 26$ IRR. 42421, Economic Recovery Tax ancingthe budgetIs something that we must TuE Warn Houss, Act of 1981, July 16. 1981) do, but notonthe backs of Social Security Washington, August 12, 1981. No. .218 Sasaer, et a. amendment express', beneficiaries. Hon. ROBERT C. Bus, ing sense of Senate that Finance Qososnitise Democrats stand ready to work for a reso-U.S. Senate, report bill by November 15, 1981, authortalng lution of the long-range problems of theWashington, D.C. Social Security Interfund borrowing. Agreed SOCI1 Security system, while protecting the DzsR SENATOR BYRD: The President hasto 89 to t 96 percent of Democrats veted financial security of our elderly in the shortasked O to thank you for your July 27 let-yea; 96 percent of Republicans voted yea. run. I believe that such a solution can beter on the Social Security issue. (H.J, Re., 266 IH.R. 4242J, Economic Re- found, and that the American people expect During his Stay In California, the Presi-covery Tax Act of 1981, July 24, 1981) us to find It. dent and his advisory staff will be looking carefully at the Issue of Social Security. As NEW BESERVll lUND Sincerely, No. 294 Dole motion to table th6 Eagleton. ROBERTC.BvsD. you know, we are concernàd to make sure that all Americana receive the benefits toet sl, amendment establishing a reserve So- which they are entitled. We recognize thatcial Security Trust Fund which would be fi- U.S. SENATE, nanced from revenues from the repeal of i'S-. Washington, D.C, July 27, 1981. no one benefits if the Social Security systemduction In the windiall profit tax Oontained TuE PRESIDENT, goeé bankrupt and the funds are unavailable The White House, to pay those citizens who have contributedIn the 1981 Tax Cut Act. Tabled 67 to 31, over the years. The President has made clear62 percent of Democrats voted nay; 94 per- Washington, D.C. cent of Republicans voted yea. (H.J. Be., 266, Dssa Ms. PRESIDENT: Tax cuts, spendinghis commitment to see that those in genuine cuts, and the Social Security System are allneed are not jeopardized. Public Debt Limit Increase, September 99, part of the Intricate fabric of the Federal As the Democratic Leader of the Senate. 1981) budget. One element of the budget cannotyou may be assured that your ideas on this • TaOS? lUND £OcouN'raBu.ZTY be changed without having a direct affect onsubject are appreciated and that we welcome No, 235 Eagleton-Stennla amendment to another. your suggestions in this important effortto require a report to Congress with the, budget During the campaign for the presidencyresolve the Social Seèurity financing crisis. that summarizes deficit or surplus for three you promised the American people that you With cordial regard, I am Social Seourity trust fund.. Agreed to 97 to would balance the budget in fiscal year 1983 Sincerely, 2. 100 percent of Democrat. voted yea; 9$ The Administration's current budget pro- MAX L. FRIEDERSDORP, percent of Republicans, voted yea. (H.J. Bee. jects a balance by fiscal year 1984, and as- Assistant to the President. 266 (H1. 42421, Economic Recovery Tax Act sumes additional Social Security cuts as well of 1951, July 29, 1981 as $44 billion in "unidentified" cuts. SocIAL SECURITY Vovze, 1981 BEND'ITS TAXATION Your economic recovery plan calls for an MINIMUM BENEFI'i'S No. 181 State. 'ensof the Senate that enormous reduction in the revenue collected No. 50 Riegle, et al., amendment to restoreSocial Security benefits shall not be taxable. by the Federal government, on the order of $800millionin 1962 outlays and $900 millionAdopted 98 to 0. (8. Bee. 87, Social Security $730 billion over the next five years. In orderin 1983 outlays to maintain current payments Benefits Taxation, July 14, 1981) to avoid large deficits, spending cuts muchfor Social Security minimum benefits and BENIPTI'S 'CUT lOB ZASLY RETIREES larger than those the Congress is about to offsets these amounts by savings in adminis- No. 121 Hatfield motion to table Moynihan', enact will be necessary to offset the loss oftrative Costs. Defeated 39 to 55. 91 percent of et alT amendment stating finding of Congress revenue from the proposed tax cut. Deinocrate voted yea; 100 percent of Repub-that President has proposed precipitous and On May 12, you recommended a severe re- licans voted nay.(S. Con. Res. 9, Budgetsevere reductions in Social Security benefits. duction In Social Security benefits. Under ReconcilIation, 1981—88, March 30, 1981) your plan, Social Security benefits. would be for persons approaching retirement age and. cut by $88 billion over the next five years, No. 160 Riegle, et al., amendment to limitstates that Congress will not support modi- including a 40 percent reduction in benefitsrepeal of Social Security minimum benefitfications inexcess of thOse necessary to f.r people retiring at age 62. to new beneficiaries. Defeated 45 to 63. 89achieve a financially sound system. Tabled Most objectiveanalysts,including thepercent of Democrats voted yea: 92 percent49 to 48. 98 percent of Democrats voted nay: non-partisan Congressional Budget Office.of Republicans voted nay. (S. 1371. Omnibus96 percent of Republicans voted yea. (RB, Reconciliation, 1981. June 23, 1981) 3512, Supplemental Appropriations and Re- believe that your massive cuts in Social Se- scissione Act, 1981, May 20. 1981) curity benefits are unnecessary to preserve No. 207 DOle motion to table Riegle et al. No. 122 Hatfield motion to table Dole, et al, the solvency of the System. Cuts in benefitsamendment to restore Social Security mini-amendment stating sense of Congress that it which the Congressis about to enact as partmum benefits to persons enrolled prior toshall not precipitously and unfairly reduce of your budget-cutting program, when comrn December 1981 Tabled 52 to 46. 91 percent ofearly retirees' benefit. and it will enact with billed with authority for the three Social Se-Democrats voted nay; 92 percent of Repub- bipartisan effort reforms necessary to insure curity funds to borrow among themselves, licans voted yea. (H.J. Res. 266 (H.R. 42421.the solvency of the system but will not sup- would meet any foreseeable need to shore up Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981, July 21, port reductions in benefits which exceed the System well into the next century. 1981) those necessary to achieve a financially sound It appears that the Administration has No. 248 Chair ruling that Moynihan, et al,system and well-being of all retired Ameri- abandoned its promise not to cut Social Se-motion to bring up bill to restore Social Se-cans. Motion to table defeated 4 to 93. 100 curity retirement benefits. It appears thatcurity minimum benefit Is not in order inpercent of Democrats voted nay; 92 percent Office of Management and Budget Directorthat no bill from the House may be consid-of Republicans voted nay. (H.R. 3512, Supple- David Stockman discovered that the budgetered on day received unless by unanimousmental Appropriations and Rescissions Act, cannot be balanced, in light of the enormousconsent. Chair sustained 57 to 30. 79 percent 1981, May 20, 1981) tax cuts, unless Social Security benefits areof Democrats voted nay; 100 percent of Re- No; 123 Dole, et al, amendment stating reduced. publicans voted yea. (H.R. 4331, Social Se-sense of Congress that it shall not precipi- In a letter to me dated July 18. you prom-curity Minimum Benefits, July 81, 1981) tously and unfairly reduce early retirees' ised to "ask for time on television. . .to No. 249 Robert C. Byrd motion to adjournbenefits and it will enact with bipartisan ef- tell the American people the facts . . for one minute as a means of consideringfort reforms necessary to Insure the solvency aboutSocial Security. Social Sceurity Minimum Benefits bill. Mo-of the system but will not support reductions, Since the tax cuts apparently are directly in benefits which exceed those necessary to linked to your proposed Social Security bene-tion rejected 37 to 49. 95 percent of Demo- crats voted year: 100, percent of Republicansachieve a financially sound system and well- fit reductions, I was very disappointed to. being of all retired Americans. Agreed to 96 learn that your television address this eve-voted nay. (H.R. 4331, Social Security Mini- mum Benefits, July 31, 1981) to 0.(N.E. 8512, Supplemental Appropria- ning will be directed primarily, if not ex- tions and Rescissione Act, 1981, May 20, 1981.) clusively, to promoting' the revised tax-cut- No. 284 Hatfield motion to table the Sasser, ting plan. et al, amendment reducing the travel budgets - Co8T-o5'LIVINOCEANGE It is my sincere hope that your speech to-of non-defense agencies, taking with it the No. 63 Hollings amendment to allow Fed'. night will allay the concerns of the Americansecond degree Chiles, et al, amendment con-Oral cost-of-living adjustments (COLA) to people by abandoning your commitment totinuing Social Security minimum benefitsSocial Security, SSI, military civil service, Immediately and drastically cut basic Socialfor current recipients. Tabled 46 to 44. 95veterans and railroad retirement benefits to Security retirement benefits. percent of Democrats voted nay; 92 percentbe based on lesser of either CPX (which is It Is my further hope that your speechof Republicans voted yea. (H.3. Res. 325, Con-Ppresently used) or National Wags !ntion, De- tonight will answer this basic question: Howtinuing Appropriations, 1982, September 24,feated 12 to 86. 93 percent of Democrets can we explain an economic plan to the 1981) voted nay: 83 percent ofepazblleemc voted Qctober 15, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 11507 nay. (S. .Con. Res.' 9, Budget 1econciliation, IRoucanVote No 315 Leg.I ticular the staff of the committee on 1981—83,April 1.. .1981) YEAS—95 both sides, but above all to mention the No. 94 Riegle. et ai. modifled amendment chairman of the Committee on Finance to restore cuts to Social SecurIty, 881. vet-Andrew Pod Metzenbaum erans pensions, military retirement, railroadAnnstroug Garn MttcheJ Who has taken a potentially divisive and and civil service retirement benefits thatBaker Glena Moynthan even acilmonlous debate and brought a would result In changes to COLA.Defeated Baucus Oodwater Nicklea unanimous conclusion to it. 42 to 49. 88 percent of Democrats voted yea; Bentsen Gorton Nunn . There are at mInimum 3 mIllion per- 90 percent of Republicans voted nay. (S. Con.Biden Grassloy Packwood Borca Pell sons in America who have reason to be 1es. 19 IH. Con Res. 1151, FIrst Budget Reso-Boschwtta Hatch Percy grateful to him tonight. AltI3ough I will lution, 1982—84. May 8. 1981) Brsdley Hatfield Pressler 'not be among those 3 millIon I wish to No. 109 Riegle. et al, amendment to restore Buxnpere ftawkins ?roxxnLrO have myself so recorded. funding levels to retain present use of CPI Burdick liayaawa Pryor for calculating COLA and toretain July. dateByrd. Heflin QuaylO Mr. MITCHELL Mr. President, I ask instead• of October date for implementing liatiry F., Jr. Hen 1andolph unanimous consent that-I be added as Byrd. Robert C. fteJa3a Riegle a cosponsor to the bill. adjustznents. Defeated 44 to 54. 85 percent Caimon HolUnge Roth of Democrats voted yea; 90 percent of Re- Clafeo Huddieston Rudman The PRESIDING OFFWER. Without publicans voted nay. (8. Con. Res. 191 H. Chilea Humphre' &axbanee Objection, it is so ordered. Con. Res.1151, First Budget 1esolution, Cochran Inouye Ssaer Who seeks recognition? 1982—84, May 12, 1981) Cohen Jackson Schmitt . Cranston Jepsen 8Impso Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I wish to SOCIAL SECURITYENTITLEMENTS D'Ainato Johnston Specter ' take this opportunity to add my com- No.162 Moynihan, et al, modified amend. Dan.forth Kaaebaum Stenuts mendation to those of others for the dis- ment to maintain current Social Security law Deooncini Kten Stevena ' tinguished cha1rni.n of the committee, with respect 'to child welfare services, adop-Deutan . Kennedy Thurmond Senator DOLE, the ranking minorltv tion, assistance, and foster care payments.Dtxo Laxalt Tower todd Leaby • Defeated 48 to 52. 91 percent of I)emocratn Tsongea member, Mr. LONG, as well as' to the Sen- 1o1e Levln ' Wailop ator from Colorado (Mr. AsnIONo), voted yea 91 percent of Republicans voted Dorneulci Long Warner . nay. (8. 1377, Omnibus Reconciliation, 1981,Duren3erger Mathaa ' Weicker and the Senator from New. York (Mr. June23, 1981)., gieton Mateunnga Williams Moyim*pi) for their extraordinarily suc- No. 188 Cranston, ët al. amendment to re-East Mattthgly Zortnsky cessful effort to deal with this contro- tain -authority for Social Security Act fund- NOT VOTXNG—5 versial fssue with dlspatth and efficiency. ing for vocational rehabilitation services for Luger Murkowaki 8ymma I think all of us owe them a debt of disabled beneficiarieB of disability insurance Mcclure 8taord gratitude fo the manner in which they and supplemental security inc'me. Defeated have handled this piece of legislation. 47 to 50. 84 percent of Democrats voted yea; So the bill (H.R. 4331), as amended, 81 percent. Of Republicans voted nay. (S. 1377,was passed. The bill that we have Just pa8sed,as Omnibus Reconciliation. 1981, June 25, 1981). Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President,Iamended, will restore he minimumso- move to reconsider the vote by which thecial security benefit for'mo8t of the pres- Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, there are nobill was passed. ent recipients. Most importantly, Mr. further amendments that I know of.- Mr. DOLE. I move to lay that motionPresident, it restOre benefits for tho6e Mr.MOYNIHAN. There are none thaton the table. recipients who may be most in need— we are aware of on this side, Mr. Presi- The motion to lay 'on the table wasthose retirees who, through no fault of dent. agreed to. their own, had lOw earnings histories. I Mr. DOLE. I ask for third reading, Mr. Mr. BAKER. Mr President, earlier thebelieve that this amendment represents President. an equitable and admirable comprome. The PRESIDING OFFICER ThereSenator from Kansas prior to the vote being no further amendments to be of-on final passage of the social security This measure also providesa baWy fered, the o,uestlon is on the engrossmentamendments Indicated that on the so-needed Injection into the sôcjal secuilty and third reading of the bill. called Highway Trust Funds that theretirement fund. By reallocating tax co1- The bill was ordered to be engrossed.name of Senator RANDOLPH should belectiona aud a1Iwing inteflund borrow-, for a third reading and was read-a thirdwithdrawn as a cosponsor. That Is in-Ing, the OASI fund should beable- to time. correct. He should be shown as a co-make payments for the next several Mr. DOLE. I ask for the yeas and nayssponsor. He wishes to cosponsor theyears. Without this action, the fund amendment and I wish the RECORD tocould have been depleted as earlyas next on passage. reflect that. The PTESIDING OFYICEE.Isthere a fall. While everyone in this Chamberun- sufficient second? There is a sufficient The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withoutderstands that the short-termsolvency second. objection, it isso ordered. of the funds depends critically onthe Mr. DOLE. Mr. President,'I thank myperZormance of the-economy, I hopeaitd The yeas and nays were ordered. distinguished -colleague from New Yorktrust that the. measureswe have takn The PRESIDING OFFICER. 'The billand also the distinguished ranking mi-to restore our economic healthwill In - having been read the third time, thenority Member on the Democratic side, ampletime avoid a crisis In the oc1aI question is, Shall it pass? The yeas andSenator LONG, for their cooperation osecurity funds. ' - - - nays have,been ordered. The clerk willthis legislation; Yet, call the roll. Mr. President, I think everyoneh I think the final vote Indicated thethis Chamber also understandsthat we. The, assistant legislative clerk calledstrong bipartisan' support for what wehave done nothing to adcfress the longero the roll. have done. term problems in the socialsecurity sys- Mr. STEVENS. I announce that the • I also thank the staff,, the committeetem. After 1990, thesystem w111enj'oy Senator from Indiana (Mr. LTJGAR), thestaff and Membersv staff for their helpa 20 to 25-year respite from financial Senator from Idaho (Mr. MCCLURE), thethroughout the debate and in prepara-pressures. But even under the zno8t tion of the amendment, as well as Mr. Senator from Alaska (Mr. MuRxowsKI), optimistic economic scenarios, thesys- -' the Senator from Vermont (Mr. STAF-Robert Myers, the Deputy' Commissionertem,wmbe in dire straits again by the' FORD), and the Senator from Idaho (Mr.of the Social Security Administration,year 2015. WhIle you or -I may not' be and others who have been very helpful SYMMs) are necessari'y absent. - around to witness that event, it 'wouldbe Ifurther announce that, if present andto all of us in consideration of this sig-unconscionable for us to walk away and voting, the Senator from Vermont (Mr.nificant legislation. claim that "it didn't happenon my STAFFORD) and the Senator-from Idaho Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, if theshift." . • , - (Mr. SYMMS) would each vote "yea." Senator will yield, on behalf of the Mem- Wemust begin now to. fashion the bers of this side of the alsleI *lsh alto-changes needed to Insure that The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are .theregether to echo his sentiments to include our chU any other Senators in the Chamber dren and grandchildren, some of whom - wishing to vote? in our congratuIations the distinguishedarealreadypa-ying into the system, will chairman of the Subcommittee on Socialbe able to ehjoy the financial The result was announced—yeas 95,Security,, the Senator frOm Colorado security that a sound re%iremnt system affords. - nays 0, as follows: (Mr. ARMSTRONG), to mention in par-Wehave that rare opportuIi1ty of fpre- S 11508 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE (ktober 15,1981. sightInthis cae to allow gradual changes In the program that will not precipitously affect either present benea ficiaries or those close to retirement. We have. Mr. PresIdent, 20 to 30 years to implement policies that Insure the long-term viability of social security. But that should not lull us Into com- placency nor Invite us to esigage In demagoguery. Rather, it gives us the time to act expenditlously and respon- sibly to solvea potential problem before it beøomes a crisis. I look forward to working with my colleagues In both Chambers of Congress In formulating a solution that we can all be proud of.

(H.R. 4331 —AsPassed by the Senate -October15, 1981)

Inthe Senate of the United States, October 15 (legislative day, October 14), 1981.

Resolved, That the billfromthe House of Representa- tives (H.R. 4331)entitled"An Act to amend the Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1981 to restore minimum benefits under the Social Security Act", do pass with the following AMENDMENT:

Strike outallafter the enacting clause and insert: TITLE I—SOCIAL SECURITY AJIENDJIENTS

INTERFUND BORROWING SEC. 101. Section 201 of the Social Security Act is

amended by adding at the end thereof the followingnew sub-

sect zon: "(V(1) If at any time prior to January 1991 the Alan- aqing Trustee determines that borrowing authorized under this subsection is appropriate in order to best meet the need for financing the benefit payments from the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund or the Federal Dis- ability Insurance Trust Fund, the Managing Trusteemay borrow such amounts which he determines to be appropriate from either such Trust Fund for transferto and deposit in the other such Trust Fund. "(2) In any case where a loan has been made under

paragrqph (1), there shall be transferred from timeto time, 2

fromIhe borrowing Trust Fund to the lending Trust Fit nd,

interestwith respect to the unrepaid balance of such loan at a rate equal to the rate which the lending Trust Fund would earn on the amount involved if the loan were an inz.'estment

under subsection .(d). "(3) If in any month after a loan has been made under paragraph (1),the Managing Trustee determines that the assets of the borrowing Trust Fund are sufficient to permit repayment of all or part of any loan.9 made under paragraph (1), he shall make such repayments as hedetermines to be appropriate. "(4) The Board of Trustees shall make a timely report -to the Congress of any amounts transferred (including inter- est payments) under this subsection. ".

REALLOCATIONOF SOCIAL SECURITY TAXES AND

ADJUSTMENTS IN ALLOCATION OF RECEIPTS

SEC. 102.(a)(1) Section3101 ('a) of the Internal Reie- nue Code of 1954 is amended by striking out paragraphs (5) through (7) and inserting in lieu thereof the following: "(5) with respect to wages received during the cal- endar year 1982, the rate 8hall be 5.90 percent; "(6) with respect to wages received during the cal- endar year 1983, the rate shall be 5.70 percent; "(7) with respect to wages receired during the cal- endar year 1984, the rate shall be 5.45 percent;

H.R. 4331—Engr.4tmdt. 3

"(8)with respect to wages receiied during the cal- endar year 1985, the rate shall be 5.60 percent; "(9) with respect to wages receited during the cal- endar years 1986 through 1989, the rate shall be 5.70

percent; "(10) with resped to wages received during the calendar years 1990 through 2004, the rate shall be 5.90 percent; and "('11) with respect to wages received afferDecem- ber 31, 2004, the rate shall be 6.20 percent. ".

(2)Section 3111(a) of such Code is amended by strik- ing out paragraphs (5) through (7) and inserting in lieu thereof the following:

"(5) withrespect to wages paid during the calen- dar year 1982,the rate shall be 5.90 percent; "(6) withrespect to wages paid during the calen- dar year 1983,the rate shall be 5. 70 percent; "(7) withrespect to wages paid during the calen- dar year 1984,the rate shall be 5.45 percent; "(8) withrespect to wages paid during the calen- dar year 1985,the rate shall be 5.60 percent; "(9) with respect to wages paid during the calen- dár years 1986 through 1989, the rate shall be 5. 70 percent;

HR. 4331—Engr. Amdt. 4 "(10) with respect to wages paid during the calen- dar years 1990 through 2004, the rate shall be 5.90 percent; and "('11) with re3pect to wages paid after December 31, 2004, the rate shall be 6.20 percent.". (3) Section 1401(a) of such Code is amended by strik- ing out paragraphs (5) through (7) and inserting in lieu thereof the following: "(5) in the case of any taxable year beginning after December 31, 1981, and before January 1, 1983, the tax shall be equal to 8.55 percent of the amount of the self-employment income for such taxable year; "(6) in the case of any taxable year beginning after December 31, 1982, and before January 1, 1984, the tax shall be equal to 8.35 percent of the amount of

the self-employment income for such taxable year; "(7) in the case of any taxable year beginning after December 31, 1983, and before January 1, 1985, the tax shall be equal to 8.10 percent of the amount of the 3elf-employment income for such taxable year; "(8) in the case of any taxable year beginning after December 31, 1984, and before January 1, 1986, the tax 8hall be equal to 8.45 percent of the amount of the self-employment income for such taxable year;

HR. 4331—Engr. Amdt. a

'?9,)in the case of any taxable year beginning after December 31, 1985, and before January 1, 1990, the tax siall be equal to 8.5.5 percent of the amount of the self-employment income for such taxable year; "(10) in the case of any taxable year beginning after December 31, 1989, and before January 1, 2005, the tax shall be equal to 9.00 percent of the amount of the self-employment income for such taxable year; and "(11) in the case of any taxable year. beginning after December 31, 2004, the tax shall be equal to 9.30 percent of the amount of the 8elf-employment income for such taxable year. ".

(b)(1)Section 3101(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 is amended by 8triking out paragraphs (4) through (6) and inserting in lieu thereof the following: "(4) with respect to wages received during the cal- endar year 1981, the rate 8hall be 1.30 percent;. "(5) with respect to wages received during the cal- endar year 1982, the rate shall be 0.80 percent; "(6) with respect to wages received during the cal- erukr year 1983, the rate 8hall be 1.00 percent; "(7) with respect to wages received during the cal- endar year 1984, the rate shall be 1.25 percent;

H.R4331—Enp. Amdt. 6 "(8) with respect to wages received duringthe cal- endar years 1985 through 1989, the rate shallbe 1.45

percent; "(9) with respect to wages received during the cal- endar years 1990 through 2004, the rate shall be 1.75 percent; and "(10) with respect to wages received after Decem- ber 31, 2004, the rate shall be 1.45 percent. ".

(2)Section 3111(b) of such Code is amended by strik- ing out paragraphs (4) through (6)and inserting in lieu thereof the following: "(4) with respect (o wagespaid during the calen- dar year 1981,the rate shall be1.30 percent; "(5) withrespect to wagespaid during the calen- dar year 1982,the rate shall be0.80 percent; "(6) withrespect to wagespaid during the calen- dar year 1983,the rate shall be1.00 percent; "(7) withrespect to wagespaid during the calen- dar year 1984,the rate shall be1.25 percent; "(8) with respect to wagespaid during the calen- dar years 1985 through 1989,the rate shall be 1.45 percent; "(9) with respect to wagespaid during the calen- dar years 1990 through 2004,the rate shall be 1.75 percent; and

HR. 4331—Engr. Amdt. 7 "(10) with respect to wages paid afterDecember 31, 2004, the rate shall be 1.45 percent. ".

(3)Section 1401(b) of such Code isamended by strik- ing out paragraphs (4) through (6)and inserting in lieu thereof the following: "(4) in the case of any taxable yearbeginning after December 31, 1980, and beforeJanuary 1, 1982, the tax shall be equal to 1.30 percent of the amountof the self-employment income for such taxable year; "(5) in the case of any taxable yearbeginning after December 31, 1981, and beforeJanuary 1, 1983, the tax shall be equal to 0.80 percent ofthe amount of the self-employment income for such taxable year; "(6) in the case of any taxable yearbeginning after December 31, 1982, and before January 1, 1984, the tax shall be equal to 1.00 percent of the amountof the self-employment income for such taxable year; "(7) in the case of any taxable year beginning after December 31, 1983, and before January 1, 1985, the tax shall be equal to 1.25 percent of the amountof the self-employment income for such taxable year; "(8) in the case of any taxable year beginning after December 31, 1984, and before January 1, 1990, the tax shall be equal to 1.45 percent of the amountof the self-employment income for such taxable year

HR. 4331—Engr. Amdt. 8 "(9)in the case of any taxable year beginning after December 31, 1989, and before January 1, 2005, the tax shall be equal to 1.75 percent of the amount of the self-employment income for such taxableyear; and "(10) in the case of any taxable year beginning after December 31, 2004, the tax shall be equal to 1.45 percent of the amount of the self-employment income for such taxable year. ".

(c)Section 201(5)(1) of the Social Security Act is amended by striking out clauses (K) through (M) and insert- ing in lieu thereof the following: "(K) 1.43per centum of the wages as so defined) paid. after December 31, 1981, and before January 1,1983, and so reported,(L) 1.33 per centum of the wages (as so defined) paid after December 31,

1982, and before January 1, 1984, andso reported, (M) 1.19 per centum of the wages (as so defined) paid after December

31, 1983, and before January 1, 1986, andso reported, (N) 1.20 per centum of thewages (as so defined) paid after De- cember 31, 1985, and before January 1, 1990, andso report- ed, and (0) 1.50 per centum of thewages (as so defined) paid after December 31, 1989, andso reported, ". (d)Section 201.(b)(2) of the Social Security Act is amended by striking out clau.ses (K) through (M) and insert- ing in lieu thereof "(K) 1.035per centum of the amount of se'f-employment income (asso defined) so reported for any

ILL 433—Engi. Amdt. 9 taxable year beginning after December 31, 1981, and before January 1, 1983, (L) 0.975 per centum of the amount of self-employment income (as so defined) so reported for any taxable year beginning after December 31, 1982, and before January 1, 1984, (M) 0.885 per centum Of the amount of 3elf-employment income (a$ so defined) so reported for any taxable year beginning after December 31, 1983, and before January 1, 1985, (N) 0.900 per centüm of the amount of self-emplpyment income (as so defined) 80 rep.orted for any taxable year beginning after December 31, 1984, and before January 1, 1990, (0) 1.145 per centum of the amount of self-employment income (as so defined) so reported for any taxable year beginning after Decem.ber 31, 1989, and before

January 1, 2005, and fI)1.125per centum of the amount of self-employment income (as so defined) so reported for any taxable year beginning after December 31, 2004, ".

RESTORATIONOF MINIMUM BENEFIT FOR CURRENT

RECIPIENTS SEC. 103. (a) Section 2201(h) of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 is amended to read as follows. "(h)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), and in section 203(n) of the Social Security Act, this 8ection and the amendments made thereby shall be effective only with respect to benefits payable for months after October 1981, and only in the case of persons who are eligible for benefits

H.R. 4331—Engr. Amdt.——- 10 undertitle 11 of the Social Security Act on the basis of the wages and self-employment income of an indirdiual who ini- tially becomes eligible for old-age or disability insurance benefits after October 1981, or who dies after October 1981 and wasnotinitially eligible for old-age or disability insur- ance benefits before November 1981. "(2) in the case of an individual who is a member of a religious order (within the meaning of section 3121(r) (2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954), or an auJonomous sub- division of such order, whose members are required to take a vow of poverty, and which order or subdivision had elected coverage under this Act prior to the date of the enactment of this paragraph, or who would be such a member except that such individual is considered retired because of old age or total disability, this section and the amendments made there- by shall be effective only with respect to 'benefits payable for months after October 1991, and only in the case .of persons who are not eligible for benefits under title ii of the Social Security Act on the ba3is of the wages and self-employment income of such an individual who dies or initially becomes eligible for old-age or di3ability insurance benefits before No- vember 1991. "(3) For purposes of this subsection, eligibility for old- age and di1sability insurance benefits shall be determined in

H.JL 4331—En.Amdt. 11 accordancewith paragraphs (2)(A) and (S)(B) of section 215(a) of the Social Security Act. ". (bEl)Section 203 of the Social Security Act is amend- ed by adding at the end thereof the following newsubsections:

"REDUCTIONS IN BENEFITS FOR CERTAIN RECIPIENTS OF

THE MINIMUM BENEFIT WHO RECEIVEGOVERNMEN-

TAL PENSION SYSTEM BENEFITS "('m)('l) Any individual— "(A) to whom the amendments made bysection 2201 of the Omnibus Budget ReconciliationAct of 1981 (relating to the repeal of the minimumbenefit) do

not apply; "(BY who is entitled to a monthly benefitunder this title, the amount of which, as determined without regard to deductions on account of work otherwise re- quired under this section, would be reduced for any month if the amendments made by 8ectiOn 2201 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 (relating to the repeal of the minimum benefit) wereapplicable with respect to such individual; and "(C) to whom there is payable for the month of May 1982 a monthly periodic benefit or benefits in a total amount of $300 or greater which is based upon 8uch individual's earnings while in the service of the Federal Government or any State, as defined in sec-

H.R.3331—Eng?. Amcit. 12

lion210(h)(ora political subditision thereof, as de- fined in section 218(b)(2)), or an instrumentality of two or more States, shall, for any month for which the monthly periodic benefit or benefits described in subparagraph (C) continue to be pay- able, be subject to a benefit reduction under paragraph (2). "(2) The amount of the benefit to which an individual described in paragraph (1)is otherwise entitled for such month under this title, as determined withoutregard to de- ductions on account. of work other-wise required by this sec- tion, shall be reduced by an amount equal to so much of the total monthly periodicbenefits(describedin paragraph ('l,)('C',)) paya.ble to such individual for the month of May 1982 as exceeds $300 (rounded to the next higher multiple of $1 if not a multiple of $1,), but in no event shall the monthly benefit under this title be reduced by reason of this subsection to an amount less than the amount to which such individual would be entitled if the amendments made by section 2201 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 (relating to the repeal of the minimum benefit) were applicable to such individual. "(3) For purposes of this subsection, any periodic bene- fit which' is paid on other than a monthly basis, shall be allocated on a basis equivalent to a monthly benefit (as deter- mined by the Secretary) and such equivalent monthly benefit

H.R. 433—Engr. Amdt. 13 shall constitute a monthly periodic benefit for purposes of this subsection. For purposes of this subsection, the term 'periodic benefit' includes a benefit payable in a lump sum if ifis a commutation of, or a substitute for, periodic payments. "(4) The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to any person who, for the month of May 1982,is entitled to monthly insurance benefits under this title on the basis of the wages and self-employment income of more than one individ- ual. "REDUCTiONS IN BENEFITS FOR RECiPIENTS OF MINi-

MUM BENEFiT WHO RESIDE OUTSIDE THE UNiTED

STATES "(n) Section 2201 of the Omnibus Budget Reconcili- ation Act of 1981 (relating to the repeal of the minimum benefit) and the amendments made thereby shall be effective with respect to benefits payable for any month after May 1982 in the case of a person who, during such month, is not a resident of the United States (as defined in section 210 (i)), and who was eligible for benefits under this title on the basis of the wages and self-employment income of an individ- ual who died or initially became eligible for old-age or dis- ability insurance benefits before November 1981. '

(2)The amendment made by paragraph (1) shall be ef- fective with respect to monthly benefits payable under title II

HR. 1331—Enr. Amdt. 14 ofthe Social Security Act for June 1982 and months there-

after.

(c) Section 1622 of the Social Security Act is repealed. (d) Subparagraph (A) of section 6103(V(1) of the Inter- nal Revenue Code of 1954 (relating to disclosure of certain information to Social Security Administration and Railroad Retirement Board) is amended by inserting "and payments of retirement income, "after "chapters 2, 21, and 24, ".

EXTENSiONOF COVERAGE TO FiRST SiX MONTHS OF

SiCK PAY SEC. 104. (a) Section 209(5) (2) of the Social Security Act and section 3121(a) (2) (B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 are each amended by inserting immediately after "sickness or accident disability"the following: "(but includ- ing, in the case of payments made toan employee or any of his dependents, only (A) payments made byan insurance company, other than payments (i) by an insurance company which i3 owned, to a substantial extent, by the employer, and

(ii) by an in3urance company underan administrative-serv- ices-only contract which provides for suchcpmpany to be re- imbursed only for the sicknessor accident disability pay- ments actually paid plus the accompanying administrative expenses and profit, and (B) payments which are required by a workmen 's compensation or temporary-disability insurance law)". 15

('b)The amendments made by subsection (a)shall be effective with respect to remunerationpaid after December

31, 1981.

EXTENSiON OF DiSABiLiTY iNSURANCEMAXiMUM FAMiLY

BENEFiT To OLD-AGE AND SURViVORSiNSURANCE.

BENEF1 CIARIES SEC. 105. (a) Section 203(a) of the SocialSecvrity

Act is amended— (1) by striking out paragraph (6,;

(2) by redesignating paragraphs (1), (2),(3),(4),

and (5), as paragraphs (2),(3),(4),(5), and (6), re- spectively; and (3) by inserting befoie paragraph (2) (as soredes-

ignated) the following new paragraph: "(1)(A) The total monthly benefits to whichbene- ficiaries may be entitled under section 202 or 223for a month (but prior to anyincreases resulting from the applicationof paragraph(2)(A)(ii)(Ill)ofsection 215(i)) on the basis of the wages and self-employment income of an individual whose primary insurance amount has been computed or recomputedunder para- graph (1) or (4) of section 215(a), or under section 215(d), as in effect after December 1978, shall, except as otherwise provided bythis subsection, be reduced to the smaller of—

HR. 4331—EngT. Amdt. 16 "(V 85 percent of such individual's average indexed monthly earnings (or 100 percent of his primary insurance amount, if larger), or "('ii.) 150 percent of such individual's pri- mary insurance amount. Any such amount that is not a multiple of $0.10 shall be decreased to the next lowest multiple of $0.10.

"(B)Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to bene-

fitsbaEed on the wages and self-emplojment income of an individual— "(i) who dies before 1982; "(ii) who attains age 62 before 1982, except with respect to benefits payable during an entitle- ment to disability insurance benefits of an indi- vidual whose initial entitlement to such benefits occurred after June 1980; or "('iii,.) who, in the case of an individual who attains age 62, or dies before attaining age 62, after 1981, became entitled to disability insurance benefits before July 1980, and was entitled to dis- ability insurance benefitsin any month after June 1980 and before January 1982 ('unless the individual is not entitled to such benefits during a period of more than 12 consecutive months, after December 1980,before. he dies,again becomes

HR. 1331—Engr. Amdt. 17

disabled,orattainsage62whichezerfirst occurs). '

(b.)WParagraph (2) (as so redesignated by subsection (a) of this section) of section 203(a) of such Act is amend- ed—

(A)inthe matter preceding subparagraph (A), by—

'i,)inserting"to whom paragraph (1) does not apply, and" after "in the case of a indicidu-

a 1";

(ii) inserting after "section 202 or 223 fora month" the parenthetical phrase"(but prior to any increases resulting from the application of paragraph (2) (A)(ii) (III) of section 215(i))", and striking out that phrase as itappears elsewhere in such paragraph; and

('iii)strikingout"exceptas provided by

paragraphs (3) and (6)" and inserting inlieu thereof "except as otherwise provided by this sub-

section 'and (B) by striking out 'paragraph (2)" each place it appears in subparagraphs (A),(B), and (C) and in- serting inlieu thereof in each instance 'paragraph (3)"

H.R.4331—Engr. Amdt. 18 (2)Paragraph (3)(A) (as so redesignated by subsection (a) of this section) of section 203(a) of such Act is amended

to read as follows: "(3)('A) For individuals who initially become eligible for old-age or disability insurance benefits, or who die (before becoming so eligible for those benefits),in calendar year 1979, 1980, or 1981— "(i) the amounts established with respect to sub- paragraph (A) of paragraph (2) are $230, $248, or $270, respectively; "(ii) the amounts established with respect to sub- paragraph (B) of paragraph (2) are $332, $358, or $390, respectively; and "(iii) the amounts established with respect to sub- paragraph (C) of paragraph (2) are $433, $467, or $508, respectively. ".

(3)Paragraph (3) (as so redesignated by subsection (a) of this section) of section 203(a) of such Act is further amended by striking out subparagraphs (B) and (C) and by redesignating subparagraph (D) as suiparagraph (B). (c) Section 203(a)(9)(C) of such Act is amended by striking out "section 203 (a) (4)" and inserting in lieu thereof "paragraph (5)". (d) Section 215(i) (2) (D) of such Act is amended—

H.R. 4331—Engr.Amdt. 19 (1)by striking out "paragraph (3)(B) thereof" and inserting in lieu thereof "paragraph (4)(B) there- of"; and (2) by striking out the last sentence thereof.

STUDY OF SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

EFFICIENCY

SEC. 106.The Comptroller General of theUnited States shall undertake a study of the Social Secnrity Ad- ministration for the purpose of determining the mpnagement efficiency, employee producti z.ity, and technical capacities (including computer hardware and programing) of such Ad- ministration, and the extent of current information of the characteristics of recipients. The Comptroller General shall report the results of such study not later than one hundred and eighty days after the date of the enactment of this Act, including any recommendations for improvements inany of the operations studied.

SEPARATE ACCOUNTING FOR SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST

FUNDS SEC. 107. (a) For each fiscal year beginning after Sep- tember 30, 1982, the President shall transmit to the Con- gress, at the time he transmits the Budget under subsection (a) of section 201 of the Budget and Accounting Act, 1921, and at the time he submits the midyear amendments and revisions of such Budget under subsection (g) of such section,

H.R. 4331—Engr. Amdt. 20

aspecial statement summarizing requests for new budget au- thority, estimates of outlays andrerenues, and estimates of deficit or lurplus (stated both separately and in the aggre- gate) for the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Inszrance Trust Fund, the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund, and the Federal Hospital insurance Trust Fund. The special statement required by this section shall include a compara- tive sum mary of the aggregate total requests for new budget authority, estimates of outlays and revenues, and estimates of surplus or deficit for all functions and activities of the Got- ernment (other than such Trust Funds). Such special state- ment shall also include an explanation and analysis of the -economic assumptions on which the requests and estimates for such Trust Funds and the requests and estimates for such other functions of the Government are based. (b) The special analysis required by this section shall be transmitted tc the Congress in a separate volume from the Budget of the United States or the midyear arnendmenA and revisions of such Budget, as the case may be.

iNFORMATION WITH RESPECT To PRISONERS SEC. 108. Section 223(f) of the Social Security Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new para- graph: "'3) Notwithstanding the prothions of section 552a of title 5, United States Code, or any other provision of Federal

HR. .$331—EngT. Amdt. 21 orState law, any agencij of the United States Government or of any State (or political subdivision thereof) shall make

available to ihe Secretary, upon written request, thename

and social 8ecurity account number of any individualcon-

fined in a jail, prison, or other. penal institutionor correc- tional facility under the .juri3diction of suchagency pursuant to his conviction of an offense which constituted a felony under applicable law, which the Secretarymay require to carry out the provisions of this 8ubsection. "

REPORTTO CONGRESS SEC. 109. The Secretary of Health and Human Serv- ices shall report to the Congress within ninety days after the date of the enactment of this Act with respect to the actions being taken to prevent payments from being made .under title ii of the Social Security Act to roiwe individuals, includ- ing to the extent possible the use of the death records availa- ble under the medicare program toscreen the cash benefit rolls for such deceased individuals.

PENALTIES FOR MIS USE FOR SOcIAL SECURITY NUMBERS SEC. 110. (a) Section 208(g) of the Social Security Act is amended— (1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by in- serting "or for the purpose of obtaining anything of value from any person," before "or forany other pur- pose"; and

ILR 4331—Engr. Amdt. 22

(2)by adding after paragraph (2) the following new paragraph:

"(3)knowingly,altersasocial security card issued by the Secretarij, buys or sells a card that is, or purports to be, a card so issued, cozinterfeits a social

• security card, or possesses a social security card or

• counterfeit social security card with intent to sell or alter it, or". (b) Section 208 of such Act i3 amended in the matter following subsection (Ii) by striking out "shall be guilty of a

• misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year, 'or both" and inserting in lieu thereof "shall be guilty àf a felony and upon conviction thereof shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned .for not more than five years, or both". (c) The amendments made by subsections (a) and (b) shall be effective with respect to violations committed after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SOCIAL SECURITY CARDS SEC. 111. (a) Section 205('c)(2) of the Social Security Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subparagraph: "(D) The Secretarij shall issue a social security

card to each individual at the time o issuance ofa

H.R. 4331—Engr. Amdt. 23 socialsecurity account number to such individual. The

social security card shall be made of banknotepaper,

and (to the maximum extent practicable) shall bea card which cannot be counterfeited. ".

(b)The amendment made by this section shall apply with respect to all new and replacement social security cards issued more than one hundred and ninety days after the date of the enactment of this Act. (c) Within ninety days after the date of the enactment of this Act the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall report to' the Congress on his plans for implementing the amendment made by this section.

FUTURE LEGISLATIVE CHANGES IN THE SOCiAL

SECURITY ACT SEC. 112. It is the sense of Congress thatany future legislative changes inthe Social Security Act,will not reduce the current dollar amount of monthly old-age, survi- vors, and disability insurance benefits to which individuals are entitled for the month of enactment.

STATUTORY DEADLINE FOR IMPLEMENTING AFDC HOME

HEALTH AIDE DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS

SEC. 113. The last sentence of subsection (c)(2) ofsec- tion 966 of the Omnibu.s Reconciliation Act of 1980(as amended by section 2136 of the Omnibus Budget Reconcili-

HR. 4331—Engr. Amdt. ation Act of 1981) is amended by inserting "with at least seven States" after "agreements ". TiTLEil—HiGHWAY REVENUE ACT OF 1981°

SHORT TITLE SEC. 201. This title may be cited as the "Highway

Revenue Act of 1981 ".

EXTENSIONOF THE TAXES WHICH ARE TRANSFERRED

INTO THE HIGHWAY TRUST FUND

SEC. 202. (a) GENERAL RULE.—The following provi- sions of the internal Revenue Code of 1954 are amended by striking out "1984" each place it appears and inserting in lieu thereof "1989": (1) Section 4041(e) (relating to rate reduction). (2) Section 4061 (a) (1) (relating to imposition of tax on trucks, buses, etc.). (3) Section 4061(b)(1) (relating to imposition of tax on parts and accessories). (4) Section 4071(d) (relating to imposition of tax on tires, tubes, and tread rubber). (5) Section 4081(b) (relating to imposition of tax on gasoline). (6) Section 4481(a) (relating to imposition of tax on use of highway motor vehicles). (7) Section 4481(e) (relating to period tax in effect.). (8) Section 4482(c)(4) (defining taxable period).

H.R.4331—Engr. Amdt. 25

(9)Section 6156(e)(2) (relating to installment pay- ments of tax on use of highway motor vehicles). (10) Section 6421(h) (relating to tax on gasoline used for certain nonhighway purposes or by local transit systems).

(b) A .%IENDMENT OF SECTION 6412(a) (1). —Section 6412(a) (1) of such Code (relating to floor stocks refunds) is amended— (1) by striking out "1984" each place it appears and inserting in lieu thereof "1989' and (2) by striking out "1985" each place it appears and inserting in lieu thereof "1990".

EXTENSION OF HIGHWAY TRUST FUND

SEC. 203. (a) HIGHWAY TRUST FUND.—Subsections

(c),(e)(1), and (f) of section 209 of the Highway Revenue

Act of 1956 (relatingtothe Highway Trust Fund; 23 U.S.C. 120 note) are amended— (1) by striking out "1984" each place it appears and inserting in lieu thereof "1990' and (2) by striking out "1985" each place ii appears and inserting in lieu thereof "1991 ".

CONFORMiNG AMENDMENTSTO LAD AND

WATER CONSERVATiON FUND.—Subsection (&)ofsection 201 of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16 TLS.C. 4061—11) is amended—

H.R. 4331—Engr.Amdt. 26 (1) by striking out "1984" and inserting in lieu thereof "1990"; and

(2)by striking out "1985" each place itappeur8 and inserting in lieu thereof "1991 ". Attest:

Secretary.

H.R 4331—Engr. Amdt.

H 8078 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD HOUSE November 4,1981 pressure for significant alterations to present budget and tax policy is likely to keep the Ways and Means Commit- tee occupied well into next year. There is, however, a critical shOrt- term step that Congress can take in themeantimethatpromisesto strengthen the OASI trust fund's fi- APPOINTMENT OF CONFEREESnancial' posture over the short run— ON H.R. 4331, OMNIBUS RECON-and alsorelieve the anxiet' of millions CILIATION ACT OF 1981of elderly over the loss of their mini- • AMENDMENTS mum benefit. That is the reason I Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak-appear here today to move to go to er, pursuant to clause 1, rule XX, Iconference to consider H.R. 4331 as move the direction of the Committeeamended by the Senate. on Ways and Means to disagree with Mr. Speaker, we face two crucial the Senate amendment to the billfactsthat demand our immediate (H.R. 4331) to amend the Omnibusaction on this bill. Reconciliation Act of 1981 to restore The first Is the fact that if we do minimum benefits uhder the Socialnothing, the old ge and survivors in- Security Act, and request a conferencesurance trust fund will have insuffi- with the Senate thereon. cient funds to pay benefits to retirees The SPEAKER pro tempore. Theand survivors as early as next Septem- gentleman from Illinois (Mr. R05TEN-ber. • KowsKI) Is recognized for 1 hour. The second reason for moving ahead Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Four yearstoday is to restore the minimum bene- ago, members of the Ways and Meansfit—eliminatedinthePresident's Committee came to the House floorbudget package—in time to head off with a social security financing billwarning notices of benefit cuts due to that demanded rare political courage.be sent December 3. Faced with imminent insolvency of the Of the three social security trust trust funds, we asked the Congress tofunds, OASI is by far the largest—and - votefor a payroll tax increase and sig-by far the most crucial to the system's nlficantbenefitcuts. We virtuallycredibility.Theothertwotrust promisedthisHousethatthosefunds—disability(DI)andhealth amendments would restore the finan-(HI)—show relatively secure finances cial stability of the trust funds—andover coming- years, and consequently even aliow a surplus—in the next 25stand as available sources for borrow- years. We reckoned that our proposalsing in the Immediate years ahead. would eliminate about four-fifths of the In the absence of certain economic long-range deficit over the next 75forecasts for the rest of the decade— years. That is what we thought 4 yearsand the months and months demand- • ago. That Is what the finest actuariesed for massive reform of the social se- in the country thought. That Is whatcurity system—the majority of the • the elderly and the workers of thisCommittee on Ways and Means has country thought. agreed that we should seek immediate Well, we were all wrong. authority to allow funds from the two We misjudged the extent of the eco-more secure trust funds to be trans- nomic stagnation. We did not antici-ferred to the OASI fund as required • pate the high rates of inflation thatfor benefit payment. triggeredhistoricallylargeannual While this alternative would certain- cost-of-living benefit increases. tjnem-ly improve the immediate situation, it ployment also rose higher than alldoes not fundamentally deal with the • projections, cutting tax revenues intofact that the system's income is not the trust funds. The dilemma that wecertain to meet benefit costs through face today is the dilemma that wethe decade. have faced in the past: Benefits are Over the longer term, the situation simply outstripping revenues. And it isonly becomes more serious. happening rapidly—too rapidly nOt to Interfund borrowing is not a perma- respond immediately in some way. nent answer to the structural Imbal- Long-range restoration of the socialazice in the social security system. Let security system rests on one—or athere be no illusions that this is any- combinationof—toughalternatives:thing more than a tourniquet-a tem- reduce benefits, raise taxes or borrowporary measure that affords the Con- from general revenues—thereby rais-gress and the administration time to ing income taxes or the Federal defi-work out the details of a long-range cit. In a perfect world, we might wellsolution. cloister the Ways and Means Commit- To those who demand that we rush tee for much of the coming year toto judgment, .1 ask for patience. To shape a new financing formula thatthose who fear that interfund borrow- wouldreorderthesocialsecuritying will not buy more than 2 or 3 more system for decades to come. Unfortu-years of solvency, I promise full-scale nately, we do not live in a perfectlegislation before a crisis strikes. world. Once again, even more pressing than At no time in recent memory hasshoring up OASI is the Immediate res- economic performance appeared lesstoration of the minimum benefit. Both certain. Unemployment and InflationHouses of Congress havö overturned are once again on the move. Growing

118080 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE November 4,1981 Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak-our failure to make the tough deci-do and what many members of the full er, I yield 8 minutes to the gentlemans1ois. We as a body deserve their con-committee want to do? Why does the from New York. (Mr. CoNrn). demnation. gentleman suppose we are not really Mr. CONABLE.Mr.Speaker,I I have no objection, Mr. Speaker, toaddressing an entire reform of this thank thedistinguished committeegoing to conference on this matter, re-system so that we may really save it? chairman for yielding me this time. allzing that very little is to be accom- Mr. CONABLE. Mr. Speaker, I think' Mr. Speaker, there is no way a con-plished by it. the gentleman can seek his answer ference on this legislation can do any Mr. ROUSSELOT. Mr Speaker, willelsewhere. I am at a lost to understand thing helpful to strengthen substan-the gentleman yield? the attitude which says, "Let's coddle tially the social security system. The Mr. CONABLE. I yield to the gentle.it up with bailing wire again," knowing House has taken no action on the cen-man from California. that we are running out of bailing tral issue, and the other body has pro- Mr. ROUSSELOT. Mr. Speaker, Iwire, and that the bailing wire is get- vided us with a measure that mightappreciate my colleague's making theting pretty rusty and is not going to keep the social security trust fundspoint that we really are not doinghold. The longer we wait, the worse afloat for a very few years only atmuch with this particular proposalthe difficulties are going to be in best. that came out of the Senate. achieving any long-term solution. Therefore, the hands of the confer- As the chairman of our subcommit- Mr. ROUSSELOT. Let me ask, does ees are effectively tied. They can dotee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr.the gentleman think any of this is po- no more than provide cough syrup forPICKLE), has said. "This is just a rushlitical? a patient who is dying of chronicto do nothing." Mr. CONABLE. I hesitate to draw pneumonia. ThisIsan absolutely dis- The Senate bill only takes the cos-that conclusion. I cannot believe the graceful situation. Unfortunately, It ismetic approach. It is a very minimalMembers would play politics with this the same sort of situation this bodystopgap social security bill which even has created and malntafned for years.many Senate Members agreed duringimportant institution. We'have avoided at virtually every op-debate was temporary. Mr. ROUSSELOT. And with the 36 portunity the tough decisions neces- The fact is the Senate bill will notmillion recipients of social security. sary to put our social security systemwork because it does not even begin to Mr. CONABLE. And with the 115 on a sound basis. We have sought thedeal with the main problems facingmillion people who are required to easy way out. We have allowed thesocial security. contribute to it. trust funds to come perilously close to Consider the following three facts: Mr. ROUSSELOT. I hope that they disaster time after time—ft is small First, the social security system con-are not playing politics, but we begin wonder that we have lost confidencetinues to lose$12,000 every singleto wonder after awhile. in the system—and we are doing pre-minute. Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, will the cisely thatonce again. Second, the social security systemgentleman yield? Not all of us have been so craven orcontinues to operate in the red as It Mr. CONABLE. I yield to the gentle- so indifferent to our Nation's basichas for every year since 1975. man from Texas. social security lnEurance system. To Thlrd the actuaries have repeatedly Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, I thank hiseverlastingcredit,thed1st1nWarned us that over the next 75 years,the gentleman for yielding. - guished chairnian of the Subcommit-the social security system will be re- Ialso want to commend the chair- tee on Social Security, the gentlemansponsible for $1.6trillion more inman of the Subcommittee on Social from Texas (Mr. PIcKI.E), has tried tobenefits than it wifi be able to pay. Security, the gentleman from Texas get this body to act responsibly on The Senate-passed measure makes a(Mr. PICKLE), and the chairman of the social security. He has been persistent,very minimal attempt in facing up toCommittee on Ways and Means, the but so have those within his own partythe problems facing the system. Realgentleman from fllinois (Mr. R05TEN- who do not agree with him and wholocating payroll tax rates among theKowsKr), for attempting to bring con- have preferred to keep the socia' secu-program's three trust funds and allow-structive answers to this floor. rity system in jeopardy for no othering Interfund borrowing among two of We cannot continue to waste the apparent reason than political oppor-the trust funds, as the Senate legisla-leadtime that is so desperately needed tunisnt tion proposes, is not the ansver. for solutions tothe problems of social The gentleman from Texas has lost To make matters worse in this a!-security. The onething we have every skirthish with these adversaries,ready tangled mess, less than 1 weeklearned in this Congress, if nothing but time and events eventually willalter passage of the Senate bill newelse,is that any significant Changes prove he is right, and his or similaractuarial information reflecting unan-need to be phased in with adequate ad- views someday will prevail, we can con-ticipated increasesin. the medicarevance warning. tinue to hope. part of social security show that even If we merely accept the Senate pro- My I say that they must prevail.with the Senate legislation, the medi-visions to reallocate from the health Mr. Speaker. The gentleman fromcare fund "will be exhausted" in 1983fund to the retirement fund and to Texasis,of course, not the onlyor 1984. borrow from disability, we will still see Member of this body to seek a reasOn. For the system's sake and for thea health fund which could be short of able solution to the deep-seated flnàn-miluons of present, as well as future,money as early as the end of 983. We cai and other problems associatedbeneficiaries, we must act. desperately need as much time as pos- with our social security system. Many It is not as if there is an absence ofsible. We do not need to merely patch of my Republican colleagues and I onchoices to restore the financial stabil-this up until after the next election. I the Ways and Means Committee haveity and integrity to the social securityknow it is difficult to act in an election been calling for exactly that kind ofprogram. There are many alternativeyear, but we have n choice, in my action for the past decade, and weproposals from which Congress mayopinion. have gotten nowhere. As a result, thechoose, as contained in packages pre- Mr. Speaker, I hope that when the system has been sinking deeper into asented in both the House Social Secu-motion to instruct is presented to this quagmire of financial deficit and ad.rity Subcommittee and the Senate Fi-floor, it will receive overwhelming sup- ministrative difficulties. nance Committee. All that is lacking isport. These problems will not solve them-the decisivecongressionalaction Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak- selves. They will not fade; they wiflneeded to insure that the system willer, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman Just get wOrse. The losers will continueremain solvent for mans years tofrom Minnesota Mr. VErto). to be the 115 million Americans whoCome. (Mr. VENTO asked and was given are foro d by law currently to contrib- I would like to ask my colleague thispermission to revise and extend his re ute to the system and the 36 millionquestion: Why does the gentlemanmarks.) who depend upon it for benefits everysuppose that we tire not doing what Mr. . VENTO.Mr. Speaker, first of month. We do them -a disservice bythe subcommittee has been trying toall, I want to cOmmend the chairman November 4,1.981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE H 8079 the President's early attempt to elimi-those under 40 do not expect to see a I am not saying we can do anything. nate the minimum benefit. We alldime from social security. The only ar-In the present mess it is difficult even agree that the Nation's elderly shouldgument is when and how to restoreto dicuss the facts. But if we do noth- not have a benefit taken away on suchthat confidence. ing, we will have nothing to crow short notice. We all agree that no el- The Subcommittee on Social Secu-about either. 'derly person should endure anxietyrity, working, quietly and without fan- We are hung up on the short range. over the loss of his current minimumfare, made a'lot of progress—particu-The President wants cutbacks. I and benefit any longer—that the Congresslarly toward addressing the long-rangeothers have proposed indirect general has an obligation to act before benefitproblemsinsocialsecurity.Andrevenues in medicare in some form. reduction notices go into the mail. through that progress we offered anMost of us want neither, and no one is We are all palhfully aware that weopportunity to rebuild confidence intalking payroll tax increases. ran out of easy answers to the finan-the program. But, we can address the confidence cial problems facing the social security The President, in his sincere propos-problem if we will. We can say to our system years ago. We have learnedals, reached too far, scared people tooyouth that we are willing to take steps over and over again how vulnerablebadly and blew this issue sky high.now to insure their benefits m the the financial stability of the system isAnd the Congress, both House andfuture. And we can give some sign to to fluctuations in. the national econo-Senate, has shown an understandablethe people that we will do more than my. reluctance to address this Issue seri-reach for panic buttons and band-aids We are also sensitive to the politicalously ever since. when social security has problems. implications of the slightest attempt Nevertheless, as we rush to do noth- The long range is the key to the con to change the functioningof theing, we should at least slow down longfidence. With it, the short range be- system. No issue we regularly face inenough to realize what we will facecomes more manageable. Without it Congress is more politically fearful—when the budget projections come outthe short range Is only the first of a or more potentially threatening. in January, when the social securityseries of pitfalls. Ours is not a permanent response totrustees report comes out in early And the long-range problem will be the social security dilemma—nor thesummer, when the midsession reviewthere. Right now the long-range defi bravest. We all recognize that. It Is aarrives, and when press reports appearcit inOASDI is —1.65 percent of pay- response to the immediate anxieties ofthroughout the year as the Statutoryroll. It is manageable. If we wait—if we the Nation's elderly. At this time, weAdvisory Council and perhaps thewait until it is upon us, it will be closer owe them no less. President's task force meet. First, even under intermediate pro-to 4 percent of payroll, or about' $50 01600 jections the three trust funds willbillion a year in current dollars, a Mr.. Speaker, I yield myself such timebegin 1982 with 20 percent reserves—much bigger problem. as I may consume. about 10 weeks worth of benefits— I will continue to propose we break Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the1983 with 18 percent reserves; 1984out of this fearful standoff rationally, gentleman from Texas (Mr. PIcKLE). with 16 percent reserves; and 1985and without recriminations. In one na- (Mr. PICKLE asked and was givenwith 12 percent reserves—about 1½tional poll taken in September, 82 per- permission to revise and extend his re-months. cent said they felt it was necessary for marks.) Second, our chances of hitting evenCongress to revise the financing of Mr. PICKLE. Mr. Speaker, the votethese targets are almost nil—as theysocial security during the next year or In the Committee on Ways and Meansare with any projections based on anyso; 77 percent said they felt it neces- today was a strong indication of theassumptions. As late as 1979 we weresary for Congress to revise the bene- growing concern on the part of Mem-projecting 7.4 percent CPI and 0.6 per-fits during the next year or so. The bers of Congress that the problemscent real wage growth for last year.message is out there They will bring it facing social security need to be ad-Last year we had 13.5 percent, not 7.4home to us one way or another. dressed. The proposal that was offeredpercent, CPI, and we had minus 5 per- And most important, the social secu- on a bipartisan basis by myself andcent, not plus 0.8 percent, real wagerftyprogram does have problems, Mr. CONABLE of New York, ranking Re-growth. problems that will only get worse as publican on Ways and Means, was It is helpful to put aside projectionswe wait, problems that will continue to aimed at the long-term problems ofand look at what has to happen for uscauseallour citizens concern and social security in an effort to breakactually to go broke in, say, 1984. Toworry needlessly. th Impasse all sides have faced ondo that- we need only have minus 1 It looks like we cannot get a vote on • this issue. percent real wage growth—which wethe long range proposals in view of the It shows that we can work togethernow have. Or we need to have 12 per-vote today. That is regrettable. We in a constructive way and it portendscent inflation, and inflation the last 4must continue to try. well for future action. months has averaged 11.1 percent. Or Mr. ROUSSELOT. Mr. Speaker, will Right now we recognize that the billwe need to have medicare expendi-the gentleman yield? moving through conference will cor-tures rising at 23 percent, and for Mr. PICKLE. I yield to the gentle- rect neither the short-term nor the1980, they did rise at 21.4 percent. Inman from California. long-term problems we face. It willother words, we are not far from hit- Mr. ROUSSELOT. Mr. Speaker, I correct the minimum benefit, and buyting three out of three—and we onlyjust briefly wanted to compliment the usafew more months ofgracehave to hit one out of three not tochairman of our subcommittee for this through reallocation and/or Interfundmake it past 1984. effort to genuinely try to face up to borrowing. That Is all. But the larger When the problem hits the nextthe problems of the system on a long- Issues remain basically untouched—time, there will be no Interfund bor-range basis. And most Important try to except that we have come one steprowing and no band-aids. All threedo something constructive to save the further toward realizing that theyfunds will be in trouble. system. must be addressed. Throughout next year, and through- out our campaigns, the people will No one Is arguing that the trust 0 1610 - funds are not going down: The only ar-know—as they know now—that social gument is when—and how quickly wesecurity is going under and we have Bothin subcommittee and in the should do something about it. done nothing. full committee today the gentleman No one is arguing there is little or no What will this bill (H.R. 4331) do tofrom Texas (Mr. PICKLE) made a real confidence in social security. In theimprove the reserves in social secu-effort to try to implement ideas that short run, a majority now believerity? Nothing. we had discussed extensively in the social security will default fairly soon. What will this bill (H.R. 4331) do tosubcommittee to genuinely save the In the long run three quarters ofImprove the confidence of oUr youngsystem on a long-range basis, and I In social security? Nothing. compliment him on that effort. H 8082 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE November 4, 1981 and substitute theref or provisions author-with family benefits as such. The pur- The SPEAKER pro tempore. With. king interfund borrowing only, for a fixedpose of this is to make it prospectiveout objection, the Chair appoints the period of time and with appropriate pay-only. following conferees on the bill, H.R. back requirements. Mr. VENTO. Prospective only in the4331: Messrs. RosraNKowsKI, PIcIa.E, The SPEAKER pro tempore. Thesense that this would apply to theRANGEL, JAcoBs, GErHARDT, CONABLE, gentleman from New York (Mr. CONA-future? ARcHER, and GRADI50N. ,BLE) is recognized for 1 hour. Mr. CONABLE. Relating to the indi- There was no objection. Mr. CONABLE. Mr. Speaker, I yieldviduals and their current benefits. myself such time as I may consume. Mr. VENTO. If the gentleman wifi Mr. Speaker, I urge the House toyield further, I think that it is good as support this motion to instruct. It willfar as it goes. I fear that it does not go insure that the conferees will notfar enough because of the nature of reduce benefits for those persons car-the measure that we have before us in rently receiving only social security orterms of what it does. only social security benefits and SSI. Mr. CONABLE. I regret that the

• It wifi also instruct those portions ofgentleman is disappointed. the measure related to the realloca- Mr ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak- tion of tax rates and substitute there-er, will the gentleman yield to me? fore provisions authorizing Interfund Mr. CONABLE. I yield to the gentle- borrowing only. The purpose of this isman from flhinois. to give greater flexibility to the man- Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. As the gen- agers of the trust funds rather thantleman from New York knows, going reallocating for a specific period ofto conference under instructionsis time a portion of the payroll taxalways a difficult proposition. which we are now told by actuaries of Mr. CONABLE. Yes. the social security system will leave Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Of course, I the HI trust fund In some peril. would oppose the gentleman's motion I do not wish to belabor the motionto instruct for fear that we will be to instruct any further, but I urge mybound by the motion. colleagues to support it. Mr. CONABLE. I understand the Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, will thechairman's position. gentleman yield? Mr. ROSTENKOWSKL But I cer- Mr. CONABLE. I yield to the gentle-tainly hope the motion is not agreed man from Minnesota. to. Mr. VENTO. First of all, I think it Is Mr. CONABLE. Mr. Speaker, I move good that the gentleman makes anthe previous question on the motion. effort not to reduce any benefits for The previous question was ordered. anyone receiving currently only social The SPEAKER pro tempore. The security. But does that mean that thequestion Is on the motion offered by gentleman's language would not coverthe gentleman from New York (Mr. those that might be receiving otherCoNaLa). types of benefits such as 'other forms Themotion was agreed to. of unearned income? Mr, VENTO, Mr. Speaker, I have a Mr. CONABLE. Other forms of unpreferential motion at the desk to In- earned income? struct. Mr. VENTO. Yes POINT 07 ORDER Mr. CONABLE. I do not think we Mr. CONABLE. Mr. Speaker I have have any jurisdiction over that. a point of order. Mr. VENTO. What does the gentle- It is my understanding that only one man mean in his motion when he saysmotion to instruct lies. only receiving social security? The SPEAKER pro tempore. The I do not quite understand that. IChair will state that the point is well only heard it read, but I am Interestedtaken. and curious as to what the gentleman PERMISSION TO FILE CONFERENCE REPORT ON means by that. ILL 4231 Mr. CONABLE, As the gentleman Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak- knows, the bill In the other body pro-er, I ask unanimous consent that the vides for reductions for people receiv-Committee on Ways and Means may ing other types of benefits. If they re-have until midnight tonight to file .a ceive only Social security or only socialconference report on the bill.. ER. securityand SSI, my instructions4331. would limit the protections to those The SPEAKER pro tempore.Is people in particular. there objection to the request of the Mr. VENTO. If the gentleman willgentleman from Illinois? yield further, would this, In the gen-" There was not objection. tleman's judgment, prevent a reduc- PERMISSION TO CONsIDER REPORT ON H.R. 4331 tion of this passage of thIs or the. In- ON TOMORROW OR ANY DAY THEREA7EER structiontothe conferees not to Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak- reduce the family benefit, as an exam-er, I ask unanimous consent that it ple, because it instructs not to reducemay be In order In the House to con- benefits of those receiving only thatsider the confei'enee report to accom- benefit? Is it the gentleman's judg-pany the bill, H.R. 4331, on Thursday, ment that would be the Instruction toNovember 5, 1981, or any day thereat- the conferees, to fight any reductionter. in the family benefit? The SPEAKER pro tempore.Is Mr. CONABLE. I think I will havethere objection to the request of the to stick with the wording that I havegentleman from Illinois? here as "no person." It does not deal There was no objection. November 4, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD HOUSE II 8081 of the committee or hi fonnal atten•no reduction In family benefits. Thatsay that this problem cannot wait tion to the measure goingtocon.fers the issue we willhavebefore us Inuntil 1983. ence. conference. This Is of Immediate and The Democratic leadership in the Indeed, under the guise of a ha1fgreat concern House of Representatives has been hearted restoration of minimum bene- We do have K,roblems with thesaying ever since the President's pro- fits, the Senate has worked havoc withsystem. But I suggest to the Membersposed task force on social security that the social security program. X mightthat when we have a declining wagethe task force report should not come remind my colleagues that mostofbase and peopleareunemployed,back in 1983 but should be back in the this problem emanates from the factwhen wages do not keep pace with In-spring of 1982. Americans are deeply that this spartof the reconciliationflation, and we have an economicconcerned about social security and we motiOn that was passed by this body.system that is going in the wrong di-want to work together to try to solve And, we would not be facing this prob-rection, that is what social security'sthat problem in a fair way, a way that lem If we had not stood the committeereal problem is all about. That is whatgives people notice about what we are process and the processes in this bodyIs going to compound the problem. Wegoing to do with the system, a way on their head In order to achieve thedo not have too many or too higWthat does not cut benefits for people type o changes that perhaps are necbenefits. as the Reagan proposals would have, essary and even warranted in social se The Senate solution is sort of likeanc n a way that is going to do it curity. bleeding the patient In order to curepromptly and not wait until 1983. So we have been fighting a battle,the disease. If we bleed him just a So I am glad to hear that people on and it Is one in which our committees,littlebit,perhaps bleeding him athe other side of the ai&le are saying and the experts who ea1 with thesewhole lot more Is going to work, andthat they agree with us on this side of Issues, have not had the opportunitythat will make the system healthy the aisle in not wanting to delay, and to fully examine the problem& Sociai security is a big piece of whatagreeing with us on this side that ade- But make no rn1take about It, thisthe Federal and National Governmentquate notice should be given before bill that the Seflate has sent back tois about, and not just what this cono-any changes are made in the social se- us with the overenthuslasm of the resmy is. curity system, backing off from the toration of the minimum benefits In earlier Reagan position. some sort of shape, form, or manner 01620 Mr. CONABLE. Mr Speaker, will does far more than just restore par It Is a big sign to all of us of thethe gentleman yield? tially the mlnlnuun benefit. It, first ofproblems that this particular Reagan Mr. SHANNON. I yield to the gen- all, 1nltiates for the first time in theeconomic program Is having in ourtleman from New York. history of this system a means test particular society, and you had better Mr. CONABLE. May I ask the gen- social securlty—no less than one thatface up to that because there s moretleman how he voted a few moments alms specifically at ethnlnatlng bène-of this coming down the pike. You areago on an opportunity offered by the fits for public employees, any publicnot going to correct this system unlessleader of his subcommittee to deal employee, that Is, a teacher, a State oryou correctthe economic circum-with some of the long-term problems local employee, Feder1 employee,stances that surround it of social security? anyone in the military. Anyone who So, Mr. Speaker, I hope the confer- Mr. SHANNON. Is the gentleman gets a pension of over $300 a monthees will hold up, and I would like theaskIng how I voted on the COLA pro- would suffer a reduction In benefits. chairman to yield to me or a question.posal? And indeed ft s eligibility, zot anWhat Is his feeling about the family Mr. CONABLE, No. I am asking the earned or unearned bentflt, as somemaximum? And, what IstheIntent ofgentleman how he voted on the Pickle have sought to debate on this floorthe gentleman in going to conferenceproposal to deal with the long-term over the last month that Is the issuewith respect to the family benefit? problems of social security. here. 0' Mr. SHANNON. If the gentleman Is Perhapsmore Importantly us the Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak-asking how I voted on the then pro- new ground the cuts the Senate haer, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. SHANNON). posal to reduce benefits in the future made in the family benefit.' Unde'r the for all beneficiaries— Senate bill,all families with more Mr. SHANNON. I thank the chair- Mr. CONABLE. No, that Is not what than one dependent will have theirman for yielding. I am asking the gentleman, and the benefits reduced. And indeed, those I would just like to say how happy Igentleman knows very well I am not who receive the least In terms of theam that we are beginning finally toasking that. He is saying a different family benefits are those who areget some minimum-benefit issues re-thing now than he said in committee. going to suffeir the greatest cut3 bysolved. I think to go back, we have to Mr. SHANNON. I voted against that. these provisions the Senate ha passedremember that the minimum benefit Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak- over to us as a modified minimumwas removed in the Reagan budgeter, I have no further requests for time. benef it. proposal which passed this House last And it goes even further than that.summer and, ever since that time, mil- The SPEAKER pro tempore. With- The fact is, that the dollars saved bylions of Americans have bcen deeplyout objection, the previous question is concerned at this action of the Con-ordered. virtue of the reduction In the family There was no objection. maximum are nearly 10 tImes as muchgress, cutting social security benefits The SPEAKER pro tempore. The as would be saved if they had com-for people receiving them for the firstquestion is on the motion offered by pletely struck the minimum benefit. time In history So, under the guise o doing nothing, X am aLso heartened to hear that mythe gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Ros- the Senate has done great deLcolleagues on the other side of theTENKOWSKI). Under the restoration of the mlnhnumaisle are saying some things that they The motion was agreed to. 0 benefits, there are deep cuts in ternhad not been saying earllr In this MOTIONTO U5TRUCT OFFER)Y MR.CONABLE of family benefits, and, Interestinglyyear, things like social security benefi- Mr. CONABLE. Mr. Speaker, I offer enough,they are aimed t those whociariesshouldgetnoticebeforea motion to Instruct conferees. 0 receivethe least from the system. changes are made. Of course, the The Clerk read as follows: Those of us who are fighting againstReagan proposal would not have given Mr. CONABLE moves that the conferees be these cuts will, I hope, be somewhat.any noticetotheearlyremovalInstructed to (1) support those aspects of the Bouse bill(ILR.4331) necessary to successfuL I hope this conference willpeople, people retiring next year atInsure, that no person currently receiving recognize the strong interest of thisthe age of 62 who would have hadonly social security benefits or only social House 2n this 1eg1slation We needtheir benefits cut by 30 percent. I amsecurity benefits and 0SSI will have those morethan the Senate's version of res-glad to see some movement away frombenefits reduced by the conference agree-

• toration of the minimum benefits,that proposal from the other side ofment, and (2) strike those portions of the •that Is, we need total restoration, andthe aisle, and I am glad to hear themmeasure related to reallocation of tax rates

November 4, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S 12919 RESTORATION OF f1INIMUM SOCIAL SECURITYBENJirIT8 Mr.BAKER. Mr.President, I ask the Chair to lay before the Senate a message from the House of Representatives on HR. 4331. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Ju'- sEN) laid before the Senate a message from the House of Representatives an- nouncing its disagreement to the amend- ment of the Senate to the bIll (HR. 4331) to amend the Omnibus Reconcilia- tion Act of 1981 to restore minimum benefits under the Social Security Act, and requesting a conference with the Senate on the disagreeing votes of, the two Houses thereon. Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I move that the Senate insist on its amendment, agree to the request of the House to a conference and that the Chair be au- thorized to appoint conferees. The motion was agreed to; and the President Officer appointed Mr. DOLE, Mr. ARMSTRONG, Mr. REINS, Mr. LONG, and Mr. Moywniaz conferees on the part of the Senate.

97m CONGRESS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORT

1st Session J No.97—409

SOCIAL SECURITY AMENDMENTS OF 1981

DECEMBER 14, 1981.—Ordered to be printed

Mr. RosTENicowsiu, from the committee of conference, submitted the following

CONFERENCE REPORT

[ToaccompanyH.R. 4331] The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 4331) to amend the Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1981 to restore minimum benefits under the Social Security Act, having met, after full and free conference, have agreed to recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses as follows: That the House recede from itsdisagreementto the amendment of the Senate and agree to the same with an amendment as fol- lows: In lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted by the Senate amendment insert the following: INTERFUND BORROWING SECTION 1. (a) Section 201 of the Social Security Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection: "axvIfat any time prior to January 1983 the Managing Trustee determines that borrowing authorized under this subsection is ap- propriate in order to best meet the need for financing the benefit payments from the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund or the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund, the Manag- ing Trustee may borrow such amounts as he determines to be appro- priate from the other such Trust Fund, or from the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund established under section 1817, for transfer to and deposit in the Trust Fund whose need for financing is involved. "(2) In any case where a loan has been made to a Trust Fund under paragraph (1), there shall be transferred from time to time, from the borrowing Trust Fund to the lending Trust Fund, interest with respect to the unrepaid balance of such loan at a rate equal to

87-6560 2 therate which the lending Trust Fund would earn on the amount involved if the loan were an investment under subsection (d). "('3) If in any month after a loan has been made to a Trust Fund under paragraph (1),the Managing Trustee determines that the assets of such Trust Fund are sufficient to permit repayment of all or part of any loans made to such Fund under paragraph (1), he shall make such repayments as he determines to be appropriate. "(4)TheBoard of Trustees shall make a timely report to the Con- gress of any amounts transferred (including interest payments) under thi$ subsection. " (b)Section 1817 of such Act i$ amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection: "(j)(1) If at any üme prior to January 1983 the Managing Trustee determines that borrowing authorized under thi$ subsection 8 ap- propriate in order to best meet the need for financing the benefit payments from the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund, the Managing Trustee may borrow such amounts as he determines to be appropriate from either the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insur- ance Trust Fund or the Federal Di$ability Insurance Trust Fund for transfer to and deposit in the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund. "(2) In any case where a loan has been made to the Federal Hospi- tal Insurance Trust Fund under paragraph (1), there shall be trans- ferred from time to time, from such Trust Fund to the lending Trust Fund, interest with respect to the unrepaid balance of such loan at a rate equal to the rate which the lending Trust Fund would earn on the amount involved if the loan were an investment under sub- section (c). "(3) If in. any month after a loan has been made to the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund under paragraph (1), the Managing Trustee determines that the assets of such Trust Fund are sufficient to permit repayment of all or part of any loans made to such Fund under paragraph (1), he shall make such repayments as he deter- mines to be appropriate. "(4)TheBoard of Trustees shall make a timely report to the Con- gress of any amounts transferred (including interest payments) under thi$ subsection. " (c)The amendments made by thi$ section shall be effective on the date of the enactment of thi$ Act. CONTINUATION OF MINIMUM BENEFITS FOR EXISTING BENEFICIARIES SEC.2.(a)(1) Section 215(a) (5) of the Social Security Act (as amended by section 2201 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981) is further amended— (A) rn the first sentence, by striking out 'andthe table for determining primary insurance amounts and maximum family benefits contained in this section in December 1978 shall be modified as specified in paragraph (6)"; and (B) in the last sentence, by striking out ",modifiedby the ap- plication of paragraph (6), " (2)Section 215(a)(6)(A) of the Social Security Act (as added by sec- tion 2201 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981) is amended by striking out "The table of benefits" and all that follows down through "shall be extended" and inserting in lieu thereof the following "In applying the table of benefits in effect in December 1978 under this section for purposes of the last sentence of para- 3 graph(4),suchtable, revised as provided by subsection (i), as appli- cable, shall be extended" (b) Section l15(f)(7) of the Social Security Act (as amended by sec- tion P01 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 11181) is fur- ther amended— (1) by striking out the period at the end of the second sentence and inserting in lieu thereof ",and(effective January 1118l) the recomputation shall be modified by the application of subsec- tion (aX6) where applicable. "and () by striking out the last sentence. (c) Section 215(i)(2)(A)(iii),oftheSocial Security Act (as amended by section 2201 oftheOmnibus. Budget Reconciliation Act of1981)is further amended by inserting after "this title" the follow- ing: "and, with respect to a primary insurance amount dete'rmined under subsection (a)(1)(C)(i)(I) in the case of an individual to whom that subsection (as in effect in December 1981) applied, subject to the provisions of subsection (a)(1)(C)(i) and clauses (iv) and (v) of this subparagraph (as then in effect)". (d) Section l15(i)(4) of the Social Security Act (as amended by sec- tion l01 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 11181) is fur- ther amended by striking out',modifiedby the application of sub- section (a)(6,), "each place it appears. (e) Section l0l(q) of the Social Security Act (as amended by section P01 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 11181) is further amended— (1) in paragraph (4),bystriking out "changed" and "change" each place they appear and inserting in lieu thereof "increased" and "increase", respectively; and (el) in paragraph (10), by striking out "changed': "change': and "changes" each place they appear and inserting in lieu thereof "increased ","increase",and"increases ",respectively. (f)Sectionl03(a)(8) of the Social Security Act (as amended by sec- tion Pl01 of the Omnibus Budqet Reconciliation Act of 11181) is fur- ther amended by striking out',modifiedby the application of sec- tion l15(a)(6), ". (g)Section V7(bXl) of the Social Security Act (as amended by sec- tion P01 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 11181) is fur- ther amended by striking out',andas modified by the application of section l15(a)(6), ". (h)Section 162k? of the Social Security Act (as added by section 201 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 11181) is repealed. (i)Subsection (e) of section 2201 of the Omnibus Budget Reconcili- ation Act of 11181 is repealed. (j)(1) Subsection (ii)ofsection 2?01 of the Omnibus Budget Recon- ciliation Act of 11181 is repealed, effective September 1, 11181. (el) Except as provided in paragraphs (3) and (4), the amendments made by section 2201 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 11181 (other than subsection (f) thereof), together with the amend- ments made by the preceding subsections of this section, shall apply with respect to benefits for months after December 11181; and the amendment made by subsection (f) of such section l201 shall apply with respect to deaths occurring after December 11181. (3) Such amendments shall not apply— (A) in the case of an old-age insurance benefit, if the individ- ual who is entitled to such benefit first became eligible (as de- 4 fined in section 215(aX8XB) of the Social Security Act) for such benefit before January 1982, (B) in the case of a disability insurance benefit, if the individ- ual who is entitled to such benefit first became eligible (as so defined) for such benefit before Januaiy 1982, or attained age 62 before January 1982, (C) in the case of a wifeor husbandinsurance benefit, or a childinsurance benefit based on the wages and self-employ- ment income of a living individual, if the individual on whose wages and self-employment income such benefit is based is enti- tled to an old-age or disability insurance benefit with respect to which such amendments do not apply, or (D) in the case of a survivors insurance benefit, if the individ- ual on whose wages and self-employment income such benefit is based died before January 1982, or dies in or after January 1982 and at the time of his death is eligible (as so defined) for an old-age or disability insurance benefit with respect to which such amendments do not apply. (4)Inthe case of an individual who is a member of a religious order (within the meaning of section 8121(rX2) of the Internal Reve- nue Code of 1954), or an autonomous subdivision of such order, whose members are required to take a vow of poverty, and which order or subdivision elected coverage under title II of the Social Se- curity Act before the date of the enactment of this Act, or who would be such a member except that such individual is considered retired because of old age or total disability, paragraphs (2) and (8) shall apply, except that each reference therein to "December 1981" or "January 1982" shall be considered a reference to "December 1991" or "January 1992': respectively. EXTENSION OF COVERAGE TO FIRST SIX MONTHS OF SICK PAY SEC. 8. (a) Clause (2) of section 209(b) of the Social Security Act is amended by inserting immediately after "sickness or accident dis- ability" the following: "(but, in the case of payments made to an em- ployee or an;Y of his dependents, this clause shall exclude from the term 'wages only 1ayments which are received under a workmen compensation law) (bXl) Subparagraph (B) of section 8121(aX2) of the Internal Reve- nue Code of 1954 (defining wages for purposes of the Federal Insur- ance Contributions Act) is amended to read as follows: "(B) sickness or accident disability (but, in the case of pay- ments made to an employee or any of his dependents, this sub- paragraph shall exclude from the term 'wages' only payments which are received under a workmen's compensation law), or ". (2)Section 8121(a,) of such Code is further amended by adding at the end thereof (after and below paragraph (18)) the following new sentence: "Except as otherwise provided in regulations prescribed by the Sec- retary, any third party which makes a payment included in wages solely by reason of the parenthetical matter contained in subpara- graph (B) of paragraph (2) shall be treated for purposes of this chap- ter and chapter 22 as the employer with respect to such wages." (c) Subsection (e) of section 3231 of such Code (defining compensa- tion for purposes of the Railroad Retirement Tax Act) is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new paragraph: 5

"(4)(A)For purposes of applying sections 3201(b) and 3221(b) (and so much of section 3211(a) as relates to the rates of the taxes imposed by sections 3101and3111), in the case of pay- ments made to an employee or any of his dependents on account of sickness or accident disability, clause (i) of the second sen- tence of paragraph (1) shall exclude from the term 'compensa- tion' only— "(i) payments which are received under a workmen s com- pensation law, and "(ii) benefits received under the Railroad Retirement Act of 1974. "(B) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for purposes of the sections specified in subparagraph (A), the term compen- sation' shall include benefits paid under section 2(a) of the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act for days of sickness, except to the extent that such sickness (as determined in accord- ance with standards prescribed by the Railroad Retirement Board) is the result of on-the-job injury. "(C) Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, subpara- graphs (A) and (B) shall not apply to payments made after the expiration of a ti-month period comparable to the 6-month period described in section 3121(a)(4). "(D) Except as otherwise provided in regulations prescribed by the Secretary, any third party which makes a payment included in compensation solely by reason of subparagraph (A) or (B) shall be treated for purposes of this chapter as the employer with respect to such compensation." (d)(1) The regulations prescribed under the last sentence of section 3121(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, and the regulations prescribed under subparagraph (D) of section 3231(eX4) of such Code, shall provide procedures under which, if (with respect to any em- ployee) the third party pro mptly— (A) withholds the employee portion of the taxes involved, (B) deposits such portion under section 6302 of such Code, and (C) notifies the employer of the amount of the wages or com- pensation involved, the employer (and not the third party) shall be liable for the employ- er portion of the taxes involved and for meeting the requirements of section 6'OSl of such Code (relating to receipts for employees) with respect to the wages or compensation involved. (2) For purposes of paragraph (1)— (A) the term 'employer" means the employer for whom serv- ices are normally rendered, (B) the term 'taxes involved" means, in the case of any em- ployee, the taxes under chapters 21 and 22 which are payable solely by reason of the parenthetical matter contained in sub- paragraph (B) of section 3121(a)(2) of such Code, or solely by reason of paragraph (4) of section 3231(e) of such Code, and (C) the term "wages or compensation involved" means, in the case of any employee, wages or compensation with respect to which taxes described in subparagraph (B) are imposed. (e) For purposes of applying section 209 of the Social Security Act, section 3121(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, and section 3221(e) of such Code with respect to the parenthetical matter con- tained in section 209(bX2) of the Social Security Act or section 6 3121(a)(2)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, or with respect to section 3231(e)(4) of such Code (as the case may be), payments under a State temporary disability law shall be treated as remuneration for service. (f) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no penalties or in- terest shall be assessd on account of any failure to make timely pay- ment of taxes, imposed by section 3101, 3111, 3201(b), 3211, or 3221(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1.954 with respect to pay- ments made for the period beginning January 1, 1982, and ending June 30, 1982, to the extent that such taxes are attributable to this section (or the amendments made by this section) and that such fail. ure is due to reasonable cause and not to willful neglect. (g)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2),this section (and the amendments made by this section) shall apply to remuneration paid after December 31, 1981. (2) This section (and the amendments made by this section) shall not apply with respect to any payment made by a third party to an employee pursuant to a contractual relationship of an employer with such third party entered into before December 14, 1981, if— (A) coverage by such third party for the group in which such employee falls ceases before March 1, 1982, and (B) no payment by such third.party is made to such employee under such relationship after February 28, 1982. PENALTIES FOR MISUSE OF SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS SEC. 4. (a) Section 208(g) of the Social Security Act is amended— (1) by inserting "or for the purpose of obtaining anything of value from any person," before "or for any other purpose" in the matter preceding paragraph (1); and (2) by adding after paragraph (2) the following new para- graph: "(3) knowingly alters a social security card issued by the Sec- retary, buys or sells a card that is, or purports to be, a card so issued, counterfeits a social security card, or possesses a social security card or counterfeit social security card with intent to sell or alter it; or" (b)Section 208 of such Act is further amended by striking out "shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both" in the matter following subsection (ii) and inserting n lieu thereof "shall be guilty of a felony and upon conviction thereof shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both "

• (c) The amendments made by subsections (a) and (b) shall be effec- tive with respect to violations committed after the date of the enact- ment of this Act. STATUTORY DEADLINE FOR IMPLEMENTING AFDC HOME HEALTH AIDE DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS SEC. 5. The last sentence of subsection (cX2) of section 966 of the Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1980 (as added by section 2156 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981) is amended by insert- ing "with at least seven States" after 'agreements " 7

INFORMATIONWITH RESPECT TO PRISONERS SEC. 6. Section 223(f) of the Social Security Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new paragraph: "(3) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 552a of title 5, United States Code, or any other provision of Federal or State law, any agency of the United States Government or of any State (or po- litical subdivision thereof) shall make available to the Secretary, upon written request, the name and social security account number of any individual who is confined in a jail, prison, or other penal institution or correctional facility under the jurisdiction of such agency, pursuant to his conviction of an offense which constituted a felony under applicable law, which the Secretary may require to carry out the provisions of this subsection. " REPORTTO CONGRESS SEC. 7. The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall report to the Congress within ninety days after the date of the enactment of this Act with respect to the actions being taken to prevent pay- ments from being made under title II of the Social Security Act to deceased individuals, including to the extent possible the use of the death records available under the medicare program to screen the cash benefit rolls for such deceased individuals. And the Senate agree to the same. DAN Ros'rENKowsKI, J. J. PICKLE, CHARLES B. RANGEL (except for section 3), ANDREW JACOBS, Jr., RICHARD A. GEPHARDT, BARBER B. CONABLE, Jr., Wnns GRADISON, Managers on the Part of the House. BOB DOLE, W. L. ARMSTRONG, JOHN HEINZ, RussEu. LONG, DANIEL MOYNIHAN, Managers on the Part of the Senate.

JOINT EXPLANATORY STATEMENT OF THE COMMIVJ'EE OF CONFERENCE The managers on the part of the House and the Senate at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 4331) to amend the Om- nibus Reconciliation Act of 1981 to restore minimum benefits under the Social Security Act, submit the following joint statement to the House and the Senate in explanation of the effect of the action agreed upon by the managers and recommended in the ac- companying conference report: The Senate amendment struck out all of the House bill after the enacting clause and inserted a substitute text. The House recedes from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate with an amendment which is a substitute for the House bill and the Senate amendment. The differences between the House bill, the Senate amendment, and the substitute agreed to in confer- ence are noted below, except for clerical corrections, conforming changes made necessary by agreements reached by the conferees, and minor drafting and clarifying changes. INTERFUND BORROWING Present law.—The present law tax rates for OASDI and HI, and the allocation of the OASDI tax rate between OASI and DI are shown below. No authority exists for administratively transferring funds from one trust fund to another.

PRESENTLAWOASDHITAX RATES

OAS Dl HI Total

Employees and employers, each (in percent): . 1982 4.575 0.825 1.30 6.70 1983 4.575 .825 1.30 6.70 1984 4.575 .825 1.30 6.70 1985 4.750 .950 1.35 7.05 1986—89 4.750 .950 1.45 7.15 1990—2004 5.100 1.100 1.45 7.65 2005 and after 5.100 1.100 1.45 7.65 Self-employed (in percent): 1982 6.8125 1.2375 1.30 9.350 1983 6.8125 1.2375 1.30 9.350 1984 6.8125 1.2375 1.30 9.350 1985 7.1250 1.4250 1.35 9.900 1986—89 7.1250 1.425C 1.45 10.000 1990—2004 7.6500 1.6500 1.45 10.750 2005 and after 7.6500 1.6500 1.45 10.750

House bill.—No provision. Senate amendment.—Section 101 of the amendment would au- thorize borrowing between the OASI and DI trust funds at any time prior to January 1991. The Managing Trustee, the Secretary (9) 10 of the Treasury, would determine when borrowing would be appro- priate to meet the need to finance the benefit payments from these trust funds. The Managing Trustee would be authorized to borrow any amounts which he determines to be appropriate from either of these trust funds for transfer to and deposit in the other trust fund. In any case where a loan had been made, interest would be paid by the borrowing fund to the lending fund at a rate equal to the rate the lending trust fund would earn on the unrepaid amount if the loan were a regular investment. Whenever the Managing Trustee determined that the assets of the borrowing trust fund were sufficient to permit repayment of all, or part, of any loans made, he would make such repayments as he determines to be appropriate. The Board of Trustees would be required to make a timely report to the Congress of any amounts borrowed or repaid (including in- terest payments). Section 102 of the Senate amendment revises the distribution of social security taxes between the OASI, DI, and HI trust funds for 1982 and later, but did not alter the overall OASDHI combined tax rate under present law.

PROPOSEDREALLOCATION OF OASDHI TAXRATES

0451 DI HI TtaI

Employees and employers, each (n percent): 1982 5.185 0.715 0.80 6.70 1983 5.035 .665 1.00 6.70 1984 4.855 .595 1.25 6.70 1985 5.005 595 1.45 7.05 1986—89 5.100 .600 1.45 7.15 1990—2004 5.150 .750 1.75 7.65 2005 and after 5.450 .750 1.45 7.65 Self-employed (in percent) 1982 7.5150 1.0350 0.800 9.350 1983 7.3750 0.9750 1.000 9.350 1984 7.2150 0.8850 1.250 9.350 1985 7.5500 0.9000 1.450 9.900 1986—89 7.6500 0.9000 1.450 10.000 1990—2004 7.8550 1.1450 1.750 10.750 2005 and after 8.1750 1.1250 1.450 10.750

Conference agreement. —The conference agreement does not in- clude the Senate provision with respect to changing the social secu- rity tax rates or the allocation of the OASDI tax rate between the OASI and DI trust funds. The conference agreement would author- ize borrowing of existing assets between the OASI, DI, and HI trust funds under the same conditions and requirements as provided in the Senate amendment except with regard to effective date for bor- rowing between the OASI and DI trust funds. Under the confer- ence agreement, the borrowing authority would be effective from the date of enactment through December 31, 1982. In determining that borrowing under this provision is appropriate in order to best meet the need for financing the benefit payments under any of the three trust funds, the Managing Trustee should, after consultation with the other trustees, make such determination no less frequent- ly than on a monthly basis. In no case shall such interfund borrow- 11 ing make adjustments in the trust funds insuring benefit payments for a period more than six months beyond the date of such determi- nation. RESTORATION OF MINIMUM BENEFIT FOR CURRENT RECIPIENTS (sECTION 2) Present law.—The minimum benefit for all present and future beneficiaries will be eliminiated. No person becoming eligible for old-age or disability benefits after October 1981 will be entitled to the minimum benefit. Benefits payable to new beneficiaries will be based on their actual earnings. All other persons will be affected beginning with benefits pay- able for the month of March 1982. Their benefits will be recomput- ed based on their actual earnings record and according to recompu- tation procedures prescribed in regulations issued by the Secretary of HHS. In addition, persons aged 60 to 64 who are entitled to a minimum benefit for the month of February 1982 will become eligi- ble for a special SSI benefit if they qualify under all SSI rules except that pertaining to age. The amount of the special SSI pay- ment will be limited to the difference between the minimum bene- fit the individual received in February 1982 (without regard to the earnings test) and the recalculated benefit. These SSI payments will not be adjusted for increases in the cost of living, nor will these 60 to 64 year old persons become eligible for certain other benefits including State supplementation, food stamps, medicaid, or social services as a result of this provision. This provision was adopted in section 2201 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 (P.L. 97—37). House bill.—The House bill would repeal section 2201 of the Om- nibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 (P.L. 97—35), thereby rein- stating the OASDI minimum benefit provision as it existed under prior law for both current and future beneficiaries. Senate amendment.—Section 103 of the amendment would re- store the minimum benefit for all people who are eligible for bene- fits before November 1981 and who are residents of the 50 States, District of (.olumbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, Virgin Islands, and American Samoa. Among this group of beneficiaries, those with governmenLa! pensions would, beginning with benefits for June of 1982, have tiieir minimum benefit reduced dollar-for-dollar for the portion of their governmental pensions above $300, but not below the amount of the benefit based on their actual earnings. This offset would apply only to the benefits of retired or disabled work- ers; it would not affect survivors' or dependents' benefits. For members of religious orders who have taken a vow of pover- ty and who were. first covered under the social security program prior to the dat of enactment as a result of amendments adopted in 1972, the provision would apply the elimination of the minimum benefit for future recipients, only to those who become eligible after October 1991. Conference agreement. —The conference agreement restores the minimum benefit for all people who are eligible for benefits before January 1982 or whose benefits are based on a worker's eligibility or death before January 1982. Also, the elimination of the mini- mum benefit for future recipients applies to members of religious orders who have taken a vow of poverty, who were first covered 12 under the social security program prior to the date of enactment, and who become eligible after October 1991. For current recipients to whom the minimum benefit would be restored, the conference agreement does not include the provision of the Senate amendment that limits the restoration to residents of the United States and does not include the provision reducing the minimum benefit dollar-for-dollar for those also receiving govern- mental pensions above $300. EXTENSION OF COVERAGE TO FIRST SIX MONTHS OF SICK PAY— SECTION 3 Present law.—Payments made to or on behalf of an employee of a private employer on account of sickness or accident disability are subject to social security taxes and are treated as covered earnings unless they are either: (1) paid under a qualified plan or system; or (2) paid after the employee has not worked for the employer for more than six months. A qualified plan or system is one that ap- plies to the employees of a firm generally or to a. class or classes of employees. The existence of a plan or system is shown if the plan or system is in writing or is otherwise made known. to employees (for example, through the medium of a bulletin board notice or the long and established practice of the employer). Other indications of the existence of a plan or sytem include, but are not limited to, contractual references to a plan or system, employer contributions to a plan, or segregated accounts for the payment of benefits. With respect to railroad employment, the Railroad Retirement Tax Act, sec. 3201 et seq. of the Internal Revenue Code, excludes from taxable compensation the amount of any payment (including any amount paid by an employer for insurance or annuities) made to, or on behalf of, an employee or any of his dependents undera plan or system, on account of sickness or accident disability. Under the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act (sec. 2(a))cer- tain daily benefits are paid from the railroad unemployment insur- ance account for qualified employees for each day of sickness after the fourth consecutive day of sickness in a period of continuing sickness. In general, the daily benefit rate for such sickness isan amount equal to sixty percent of the employee's daily rate of com- pensatior in a base year, but not less than $12.70nor in excess of p25.OO et day. The maximum number of days of sickness withina benefit year for which benefits may be paid to an employee isone hundred and thirty (26 weeks). Under present law these sickness and disability benefits are not taxable compensation for railroad retirement tax purposes. House bill.—No provision. Senate amendment. —Section104of the amendment would remove the exclusion of certain sick pay received under a plan or system during the first six months the employee is off work. How- ever, payments made by an insurance company would still be exempt unless the company is owned, to a substantial extent, by the employer, or the insurance company has an administrative. services-only contract with the employer under which the insur- ance company is reimbursed for sick payments actually made plus administrative expenses and profits. In addition, payments re- quired by a workmen's compensation or temporary disability insur- ance law would continue to be exempt. This provision would be ef- 13 fective for sick payments made in January 1982 and thereafter. The treatment of payments made to an employee more than six months after the employee last worked would be unchanged from current law. Under the Senate amendment, sick payments made to employees covered by the railroad retirement system and sick pay benefits received under the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act would continue to be exempt from railroad retirement employment taxes. Conference agreement.—The conference agreement follows the Senate amendment extending coverage to certain forms of sick pay. In addition, the conference agreement would include in the defini- tion of wages both for tax and coverage purposes, payments made under a Sick pay plan to an employee or any of his dependents by a third party on account of the employee's illness. However, in the case where an employee has contributed to such plan, "wages" or "compensation" shall not include that portion of such payments at- tributable to the employee's contributions. It is the view of the con- ferees that such amounts are properly excludable in that they do not constitute remuneration for employment but rather represent a return on the premium contributions made by the employee. The conferees intend that rules similar to those provided in sec. 105 of the Internal Revenue Code (and regulations promulgated thereun- der) shall apply in this instance. Payments which are received under a workmen's compensation law and those paid to an employ- ee by either the employer or a third party more than six months after the employee last worked would continue to be excluded from the definition of wages, as under present law. The conference agreement also provides that any third party (for example, an insurance company) that makes a payment, which is included in wages solely by reason of this provision, shall be treat- ed as the employer with respect to such wages for purposes of social security and railroad retirement employment taxes. Thus, a third party payor will be responsible for the withholding of employ- ee FICA taxes on wages up to the applicable maximum taxable wage base and for the remittance and timely deposit (as otherwise provided by law) of FICA taxes. However, the conference agree- ment establishes a specific statutory exception to this rule: the lia- bility for the employer share of the FICA taxes will shift from the third party to the actual employer as soon as the third party payor has deposited the withheld employee taxes and notified the employ- er of the amount of sick pay made to the employee. The conference agreement mandates the development of regula- tions which shall provide procedures under which, if the third party payor promptly withholds the employee portion of the taxes, deposits those taxes pursuant to the rules under section 6302 of the Code, and notifies the employer for whom services are usually ren- dered, of the payment, the employer (and not the third party payor) shall be liable for the employer portion of tax and for pro- viding written statements and other reporting requirements under Code section 6051. It is the intention of the conferees that these regulations provide that third party payors withhold the employee portion of the tax as payments are made and deposit such withheld amounts under the applicable schedule authorized by Code section 6302 (including information reports such as Form 941 and related forms) as if these amounts were paid out of the third party payor's 14 own payroll. Further, the provision adopted by the conferees re- quires simultaneous notification of the employer of the amount of compensation paid to each employee. If these conditions are met, the liability for the employer portion of the payroll tax shifts from the party making the payments to the employer for whom services are normally rendered. Upon the employer's receipt of the notifica- tion of the payment made by the third party, such employer must deposit the appropriate employer taxes as if these payments were made out of his own payroll on that date. The conferees intend that the implementing regulations shall be promptly issued and • that, having met the conditions specified in sec. 3(d), they will be relieved of the liability. As a result, FICA and railroad retirement employment taxes on combined amounts in excess of the maximum taxable wage base could be withheld from employees and paid by employers. Under section 64 13(c) of the Internal Revenue Code, employees who expe- rience such overwithholding are eligible to receive refunds. The conferees expect that the Secretary will attempt to design proce- dures whereby employers and third party payors can avoid with- holding on combined amounts in excess of the maximum taxable wage base (both for FICA and railroad retirement taxes) and will implement these procedures by regulation. The conference agreement provides that, notwithstanding any other provision of law (including certain payments made under the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act), compensation for pur- poses of the Railroad Retirement Tax Act shall include all pay- ments made to an employee or any of his dependents on account of sickness or accident disability during the first six months the em- ployee is off work except: payments which are received under a workmen's compensation law; payments which are received under The Railroad Retirement Act of 1974; or benefits which are paid under section 2(a) of the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act for days of sickness to the extent that such sickness is the result of on- the-job injury (as determined in accordance with standards pre- scribed by the Railroad Retirement Board). In addition, the conference agreement provides that, for purposes of the taxes imposed by this provision, payments made under a state temporary disability insurance law shall be treated as remu- neration for service. Under the conference agreement, no penalties or interest shall be assessed for failure to make timely payments of taxes with re- spect to payments of sick pay made between January 1, 1982 and June 30, 1982 and which are imposed as a result of amendments made by this section, to the extent that such failure is due to will- ful neglect and such taxes are paid on or before June 30, 1982. Finally, the conference agreement provides generally that the amendments made by this section shall apply to remuneration paid after December 31, 1981. However, these amendments shall not apply to any third party payment made to an employee pursuant to a contractual relationship of an employer with such third party which is entered into before December 14, 1981, if the third party's coverage for that employee's group ceases before February 28, 1982 and no third party payment is made to such employee under that contract after February 28, 1982. Since such payments would not 15 be considered remuneration for purposes of these taxes, no employ- ment taxes would be levied on such payments. PENALTIES FOR MISUSE OF SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS (SECTION 4) Present law.—Criminal penalties are provided for: (1) knowing! and willfully using a social security number that was obtained wit false information, (2) using someone else's social security number, or (3) unlawfully disclosing or compelling the disclosure of someone else's social security number. The crime is considered a misde- meanor and the penalty involves a fine of up to $1,000 or imprison- ment for up to one year or both. House bill.—No provision. Senate amendment.—Section 110 of the amendment would add new acts considered to be a misuse of social security cards by making it unlawful to: (1) alter, (2) buy or sell, or (3) counterfeit social security cards, or (4) possess a regular or counterfeit card with intent to sell or alter it. The provision would make all unlawful acts affecting the social security number or card a felony, rather than a misdemeanor. It would increase the maximum fine for conviction of such acts from $1,000 to $5,000 and the maximum prison term from 1 year to 5 years. Conference agreement.—The conference agreement follows the Senate amendment. STATUTORY DEADLINE FOR IMPLEMENTING AFDC HOME HEALTH AIDE DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS (SECTION 5) Present law.—P.L. 96—499 authorized the Secretary to enter into agreements with up to 12 States for the purpose of conducting dem- onstration projects to train AFDC recipients as homemaker-home health aides. This provision was amended by P.L. 97-35 to require the Secretary to establish by October 1, 1981, such guidelines and regulations as may be necessary to assure that agreements with the States are entered into by January 1, 1982. House bill.—No provision. Senate amendment.—Section 113 of the amendment wouldre- quire the Secretary to meet the January 1, 1982 deadline for enter- ing into demonstration agreements with at least 7 States. Conference agreement.—The conference; agreement follows the Senate amendment. INFORMATION WITH RE5PECT TO PRI5ONERS (sECTION 6) Present law.—Beginning October 1980, disability insurance bene- fits cannot be paid while individuals are imprisoned for conviction of a felony, except where the individual is satisfactorily participat- ing in a rehabilitation program which has been specificallyap- proved for that individual by a court of law and which is expected to result in his being able to engage in substantial gainful activity upon release and within a reasonable period of time. Such individ- uals are also not eligible for student benefits. However, benefits can be paid to dependents of prisoners, just as if the prisoners were receiving benefits. The law also provides that impairments, to the extent that they arise from, or are aggravated by, the commission of a crime, cannot be considered in determining whether a person is disabled, and im- 16 pairments arising while an individual is in prison cannot be consid- ered for purposes of disability as long as the person remains in prison. In order to implement this law, the Secretary of HHS requires information from penal institutions with which to identify the rele- vant prisoners. In some cases, providing this information without the consent of the prisoner possibly violates various privacy acts. House bill. —No provision. Senate amendnient.—Section 108 of the amendment provides that, without regard to any contrary Federal or State law, Federal, State, or local government agencies must furnish the name and social security number of any prisoner convicted of a felony, when the Secretary of HHS makes a written request to the agency for the information. Conference agreement.—The conference agreement follows the Senate amendment. REPORT TO CONGRESS REGARDING PAYMENTS TO DECEASED PERSONS (sECTION 7) Present law.—Social security benefits terminate with the month in which a beneficiary dies. Benefits are not payable for that month. House bill. —No provision. Senate amendment.—Section 109 of the amendment would re- quire the Secretary of HHS to report to Congress within 90 days after enactment on actions being taken to prevent payments to de- ceased social security beneficiaries. Conference agreement. —The conference agreement follows the Senate amendment. OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE SENATE AMENDMENT EXTENSION OF DISABILITY INSURANCE MAXIMUM FAMILY BENEFIT5 TO OLD-AGE AND SURVIVORS INSURANCE BENEFICIARIES Present law.—There is a limit on the amount of monthly benefits that ca be paid on the earnings record of one worker. This limit is known as the maximum family benefit (MFB). In retirement and survivor cases, the MFB ranges from 150 to 188 percent of the pri- mary insurance amount, the unreduced benefit of the worker. In disability cases, the MFB can be no more than the lower of 85 per- cent of the worker's average indexed monthly earnings or 150 per- cent of the primary insurance amount, but not less than 100 per- cent of the primary insurance amount. House bill.—No provision. Senate amendment.—Section 105 of the amendment would pro- vide that the disability maximum family benefit formula would be extended to retirement and survivor cases, for workers reaching age 62 or dying after December 1981. Conference agreement.—The conference agreement does not in- clude the Senate amendment. 5TUDY OF SOCIAL 5ECURITY ADMINISTRATION EFFICIENCY Present law. —Administrative expenses of the social security pro- grams are paid out of trust fund monies. No provision of law re- 17 quires special or ongoing reports to Congress on the adequacy of the administrative capacity of the agency. House bilL—No provision. Senate amendment.—Section 106 of the amendment wouldre- quire GAO to undertake a study of the SSA for the purpose of de- termining the management efficiency, employee productivity, and technical capacities (including computer hardware and program- ming) of that agency and the extent of current information on the characteristics of recipients. The Comptroller General would be re- quired to report to Congress, no later than 180 days after the date of enactment, the results of the study and any recommendations for improvements in any of the operations studied. Conference agreement.—The conference agreement does not in- clude the Senate amendment. 5EPARATE ACCOUNTING FOR SOCIAL 5ECURITY TRU5T FUND5 Present law.—Reports on the receipts, outlays, surplus or deficit, and reserve balance of each of the social security trust funds are included in the President's annual budget. In addition, the Boards of Trustees publishes annual reports on the financial status of the trust funds and includes in the reports current estimates of the short-run and long-run actuarial balances of each trust fund. House bill.—No provision. Senate amendment.—Section 107 of the amendment wouldre- quire the President, in the annual budget message and midsessiori review, to include a separate statement containing asummary of his requests for new budget authority and estimating outlays,rev- enues, and surplus or deficit of the OASI, DI, and HI trust funds. The separate statement would show the revenues, outlays, andsur- plus or deficit estimates for the trust funds, would describe theeco- nomic assumptions that were used in making the estimates for trust funds and the relationship to economic assumptions made for other parts of the budget, would indicate financial prospects of the tr.ust funds, and would present a comparative summary of the three trust fUnds with all the other portions of the unified budget. This report would be in addition to the usual budget submission which includes the budget estimates for the trust funds within the unified budget estimates. Conference agreement. —The conference agreement does not in- clude the Senate amendment. SOCIAL SECURITY CARDS Present law.—Social security cards are issued on regularpaper. No special procedures are employed to prevent alteration and du- plication. House bill. —No provision. Senate amendment.—Section 111 of the amendment wouldre- quire that new and replacement social security cards issuedmore than 190 days after enactment be made of bank-notepaper and (to the maximum extent practicable) to be a card that cannot becoun- terfeited. The Secretary of HHS would be required to report his plans for implementing this provision within 90 days after enact- ment. Con ference agreement. —The conference agreement does not in- clude the Senate amendment. The conferees, however,are aware 18 that the General Accounting Office has found that there may be a significant problem related to the use of counterfeit social security cards and believe that this matter deserves further consideration. The conferees believe that the Secretary of Health and Human Services should study the costs and benefits to the trust funds of such a proposal, the costs and benefits to other government pro- grams, and the impact of such a proposal on the privacy of individ- uals. FUTURE LEGISLATIVE CHANGES IN THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT Present law.—Congress has the authority to alter tax and spend- ing provisions. House bill.—No provision. Senate amendment.—Section 112 of the amendment provides that it is the sense of the Congress that any future legislative changes in the Social Security Act will not reduce the current dollar amount of monthly OASDI benefits to which individuals are enti- tled for the month of enactment. Conference agreement.—The conference agreement does not in- clude the Senate amendment. HIGHWAY TRUST FUND AND HIGHWAY EXCISE TAXES Present law.—Under present law, the Highway Trust Fund and its related excise taxes are in place until October 1, 1984. At that time, the current rates of the excise taxes on gasoline and other motor fuels, on lubricating oil, on trucks and trailers, on truck parts and accessories, on tires, tubes and tread rubber and on the use of heavy trucks will expire or revert to prior lower rates. The provision authorizing the deposit of taxes to and appropriations from the Highway Trust Fund will also expire on October 1, 1984. House bill—No provision. Senate amendment.—Sections 202 and 203 of the amendment would extend the highway excise taxes at current rates for 5 years, until October 1, 1989, but deposits of tax revenues to the Highway Trust Fund would be continued for 6 years, to October 1, 1990. Au- thorization for expenditures from the Highway Trust Fund would also be extended for 6 years, through September 30, 1990. Conference agreement.—The conference agreement does not in- clude the Senate amendment. DAN ROSTENKOWSKI, J. J. PICKLE, CHARLES B. RANGEL (except for section 3), ANDREW JACOBS, Jr., RICHARD A. GEPHARDT, BARBER B. CONABLE, Jr., WILLIS GRADISON, Managers on the Part of the House. BOB DOLE, W. L: ARMSTRONG, JOHN HEINZ, RUSSELL LONG, DANIEL MOYNIHAN, Managers on the Part of the Senate. 0

Deember 15,/981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 15269 The PRESIDING OFFICER. Withoutunder an employer plan or system but objection, the Senate will proceed toalso those payments made under a sick theconsiderationofthe conferencepay plan to an employee or any of his

report. - dependents by a third party (such as an (Theconference report is printed ininsurance company) on account of the the House proceedings of the RECORD ofemployee's illness. In the case where an today, December 15, 1981.) employee has contributed to such a plan, Mr. -BAKER. Mr. President, I under-• however, only that portion of payments stand there are a number of Senatorsattributable to the employer's contribu- who wish a rollcall vote on this meas-tionswillbe taxable. This provision ure. I ask for yeas and nays on passage.would be effective January 1982,al- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is therethough interest and penalties for failure a sufficient second? There Is a sufficientto comply would be waved for 6 months second. •in cases where late payments are not due The yeas and nays were ordered. to wilful neglect.. Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, the dis- Regarding the tax reallocation and in- tinguished Senator from Louisiana is notterfund borrowing contained in the Sen- on the floor, but I understand he is pre-ate amendment to H.R. 4331, the confer- pared to proceed. In the meantime, theence agreement does not include real- Senator from Kansas will make a state-location of the social security payroll tax ment and perhaps by that time theamong the three trust funds. The au- Senator from Louisiana will arrive. thority for interfund borrowing is ex- ThePRESIDING OFFICER.Thepanded to permit borrowing among all ChairrecognLizestheSenator fromthree trust funds, however, and the aw Kansas. thority expires after 1 year. TH 5OCIAL 5ECtflITY AMENDMENTS OF 1981 In particular, the conference agree- ment would authorize borrowing of ex- Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, yesterday,isting assets among the OASI, DI, and theHouse-SenateconfereesreachedHI trust funds under the same conditions agreement on provisions of H.R. 4331,and requirements as provided in the Sen- the bill to restore the social securityate amendment except with regard to ef- minimum benefit. After several weeks offective date. The borrowing authority negotiations, the conferees agreed towould be effective from the date of enact- fully restore the minimum benefit for allment through December 31, 1982. current recipients and to partially fl In the statement of managers, guid- nance this change by extending the pay-ance is provided to the managing trustee roll tax on covered workers. Interfundfor determining when borrowing is ap- borrowing on a temporary basis is au-propriate in order to best meet the need thorized in the conference agreement tofor financing benefits. The managing insure that the retirement and survivors'trustee is instructed to consult with the insurance trust fund can remain solventother trustees in making such determina- ORDER OF PROCEDURE next year by drawing on the resources oftions which should occur no less fre- the disability and hospital -insurancequently than on a monthly basis. Mr. BAKER. Now, Mr. Président, I ob-trust funds. Finally, several amendments Moreover, interfund borrowing should serve that the distinguihed chairman ofoffered on the Senate floor were acceptednot make adjustments in the trust funds the Finance Committee is on the floor.that should lead to improvements in thethat insure benefit payments for a pe- Might I inquire of him if he is ready atadministration of the social security pro-riod of more than 6 months beyond the this time to proceed to the consideration-gram. date of determination. It was the view of the, minimum benefit social security As we all know, under the Reconcili-of the conferees that interfund borrow- conference report? ation Act, the minimum benefit will being was a safety mechanism to insure Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I am readyeliminated for all present beneficiariesbenefit payments could be paid-next year. to proceed if the distinguished Senatorin March and is eliminated for all fu-The conferees do not intend that inter- from Louisiana (Mr. LONG) and the dis-ture beneficiaries, effective last month.fund borrowing should be used as a sub- tinguished Senator from New York (Mr.No person becothing eligible for old ageSstiute for more comprehensive financing MOYNIHAN) are also prepared. or disability benefits after October 1981legiSlation in then near and long term. Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, Is the mi-will be entitled to the minimum benefit, In fact, several conferees, particularly nority leader prepared to proceed at thisand benefits payable to new beneficiariesthe House conferees, were suggesting we time? will be based on their actual earnings.have a lameduck session after the next Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Yes. The conference agreement restores theelection, in November of 1982, and ad- minimum benefit for all people eligibledress the entire social security problem for benefits before January 1982 or whoseat that time. SOCIAL SECURITY MINIMUM BENE-benefits are based on a worker's eligi- AlthoughalloftheSenatefloor FIT—CONFERENCE REPORT bility or death before January 1982. Theamendments to H.R. 4331 had merit, the Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I submitelimination of the minimum benefit forconferees ultimately agreed to just four. a report of the committee of conferencefuture recIpients also becomes effective First, to facilitate the denial of dis- on H.R. 4331 and ask for its immediatein January. Members of reliigous ordersability benefits to prisoners, as enacted consideration. who have taken a vow of poverty andin 1980, the conference agreement would ThePRESIDING OFFICER.Thewho were first covered under the socialwaive any contrary Federal or State report will be stated. security program prior to the date of en-lawS to require Federal, State, or local The assistant legislative clerk readactment would, however, maintain theirgovernment agencies to furnish o the as follows: eligibility for the minimum benefit for aSecretary of HHS the names and social The committee of conference on the dis-10-year period, as under the -Senate bill,security numbers of prisoners convicted agreeing votes of the two Houses -on theuntil December 1991. of felonies. amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. To help finance the minimum benefit Second, to Improve the situation with 4331)to amend the Omnibus Reconcilia- tion Act of- 1981 to restore minimum bene-change, the conference agreement ex-regard to Incorrect payments or over- fits under the Social Security Act, havingtends social security tax coverage to thepayments, a provision is included that met, after full and free conference, havefirst 6 months of certain sick pay. Con-would require the Secretary of HHS to agreed to recommend and do recommend toferees accepted a House proposal to ex-report to Congress within 90 days on ac- their respective Houses this report, signedtend the tax beyond the Senate amend-tions being taken to prevent payments by a majority of the conferees. ment to cover not only sick pay receivedto deceased social security beneficiaries. S 15270 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—• SENATE December lSç. 1981 Third,theconferenceagreementcasions, the financial condition of socialregardless of their concern or lack of makes it unlawful to alter, buy, sell, orsecurity is critical. Under trustees' in-concern about the social security prob- counterfeit socialsecurity cards;in-ternediate assumptions, $50 billionislem, that that should be done. Again, I creases the classification of card viola-still needed by 1990 to insure the barestindicate that this is one reason the inter- tions from misdemeanors to felonies;level of solvency; nearly $100 billion isfund borrowing period was shortened. and increases the maximum penalty toneeded to restore current levels of re-It was 10 years in the bill passed by the $5,000 or 5 years in prison. serves. Over the longer term, the situa-Senate;itended up to be about13 Finally, the Secretary of HHS wouldtion only becomes more grave. The sys-months. - be required, by January 1, 1982, to entertem's deficit is projected to equal 29 per- TheHouse Republican conferees very Into agreement6 with atleast sevencent of expenditures over the next 75properly, in my opinion, insisted on a Statesfor demonstration projectstoyears. Responsible action must be taken.very short duration for interfund bor- train AFDC' recipients as home health Despite my disappointment in the outrowing. It is their purpose to keep the aides. The Secretary is currently author-come of the conference. I support thepressure on all of us who have the re ized to approve up to 12 such projects. conference agreement and urge my col-sponsibility to restore this system to what Mr. President, while I am pleased anleagues to vote for its passage. With theit should be. agreement has been reached that willrestoration of the minimum benefit be- Mr. President, I urge the adoption of maketwoquitewidelysupportedhind us, and with another year or two ofthe conference report. changes—restoring the minimum benefitsolvency provided by interfund borrow- I ask unanimous consent that excepts and authorizing interfund borrowing—Iing, we have the opportunity to reopenof the statement of managers be printed am disappointed that House coifereesand deal responsibly with the Issue ofin the RECORD that describe the provi were unwilling to make the changes nec-social security financing. visions adopted by the conferees. essary to finance the restoration of the Mr. President, finally, I understand There being no objection, the excerpt minimum benefit. Unlike the Senatethat the task force on social security iswas ordered to be. printed in the RECORD, amendment, which was passed by unani-about to be appointed by the majoritya. follows: mous vote on October 15, the conferenceand minority leaders in the Senate, byExcmtrs FEOM CONFERENCE REPORT TO agreemenb does not maintain the finan-the Speaker and minority leader In the ACCOMPANY H.R.4331, STATEMENT OF cial condition of the trust funds In theHouse and by the President. Therefore, MANAGEItS next 5 years—the critical years—but ac-it is our hope that the task force can XNTEEFUND BORROWING tually worsens their condition. Accord-finish its work In time so that we may Section 1 address the problems—as we should have Present Law.—The present law tax rates ing to the social security actuaries, this for OASDI and HI, and the allocatlon of the agreement will, on net, cost the trustaddressed them this year—no later thanOASDI taz rate between OASI and DI are funds at least $1.8 billion over the nextmid-183. I found almost unanimousshown below. No authority exists for admin- 5 years. agreementamongRepublicansandistratively transferring funds from one trust As others and I have said on many oc-Democrats, regardless of philosophy andfund to another.

PRESENT LAWOASDHITAX RATES

OASI DI HI Total OASI DI rn Total

Employees and employers each (in percent): Self-employed (ki percent): 1982 4.575 0.825 1.30 6.70 1982 6.8125 1.2375 1. 30 9.350 1983 4.575 .825 1.30 6.70 1983 6.8125 1.2375 1. 30 9. 350 1984 4.575 .825 1.30 6.70 1984 6.8125 1.2375 1.30 9. 350 1985 4.750 .950 1.35 7.05 1985 7. 1250 1.4250 1.35 9.900 1986-89. 4.750 .950 1.45 7. 15 1986-89 7. 1250 1.4250 1.45 10.000 1990—2004 5. 100 1. 100 1.45 7.65 1990—2004 7.6500 1.6500 1. 45 10.750 2005 and after 5. 100 1. 100 1.45 7.65 2005 and after 7.6500 1.6500 1.45 10. 750

House Bill.—Noprovision, funds for transfer to and deposit in themake such repayments as he determines to Senate Amendment.—Section 101 of theother trust fund, be appropriate. amendment would authorize borrowing be- In any case where a loan had been made The Board of Trustees would be required tween the OASI and DI trust funds at anyinterest would be paid by the borrowingto make a timely report to the Congress of time prior to January 1991. The Managingfund to the lending fund at a rate equalany amounts borrowed or repaid (including Trustee, the Secretary of the Treasury wouldto the rate the lending trust fund wouldinterest payments). determine when borrowing would be appro-earn on the unrepaid amount if the loan Section 102 of the Senate amendment re- priate to meet the need to finance the bene-were a regular investment. vises the distributlon of social security taxes fit payments from these trust funds. The Whenever the Managing Trustee deter-between the OASI, DI, and HI trust funds Managing Trustee would be authorized tomined that the asseta of the borrowing trustfor 1982 and later, but did not alter the borrow any amounta which he determinesfund were sufficient to permit repayment ofoverall OASDHI combined tax rate under to be appropriate from either of these trustall, or part, of any loans made, he wouldpresent law.

PROPOSEDREALLOCATIONOF OASDHTAX RATES

OASI DI HI Total OASI DI H Total

Employees and employers, each (in percent): Self-employed (in percent): 1982 5.185 0.715 0.80 6.70 1982 7.5150 1.0350 0.800 9.350 1983 5.035 .665 1.00 6.70 1983L 7. 3750 .9750 1.000 9.350 1984 4.855 .595 1.25 6.70 1984 7.2150 .8850 1.250 9.350 1985 5.005 .595 1.45 7.05 1985 7.5500 .9000 1.450 9.900 1986—89 5. 100 .600 1.45 7. 15 1986—89 7.6500 .9000 1.450 10.000 1990—2004 5. 150 .750 1.75 7.65 1990—2004 7.8550 1. 1450 1.750 10. 750 2005 and after 5.450 .750 1.45 7.65 2005 and after 8. 1750 1. 1250 1.450 0. 750

Conference Agreement.—The conferenceas provided in the Senate amendment exceptunder any of the three trust funds, the Man- agreement does not include the Senate pro-with regard to effective date for borrowingaging Trustee should,afterconsultation vision with respect to changing the socialbetween the OASI and DI trust funds. Underwith the other trustees, make such deter- security tax rates or the allocation of thethe conference agreement, the borrowing au-mination nolessfrequently than on a OASDI tax rate between the OASI and DIthority would be effective from the date ofmonthly basis. In no case shall such inter-, trust funds. The conference agreement wouldenactment through December 31,1982. Infund borrowing make adjustments in the authorize borrowing of existing assets be-determining that borrowing under this pro-trust funds insuring benefit payments for a tween the OASI, DI, and HI trust fundsvision is appropriate in order• to best meetperiod more than six months beyond the under the same conditions and requirementathe need for financing the benefit paymentsdate of such determflmtion. December .15,.198.1 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 15271 RESTORATIONOF MINIMUM BEN'1T WOR CUR- EX'rENsION OF COVERAGE TO FIRST SIX MONTHS However, in the case where an employee has RENT RECIPIENTS OP SICK PAY contributed to such plan, "wages" or "com- Sectf on 2 Section 3 pensation" shall not include that portion of Present law—The minimum benefit for all Present law—Payments made to or on be.such paymentsattributabletothe em present and futurebeneficiarieswillbehalf of an employee of a private employer onployee's contribt4tions. It is the view of the eliminated. No person becoming eligible foraccount of siçkness.or accident disability areconferees that such amounts are properly old-age or disability benefits after Octobersubjecttosocial securitytaxes and areexcludable in that they do not constitute 1981 will be entitled to the minimum bene-treated as covered earnings unless they areremuneration for employment but rather fit. Benefits payable to new beneficiaries willeither:(1) paid under a qualified plan orrepresent a return on the premium contribu. be based on their actual earnings. system; or (2) paid after the employee hastions made by the employee. The conferees All other persons will be affected begin-not worked for the emplQ'er for more thanintend that rules similar to those provided ning with benefits payable for the month ofsix months. A qualified plan or system is one in sec. 105 of the Internal Revenue Code (and March 1982. Their benefits will be re

now.It Is defensible social policy to say Mr. DECONCINI. Mr. President, I riseamazing statements about the record of that they should be treated as any otherin support of the conference report onhis administration on social• security. income because they are designed to beH.R. 4331. The conference report does The President began: as any other income. restore the minimum benefit for those Maybe you can understand my frustra- It would have, been easy to say therepresently receiving it and for those whotion . . .tobe portrayed as somehow an was not a single chance, but if the effortqualifiedbeforeDecember31,1981.enemy of my own generation. Most of the of May 1980 was simply a masterpieceThose retiring after this year would notattack has been centered around one issue, of bad timing and if it was not the policybe eligible. social security. aspect of the problem, that it was the On at least five occasions a majority Less than 4 months into his term, last fact that the selling of it, the marketingsaw fit on this floor to oppose the res-May, the President asked Congress to cut of it, was the problem, then we have atoration of this benefit. I applaud themsocial security benefits by more than $88 turbulent time ahead indeed. If that isf or supporting the President's change ofbillion over the next 5 years. The admin- to be, so be it. heart in this effort and restoring theistration asked Congress to immediately Mr. President, I will not detain theminimum benefit for those presently re-slash retirement benefits for Americans Senate any longer. The distinguishedceiving it. I wish we had not tinkeredhaving to retire before the age of 65 by ranking member of the Committee onwith this in the first place. There was no justifiable reason. With strong commit-40 percent. Eight days after the adminis- Finance Is present, as is the minority tration formally proposed its $88 billion leader. I simply want to say I came onments on a bipartisan basis on bothbenefit cut plan, the Republican-con- this floor in the spirit of compromise andsides of the aisle, -the President on manytrolled Senate rejected it, by a unani- bipartisan understanding of a commonoccasions had said this was a safety netmous vote of 96 to zero. Yet. late into responsibility, and I expect that will sur-and would not be touched. Then we not only touched it but we hammered awaythe summer, the administration con- vive this little exchange. But no oneat it. tinued to assume these deep benefit cuts should be proposing that the Members in its budget. on this side will not be aware of what In total, thisIs an improveme:t. I think it is best left alone when you have a At the Conference on Aging, the Presi- has been said, alerted to what might becommitment not to change the basicdent said: done, and, indeed, if we •have to gostructures, and I think the social security There's been political demagoguery and through the events of the last 8 monthssystem is such a basic structure, at leastoutright falsehood, and as a result, many once again, we will go through the eventsas it relates to the benefit side. who rely on social security for their liveli- of the last 8 months once again. hood havebeenneedlesslyandcruelly 1 would hope, Mr. President, that we We ought not to be making those• frightened. could proceed in the spirit of the Financealterations. Committee's original report and the com- On the side of financing and the man- Again, the President is right. In an- mittee of conference, which is a bipar-agement of those funds there are manynouncing the administration's plan of tisan effort to secUre the system and toalterations that must be considered, but$88 billion in social security benefit cuts, restore to the American peonle a shame-as far as reducing the benefit, raisingIt was Health and Human Services Sec- age limitations, eliminating or substan-retary Schweiker who said: lessly damaged understanding of thetially reducing the cost of living, we can fundamental soundness of the social se- The crisis is inescapable. It is here. It is do better here in balancing the budget.now. It is serious. curity system. It is sound because, as the I just came from the Foreign Opera- distinguished Senator from Louisianations Appropriations Conference Com- In defending the administration's May has said, Congress will keep it sound.mittee. We will indeed, I suspect, agreeplan,it was 0MB Director Stockman Nothing larger could be said but in theon a conference report from that Appro-who testified before the House Ways and history of human institutions, that is apriations Subcommittee that will be aMeans Committee: very: powerful statement. I thank thelarger foreign aid bill under this admin- Thequestionbefore Congress iB whether Chair. istration than it was under the previousthe 36 million Americans who currently de- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-administration. pend on the Social Security system can count ator from Louisiana, Mr. LONG. It is hard for me to face retirees, peopleon any check at all in less than two years Mr. LONG. Mr. President, I supportwho have worked and paid in their hardhence.... The most devastating bankruptcy the conference report on the bill HR.earned money Into the social securityin history will occur on or about Nov. 3. 4331. The main element in this legisla-system, and then be asked that to bal- 1982. tion is the restoration of the social se-ance the budget we must make some a1 Yet, by the administration's own esti- curity minimum benefit. Under this pro-terations or reductions. mates, the May social security plan called vision, that benefit will be preserved for I am glad to learn that most of thefor deeper benefit cuts and greater say- all those who are already on the benefitmore onerous provisions in the SenateIngs than might be needed to insure the rolls or who become eligible before theversion of H.R. 4331 I have been removed.financial solvency of the system. In its end of this month. On several occasionsFor example, the offset for those receiv-plan, the administration appeared to be over the past year, I offered and sup-ing Government pensions .was removedusing the revenues of the social security ported amendments to assure that theduring the conference. However, the pro-system to balance the Federal budget. minimum benefit would not be takenvision taxing the first 6 months of sick Many of us read the December issue away from those already receiving it.pay remains. This reduction in benefitsof the Atlantic Monthly. This time, David Many of these people are quite old andand the failure to provide minimum ben-Stockman said: have been depending on that income forefits for future retIrees causes me some The Social Security problem is not simply many years. I am pleased that agreementconcern. But in the spirit of getting theone of satisfying actuaries s one of has been reached on legislation to avoidrestoration of the minimum benefits,satisfyingthehere-and-nowofbudget that unfortunate situation. restored almost to what they were, I willrequirements. The conference agreement also in-reluctantly support the conference re- cludes an extension of social securityport, for unless we pass this measure At the Conference on Aging, the Pres- taxes to cover sick pay. This provision ident said: those presently receiving benefits will In October of 1080. I pledged that I would will partially offset the cost to the trusthave them terminated. try to restore the Integrity of social security fund from the restoration of the mini- Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, in or-and to do so without penaity to those de- mum benefit. In addition, the conferenceder that the record might be clear, mightpendent on that program. I have kept my agreement allows for Interfund borrow-I say that the exemption of sick pay waspledge and intend to keep it. ing through the end of next year. Clearlyincluded in the law in 1939, not in the further• action by the Congress will beoriginal 1935 legislatIon. My understand- Today, we are taking a major step to- needed to assure the soundness oftheing remains that it was done to encour-ward helping the President begin to keep program, but these provisions do give usage the adoption of this provision at athat campaign pledge—as many of us• some time to take the needed actions. Itime when it was not common. have attempted to do throughout this urge the adoption of the conference session. The President asked Congress to agreement. SOCXAL SECURITY cut the social security minimum benefit Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President,payment for retired Americans as part Mr. DECONCINI addressed theChair.2 weeks ago, President Reagan addressedof his Federal budget-cutting plan. He The PRESIDING OFFICER. TheSen-the White House Conference on Aging.asked for it and 0MB DIrector Stockman ator from Arizona. In that speech, the President made somefought for it. December 15,1981 CONGRESSIONAL REcoRD— SENATE S 15277 Theintegrity of social security—and There being no objection, the reportthe amendments, was chief sponsor and the overwhelming success of the sys-was ordered to be printed in the RECORD.author of the amendments, and provided tem—is dependent upon the trust. con-as follows: the direction for the rest of us to follow. fidence and predictability that promised SPECIAL REPORT I personally thank him. The Senate is in benefits will be paid. Yet, as part of its SOCIAL SECURITY VOTES, 1981 his debt. The elderly citizens of this Federal budget-cutting bill, in which the Minimum benefits country will never cease to remember the Congress was to cut waste, fraud and No. 50 Riegle, et al, amendment to restoreservices he has given in this regard. abuse the administration asked Congress$800 million in 1982 outlays and $900 mil- Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I yield to take away a basic social security re-lion in1983 outlays to maintain currentmv self 2 minutes. tirement benefit from some 3 million re-payments for Soctal Security minimum bene- Mr. President. I thall vote for this con- tired Americans. fits and offsets these amounts by savings inference report that restores the social administrative costs. Defeated 39 to 55. 91security mininum benet. permits inter— The minimum benefit was designed to percent-of Democrats Voted yea; 100 percent be a safety net under social security, toof Republicans voted nay. (S. Con. Res. 9.fund borrowing, among ill of its trust insure an adequate retirement pension Budget Reconciliation, 1981—83, March 30funds, and makes other changes. The for America's lowest-income workers. 1981) President has given his support to thi.s Over half the minimum benefit recipients No. 160 Riegle, et al. amendment to limitbill and it obviously has broad congres- nre over the age of 70; 75 percent arerepeat of Social Security minimum benefit tosional support. elderly women. Over half a million Amer-new beneficiaries. Defeated 45 to 53. 89 per- However, as I said when the committee cent Cf Democrats voted yea; 92 percent ofbill was considered on the floor. I am icans over the age of 80 have been re-Republicans voted nay.(5.1377. Omnibus ceiving the minimum benefit for at leastReconciliation, 1981. June 23, 1981) truly disappointed that we cannot agree 15 years. No. 207 Done motion to table Riegle, et al.on a wider range of proposals neces.sary Democrats in the Senate attempted toamendment to restore Social Security mini-to the soundness of social security. After prevent the minimum benefit from beingmum benefits to persons enrolled pilot toall that this Congress has accomplished. eliminated by the administration's budg-December 1981. Tabled 52 to 46. 91 percentwe failed on perhaps the most imnportant et-cutting bill. 0MB Director Stockmanof Democrats voted nay: 92 percent of 1e-issue facing us. The bill today is merely publicans voted yes.(H.J. Res. 266 (HR.a bandaid on a very serious wound. fought forcefully and consistently for4242). Economic ecovery Tax Act of 1981. complete across-the-board repeal. In an July 21. 1981) I am also disappointed in this report official statement, 0MB described the No 248 Chair ruling that Moynihan. et al from a budget standpoint. This bill will pension payment as a "pure windfall formotion to bring up bill to restore Social Se-cost about $400 million in fiscal year recipients," saying that financially needycurity minimum benefit is not in Order in1982, undoing a portion of reconciliation. retirees had a safety net of public wel-that no bill from the House may be consid-We are also conceding that the $4.2 bil- fare.assistance to fall back on after theirered on day received unle2s by unanimouslion in additional social security savings consent. Chair sustained 57 to 30. 79 percentassum'?d in the first and second con- hard-earnedretirementincomewasof Democrats votecf nay; 100 percent of Ie- slashed. publicans vdted yea. (HR. 4331, Social Se-current budget resolutions cannot be On at least five votes in the Senatecurity Minimum Benefits, July 31. 1981) achieved. this year, Democrats fought to prevent No. 249 Robert C. Byrd motion to adjourn Chairman DOLE plans on considering elimination of the minimum benefit. Fivefor one minute as a means of consideringfurther changes to social security in the times, we were defeated by MembersSocial Security Minimum Benefits bill. Mo-near future. I congratulate him and the from the other party, marching in lock-tion reJected 37 to 49. 95 percent of Demo-other Senate conferees for their commit- step to David Stockman's marching or-'crats voted yea; 100 percent of Republicansment and dedication. voted nay. (H.R. 4331, Social Security Mini- Let us face a few realities, Mr. Presi- ders. Senate Democrats would have wel-mum Benefits, July 31. 1981) comed Republican votes in the fight to No. 284 Hatfield motion to table the Saser,dent. This bill does not solve the under- preserve the benefit; but partisan poli-et al. amendment reducing the travel budgetslying financial problems of the social se- tics, directed from the 0MB, resulted inof non-defense agencies, taking with it thecurity system. The President knows this; partisan votes time and time again, onseCOnd degree Chiles, et al, amendment con-the Congressional BudgetOffice has this, as well as other matters. tinuing Social Security minimum benefitsstated this; the House and Senate know -Two months after the House votedfcr current recipients. Tabled 46 to 44. 95it; and the public had better understand percent of Democrats voted nay; 92 percentit. We will have to act again, and soon, to 404 to 20 to restore the minimum benefitof 1epublicans voted yea.(H.J. Res. 325 cut—hardly what one could characterizeContinuing Appropriations, 1982, Septembersave the social security system amd re- as a partisan vote—and on this same24, 1981) assure millions of elderly and disabled night that Serate Democrats had been No. 315 Passage of bill restoring the mini-recipientsthattheirbenefitswill defeated, by only two votes, in their fifthmum benefit for current recipients exceptcontinue. attempt to preserve thebenefit, thethose with monthly government pensions in How soon? Mr. President, the estimates White House changed its mind and askedexcess of $300 and allowing interfund bor-vary. Depending upon the estimate, so- that the benefit be restored. rowing. Bill passed 95 to 0. (HR. 4331, Socialcial security could be n deficit in 1983 Security Minimum Benefits,October15.even with the legislation now before us. This change in thinking came only 1981) It all depends upon the economic recov- afterit became clear that Democrats Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, willery of the country. If economic condi- would not give up on this question—thatthe Senator yield? tions are even slightly worse than pro- the issue would not go away—and after Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Yes, I yield. jected. we could be facing urgent social it was clear that Congress would even- Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I con-security financing problems even sooner. tually act to restore the payment. Suchgratulate the minority leader, who has I have confidence that Chairman DOLE action was inevitable. been steadfast in this matter, withoutand the Finance Committee can muster In times 01 a partisan Senate, wherewhose leadership and conviction therecooperation 011 this issue. I truly hope straight party line votes seem to be thewould be 3 million Americans, a thirdthat everyone in this Chamber will join order of the day, this bill represents aof whom are over 80 nd have no otherin support of the committee's efforts to victory where victories, for Democrats,source of income, whose meager incomesaddress the social security financing di- appear to be scarce. And it is a victorywould be substantially reduced. That islemma. No partisan benefit will accrue to to cherish because itis one springingmeager. It is not hyperbole. We are talk-anyone if we allow social security to go from legitiniate and strongly held policying about poor people who would be re-bankrupt. disagreements regarding the future ofduced to welfare and are not now. If The administration has clearly indi- social security. the distinguished minority leader goescated its willingness to discuss and con- It is a victory of the senior citizens ofhome for Christmas with nothing else tosider all possible solutions to social secu- the country and I cozgratulate the Sen-look back on for the year, it would be arity.I think that is a wise judgment. ate on what will soon be a vote to re-more than successful one for ny normalSocial security must be separated from store that minimum benefit payment. person, not that he is not a normal per-partisanship and discussed in an open Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-son, but even so, I thank him. and honest manner. sent that a part of the special report of Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, But Congress must show responsibility the Democratic Policy Committee listingI thank the distinguished Senator, who,and act soon. Frankly what we are doing the votes this year on the minimum bene-as ranking member of the Senate Com-today Is a short-term quick fix which fit be printed in the RECORD. mittee on Finance, led the way, offeredcontributes very little to solving longer. S 15278 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE December 1, 1981 run problems. The next time we work onto pay benefits. That is what makes ittuallyoperative—thedifferenceswill social security, Congress will need to bepart of budgetary debate. I want thecome out only with respect to how criti far more courageous than itis beingSenate to know that this Senator doescal is the solvency issue. Is it 10 years today. not look at it as chairman of the Budgetdown the line? Is it 3 years? Is it 15 Mr. President, it is interesting. I wasCommittee, from the standpoint of bal-years? Have we, by interfund borrowing, not present when all the remarks aboutancing budgets. But I say, I cannot dis-brought the proximityofinsolvency what has gone on in the past regardingassociate, unless you want to take thatcloser? Is there some way to once again the minimum benefit episode were given,out from under the budget of the U.S.disassociatethe two? But,obviously, but I think everyone should understandGovernment, the responsibility for pru-sooner or later, we have to address tlat it from the standpoint of the singledent reserves, stability of all three trustissue. most important issue about social se-funds from budgetary consideration. I wish we never had to do so. I wish curity, which is the solvency of the trust It was Lyndon Johnson who putso-I could stand here and say you did not funds. It is interesting to note that whencial security into the consolidated Fed-have to raise any revenue to offset the you finally analyze what has been done,eral budget, and many people think itcost of the minimum benefit, but you did. this has been an excellent exercise inshould come out. I do not thinkso. II do not think you did because you like to solvency, because the end product meansbelieve that a budget item of thismag-go through an exercise in raising reve- that Congress will take care of whatnitude, with solvency of the trust funds,nue. I think you went through it because they perceive to be a commitment, andis indeed an integral part of lookingatthere is a genuine concern on the part also, on a net basis, the trust fund is notthe Federal budget. Since that solvencyof your committee, and obviously on the going to lose any money over the nextis impacted by economics, by unemploy-part of your counterparts in t1e House. 3 years. ment, by the level of employment, bythat we cannot afford any significant Regarding the major solvency problemgrowth, by inflation, and by interest, itoutlays, at least without rnaximi?ing thtt that we are going to confront, I do notcertainly should be considered in theday of reckoning. construe this present episode and onetotal package as we look at and share That is what I said in commending the excellent exercise to solve a great dealour responsibility, as a Budget Commit-Senator. of the solvency problem. But It is inter-tee, to this institution and to the Ameri- Obviously, that is a different situation esting for all that has been said here oncan people. from the one we had when we started the floor, and from the littleI have It is in that context that I hope thosereconciliation some 7 or 8 months ago. heard, that there was some intent towho are standing on the floor,on bothWe had the mininium benefit, with no hurt people and that we should live upsides of the aisle, saying that theyarenew revenues. It was broader when you to our commitments. As a matter ofconcerned about social security, will joinbrought it back, and you narrowed it some additionalrevenues were somewhat and paid for it. With the in- fact, hands, rather than forming some kindterfund borrowing, and no other kinds of found; some changes were made andof irreconcilable chasm between us. reforms being looked at for a while, how what we have now is a minimum benefit If we focus on the reality of the sol-close is the system to insolvency or seri- acceptable to everyone that at least doesvency of the fund and address that issueous solvency prob'ems? not cause the trust funds any furtheras we look at social security, I can as- I think you could have a date in mind deficits in the next 3 years. sure you that we will have joint effortstoday and be absolutely looking at the Mr. MOYN1HAN. Would the Senatorat living up to the commitment every-facts as you see them. I could have a yield for one remark? I simply want toone is speaking about. The commitmeitcloser date in mind as to when that would express the appreciation of the con-is not for the next 10 years. It is notoccur, and I think I would be entitled ferees and the Committee on Finance forjust to those who are beneficiaries. It isto the same. his generous comments. alsotothose millions upon millions I hope that, in the next 24 months, we Mr.DOMENICI. I am sorry, Mr. Presi-who are paying into that fund now andwill arrive at the same conclusion, or dent. I did not hear Senator MOYNIHAN.will be paying for 20 or 30 years. Boththatacompelling majorityof both Mr. MOYNIHAN. I simply want to ex-must be assured that the fund will beHouses will arrive at the same conclu- press the appreciation of the confereesthere to make its basic payments andsion, with reference to this, and then and the Committee on Finance for hislive up to its basic responsibility. address it. generous comments. Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President,I Mr. HUDDLESTON. Mr. President, I Mr. DOMENICI. I say, thank you verysay to the chairman of the Budget Com-support the pending conference report much, to my good friend from New York. mittee, of which I am a member, that he Mr. MOYNIHAN. I hope my friend which would restore the social security makes perfect sense in what he hasminimum benefit to some 3 million bene.- from New Mexico has not developed asaid. ficiaries nationwide. It is a benefit which hearing impairment with respect to kind An expenditureofthismagnitude words. never should have been repealed in the Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, mycannot be neutral with regard to thefirst place, and I am pleased that this budget. Itis part of the activities ofbody and the administration are finally head is so filled with numbers that I un-the Federal Government, whether you intentionally immunized it from kind re- giving the serious consideration due to a print it in one volume or two. Generallyproposal to reinstate it. The House has marks. I apologize. speaking, it is desirable that there be an Mr. President, I believe the centraladequate surplus in the trust funds—already voted to do so, and I believe that issue that we are going to have to face upprobably not a huge surplus. we in the Senate have the responsibility to, and I guess each could say it in his I can imagine some future budget di-to do the same. own way, is indeed, are we going to liverector about. the year 2010 finding that The American people support the con- up to a commitment to the social secu-socialsecuritypaymentsaretakingcept of reduced Federal spending, and rity recipients of this country? Perhapsmore money out of the economy thanon the whole, judging from the countless there are different ways of looking athe would wish to be the case. It couldpeople I have heard from in Kentucky, that. I think the central issue is not of ahappen. It certainly is the case that forwould support some rationaladjust- budgetary nature but that this commit-many years Presidents had a ratherments In the social security system if ment is to the solvency of the fund, botheasy time of things because there wasneed be. It is the irrational cuts, partic- the solvency of the medicare fund and ofthat small but not insignificant sur-ularly that of the minimum benefit, that the fund that disburses the retirementplus. they are not willing to stand by and sup- and disability checks to our millions and The Senator from New York wouldpit. millions of beneficiaries. not contradict anything the Senator The financing of the od age and sur- I regret that people constantly statefrom New Mexico has said. vivor's insurance trust fund does need that there is no real budget reason for Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I sayto be strengthened; no present or future looking at it. I want to state from myto the Senator from New York that Istatistics dispute this. What is more, an- standpoint, Mr. President, the only rea-think where we may differ in the fu-ticipated problems may surface much son that I think it relates to the budgetture, and it will all come out as his com-sooner than we would like to believe. All is that we must address the nature, themittee, under the leadership of the dis-this depends on the ability of the econ quality and quantity of the reserve thattinguished Senator from Kansas—andomy to rebound and respond to what we is established to assure the commitmentwhen the blue ribbon commission is ac-all hope will be the successful effects of December 15, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 15279 the administration's economic policy on Mr. HEINZ. Mr. President,first,I It was my hope, and I believe the hope this country. commend the manager of this bill. of my fellow conferees on this bill, that At Issue, however,Is not whetlr I note the presence on the floor of sev-we could retain the minimum benefit changes should be made, but how. I be-eral Members who have been Instrunien-without losing any of the 8hort-term lieve and have consistently statedthattal in bringing about this work product.—savthgs we achieved in the Omnibus this can and should be achieved withoutthe chairman of the Finance Committee,Budget Reconciliation Act earlier this severe reductions in benefits to those nowSenator DOLE; the chairman of the sub-year. This bill was never intended to receiving them and without reducingcommittee, Senator ARMSTRONG, who nowprovide any solution to socie ,securlty'8 promised protection for those now con-occupies the chatr; the ranking minorityshort-term problems, but it should have tributing to the program. The massivemember on the subcommittee, Senatorat least been neutral in its impact on the and piecemeal cuts proposed by the ad- MOYNIHAN. trust funds. Unfortunately, this bill not Senator DOLE and Senator MOYNXHANonly does nothing to improve the trust ministration to solve the problems facingare not occupied with the responsibilitiesfunds, it actuafly ends up costing the the social security system have done justof the chair at this moment, and I wishtrust funds $1.7 billion between now and the opposite; they have been examplesto bring to their attention a problem that1986. Given the highly charged atmos- of using a meat ax Instead of a scalpelwas brought to my attention earlier to-phere surrounding the social security to perform necessary surgery. day regarding page 13 of this bill, whereissue this year, I am persuaded to con- In the President's televised message toI believe there has been an inadvertentclude, albeit reluctantly, that this pack- the Nation on September 24, we finallydrafting error. age is the best compromise we can ex- had a glimpse of what the administra- I think Senator MotiiuuN and Senatorpect. At least it leaves us with no mu- tion has meant all these months in itsDoi.z will recall a discussion involvingsions—it can not get social security referral to the truly needy. In fact, theourselves and Mr. Spahn, and I think thethrough the decade, it cannot even get it main Impact of the proposal to repealtranscript of that discussion will showthrougb the next 5 years. In fact, the the minimum benefit would fall on some-that at our meeting of the conferees onCongress will be luckyJf we are spared where around 1.3 million elderly poorthis bill yesterday, we had reached a dearthe agony of wrestling with social se- beneficiaries who would be forced to findunderstanding that the waiver of inter-curity again before the next election. other sources of assistance, most prob-est and penalties referred to in Mr. President, this bill does nothing to • ably SSI or some form of State welfare.3(f) of the bill would be granted auto-i'lessen the urgency of ocial security'a It does not seem to me to be good,matically in all cases of the delinquentfinancing problems. Interfund borrowing. sound policy to deny benefits to elderlypayment of the payroll tax on sick payfor 12 montha only postpones the inevit- poeple who have been living for yearsprior to June 30, 1982, unless it could beable depletion of the old age, survivor's on benefits we have pledged them andshown that late payment was due to will-and disability funds until the end of next who have no ability to otherwise com-ful neglect. year. Before then the Congress must pensate for the loss of Income proposed. I ask my colleagues if that was thetrcome to grips with the need for addi- And forcing them onto welfare or Stateunderstanding as well. tional revenues or savings In the old age public reliefrollsis not the answer Mr. DOLE. That Is our understanding.and survivors Insurance and the hospital. either. First, I thank the distinguished Sena-insurance program. There are other ways to bring the so-tor from Pennsylvania, one of the con- Even U we had authorized intérfund cial security system out of immediateferees, for raising this issue in confer-borrowing until the end of the decade, threat of Insolvency than to drasticallyence. He is correct. There Is a draftingwe would still only have about 97 percent cut benefits to individuals who wereerror that failed to remove the words in-of the revenues needed in all three funds paying into a system that claimed it,volving "reasonable cause." That was theto cover outlays and maintain a 2-month would aid them in their retirement. Iagreement reached by the conference. reserve cushion uider intermediate as- •beljeve that the interfund borrowing It was the view of the coiferees thatsumptions. I consider this an optimistic mechanism endorsed by the Senate Fi-the tax should be made effective in Jan-assessment. In fact, if you look at the nance Committee, and more recently,uary and that interest and penalties forperformance of the economy this year, by the President, is one which will allowfailure to comply should be waived forIt is clear that we will be lucky to see an us to take a serious and indepth look at6 months unless the late payment is dueeconomy as healthy as the intermediate the long-term financing of the systemto willful neglect. assumptions forecast. without placing the bulk of the respon- Mr. MOYNIHAN. That is my under- This year's price Increases appear to be sibility of these problems on those leaststanding, too. exceeding wage increases by more than able to bear it. Mr. HEINZ. I think the record wewas forecast. And the rising rate8 df un- I believe too that the 15-member taskmake here is clear: that there Is no bur-employment and declining growth rates force proposed by the President will nowden on the employer in having to showare cause for concern in reviewing next have the time and resources which arethat he has reasonable cause. The bur-year's forecasts. integral to the formation of reasonableden, as I understand it, would be on the The real problem in socifti security, and workable answers to the future ofenforcenent agency of this bill to showhowever, is not the short term deficits social security. willful neglect. in OASDI. These deficits are small by Mr. DOLE. That Is the understandingcomparison to the deficits we will see in Mr. President, the American people,of the chairman of the conference, andmedicare in the next decade; and they by electing us to represent their inter- are temporary. After 1990, an already ests in Washington, placed a trust in us.I think it is the understanding of the other conferees. sôheduled increase in the payroll tax rate They have every right to expect us to will restore the solvency of OASDI for uphold that trust, and Ii fact, to insist Mr. MOYNIHAN. That is the under-another 25 years. At the same time. upon it. They have already experiencedstaxding of the Senator from New York.medicare will be headed for imminent a violation of that trust in. an adrninis- Mr. HEINZ. I thank my colleagues. Iand permanent depletion. We cannot al- tration that promised no changes in soappreciate it. low this to hapoen. Medicare has been cial security and then pushed through Mr. President, the conference reportthe foundation for Improved health care topassagebenefitreductions whichnow before the Senate is one whichfor, millions of older men and women. would collectively constitute the mostIsuspecteveryoneinthisCham-It has vastly contributed to the better sevre cuts in the history of the system.ber will be able to support,. With thishealth that now prevails among the The implications for such a blatantaction we can end the discussion of theelderly and it is vital to their continued violation of that trust are very serious.minimum benefit and act positively well-being. But if' we look beyond this Should the American people get used toassure that the 3-million individuals whodecade. we can clearly see that niedi- this game of chance where the tablesnow rely on this $122 a month to con-care'q financtn problems dwarf the dif- can turn on them in the matter of sec-tinue receiving it without interruption.ficulties we have in OASDI, either short onds? I believe not. I urge my colleaguesWhile I am pleased that we can at lastrange or long range. Between now and to join in this effort to restore the mini-send this bill to the President. I am dis-the turn of the century, OASDI will ac- mum benefit to those now receiv!ng itappointed that the Congress has beentually have on average an annual sur. and In so doing, some of the lost confi-unable to agree to any measures whichplus, while medicare will hWve, on aver- dence and trust of the American peoplecould help alleviatesocialsecurity'sage. large annual deficits twice as large In their elected representatives. pressing financing problem. as the surpluses in OA8DI. S 15280 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE December 15, 1981 In the next 25 years, under inter- Mr. DOLE. The Senator from Kansasunemployment (which curtail social security mediate assumptions, OASDI will aver-understands it is about to be hatched. revenues) and the equally high rates of in- Mr. 1ation (which cause increases in social se- age a surplus of $8.1 billion a year in MOYNIHAN. About to becurity benefits), the OASI and DI trust funds constant 1981 dollars. Over the same pe-hatched? have experienced annual deficits;i.e.,ex- riod, the hospital insurance fund will Mr. DOLE. Not axed but hatched. penditures have exceeded income. Thus, the average a deficit of $16.1 billion a year Mr. MOYNIHAN. Is it hoped that thefunds have had to eat into their reserves. (constant dollars). If you extend the pe-Senator from Kansas is to be a member?Projections show that if no action is taken, riod to 50 years or 75 years, the differ- Mr. DOLE. That is a possibility, but Ithe DI trust fund will be exhausted in 1979 ences are even more extreme. For in-cannot speak for the majority leader. Ihind the OASI trust fund will run out in 1983. The long term crisis is primarily caused stance, over the next 50 years, the aver-base my supposition that the appoint-by the sharp decline in the birth rate, along age annual deficits in HI are 10 timesments will soon be made on the fact thatwith an increase in, average life expectancy as great as those in OASDI. we are at the end of the session. Thereand a trend toward earlier retirement. These The medicare financing problem, andis some effort to conclude that proceduretrends mean that the number of people the short-term and long-term deficits inbefore the session ends. working and paying social security contribu- the old age, survivors, and disability in- Mr. MOYNIHAN. May I say it has beentions in the future will be smaller in relation surance programs are now matters to besuggested to me by the minority leaderto the number drawing benefits. 'or example, taken up by the bipartisan task force thethat I be a member, and I said I wouldtoday there are about three workers for every person getting social security benefits; the President called for in his nationallybe proud to serve on it. I hope the Presi-next century is expected to have only about televised speech on September 24. I urgedent will be careful about the persons hetwo workers for every beneficiary. Conse- the task force and the Congress to workchooses, and I know he will be. There isquently, the cost of the program per worker quickly. The confidence of the Americana long tradition of bipartisan concern will rise. people in social security and in the Con-among both parties. There are persons of gres is dwindling rapidly. It is unfair toexperience in both parties, and I hope What is most important about this those who have retired and those aboutwe might see a mixture in the Executivestatement, Mr. President, is the fact that to retire to keep up this atmosphere ofappointments that reflect that 45 years,it was made in 1977. The date of this alarm and uncertainty hidefinitely. Andand lam sure we will. factsheet is October 177, 1977. ultimately,it can only weaken public Mr. DOLE. Right. The Senator from The other point I would like to make. support for the social security system toKansas heard a number of names underMr. President, deals with the social se- drag the country through these prophe-consideration, including such constitu-curity minimum benefit. Included in this cies of gloom and doom year after year.ents of the Senator from New York assame report is a list of amendments to be This bill will give the Congress a briefAlan Oreenspan and others with con-offered by House Members. Under the respite we need from the politics of socialsiderable knowledge in the area. following heading "Minimum Benefit," security to consider options for resolving Mr. MOYNIHAN. AlanGreenspanthe following Democratic proposal ap- the systems problems. I urge my col-would be a superb appointee from somepears: leagues to support this conference reportpoint of view. He is not likely to make my MINIMUM BENEFIT and then to take advantage of the oppor-life easier, but he might sharpen my wits Ifthe universal coverage provisions are tunity this affords us for addressing so-a bit, as he frequently does. stricken from the bill, Rep. Corman will offer cial securitys problems more objectively an amendment to eliminate the minimum Mr. DOLE. It is only a rumor. I like tobenefit from the socia' security program. in the next session. start rumors if I cannot do anything else, Arguments for the Amendments.—Propo- Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, itis myand I can start a few rumors while wenents of the amendment argue that if uni- understanding that there is an agree-are waiting to check out the votes. Iversal coverage is etriken from the bill the ment that there will be no vote beforeunderstand that process is now undermiiftmum benefit must be eliminated to ad- 4 oclock. Is that correct? way. dressthe problemof"double dipping." Does the Senator from New York know The Senator from Iowa (Mr. JEP5EN) isEliminating the minimum benefit will cut off of other speakers on his side? on his way to the floor to make a briefthe windfall social security benefits received Mr. MOYNIHAN. I am not aware of by many retired civil servants. The minimum statement on the conference report. Sobenefit is often paid to governmental em- any. while he is about to enter the Chamberployees who either moonlight or retire early Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I thank theI suggest the absence of a auorum. and work just long enough under social se- distinguished Senator from New York The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerkcurity to meet the minimum eligibility re- and others who have participated in thewill call the roll. quirements. As of December 1975 about 45 discussion—the Senator from Colorado, percent of civil service retirement annuitants the Senator from Pennsylvania, and The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.also received social security benefits, and others. The Senator from Kansas was Mr. JEPSEN. Mr. President,I askmore than a quarter of them were receiving unanimous consent that the order forthe minimum. necessarily absent for about 30 minutes.the quorum call be rescinded. Mr. President, we have a responsibil- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without As we all know, Mr. President, uni- ity, those of us on the committee andobjection, it is so ordered. versal coverage for Federal employees those who may serve on the task force— was not enacted. Thus, the Democratic I understand that some in this body will Mr. JEPSEN. Mr. President, a greatalternative to this proposal was elimina- be on that task force—to come to somedeal has been said on the floor todaytion of the so-called minimum benefit. resolution of this very important prob-regarding the real status of the social As I mentioned when I began my re- lem. security trust funds. In addition, we havemarks, I would hope that social security We were told in the last few days thatheard Members tell us how it was onlycould be dealt with in a responsible, bi- we will soon reach the point when socialthrough the efforts of our Democraticpartisanmanner.Unfortunately,the security will take up about 23 percent ofcolleagues that the minimum benefit wasrhetoric which has surrounded the de- the total budget. It is a large item thatsaved. I think it important, Mr. Presi-bate thus far has only served to muddy needs to be addressed. dent to try and get this whole issue inthe issue. Instead of trying to lay blame I do not suggest, as the Senator fromperspective. I do this, because itis myfor the problems, for surely social secu- New York has indicated a number ofsolemn desire, along with my colleagues,rity has been in trouble for a long time, times, that we should balance the budgetto see social security handled in a bi-we should lay aside the rhetoric and on the backs of social security. partisan manner. I am afraid, however,get down to restoring the system to its That is not in the interest of currentthat in light of the comments made hereproper financial stability. beneficiaries or future beneficiaries. Butthis afternoon, this may prove difficult. I therefore would like to quote from a I thank my colleagues for listening to all of us certainly have some responsibil- these interesting comments made by the ities to restore the solvency of the socialDemocratic study group report. It is a fact sheet dealing with social security. Democrats in 1977. I think it gives us all security program. I hope we can soon some food for thought. go to work in that area. It is a factsheet dated October 17, 1977, from the Democratic Study Group. These I thank the Chair. (Mr. HEINZassumedthe chair.) are the Democrats now in 1977, and the Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, will the Sen- Mr. MOYNIHAN. I wonder if I couldfactsheet reads as follows; ator yield? ask the distinguished chairman what has The social security system currently faces Mr. JEPSEN. Yes. he heard about the status of our tasktwo financing crises, long term and short Mr. DOLE. I want to thank the distin- force, commission, board of inquiry? term. Since 1975,due tothe highrates ofguished Senator from Iowa for bringing December 15, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 15281 that material to the floor. There hassystem—that is, enough money on handrather cynically, in my opinion—when been on the part of some on the otherto insure benefits can continue to be paidthey estimated that the cost of new as- side—not all—a suggestion that some-without interruption. sistance for these eligible low-income el- how Republicans dreamed up this elim- In 1950, we had a fund reserve equal toderly would not be very great due to this ination of the minimum benefit. Some10 years worth of benefits. The resörvediscouragement factor. Phasing out the suggest that we are heartless and coldratio was 1,157 percent of potential pay-program was never considered; the ad- and do not care about lw-lncome Amer-outs. In 1960, the ratio was 186 percent.ministration wanted up-front savings icans. But by eliminating the minimumIn 1970, the ratio dropped to 94 percent,and only total elimination of the pro- benefit we were trying to address some ofand many in public life were quite con-gram would bring the dollars needed to .the problems outlined by the distin-cerned that the system was less than se-offset theadministration'sgrowing guished Senator from Iowa. We did notcure. In 1975, the combined fund ratiobudget deficit. give up until we got to conference on thedropped to 68 percent, and after a major Mr. President, despite Democratic at- theory that if, in fact, you have a sizablefinancing bill was passed in 1977, thetempts to continue social security mini- Federal, State, or local pension, youratio fell to 29 percent at the beginningmum benefits to current recipients, the should not also receive a minimum ben-of 1980, and to 23 percent at the begin-Congress did pass the administration's efit. You should receive your earnedning of this year. It now stands at 20 per-proposal to eliminate the program in the benefit butnot the minimum. cent of annual outgo—just 2 monthsReconciliation Act last summer. But the House would not accept tlmt.worth of benefits. It is projected to fall However, as legislators began to hear .1 only regret that I did not have thatcontinuously. from their constituents about this par- DSG document In conference. It would If the reserve ratio ever dropped belowticularly rash bit of budget cutting, they have been very helpful, and I appreciate9 percent, the fund would not have suffi-started question4ng the wisdom of ending the Senator from Iowa's diligence incient funds to pay the benefits in the up-minimum benefits for those already re- furnishing this material. coming month. This is a tragic situationceiving them. The result is the legisla- Hopefully, those who cover this storythat should never be allowed to occur. tion now before us for final passage, will take note of the history of the Some have said that we have no short-which would undo the earlier harmful minimum bezefit elimination and willterm financing problem because underaction. Moreover, this legislation would properly indicate that there are politicscurrent law, or as in the conferencenot discriminate against those benefici- in social security. There always will be;agreement, reserves should "only" fall toaries who are receiving Government pen- But, as the Senator fromIowa pointsthe range of 12 percent of the projectedsions, earned through many years of up in his final statement, we do have apayout in 1985, according to CBO. This Isdedicated public service. Nor would it bipartisan obligation. I do not believesimply not enough money to slip by,reduce family benefits, as earlier pro- most senior citizens really care, when ithowever. posed. comes to dealing with social security, The CBO believes that if we start a Mr. President, today we have the op- what our party affiliation may be. I doyear with as little as 12 percent of neededportunity to correct amistake.Many not believe that the 115-million workingfunds, the normal swings in income toolder Americans have endured months of Americans, Americtns paying into thisthe fund that occur from month to monthworry about their financial status. That system, are interested so much in politicswill plunge the ratio below 9 percent dur-worry should never have plagued them; as in trying to find some way to preserveing the year. That is, the normal swingstheadministration'sproposalshould this system. in income to the system,' due to such•never have been passed. Mr. President, I Based on the statement by the Sena-factors as changes in the unemploynentam pleased to join my colleagues in eas- tor from Iowa and others today on therate, will probably not permit the pay-ing the minds of these older Americans Senate floor, I hope that we will acceptment of benefits during 1985. If the CBOby restoring the social security minimum that responsibility. economic assumptions are at all opti-benefits on which so many of them Social security Is a highly politicizedmistic, of course, then we will have adepend. issue, no doubt abotit It. We can lay theserious problem much sooner. Mr. DECONCINI. Mr. President, I am blame in a number of places. The point CBO does not believe we will slippleased to cosponsor 5. 1944, a bill intro- is we have not addressed the social se-through with current law and this pack-'duced by Senator LEvXN which amends curity problem. It is a matter of greatage. As I have stressed on several occa-title II of the Social Security Act to pro- concern to the Senate Finance Commit-sions, we have a short-term problem ofvide that disability benefits cannot be tee. I do regret, as chairman of thatmajor proportions that we are not ad-terminated prior to echaustion of ad- committee, that we have been unable todressing here. ministrativeremediesunlesscurrent make any movement on social security I thank my colleagues. medical evidence substantiates such a except for the few changes made In the Mr. BRADLEY. Mr. President. I amtermination. reconciliation bill. These changes werepleased to vote today to restore social According to a newspaper report, the largely due to the efforts, I might say, ofsecurity minimum benefits to currentadministration recently estimated that the chairman of the budget Committeebeneficiaries and to those .who becomeup to 25 percent of those receiving social and others. eligible by the end of 1981. security disability payments are physi- So we are going to do our best to work The administration'sinsistence oncally able to work. The article went on with Republicans and Democrats to forgeending the program threatened signifi-to say that John Svahn, Social Security meaningful change in the social securitycant hardship for many low-incomeAdministrator, told a House subcommit- program—not to cut benefits but to re-elderlyindividuals andcouples whotee that of 55,000 final decisions made strain the growth in some areas so tlmtcount the $122 monthly minimum beie-by the end of September, 26,000 were those who now rely on social security andfit as an important source of income.ordered taken off the rolls. Mr. Svahn will rely on the program in the future canEven the administration admitted thatwas quoted as saying that a substantial be assured that the system Is sound. over half a million beneficiaries had in-number of appeals are anticipated. To conclude, I urge my colleagues tocomes low enough to qualify them as I do not believe that too many would support the conference agreement in full"truly needy" and make them eligible forquarrel with the proposition that those knowledge that the possibility of insol-other assistance programs. But the ad-who are capable of engaging in "substan- vency Is right around the corner. Theministration excused this sudden harshtial gainful activity" should not be re- near-term fiiancial condition of socialaction by saying that these older Amer-ceiving social security disability bene- security is revealed most clearly by recenticans could simply go to their local wel-fits—I would not. Thus, the adrnlnistra- projections of the "trust fund ratio"—thefare offices, stand in line, cope with thetion'seffort to ferret out those who ratio of reserves in the system to the po-many confusing forms, document theirshould not be receiving disability bene- tential payout. In a sense, this statisticincome and expenses1 and eventually re-fits Is commendable. However, even the tells uswhetherwe have sufficient moneyceive aid. most avid ferreter, one assumes, would to pay benefits. The fact is that these older Americanshave the necessary medical evidence to The historic level of these reserve ra-would be sufficiently discouraged or em-document a termination of one's dis- tios is instructive and points to the needbarrassed by these requirements that notability benefits. for financing reform. We have always feltvery many of them would apply for aid. Apparently, current medical evidence we should have a "fully self-sustaining"The administration admitted as much—Is not high on the priority 1Lt of those S 15282 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE December 15, 1081 who have the responsibility for ferreting.ing of the social security system nextpublic confidence in its ability to deal In a survey of those most familiar withyear by authorizing borrowing among thewith the problems confronting the social the review process for making an eligi-three trust funds. Finally, it pays forsecurity system. bility determination several cogent con-most of the additional costs incurred by Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I am clusions were reached. This survey con-the restoration o the minimum benefitpleased today to join with my colleagues ducted by members of Senator LEvIN'Sthrough a reform in the treatment ofin supporting the agreement of House- staff resulted in the following conclu-sick pay. Senate conference. This report endorses sions. Based on President Reagan's originalwhat many of us on this side of the aisle First. Persons have been terminated frombudget request, the Congress eliminatedhave been saying for months. The admin- the Disability rolls even when they meet thethe minimum benefit for all beneficiariesistration's social security proposals went medical listing of the Social Seourity disa-in the Reconciliation Act. I opposed thisfar beyond what was needed to solve the bility program. action, both in the Finance Committeetrust funds' short term problems. The Secofld.Hundreds of termination$ were administration's plan to penaljze early the result of staff error. Hundreds more wereand on the Senate floor. Although budget as a result of arbitrary decisions rendered bycuts are necessary, they should not comeretirees and cut benefits for other senior overworked, untrained staffers. at the expense of the neediest of the el-citizens was nothing more than a veiled Third. State agency employees revealedderly. Many individuals changed theirattempt to balance the budget on the they were instructed to meet quotas. employment and retirement plans, basedbacks of the elderly. Fourth. Beneficiaries are being terminatedon the expectation of receiving the mini- I just want to point out that I, along from the rolls even in some cases where themum benefit. Recalculating the benefitswith the vast majority of my colleagues findings of the consultative exam and the on this side of the aisle, have supported treating physician is that the patient cannotof these retirees imposes a major burden even perform the normal day to day func-and breaks a commitment made by thethe proposal to permit interfund borrow- tions of living. Many o these terminationsFederal Government. ing since the day the administration an- were beneficiaries over the age of 55, with a The conference version of the bill isnounced its ill-conceived cuts in social good work history prior to their disablingmuch more equitable than the actionsecurity. condition and had been oz the rolls 2 or 3taken in the Reconciliation Act. The con- Senator MOYNIHAN, Senator CHILES, years. ference version restores the minimuinand I offered an amendment to author- Fifth. Beneficiaries are being terminatedbenefit to all retirees who would haveize interfund borrowing. It was defeated from the rolls without any current medical 51 to 54, with only one Republican voting Cndings. Determinations arebeing madebeen eligible for minimum up to January basd on file findings—in many cases there1, 1982. Most of the additional costs re-with us. has been no physical-medical examination of,sulting from this move will be covered We saidthatinterfund borrowing the beneficiary from 6 months to 1 year orby extending the social security payrollwould address the immediate short-term more. tax to the first 6 months of sick pay. financing problem in the system and per- I am pleased that the conference re-mit consideration of the potential long It is appalling that numerous termi-tained an amendment that I offered interm problems in a calm, deliberative nations of disability benefits are basedthe Finance Committee. This amend-fashion. Secretary Schweiker, in testi- on scanty or no medical evidence at all,ment delays the effective date for elimi-mony before the Finance Committee, and in many instances are arbitrary de-nation of the minimum benefit for mem-supported this idea. Four former direc- cisionsof overworked and untrainedbers of religious orders by 10 years. Thesetors of the Social Security Administra- staff, made because a quota must be met.individuals are much more likely to havetion supported it at a policy forum I held Further, these kinds of decisions affectwork histories in covered employmentback in May when the President first some of the most vulnerable of our citi-that result in earned benefits less thanannounced his program. zens. The National Commission on Socialthe minimum. This is due to vows of pov- For the last 7 months the senior citi- Security in its final report stated: erty these individuals take and becausezens of this country have been told by Those receiving Disability Insurance bene- the administration that the system was fits tend to be older workers; '73 percent ofthey have been covered by social security those on the Disability Insurance rolls atonly since 1972. I believe that these cir-verging on collapse and that the financial the end of 19'7'7 were over the age of 50; 58cumstances are unique and that this leg-crisis required immediate draconian cuts percent were over the age of 55. Many haveislation should reflect that fact. I amin benefits. But when we read the conces- progre3sive impairments that are not likelyalso pleased that the conference versionsions of David Stockman we learned the to be reversed. Many have limited educationsdoes not single out retired Governmentreal motives of this administration. As and job skills and few prospects for trans-employees to receive less than the mini-Stockman confessed, he was desperate to ferring to new occupations before retirementmum benefit. The Senate version wouldfind the budget savings that were needed Mr. President, it saddens me that liveshave reduced the minimum benefit. forto offset the giveaways to the oil com- must be severely disrupted and in someretired Government workers by the ex-panies and windfalls to the rich in the cases taken before we feel compelled tocess of their pensions over $300. tax bill the administration so eagerly act. Senator LEvIN cited in his Introduc- Another important provision of theembraced. tory statement, as I didinthe RECORD conference version is the 1-year author- But this time the politicians listened last February, the suicide of an Arizonaity for interfund borrowing. Even underto the people and rejected the Reagan. constituent wio took her life 2 days be-optimisticeconomicassumptions, aStockman plan. fore an appeal reversal decision arrivedtransfer of revenues among the three The proposal before us also restores in the mail. Other similar examples, bothtrust funds would have been necessarythe minimum benefit for current bene- in Arizona and throughout the Nation,to avert a financial crisis in the socialficiaries. The President said in his ad- could be given, but rather than such reci-security system in the near term. Adress to the Nation last September that tations, what is needed is prompt actionsshortfall was forecast for the retirementhe was asking that the minimum bene- onS. 1944. fund because the Congress, when itlastfit be restored, implying that the Con- What could be more fair, more equi-allocated the payroll tax rate among thegress had taken steps to eliminate it. table, more humane, than' to simoly ie-trust funds, did not earmark a sufficient I think we shculd again set the rec- quire that disability benefits should con-amount of revenues for the retirementord straight. tinue through the appeals process unlessfund. This problem is best addressed by The President's• budget request called a current medical examination attests toallowing a transfer among the trustfor eliminating the minimum benefit. a change In tile medical condition of thefunds rather than by cutting benefits or On six separate occasions Members beneficiary which would support the can-increasing taxes. of this body had the opportunity to re- clusion that the beneficiary is capable of I commend the conference committeestore the minimum benefit. On each oc- engaging In substantial gainful activity.for its actions. It has addressed the mostcasion,the majorityof Republicans I urge my colleagues to support 5. 1944.pressing issues facing the social securityvoted against those amendments. Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. President, thesystem. With no action, the minimum In a letter to Senator BYRD last July, conference committee on the minimumbenefit would have been eliminated andthe President suggested that "opportu- benefit has taken a number of positivethe retirement fund would not have ade-nistic political manuvering especially de- steps. First, it has restored the minimumquate reserves to pay monthly benefitssigned to play on the fears of many benefit for all current beneficiaries. Sec-some time next year. By approving theAmericans" lay behind Initiatives to re- ond, it has averted a crists in the flñanc-conference report, Congress can restorestore the minimum beneftt. December 15,1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —SENATE S 15283 Thepublic did not accept that ex-we address the issue of whether or notJEPSEN). Are there any other Senators planation then and does not believe itto restore the minimum benefit whichin the Chamber desiring to vote? now. Senior citizens know that it waswas eliminated in the Omnibus. Recon- The result was announced—yeas 96, the administration who wanted to cutciliation Act of 1981. nays 0, as follows: benefits and concerned Democrats who Ever since the elimmatioiiofthe worked to restore them. minimum benefit, I have consttently IRoUcall Vote No. 488 Leg.) I am pleased that so many of my col-supported its restoration. On July 21, YEAS—08 leagues are now willing to change their1981, I voted to restore the minimum AbdnOr Ford Moynihan minds and their votes. benefit. Again, on July 23, 1981, I voted Andrews Garn Murkowskl Armstrong Glenn 'Nicklee I commend the work of the conferees.to restore the minimum benefit to cur- Baker Gorton Nuim I believe the proposal worked out by therent beneficiaries. And on October 15,Bucus Grassley Packwood House and Senate offers a reasonable1981, I voted to restore the minimum Bentsen Hart Peil Biden Hatch Percy and responsible solution to the financ-benefit. Bore.n Hatfield Pres&ler ing problems facing social security in the It is with reservation that I vote inBoshwttz Hawkln8 Proxmtre short term. favor of this conference report. I will Bradley Eaakawa Pryor It Is a significant departure from the Bumpers Heflin Quayle vote for the measure because it restores Burdick Heinz Randolph administration'sdraconianproposalsthe minimum benefit for eligible bene- Byrd. Helms Riegle and a significant victory for our Nation'sficiaries retiring before January 1982. Harry P., Jr.Hollthgs Roth senior citizens. Our actio-i here today Byrd, Robert C. Huddie3ton Rudman Unfortunately, beneficiaries who re-cannon Humphrey Sarbane8 renews our Nation's contract with thosetire later will not be so fortunate. I do Chafee Inouye Sasep seniors who have paid in to social secu-not believe this isfair. The Congress Chilea JacIson Schmitt rity over the years and now rely on thoseshould also honor its prior commitments Cochran Jepsen S1mpon benefits. Cohen Johnston Specter at least to those planning to retire soonCranstoi Kassebauin Stafford Our action here today reaffirms thiswho have long counted on the minimum D'Amato Kasten Stennis Nation's commitment to maintain a fi-benefit when planning their retirement. Danforthi Kennedy Stevens nancially sound social security system Deconclnl La,alt 8ymma Furthermore, the conference reportDeiton Lehy Thurmond withoutcuttingbenefits. Our actionproposes Interfund borrowing from the Dixon Levti Tsongas should reaszure all those still workingdate of enactment through December 31,Dodd Wallop who doubt whether social security will Dole Lugar Warner be there when they retire. 1982.Permitting interfund borrowingDonienici Matsunaga Weicker for 1 year should not qualify as even a Durenberger Matttngly .W'Ifllams Over the months my Democratic col-stop gap measure, it is just a temporary Eag:eton Mcclure Zorizy leagues and I have argued that we can- East Metzenbaum deferral from real decisionmaking. Exon tcheU not allow a questionable economic pro- The 8enate amendment to H.R. 4331 gram to undermine and endanger thewould have authorized borrowing be- NOTVOTINQ—4 financial security of those citLens now Ooldwater Me1cIir Tower retired and those workers about to retire.tween OASI and DI trust funds until Matbiaa I am pleased that today so many of myJanuary 1991. ThIs temporary decision Republican colleagues now see the wis-does not really address the short term So the conference report was agred dom of our arguments and will vote tofinancing problems of the social securityto. protect the lntegriy of the social securitysystem. The Congress will have to act Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President,I system. again prior to final adjournment of themove to reconsider the vote by which Senator BENTSEN. Mr. President, I97th Congress. the conference report was agreed to. would like to take just a moment to con- In addition, when the Senate con- Mr. METZENBAUM. Mr. President, I gratulate my colleagues Chairman DOLEsidered H.R. 4331, I expressed my op-move to lay that motion on .the table. position to limiting further the max!- The motion to lay on the table was and Senators LONG, MOYNIHAN, ARM- agreed to. STRONG, HEINZ, and DANFORTH for havingmum received when a primary wage reached a workable compromise on theearner with dependents retires or dies. Several Senators addressed the Chair. bill now before us. I am pleased to castFor this reason, I am pleased by the ac- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The my vote, one more time in favor of retain-tion taken by the conference committeeChair recognizes the majority leaner. mg the minimum social security benefitto eliminate this unfair change. for the more than 3 million retirees now Mr. President, although we need to receivmg these benefits, and to lend myauthorize interfund borrowing for longer support to an interfund transfer provi-than 1 year and restore the minimum sion designed to alleviate the immediatebenefitto others not covered by this bill. financing difficulties of the retirementI will vote for the report. However, the fund. benefit from restoring the minimum ben- While I continue to believe that we Inefit to over 3 mIllion people outweighs the Congress must be prepared to takethe omissions I have stated. on the difficult but necessary task of Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I know of no strengthening the future solvency of theother requests for time. social security system, I will not endorse Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President,I modifications that force those now re-know of no requests on our side. tired to bear the brunt o such changes Mr. DOLE. The yeas and nays have through cuts in their monthly benefits.been ordered. Our objective must be to strengthen the The PRESIDING OCER. The ques- social security system for the long termtion is on agreeing to the conference and to Insure Americans that their Gov-report. The clerk will call the roll. errirnent is capable of and deterinmed to The assistant legislative clerk called live up to its commitments. Any otherthe roll. approach to this issue would constitute Mr. STEVENS. I announce that the a breach of trust with the 150 mIllionSenator from Arizona (Mr. GOLDWATER), American workers and retirees who builttheSenatorfromMaryland (Mr. this country and whose retirement plansMrrns), and .the Senator from Texas depend on a sound and equitable social(Mr. TowER) are necessarily absent. security system. I urge my colleagues to Mr. CRANSTON. I announce that the join me in support of the agreementSenator from Montana (Mr. MELCHER) reached by the conferees. Is necessarily absent. Mrs. HAWKINS. Mr. President, to- I further annOunce that, if present and day the Senate will vote on the confer-voting, the Senator from Montana (Mr. ence report to H.R. 4331, the Social Se-MELCHER) would vote "yea." curity Amendments of 1981. Once again The PRESIDING OFFICER(Mr.

December 16, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE 119721 0 1030 summer. When the House had the op- portunity to understand what was in CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R.theadministration'sGramm-Latta 4331, SOCIAL SECURITYpackage on social security and vote on AMENDMENTS OF 1981 the merits of the individual issue, it re- Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak-Instated the minimum benefit both for er, I move to suspend the rules andcurrent and flew beneficiaries. agree to the conference report on the House conferees refused to accept bill (H.R. 4331) to amend the OmnibusSenate provisknsforadollar-for- Reconciliation Act of 1981 to restoredollar offset for those with Govern- minimum benefits under the Socialment pensions paying more than $300 Security Act. per month. The House also rejected a The Clerk read the title of the con-Senate proposal to eliminate the mini- ference report. mum benefit for current beneficiaries The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, a second is not required onliving outside the United States. this motion. Under the Reconciliation Act, the (For conference report and state-minimum benefit for new beneficiaries ment, see proceedings of the House ofwould take effect on November 1 of December 14, 1981.) this year, affecting December benefit The gentleman from Illinois (Mr.checks. The agreement reached yester RosTEIucowsKI) will be recognized forday delays this effective date by 2 20 minutes, and the gentleman frommonths. Texas (Mr. ARCHER) will be recognized The most controversial issue in con- for 20 minutes. ference was a Senate proposalto The Chair recognizes the gentlemanreduce the cap on maximum family from Illinois (Mr. RosTKowsKI). social security benefits—a savings of Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak-$3 billion over the next 5 years. They er,Iask unanimous consent that,argued that the revenue loss resulting given the important nature of thisfrom reinstatement of the minimum matter, time for debate be extended tobenefit must be offset by benefit cuts an hour and a half, to be equally divid-in other areas. The House stood firm ed. against any reduction in the "family The SPEAKER protempore.Ismaximum" benefit—which would have there objection to the request of themost affected surviving spouses and gentleman from Illinois? their children. There was no objection. TheSenate confereesMonday The SPEAKER pro tempore. The agreed to drop their proposal. gentleman from Illinois (Mr. ROSTEN- The next major item in dispute was KowsKI) therefore, will be recognizeda Senate provision relating to social se- for 45 mInutes, and the gentlemancurity taxes on certain sick pay wages. from Texas (Mr. ARCHER) will be rec-Under current law, sick pay isex- ognized for 45 minutes. cluded from covered wages if employ- The Chair recognizes the gentlemaners have a formal sick pay plan. from Illinois (Mr. R05TENK0w5KI). The Senate provision expanded the GENERAL LEAVE definition of covered wages to include Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak-all sick pay except that paid through er, I ask unanimous consent that allinsurance companies or other third Members may have 5 legislative daysparties. in which to revise and extend their re- Confereesfinallyagreedtoa marks on the conference report understraightforward approach that treats consideration. all sick pay as covered, regardless of The SPEAKER pro tempore.Iswhether it is paid through third par there objection to the request of theties—with the exception of workmen's gentleman from Illinois? compensation. There was no objection. The modified sick pay provision off- Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak-sets much of the revenue lost by re- er, the conference agreement that Istoring the minimum benefit,and bring to the floor protects the benefitspulls payroll taxes more in line with of every man and woman now in theIncome taxes on this issue. social security system. I would call it a The House prevailed In dropping a victory for the House in our negotia-Senate provision extending the high- tions with the Senate. We maintainedway trust fund and its excise taxes the spirit of the House resolution Onthrough the decade. We felt that the the minimum benefit and staved of issue was not germane to a social secu- Senate proposals for $3 billion in bene-rity bill. The House maintained that fit cuts. the provision went beyond the tradi- The major achievement of this con-tional authorityofthe Senate to ference was to restore the minimumamend House-passed revenue bills. We benefit for all current beneficiaries,further believed that any long-range That benefit was eliminated at the in-extension should only be considered sistenceofthePresidentintheafter the Committee on Ways and Gramm-Latta Reconciliation ActMeans has had an opportunity to whichpassedtheCongresslastreview the financiaj status of the high- way fund—and to consult with the CommitteeonPublicWorks and Transportation. 119722 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE Decemberi6,1981 The House did accept several miscel- 1982can only guarantee benefit pay-affect the "special minimum" provi- laneous Senate amendments, includingments for the first 6 months of 1983. sion In the law, which will still be stiffer penalties for fraudulent use of MINIMUM BENEFIT available for workers who have truly social security numbers and waiving of The Omnibus Budget Reconciliationworked for most of their careers under certain provisions of the Privacy ActAct of 1981 elIminated the minimum social security at low wages (below the to facilitate administration of the 1980benefit under social security for allminimum wage). Such a worker with law eliminating disability and studentcurrent and future beneficiaries. This25 years under social security in 1980 benefits for prisoners. took effect in November of thIs yearwould be getting a benefit of $219.80 Taken together, the provision offor future beneficiaries, and in March per month. It should be borne in mind the conference agreement add up toof 1982 for all current beneficiaries. At that any worker with wages at or net budget savings of $1 billion overthe same time this body approvedaround the minimum wage for any the next 5 years. final passage of the Reconciliationlength of time will get a social security The final—and perhaps the mostAct, we passed and sent to the Senatebenefit much higher than the mini- critical—measure adopted in confer-H.R. 4331, which rescinded that provi- mum, now and into the future. ence would allow borrowing freelysion of the reconciliation bill, thereby EXTENSION COVERAGE TO FIRST 6 MONTHS O among the three social security trustrestoring the minimum for all current SICK PAY funds for a 1-year period, beginningand future beneficiaries. -I might add January 1, 1982, without any realloca• The Senate amendment to H.R. 4331 that when the Committee on Ways extended withholding ofsocial secu• tion of the rates. and Means considered this provision inrity contributions to certain payments No member of the House confereesits regular budget work, the recom- considersthis made to employees who are absent agreement anythingmendation of our Social Security Sub-from work due to illness. The Senate more than a temporary response tocommittee to eliminate the minimum the long-term needs of the social secu- amendnient would have, in gejieral for future beneficiaries, but not forprovided for withholding of FICA con• rity system. current ones, was followed. This rec- This agreement is a response to theommendation was in line with thosetriIutions from sick payments made immediate anxieties of the Nation's el•from the General Accounting Officeduilng the first 6 months that an em- deny. At this time we owe them no(GAO) and others, recognizing thatployee was off work. However, the less. while we should not cut benefits forSenate also provided an exception to We will hear criticism that Congresscurrent beneficiaries, eliminating thethis general rule: Sick payments made failed to address the system's long•minimum for future recipients was ap-by an insurance company would gener• range financial demands, I have nopropriate, since most of them were notally not have been considered wages do.ubtthat wewillconsider thatlikely to be low-wage workers, butfor FICA tax purposes. matter next year—and reach an agree-rather part•tlme or intermittent work• The conference agreement expands ment that restores not only an ade•ers with coverage under pension plansthe Senate amendment' to include' sick •quate reservoir in the trust funds, butor income from spouses. payments made byallthird-party also the confidence that the social se- When the Senate took action on thispayors,including insurance compa• curity system will forever fulfillitsprovision, they added several restric•nies. The conferees felt that the con- promises. tions on which current minimum referenceagreementprovidedmore At this point, I will review the spe-.cipients would have their benefits re-equitable application of this sick pay cific provisions of the agreement instored: those living outside the Unitedprovisionsince. payments from, all greater detail. States would not be restored at all,sources would be treated identically. INTERFUND BoRRowING and those with government pensions The conference agreement also man• The House bill as sent to the Senateof over $300 per month (regardless ofdates the development of regulations contained no financing provisions forwhether the pension was from workwhich will allow the third-party payor social security. The Senate added acovered by social security) would haveto meet the liability which is Imposed provision that would have reallocatedtheir minimum benefit reduced dollar•on him as a result of this provision social security txes over the next sev-for-dollar down to the level of thewithout deposit of both the employee eral years, taking revenues flowingbenefit based on their actual earnings.and employer share of the payroll tax. into the (health insurance) trust fundThe Senate did not restore the mini-Under theseprovisions,thethird and the disability fund (disability in-mum for future recipients, except forparty will withhold the employee por- surances) and redirecting these rev•members of religious orders under ation of the FICA tax, deposit this tax enues into the old age and survivorsvow of poverty, who would be eligibleand notify the employer for whom (OASI) fund. The Senate amendmentfor the minimum benefit until Octoberservices are usually rendered of the • also provided very limited borrowing1991. amount of sick payments made. 'At only between the old-age and survivors The conference agreement restoresthis point, the obligation to deposit and disability insurance trust funds. the minimum benefit for all people:the employer's share of the tax and to The conferees discussed the financ-who are eligible for benefits beforenotify the IRS of the amount of sick ing issue extensively, and itis clearJanuary 1982 or whose benefits arepayments made becomes that of the that the Congress will have to actbased on a worker's eligibility or deathemployer for whom the employee nor- soon, possibly before 1983, to resolvebefore January 1982. Also, the elimi-mally renders services. the financing problems af all threenation of the minimum benefit for In the event that the third-party trust funds. Interfund borrowing orfuture recipients applies only to mem-payor fails to meet any of the appro. reallocation of tax rates gives us somebersofreligious orders whO havepriate criteria for shifting the liability time to solve this problem, but thetaken a vow of poverty and whoof the employer portion of the tax to conferees recognized 'that any suchbecome eligible after December 1991.the employer-policyholder for whom measurescanbuy onlyllAnlted(I would note that the Statement ofservices are normally rendered, then amounts of time. Therefore, in orderManagers is incorrect; the correct dateany overpayment of employer taxes; to Insure that some further considera•is December 1991.) that is, combined third-party payor tion will be given to the social security Thus, the conference agreement in-and normal employer taxes should be financing problem in the near future,sures that no current recipients willrecoveredunderproceduresestab- the conference agreement provides forhave their benefits reduced, and fur-,lished by Treasury regulations as in• no tax reallocation, and allows borrow-ther delays elimination of the mini-tended by the conferees. ing among all three trust funds (old-mum for future beneficiaries by 2—Changes made by this amendment age and survivors, disability and hos-months beyond present law, from No-are effective on January 1, 1982. The pital Insurance) only through Decem-vember to January. This action is con-conferees, however, recognize that this ber 31, 1982. sistent with the Committee on Ways•date may pose problems for both em- The conferees intend that any trans-and Means' position on this issue fromployers and third-party payors. As a fer of funds made prior to the end ofthestart. This provision does notresult, the conferee8 agreed to waive ______

December16, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE H 9723

Interest and penalties for failure toprisoner possibly violates various Pr!- COMPARISON OF OJRRENT LAWANDTHESENATE PROPOS- make timely payments of taxes whichvacy acts. AL TO LIMIT FAMILY BENEFITS EXAMPLESOF.1981 are Imposed as a result of this amend- The Senate amendment would pro- ment except if this failure Is due tovide that, without regard to any con- BENEFIT LEVELS—Continued

willful neglect and if the taxes whichtrary Federal or State law, Federal, • current law Seiiate proç3oattoemIt famI'y beit are due are not deposited on or beforeState, or local government agencies Mnuabdex June 30, 1982. must furnish the name and social se- eanings Maaimumm fami& Maximum famy PENALTiES FOR MIsUSE OF SOCIAL SECURITY curity number of any prisoner convict- NUMBERS ed of a felony, when the Secretary of 8000 7,005 6,043 14 10,000 8,746 7.003 20 Under present law, criminal penal-HHS makes a written request to the 12000 9619 7.963 17 ties are provided for: First, knowinglyagency for that Information. 16000 11,324 9701 14 and willfully using a social security The House conferees accepted the 20.000 12.374 10,601 14 number that was obtained with falseSenate amendment because it was the information; second, using someoneclear intent of Congress when enact- The House conferees rejected this else's social security number; or third,ing prior law that prisoner benefitsamendment because it woild have se• unlawfully disclosing or compellingnot be paid and the conferees felt thatverely reduced benefits primarily for the disclosure of someone else's socialall efforts should be made to accom-surviving spouses and their children. security number. The crime Is consid-plish this objective. Benefit reductions would have totaled ered a misdemeanor and the penalty REPORTS TO CONGRESS REGARDING PAYMENTS TO some $3.0 billion over the 5 calendar involves a fine of up to $1,000 or Im- DECEASED PERSONS years from 1982 to 1986. No harlngs prisonnient of up to 1 year or both. Under current law, social securityon this major legislative proposal have The Senate amendment would addbenefits terminate with the month inbeen held in the House. new acts considered to be a misuse ofwhich a beneficiary dies. The Senate STUDY OF SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION social security cards by making it un-amendment would require the Secre- rF]FICIENCY lawful to: First, a1ter; second, buy ortary of HHS to report to Congress The Senate amendment would re- sell; third, counterfeit social securitywithin 90 days after enactment on ac-quire the GAO to undertake a study of cards; or fourth, possess a regular ortions being taken to prevent paymentsthe Social Securilty Administration for counterfeit card with intent to sell orto deceased social security benefici-the purpose of determining the man- alter it. aries. agement efficiency, employee produc• The provision would make all unlaw- The House conferees accepted thistivity, and technical capacities (includ- ful acts affecting the social securityprovision in order to determine whating computer hardware and program- number or card a felony, rather than aactions the Social Security Adminis-ing) of that agency and the extent of misdemeanor. tration is taking to prevent paymentscurrent Information on the character- It would increase the maximum fineto deceased beneficiaries and whetheristics of recipients. The Comptroller for conviction of such acts from $1,000these actions will be effective. General would be required to report to or $5,000 and the maximum prisonEXTENSION OF DISABILITY INSURANCE MAXI- Congress, no later than 180 days after term from 1 year to 5 years. MUM FAMILY BENEFITSTOOLD-AGE AND StIR- the date of enactment, the results of The House conferees accepted the VIVORS INSURANCE BEFICIARXES the study and any recommendations amendment. Under present law, there is a limitfor Improvements in any of the oper- Last year, the GAO investigated theon the amount of monthly benefitsations studied. misuse of social security cards andthat can be paid on the earnings The House conferees took the posi- numbers. Their findings reveal thatrecord of. one worker. This limit Istion that further, studies of this prob- the fraudulent use of social securityknown as the maximum family benefitlem would not solve the problem. The cards to gain benefits or jobs Is grow-(MFB). In retirement and survivorsAdministrative problems of the system ing immensely. cases, the MFB ranges from 150 to 188are well known to the committee and One recommendation of the GAOpercentofthe primaryInsurancethe Commissioner of Social Security. was to make the counterfeiting or al-amount, the unreduced benefit of theHearings have been held on thI sub- tering of soôial security cards afelonyworker. In disability cases, the MFBject, and the Commissioner is working punishable by a fine of $5,000 or im-can be no more than the lower of 85 prisonnient for 5 years. percent of the worker's average in-on a detailed solution, to the problem. The amendment simply adopts thedexed monthly earnings or 150 per- The conference agreement does not recommendation of the General Ac-cent of the primary Insurance amOunt,include this provision. counting Office. but not less than 100 percent of the SEPARATE ACCOUNTING FOR SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUNDS STATUTORY DEADLIIiE FOR IMPLEMENTING AFDC primary Insurance amount. HOME HEALTH AIDE DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS The Senate amendment would pro- The Senate 'amendment would re- The House conferees accepted thevidethatthedisability maximumquire the President inhis annual Senate amendment which simply con-family benefit formula would be ex-budget message and midsessión review firms a requirement in Public Law 97—tended toretirement and survivorto show the revenues, outlays and sur- 35 that the Secretary of Health andcases for workers reaching age 62 orplus or deficit estithates for each of Human Services meet the January 1,dying after December 1981. the three trust funds and describe the 1982, deadline for entering into dem- The effect of the proposal on familyeconomic assumptions upon which the onstration agreements with at leastbenefits for workers at various earn-estimates are based. seven States establishing AFDC homeings is illustrated in the table below. The conference agreement did not health aide projects. The benefit calculations are for 1981include this provision because the in- INFORMATION WITH RESPECT TO PRISONERS even though the proposal would notformation is already provided annual- Under the current law, student andhave taken effect until 1982. ly to the Congress and the Office of disabilitybenefitscannot bepaid the Actuary of the Social Security Ad- while individuals are imprisoned for COMPARISONOF CURRENT LAWANDTHE SENATE PROPOS- ministration releases more detailed in- conviction of a felony except where ALTO LIMIT FAMILY BENEFITS EXAMPLES OF 1981 formation to the committees upon re- quest. the individual is satisfactorily partici- BENEFIT LEVELS paLingina rehabilitation program. SOCIAL SECURITY CARDS In order to implement this law, the Curtent law Snte prosaIto limitfamy beirefit The Annualindexed Senate amendment contained a Secretary of HHS requires informa- earnings Maximum famfly Maximum family provision which would have required tionfrompenalinstitutionswith Pertructioo that new and replacement social secu- which to identify the relevant prison- rity cards issued more than 190 days ers. In some cases, providing this In- 2000 2,700 4000 4,123 after enactment be made of banknote formation without the consent of the 6.000 5.264 5J3 3 paper and (to the maximum extent H 9724 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE T)ecemberU, 1981 practicable) be a card that cannot be TheSPEAKER pro tempore (Mr.safer, to vote for doing as little as pos- counterfeited. KAzFJN). The gentleman from Illinoissible—just enoughtopreventthe The conference agreement does not(Mr. Ros1tiIcowsKI) has consumed 5 system from sinking—as we are indeed include the Senate amendment. Theminutes. about to do today. statement accompanying the report, The Chair now recognizes the gen- How long.we can keep this up, I do• however, does call for the Secretary oftleman from Texas, Mr. ARCHER. not know. By continuing to slap patch. HRS to study the costs and benefits to Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5es on the leaking but still ballooning the trust funds of such a proposal, theminutes to the gentleman from New trust funds, we not only are postpon- costs and benefits to other govern-York (Mr. CONABLE) the ranking Re- .lng inevitable decisions on long-range ment programs, and the impact ofpublican on the Ways and Means financing. We also are putting off such a proposal on the privacy of indi-Committee. badly needed system improvements, viduals. At this time, however, it did (Mr. CONABLE asked and was givennot the least of which are numerous not appear to the House confereespermission to revise and extend his re-corrections of inequities and anoma- that any substantial benefit wouldmarks.) lies. accure to the social security program Mr. CONABLE. Mr. Speaker. I have To cite some outstanding examples from such a card since the Social Se-a frustrating sense of deja vii. It seemsof these unresolved issues, there is the curity Administration does not itselfthat I have stood here before—many, treatment of women, and especially use the card for any purpose othermany times—taking virtually the same working women, under the system; than notifying applicantsoftheirstance on social security, there are very wide gaps in coverage; social security number. We have just completed a confer-therearedemographicdisparities, FUTURE LEGISLATIVE CHANGES IN THE SOCIAL ence report that does too little.Itwhich are becoming larger and there SECURITY ACT solves a problem with respect to theis a whole range of problems in the Tinder present law, Congress has theminimumbenefitwhichCongressdisability Insurance program. authority to alter tax and spendingwanted to solve. But it solves no other When the social security system was socialsecurityproblemofconse-established, our society was centered provisions. The Senate amendment in.quence. cluded a sense of. Congress resolution Nevertheless, I have signed the con-on the traditional family—a husband, that any future legislative changes inference report and ask my colleagueswife, and one or more children. Fami- the Social Security Act will not reduceto approve it today. I do so becauselies were more easily definable, fewer the current dollar amount of monthlythis is the only Way the minimumwomen were in the labor force, and OASDI benefits benefit problem can be resolved and-men were generally viewed as the The House conferees rejected thisbecause other provisions of the reportbreadwinners. because current Congresses cannot le-will force this Congress at least to con- The social security system was de- gally bind, the actions of future Con-front the many larger social securitysigned In light of the realities of that gresses. Issues within a reasonable time frame,era. Wives were deemed dependent HIGHWAY TRUST FUND AND HIGHWAY EXCISE rather than postponing it indefinitely,upon their husbands and did not have TAXES The old-age and survivors insuranceto prove that dependency in order to Under present law,the highway(OASI) trust fund, which pays bene-get spouses' benefits. Men, on the trust fund and its related excise taxesfits to some 30 minion persons, is ex-other hand, had to prove that they are in place until October 1,1984.pected to run short of money to makewere dependent in order to receive Under the Senate amendment, thethose payments sometime late nextsimilar benefits. highway excise taxes would be ex-year. The actual date being uncertain Working wives, in maiy cases, were tended at present rates for 5 years,as long as the economy is in transition.not—and have not—been adequately until October 1, 1989, and deposits ofThe conference report would permitcompensated, as they see it, for their tax revenues to the highway trustthe OASI fund to borrow from the s-contributions as workers. If benefits fund would be continued for 6 years toability insurance trust fund or thebased on their earning were low, and October 1, 1990. Hospital Insurance TrustFundthey were paid higher amounts based Because the highway trust fund andthrough next year only. Those two ontheirhusbands'records,they its taxes are presently in place untilitems in combination mean that therecould—and stifi Can—charge with justi- October 1, 1984, the House confereesis likely to be a lame duck session offication that they did not receive full, took the, position that there was nothe 97th Congress and that the trulytangible recognition of their Own con- need to apt on these matters nowtough social security Issues may betributions to the system. In many before either the Senate Finance Com-dealt with thea cases they get no retul'n at all' for mittee or the Committee on Ways and That is not a bad idea. It may be thetheir own contributions to' the system Means have had hearings on this pro-only way to reach an acceptable bi-as though they had themselves never posal. In addition, major studies onpartisan accord on these complex mat- worked in covered employment. highway cost allocation and on theters. I would rather see us proceed These are just a few of the reasons present excise tax structure are duenow toward such accord, but the reali-why the Congress should at least try early next year from the Departmentsties of life force me to concede thatto make corrections, where feasible, in of Transportation and Treasury (inthe conferees probably made the basethesocialsecuritytreatmentof January 1982 and April 1982, respec-of an Inherently bad situation. There- wonlen. This will never happen until, tively). These studies will allow bothfore, Mr. Speaker, I am endorsing once and unless, social security is addressed committees to better assess the pres-again a less than ideal expedient within a broader way than this conference ent tax structure for funding highwaythe hope that this body will take more report permits. -programs.Also, it is hoped that theresponsible action within the next Ms. OAKAR. Mr. Speaker, will the House and Senate Public Works Com-year. Perhaps we will have a commis- gentleman yield on that point? mittees wifi have agreed on a multi.slon report to act on by the time it Mr. CONABLE. I yield to the gentle- year highway spending program incomes up again. woman from Maryland very briefly. - 1982 SO that the tax-writing commit- Responsibleaction means, of course, Ms. O.AKAR. Mr. Speaker, I want to tees will be in a position to bettermaking the decisionsnecessaryto commend the gentleman for his com. assess the financial needs of the truststrengthen the system as much as pos-ments about the inequities toward fund when considering an extension ofsible over the long-term as well as the women andhisunderstandingof the Fund and its taxes. short, and structurally as well as ti.them. It is very well said.

Mr. Speaker, we have a good corn-jnancially. . Mr.CONABLE. I thank the gentle. promise. I urge my colleagues to sup- In the past, when responsible action woman. port It. has been requested, sufficient support Mr. Speaker, ideally,.a nation's basic Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance ofhas not developed. For the majority, itsocial insurance system should protect my time. has always seemed easier, and perhapsall the nation's workers. We are far' -December16, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE 119725 fromthat ideal in the UnitedStates—the Important thing is to deal with the 0 1045 Inconsistencies abound. problems, not to pretend they are not Why,for example, shoujd the peoplethere. Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak. who makethelaws governing social se- As for the disability Insurance pro.er, I yield 5 mInutes to the gentleman curity, and the people who administergram., the list of improvements thatfrom Minnesota (Mr. Vio). those laws, be exempt from social se-need to be made Is very long. Most of (Mr. VENTO asked and was given curity coverage? More and more of ourthese changes would cost very little, Ifpermission to revise and extend his re- fellow citizens are asking: If social se-anything; are relatively noncontrover-marks.) curity is good enough for us—all 117sial, and have been approved tentative- Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, it is with million of us—why isitnot goodly by the Subcommittee on Social Se-sadness that I have concluded that I enoughforyou2.5million whocurity. Taken as a whole, they wouldmust voteagainsttheconference • happen to be civilian employees of thehelp beneficiaries, make claims han-report on H.R. 4331, the Bolling bill, Federal Government? I do not have adling more efficient, and save moneywhich was intended to fully restore good answer for that, and I have notover the long run. the social security minimum benefit heard a good answer from anyone else, But none of these improvements canfor all current and future benefici. either. be effected unless we produce morearies. Unfortunately, the conference Anyone who has thought carefullycomprehensive, responsible legislation.report signed by the House conferees and seriously about this gap In cover- We can achieve that objective if thekills—not restores—the minimum age realizes it is possible for Federalleadership of this House will permitbenefitforthousandsoffuture civilian workers to be better off underthose Members who know social secu-beneficiaries. social security protection, whichisrity the best, because they work with There is, of course, a bittersweet vic- much broader than that provided• the subject so closely, to develop andtorycontainedintheconference under the various Federal retirementbring to the floor a comprehensive, re-report. It does restore the minimum plans. I believe that these plans can besponsible piece of legislation. benefit for 3 million current recipients coordinated with social securityIn This can be done only on a biparti-and for another 14,000 eligIble before such a way that the rights of affectedsan basis. I do not believe an enactableJanuary 1, 1982. I do not underesti- workers would be protected fully andpackage can be put together if It bearsmate the importance of this victory that their financial positions would bea Democrat or Republican label. Butfor the House. But, frankly, I strongly Improved substantially. there are enough Members of goodbelieve that the victory could have This major coverage gap presentswill—and reasonably like mind—start-protected other senior citizens, too, if particularlytough problems whiching with the Subcommittee on Socialonly the House conferees had not should at the least be confronted.Security, which isso well led, to reachalmost Immediately abandoned the They clearly will not go away. a workable bipartisan—or nonparti-House position to the tender mercies The demographic problems associat-san—consensus. of the Reagan administration's budget ed with social security are equally real We will, by approving this confer-cuts and the Republican Senate. The and Inescapable. They also wifi not goence report today, be buying ourselvesfirst offer the House conferees made away. People are living much longera little more time to reach that con-to the Senate pulled the rug out from now than they were when the systemsensus. We wifi not be evading our ul-under future minimum benefit recipi- wasstarted,andamajor break-timate responsibility. ents. through In finding a cure for any lead- One of the worst mistakes we legisla- The 404 House Members who voted ing disease will stretch those longevitytors can make is to assume that the in-for the Boiling bill deserve a better

• tables even more. We know with a rea-evitable is always postponable. Collec-conference report than that before the sonable degree of certainty that theretively, we have made that assumptionHouse today. More Importantly, the are• about three workers for everyon social security with regularity. We84,000 senior citizens—who, under the social security beneficiary now andhave been running against mathemat-Bolling bill, would have received the that the ratio will drop to 2 to 1 at theical odds, and we are losing the race.minimum benefit in 1982—deserve a beginning of the next century, whichThatistrulytragic,becausethebetter conference report than that is only 20 years away. stakes, in terms of both people andbefore the House today. The hundreds With that knowledge, we should—atdollars, are enormously high. of thousands of senior citizens—who, the very minimum—consider taking Eventually, if we stay on this course,under the Bolling bill, would have re- steps now, legislatively, to adjust thewe will simply run out of baling wireceived the minimum benefit in later system to those demographic changesand the whole system will fall down onyears—deserveabetterconference so visible In the future. our heads. It will collapse either be-report than that before the House People need time to adjust their re-cause we actually do nothing, andtoday. Finally, the millions of Amen- tirement plans, their savings patterns,benefits cannot be paid, or because wecans—whose confidence in one day re- and their ways or living. They need aslettheTreasurystartborrowingceiving their own social security bene- much time as possible. enough money every year to maintainfits has been shaken by this arbitrary To know that such adjustments arethe benefit pipeline. Either way, theattack on those about to receive the Inevitable, and to deliberately refusesocial security system will collapse,minimum benefit—deserveabetter to give adequate advance notice,isand I cannot emphasize that point tooconference report than that before the unconscionable as far as I am con-strongly.Obviously, when benefitsHouse today. cerned. We do not have to make deci-stop the game is over, and using gener- Sometimes it's the pain from the sions for a future generation. But wealrevenues—whichreallymeansmost recent Injury that dominates our should make those decisions easier.Treasury borrowing—will destroythoughts. But we must not allow this We could do so by scheduling systemwhateverinsurancecharactertheto obscure the history of how Demo- adjustments, on which a consensusbasic system has and turn it into an-cratic House éonferees came to the po- can be reached, attaching in each caseother set of welfare programs virtuallysition of joining their Republican col- a "sunset" provision so that later Con-overnight. That is not conjecture, thatleagues and a Republican Senate and a gresses would have to act to affirm theis economic fact. Republican President In cutting social earlier decision. This would not lock in In this light, Mr. Speaker, we shouldsecurity benefits for senior citizens any changes, but would cause peoplebegin to reconcile ourselves to theabout to retire—some of those retire- to adjust their thinking and planningprospect, however unpleasant, of a la-ments scheduled for only 18 days from in anticipation Of the possibility ofmeduck session a year from now, andnow. - change. to a confrontation, at last, on social se- Shortlybefore his election, Presi- There are other, posibly better,curity. dent Reagan said: ways of dealing with demographic Meanwhile, I think we really have Anyreformof the Social Security system problems. I am not a strident advocateno reasonable choice other than adop-must have one overriding goal: that the of any particular way, but I believetion of this report. benefits of those now receiving—or looking H 9726 CONGRES.SIONAL RECORD —HOUSE December L6 1981 forward to receiving—Social Security n1ustenta; place a means test on certain cur-cent of those people surveyed opposed be protected, and that payments must keeprent minimum benefit recipients In-cuts in future social security benefits. pace with the cost of 'i eluding teachers and others who re- ThIs conference report does make A few short weeks after his admInlR-ceive public pensions of more thansome exceptions in future minimum tration took office, President Reagan $300 a month; and lower the familybenefit eligibility.It stipulates that took the first step In stripping Amen, maximum benefit-,theamountofthose involved in religious orders such cans of those social security benefits monthly benefits which can be paid onas nuns or priests who take a vow of he said were sacrosanct. From the be-the earnings of one worker. poverty will remain eligible for the ginning, his budget recommendations Given the enormous publicity camminimum benefit. This raises a very targeted the social security program paign by the White House and theimportant question: Does one who Is for cuts. Specifically, the President Senate to distort their real actions inpoor by choice deserve better treat- called for elinilnation of the social se-killingthe minimum benefit,thement that one who is poor by acci- curity benefit that goes to millions of House can take credit for getting backdent? Is a nun or priest more entitled our Nation's poorest people, and elm!- a conference report that does provideto the minimum benefit than a woman nation of social security student bene-the social security minimum benefitwho has worked scrubbing floors for fits. forbeneficiarieswhoareeligiblelow wages? I say, let us continue to This spring, the administration pro-before January 1. Given the stronghonor the eligibility of both. posed even more severe slashes inresistance of the Senate conferees to Mr. Speaker, I also want to address social security benefits, and Richardfull restoration for all beneficiaries,the cost of restoring the minimum Schwelker, Secretary of Health and the House should take credit for get-benefit for the over 400,000 retirees Human Services, appeared before theting the measure of victory that it did.who would become eligible for the Aging Committee to defend the ad- I must stress, however, my strongminimum benefit in the next 5 years. ministration's hard-line position, belief that eliminating the social secu-The savings estimate for eliminating The Republican Senate agreed tOrity minimum benefit for all thosefuture minimum benefits is $685 mil- these social security cuts and with the who qualify after January 1 Is a be•lion. But this does not include the narrow adoption of the Republican trayal of the Congress responsibilityadded social security administrative budget reconciliation substitute,to maintain confidence In the social se-costs and the offsetting Increases in Orainn-Latta II, so did a bare majoritycurity system. SSI, medicaid, and State welfare costs. of the House. In frustration at this What is sacred about January 1,According to testimony we heard in abandonment of millions of senior citi-1982, the day the conference reportthe Aging Committee hearings on the zeus, over 170 House Members fromcloses the door on the minimum bene-minimum benefit,itactually costs both parties joined hi cosponsoring afit? Because itis frozen at $122 amore to eliminate the minimum bene- resolution (U. Res. 197) to defer con-month, the minimum benefit will die a sideration of the reconcifiation billnatural death with the passage offit than to maintain it. until after the Senate had agreed totime. Why should 7,000 people whose It is also important to emphasize restore fully the minimum benefit forbirthdays fall next month lose theirthat the cuts contained in this confer- all current and future recip!ents. minimum benefit when those born aence report will not solve the problem After public opinion began to mount month earlier receive it? of social security's inflation-tattered, against the administration's posturing As Speaker O'NEIU. said last July: recession-ridden wage base. Rather, let on social security, the President issued The Administration has sent a clear mes-it be clear that social security is not a carefully worded statement intendedsage: If it can cut off one group from socialthe cause of the projected $150 billion to calm the fears of the Nation. security, it can cut off' another group. Onedeficit we now face in fiscal year 1982. As a matter of fact, social security has • I will not stand by and see those of youday it attacks the minimum benefit. The Who are dependent on Social Security de.next day, it attacks those retiring at 62. Thestood on its own two feet financially prived of your benefits— -- principleis the same. Ifit can cut thefor the past 45 years and is capable of £eagan saiu a naiona y eevLseu.4 .checksof one group, it can cut the checksdoing so in the future. Social security for another. I disagree with this Adniinlstra-is as sound as the administration and speech— tion. The House of Representatives dis. I make that pledge to you as your President.agrees with the Administration. We don'tCongress want to make it. This is its You have no reason to be frightened. Youagree that the best way to save Social Secu-greatest strength and, as this Congress will continue to receive your checks In therity is to hurt those who depend on it. Weand this President have demonstrated full amount due you. don't agree that the best way to build sup.this year, its greatest weakness. At the same time the President wasport for the system is to tear it down." - The conference report before us also goingbefore the American people to In all candor,Ibelieve that theforces the payment of the social secu- reiterate his commitment to defend House this summer, and its confereesrity tax on sick pay. Clearly this will andpreserveoursocialsecuritythis fall, could have avoided this elm!-deter some employees and employers system, his top aides were pushing fornation of the minimum benefit. from providing sick pay coverage. As passage of the budget cuts his admin- I. am voting agathst the conferencethe cost of adequate compensation In- istration proposed—including elimina-report because itis an unacceptablecreases, the inevitable result will be to tion of the minimum social securitycompromise of the House position. Onreduce sick pay coverage. Ironically, beflef it as part of the Omnibus Budget July 30 the House expressed its over-without sick ay for workers, what. Reconciliation Act (H.R. 3982, Public whelming support for the minimumhappensisthat costs increase for Law 97-35). benefit by a vote of 404 to 20 We wentsocial security disability benefit, work- Although some of us were unsuccess• on record against cuts in social secu-ers compensation, and public assist- ful in our effort to stop House floorrity for our poorest senior citizens,ance. Is increasing these costs pru- consideration of the budget cuts billthose who are most in need. Althoughdent? It may save money in the funny until after the Senate had restoredthe conference report before us givesfigures of 0MB, but what about the the minimum benefit, our efforts fo-the House 85percent of whatitlong-range implications? I suggest that cused public attention and, through wanted—Idon'tthinkitisgoodthe, sick-pay change is another bogus the help of the Rules Committee and enough and I plan to vote against it. savings. its distinguished chairman (Mr. Bóu.- If we pass this bill we will be deny- I note that most arguments in favor ING), produced H.R. 4331, a bill fullying7,000peoplea month—84,400of Imposing the social security tax on restoring the minimum benefit for allpeople a year—of benefits which theysick pay refer repeatedly to. the fact current and future beneficiaries. The have every legitiniate right to expectthat most large corporations already House approved that bill 404 to 20. to receive. I think it is wrong to denypay the tax on sick pay and, therefore, H.R. 4331 languished in the Senatebenefits to persons close to retirementCongress should force all small busi- - until mid-October at which time theage and I think the American peoplenessesto do the same. Apparently this Senate amended the bill to: Kill thesupport my view. A recent Harris pollfits in with our new national policies minimum benefit for all future recipi-on social security found that 85 per-of merger approvals and tax cuts for December 16',1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD HOUSE H 9727 thebig corporations while small busi-settled hi a bipartisan way. Not untilon strengthenhig socialsecurity.I nesses are forced to take the heatthen can the American people feelhave developed a comprehensive plan from inflation and high hiterest rates.conifortable about their social securityin which I have great faith, and I Has anyone considered the Impact ofsystem's future. would be delighted If my colleagues the sick-pay change on our labor-hi- Virtually every public ophiion pollwould support that plan in its entire- tensive, credit-sensitive small business-that has been conducted on the sub-ty. es? Or will these bushiesses conthiueject hi recent years shows that a ma- But I know that accommodation, to be an afterthought or, more impor-jority of our fellow citizens are uncer-and "give and take" are essential to tantly, merely a bankruptcy statistic? tahi now about the future of social se-thefutureofthesocialsecurity It was not any suprlse that the con-curity. They express doubt that thesystem. And I am confident that other ference committee wanted to avoidsystem will survive and are fearfulmembers of the subcommittee feel the sending out the mandated notices hithat the trust funds may run out ofsame way. early December. These notices wouldmoney before they become eligible for Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I urge my have gone to current minimum recipi-benefits. This is particularly true ofcolleagues to vote for this conference ents—3 million people—informhigyounger contributors to the system.report. It will help us buy time, time them of the potential loss of benefitsFor example, hi a survey conducted bywe must use to produce a responsible under the Republican reconciliationLou Harris for the National Counciland acceptable alternative to repair bill. We can be sure that these olderon the AgIng, 68 percent of personsour financially ailing social security families would have reacted to the no-age 18 to 54. expressed "hardly anysystem. tices, and their reaction would certain-confidence" that social security would Our fellow citizens will be watching ly have prompted a reversal. More liii-be able to pay them benefits whenus carefully, Mr. Speaker. They will be portantly, those notices would havethey retired. able to detect the difference between a exposed the actions of the Congress In another survey conducted for thevote to strengthen social security and and the administration hi a most dra-recent National Commission on Sociala vote to keep it weak. matic way. Security, 61 percent of the working It almost seems that the House andpopulation that was interviewed ex- Mr. COLEMAN; Mr. Speaker, wifl Senate were hivolved hi a legislativepressed little or no confidence thatthe gentleman yield? game to see who would blhik first, andenough money will be available to pay Mr. GRADISON. I yield to the gen- •the House blhiked almost before thetheirretirementbenefits.Three-tleman from Missouri. gavel fell to open the first conferencefourths of those hiterviewed were be- (Mr. COLEMAN asked and was committee meeting. tween ages 25 and 44. given permission to revise and extend Why are we so weak in spirit when That same survey, which was basedhis remarks.) we support social security, the moston hi•depth hiterviews, showed that Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise successful of programs that this Con-most Americans also hope that eventstoday in strong support of the confer- gress has ever written, a program thatwill prove them wrong, because theyence report on aR. 4331. Restoring conthiuestoenjoyoverwhelmingwant social security to survive. Theythe mhilmum social security benefit to public support. When we chip away atare worried about its future, but theyall who now ireceiveit, or who will socialsecurity,asthisconferencewish very much to have it conthiue.qualify for it this year, is the surest, report before us today does, we de-They are even willhig, accordhig tomost concrete way to back up the as• stroy much more than the benefits forthis poll, to hicrease their contribu-surances we have all been makhig to a few hundred thousand workers. tions if necessary to keep the systemour senior citizens. Congress and this Indeed we callhito question thegohig. They would prefer not to do so,Nation must stand behhid past prom- social compact between workers andof course, but they would rather payises made to now retired Americans the retired that has persisted for themore In FICA taxes than see thewhen they paid into the social security past 50 years and we destroy the credi-system collapse. system durhig their working years. bility of this Congress. If we cannot In an earlier study by Lou Harris,They deserve no less from us. stand up and fight for social security,three-fourths of those hiterviewed said Mr. Speaker, let us also remember are there any programs or commit-they wanted social security to operatethat the difficult long•term financing ments that people of this Nation canmore as it orighially was enacted; thatquestions,aswellas the system's count on? is, essentially as a retirement program,short-termdifficulties,stillremain Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5with basic benefits to be supplementedbeforeus. These are questions we minutes to a respected member of thefrom other retirement income sources.must face up to hi a serious and subcommittee, the gentleman from Polls and surveys tell me, Mr. Speak-thoughtful manner. We have to make Ohio (Mr. GRADI50N). er, that a majority of Americans wantsure that today's workers will receive Mr. GRADISON. Mr. Speaker,Itheirsocialsecurity system tobefair and decent social security benefits thank the gentleman for yie'ding. placed on a sound financial basis as farwhen they retire, and that the prom• Mr. Speaker, most Americans are ap-hito the future as possible. They wantises we are making through the bene- prehensive about their social securityits Insurance character not only to befit structure are ones we can reason- system, and approval of this confer-retahied, but to be strengthened. Theyably expect to fulfill. ence report today is not likely to makeclearly do not like the idea of social se- The hiterfund borrowing allowed by them feel more secure. curity benefits behig based on need.this legislation, while it does not solve NevertIeless,IhavesignedtheThey prefer the earned-right concept.any problems, does nevertheless give report and urge my colleagues to johi With these samplings of public opin-us time to address these Issues. I am me in voting for it. Frankly, I thinkion as background, Mr. Speaker, Ihopeful we can use this opportunity to the conferees' decision made the bestsimpiy do not see how this House canconduct the informed national dialog of a bad situation and leaves us withfail to pass the conference report onthat is needed, without causing need- no viable alternative. H.R. 4331 and then act responsibly onless trauma to the 38 million Ameri- If we do not approve the report thelarger social security issues In 1982. cans who now receive monthly social administrationwillhavetomove The Subcommittee -on Social Secu-security checks or those who are near- ahead with plans to stop paying therity already has made long strides ining retirement age. it is utterly unac- mhiimum benefit to those now, receiv-that direction, and only a few moreceptable to leave these people in per- ing it, thus doing what the Congresssteps need be taken. Admittedly, theypetual terror that• the rug will be and the President have agreed not toare the issues most difficult to resolve,pulled out from under them. Let us do. If we do approve the report, thebut they can be negotiated if the lead-now work together toward a genuine, minimum problem will be solved,, andership herewillgive us a "greenpermanent solution to social security's the stage will be set for a lameducklight." financing problems, both immediate session of this Congress, when basic Vtrtually every member of our sub-and long-term, so that once and for social 'security issues can, we hope, becommittee has well-though-out viewsall, we can 'lay these fears to rest. !78 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— HOUSE December 16 1981 Iurge my colleagues to join with meIngs of the Statutory Advisory CouncilfromIllinois(Mr Romrowssi), In supporting the conference report. and/or the President's task force. and I commend the ranking Republi- AU the estimates show the trustcan member, the gentleman from New 0 1100 funds, even with interfund borrowing,York (Mr. C0NA3LE). for their coopera- Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak-going steadily downward. All threetion in this conference and for helping er, I yield 8 minutes to the gentlemanfunds together can make it as far asto give us the best conference report from Texas Mr. PIcII.E), the chair-1986 or .1987 if we look through rose-that I think we could have. I hope man of the Subcommittee Socialcolored glasses and what we see actu-that every Member will vote for this Security, who has done an outstandingally comes true in every single year, inconference report. ob in this area. every single detail. But all three funds Mr. Speaker, I now yield to the gen- Mr. PICKLE. Mr. Speaker, to thecould also go under as early as latetleman from California (Mr. RoussE- Members of the House and to those 31983. LOT). million elderly citizens of our land Our chances of hitting any projec- Mr. ROUSSELOT. Mr. Speaker, I who now will have their minimumtions that have been made are nil. Weappreciate the gentleman's yielding. benefits restored, Merry Christmas.may be above or below, but we will not Do I understand, then, that the pas- The House has at last and finally, bybe on the mark. As late as 1979 wesage of this bill or this conference theenactmentofthisconferencewere projecting 7.4 percent CPI andreport will not solve the long-range report, put to rest the question of the0.6 percent real wage growth for lastproblem of financing the social secu- minimum benefit. To that I say "halle-year. Last year we had 13.5 percent,rity system? lujah, praise the Lord, and Amen." not 7.4 percent, CPI, and we had Mr. PICKLE. No; it will not. That is We have come at this thing the hardminus 5 percent, not plus 0.6 percent,correct. We will have to meet that way. I take satisfaction in knowingreal wage growth. The problem whichproblem head on at a later date. that we have restored the minimumthe new medicare numbers showed us Mr. ROUSSELOT. This Congress benefit for our elderly citizens, most ofiswhile we areusingprojections whom are quite elderly and most ofwhich we know will not be exactly onhas to come back sometime darned whom are female. That is the compas-the mark, we have no room for error.soon and reform the system? sionate and the right thing to do. Putting asideprojections, we do Mr. PICKLE. We intend by this con- X also take the satisfaction In know-know that actually to go broke in 1984ference report to say to the Congress ing that this part of the conferencewe need only have minus 1-percentthat by the end of 1982 or in early committee report is in effect the samereal wage growth—which we now have.1983 some meaningful reforms in the position taken unanimously on a bi-Or we need have 12-percent inflation,social security system must be made. partisan basis by our subcommittee inand inflation the last 4 months has av-That is the challenge that we face. May. It ws not an easy decision theneraged 11.1 percent. Or we need medi- I think it is important to note that and it is not an easy decision now tocare expenditures rising at 23 percent,in this conference we did not accede to make any kind of changes. But I thinkand for 1980 they did rise at 21.4 per-the Senate's request that we pay for we can come to the floor today andcent. Or we can have any combinationthe restoration of the minimum bene- say to all Americans who have been re-of these at lower numbers. And nowfit with a sharp reduction in family ceiving this benefit, "You will receivewe must factor in higher levels of un-benefits. The Senate had proposed it permanently from now on." That isemployment, which will sharply lowerthat as one means of raising funds. We the kind and proper thing to do. revenues into the funds. objected to it and fought it down, and So that is the first thing this confer- My friends, if we cannot take ourthat is not inclqded in this bill. That is ence report does. It restores the mini-warning from those simple facts, thena good victory for all of us. mum benefit for 3 million people, and•we just are not looking after the social There will be some who might object we must not lose sight of the fact thatsecurity program. We came close re-to the inclusion of interfund borrow- that is the principal thing it does. cently in the committee to takinging in any form in this bill, and in a Another important thing thatitsteps to address the long-term problemsense they are correct, because we does is it establishes for the first timein social security, and I am encouragedshould look at the financing picture as the principle of interfund borrowing.that this Congresss will address thisa whole and not piecemeal.' That is not an approach I like to ad-problem. I recognize that the process There may be others who will object vance, although I recommended it asof solving the real problems in socialto the short timeframe on the inter- part of my bill at the first of the yearsecurity has been delayed. I wouldfund borrowing as itis contained in in order that it would be part of thehope, however, that we will use thethe bill, and they are correct that we overall package. Nevertheless, for theshort respite here to continue workingare forcing the hand of the Congress first time in the history of the socialon fuller solutions to the problemstodo something about thissoon. security program we have establishedfacing the social security program. There are others who might object to the right of interfund borrowing, but In one national poll taken in Sep-the inclusion of the tax on the first 6 wisely we have limited it to 1 year. Wetember, 82 percent said they felt itmonths of sick pay, and they are cor- have said that after December 31,necessary for Congress to revise the f i-rect,because our primary purpose 1982, we cannot rely on using the in-nancing of social security in the nexthere is not to get into other issues hut terfund borrowing process any fur-year or so; and 77. percent said theyto correct the minimum. ther, and within a few months of thatfelt it necessary for Congress to revise I would hope that in our fears, dis- time, if not in 1982, we must then facethe benefits in the next year or so. comforts, and disagreements we will the critical issues of making some per- I will continue to propose that wenot lose sight of the primary purpose. manent solution to the social securitybreak out of this fearful standoff andof this conference report. This bill program. recognize that it is the social securitydoes correct the earlier action on the That is our challenge and our re-program itself—not any of us—thatminimum benefit. This bill also allows sponsibility, and really it is one Of thethe people really care about. We mustthe retirement fund to borrow money greatest challenges of any Congress,do right by that program. We mustfrom the other social security funds This was made evident to us when themake it sound, and that is what I willnext year, because we all know that by new medicare numbers came out, in-continue to try to do, as I know willthe end of 1982 the retirement fund volving a mere 3-percent change inmy colleagues on both sides of thewill be so low in reserves that we will medicare outlays for 1 year. It will beaisle. not be able to pay full benefits. made evident again and again as the Mr. ROUSSELOT. Mr. Speaker, will We have no alternatives. I say at budget comes out in January, thethe gentleman yield? this juncture that the interfund bor- social security trustees report comes Mr. PICKLE. I will yield later, I sayrowing, as much as I do not like it, out in early summer, the mldsessionto the gentleman from California. serves a single purpose of allowing us review arrives, and as press reports Mr. Speaker, I commend the chair-to continue payments while we work appear throughout the year on meet-man of our committee, the gentlemanon more lasting solutions. December 16, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECOIU) :—HOUSE The SPEAKERprotempore. Thewon 8 out of 10 issues,' and that is a Mr. YOUNO of orfda. Mr. 8peak time of the gentleman from Texaspretty good percentage. er, I rise hi support of the conference (Mr. PxcKI) has expired. The main thing Is that we did re-report. Mr. ROSTENKOWSKL Mr. Speak-store the Tinlnlmum benefit for all Mr. Speaker, with the approval of er, I yIeld 1 addItional minute to thethose who are receivingit.In thethe legislation before us to relnbtate gentleman from Texas (Mr. PICKLE). future the only people affected will Inthe minimum social security benefit. Mr. PICKLE. Mr. Speaker, the prin-almost all cases be those who are Inwe can end 1981 with an encouraging. cipal objection that some of the Mem-termlttent workers. signal to the mny older Americans bers have to this conference report Is We should keep In mind that 98 per-who were needlessly frightened that this does away with the minimumcent of the minimum benefit peoplethroughout the year by reports that benefits for future recipients, and thatare being taken care of in this bill. Wewe would reduce their benefits. is correct. There are only from 5,000could only argue that less than 2 per- Our action thday will reffirm the to 7,000 a month who will be eligiblecent in the future will feel that theirfact that we will not allow the benefita forthis minimum benefitinthebenefits might be cut. We would notof those social ecurlty recipients cur future. Three million people will havewant to cut anybody, but we have gotrently on the rolls to be reduced. Such it restored by this action. to look at the overall problem. a reduction would be unjust and We ought to keep in mind the fact So again, Mr. Speaker, I recommendunfair and would be a breech of our that most people in the future will getthe conference report, and I commendcommitment to the retired workers of through normal wages higher benefitsthe members of the subcommittee forAmerica, who have budgete.d very than they would under the minimumthe work which was done earlier, be-carefully for their retirement. benefit. In fact someone who hadcause I think now we must look to the It Ia also my hope that we learn a worked under social security only at afuture. We must resolve to ourselveslesson from our action today. I hoLie minimum wage level for 13 years andthat on a bipartisan basis we will trywe learn once and for all that we retired this year at age 65 would getto find an answer to the social securitycannot approach social security legI- $278 per month, far higher than theproblem. There is no more importantlation bit by but, as we have done in minimum benefit. Even if he retired atdomestic Issue facing the Americanfirst ellmInatirg and then restoring age 62 he would get $225 a month, stillpeople today than our social securitythe minimum benefit. As I stres8ed In wellabove the minimum level. Aproblem. July, when we first voted to reinstate person earning $7,000 a year or so in Mr. Speaker, thisis a temporarythe inlnlmwn benefit, we must ap- 1980 would get more than the mini-stopgap, but it is an important step toproach social security legislation In a mum benefit. So we are not reallytake, and we must take it. I hope weresponsible and businesslike fahion. being that harsh or unfair to future The legislation we consider today recipients. take the step unanimously. was approached neither responsibly. It is also important to realize that Mr. ARciuu. Mr. Speaker, it yieldnor busthesslike. This body' voted to the new beneficiaries in the future willsuch time as he may consume to thereinstate the minimum benefit In July; be recipients who are part-time or in-gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Buz.EY).and the Senate concurred, in principal, termittentworkers—thedouble-dip- (Mr. BLILEYaskedand was givenless than expeditiously in October. pers or the Government employeespermission to revise and extend his re-Two months lEter, we finally have re- who haveonlyminimalcoveragemarks.) ceived the conference report. under social security. Mr. BLILEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in Throughout this period, the 3 mII Forty percent of future minimumsupport of the conference report onlion older Americans who rely on the beneficiaries will be dually entitled—H.R.4331.Thefinalagreementminimum benefit have been forced to that is to say they are spouses or otherreached is an indication of the kind ofwatt n limbo, not knowing If they individuals whose primary social secu-unity we need to secure a long-termwould continue to receive their bene rity benefit will come from the mainsolution to the social security fundingfits. Today we can brighten' this holi- worker in the family. When theircrisis. On the whole, the agreementday season for them, and for all of the minimum benefit level goes down theysymbolizes a desire by this Congress toNation's 36 million social security re- will suffer no loss of income at all be-tackle the serious problem we arecipients, by showing that we do under- cause their spouse benefit will go up. faced with,ina sound bipartisanstand their needs and that we will take We should also keep in mmd that wemanner. no action that would in any way result do have the special minimum benefit I would like to commend my col-in financial hardship. This reasur bracket which goes to at least 400 newleagues who served on the conferenceance is the least we can do for these people a month. They are the long-for their efforts toward a sound bi-retired workers, who through years of range, low-wage earners. So we arepartisan solution to the funding crisis.labor, have made our Nation what it b really not being that unfair when weWe have a long road ahead of us intoday, look at the figures and see that any-achieving our ultimate goal of estab- Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 body who is only earning $7,000 a yearlishing social security upon a stable fi-minutes to the gentleman from Cali- or who will still get a benefit highernancial base. The agreement before usfornia (Mr. ROU88ELOT), another re- than in the minimum. Finally wetoday Is the first step toward achiev-spected member of the subcommittee. should keep in mind that the numbersing that goal. Mr. ROUSSELOT. Mr. 8peakei, I eligible for the minimum will decrease I am convinced that by working to-rise in opposition to H.R. 4331 a it in the future as that benefit plays lessgether we can find a sound bipartisanwas passed out of conferéncd becue and less of a role in the social securitysolution to the social security problem, program. It is nothing more than a big 1eg11a- The SPEAKER pro tempore. Thetogether we can make social securitytive copout There Is abo1utely o time of the gentleman from Texasbetter meet the needs of the elderlyreason that this Congress ©annot ad (Mr. PIcKi) has again expired. and disabled—those for whom socialdress the real problems lacing the Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, if thesecurity was originally designed. social security system and enact com- gentleman wishes further time, I yield Therefore, I urge my colleagues toprehensive legislation to estore the fi- 1 additional minute to the gentlemanjoin me in agreeing to the conferencenancial soundness of this program from Texas (Mr. PICKLE). report on H.R. 4331, restoration ofwhich serves one out of every seven Mr. PICKLE. Mr. Speaker, I thanksocial security minimum benefits. Americans. the gentleman. Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, I yield The fact L that social security's fi- Mr. Speaker, I can understand thesuch time as he may consume to thenancial problems are not new. These concern of some who would like togentleman from Florida (Mr. YOUNG). problems will not go away. The pro- have had a better conference. We (Mr. YOUNG of Florida asked andgrain ha been operating n the red for would like to go to the conference onwas given permission to revise andthe past 6 years Although we have 10 issues and win them all. The Houseextend his remarks.) been aware of th1s,Congresshas not H 9730 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— HOUSE Lçe1thi14 1981

acted to restore the financial Integrityof public confidence In the social secu- • Mr. OTLMAN. Mr. 8peaker, .I..thtnk of the system. KR. 4331, as It hasrity system. This lack of confidencethe genIeman for yielding, aid I sup- come to us from conference, falls farhas resulted in a large degrec from theport the remarks of my colleague from short of addressing the basic problemsperiodic financial crises th... have oc-California (Mr. RoussaLor). I rise In facing social security. curred. opposition to the conference repOrt on First, with passage of H.R. 4331 the A New York Times CBS poll showedthe social aecurly inhilmum benefit social security system will continue tothat 54percentof the Americanrestoration. ft 4331. accumulatedeficits.Presently,thepeople no longer believe that the While I recognize that the confer- system is losing $12,300 every singlesocial security system will have theeOes faced a difficult uphill battle and minute of every day. KR. 4331 doesmoney available to pay them the fulldid partially restore these impoftant not address this fact at all. I wouldbenefits thOy would be entitled to atsocial security benefits, I must express like to ask my colleagues how many ofretirement. For those polled 25 to 34disappointment In their inability tO them would invest in a system that isyears of age, 75 percent doubted thatachieve a full restoration of minimum losing $12,300 every single minute ofsocial securIty will provide full bene-social security benefits and were only every day. I do not think any Memberfits for their own retirement. able to restore the benefits for those would voluntarily participate in a pro- We must provide for long-term re-who retire before January 1, 1982. gram that is operating with a dailyforms that put the system on fIrm ft. The Hoilse overwhelmingly passed deficit of over $17 million. Yet that isnancial ground. In this way we canKR. 4331, ex,resSlng ita view that we the very extent of the financial prob-assure the 115 mIllion contributors toerred In going along with an abrupt lem which the social security system isthe system and the present 36 milliontermination of these benefits at the presently facing. We are forcing 115beneficiaries that they will be able totime that we passed the Reconciliation million working Americans to paydepend on social security In their timeAct. I submit that we need more than taxes into a system that has operatedof need as a base of financial support.this btllto keep faith with those older in deficit for 6 years and also faces a And so I believe it comes down to aAmericans who deserve, and have de- deficit as large as $80 billion over the pended on, social security minimum next 5 years. question of congressional responsibili- Second, H.R. 4331 fails to establish aty. Unfortunately, Congress has notbenef its. prudent level of trust fund reserve bal-acted responsibly in overseeing the Mr. Speaker, I Intend to continue to ances on which the system may, relysocial security system. We have notwork with my colleagues on both aides during unanticipated occurrences. been the protector of the program. ItSof the aisle who seek responsible long. Throughout the past decade trustpresent financial state is testimony torange solutions to stzengthen and sta- fundreservebalanceshavebeenthis. As I have already stated, the pro-bilize our social security system and drained until today they are at theirgram has been operating in the red forwho support minimum social security lowest levels ever (reserves as a per-6 years. Although we have been awarebenefits, so that we may eventually re- cent of outgo). At the beginning ofof this, Congress has not acted to re-store these benefits, and plow those this year, just over 2 months of re-store the financial integrity of thewho have earned their social secuzity serves remained in the system. Thissystem. benefits to receive: theIr benefits at greatly contrasts with the 12-year re- Our main objective today should bereasonablelevels,Inadignified serve level of 1950 or even with the 1.to insure the continued stability of themanner. year reserve level of 1970. Now somesocial security system. Its problems Mr. ROUSSELOT. Mr. Speaker, I may feel that itis not essential towill not go away by our sweeping themthank the gentleman from New York have exactly 1 year's worth of reservesunder the rug—and that is exactly(Mr. OILMAN). in the system. This point is up to dis-what this bill does. All we are doing is Mr. Speaker, I believe it Oomes down pute. But one thing is certain, whenbuying time; time that the systemto the question of congressional re- the system is drained down to a fewdoes not have. sponsibility, and I think we have failed months of reserves, it becomes vulner. H.R. 4331 is a stopgap measure atthat test. able to unanticipated fluctuations inbest. By not addressing the problems I The SPEAKER pro tempore. The the economy which may occur. have mentioned we are shirking ourtime of the gentleman from California The point is that in the past, it hasresponsibility as elected representa.(Mr. Roussator) has expired. been the high trust fund reserve bal-tives. We know what the problems are, 01115 ances which have seen us through un-we have several options from which we anticipated economic downturns. How-may choose—asadvancedinthe Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak- ever. today, with trust fund balancesSenate Finance Committee and theer, I yield such time as he may con- at their lowest level ever, we no longerHouse Ways and Means Social Secu-sume to the gentleman from New can depend on that cushion. I questionrity Subcommittee. AU that is lackingYork (Mr. LurmiNs). the prudence of our failure to addressis our congressional action. It was the (Mr. LUNDINE asked and was given this problem in H.1. 4331. Congresswhichoriginallyenactedpermission to revise and extend his re- A third consideration that Is neglect-social security and it is the Congressmarks.) ed in this measure before us is the sys-which must continue to protect it as a Mr. LtTNDINE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in tem's long-term deficit, over the nextviable, financially sound social insur-opposition to theconference report on 75 years, of $1.6 tiillion—thls is almostance system. H.R. 4331, a bill to. restore minimum twiceou nationaldebt.Future I must warn my colleagues that eva-benefits under the social security pro- beneficiaries certainly have much tosive and dilatory action cannot persistgram. The report does not go far be concerned about in regard to theirwithout severe consequence to millionsenough in Implementing the clear benefits. Since we are aware of thisofbeneficiaries who depend uponintent of the House to continue mini- deficit, we should responsibly begintheir earned social security benefits.mum benefits to all current and future consideration of steps which InsureWe can be certain that by delayingsocial security benefits. that we may allow for a smooth phase-our legislative decisions they will not On several occasions this session, the in of any changes that may be neces-become any easier. And soI mustHouse has expressed its intent to pre- sary. Furthermore, in 50 years, oneoppose H.R. 4331 on the basis that it isserve the minimum socialsecurity out of every five Americans will benot responsible legislation. benefit. In action on this legislation in over 65 years of age. Careful consider- Mr. OILMAN. Mr. Speaker, will theJuly, the House voted 404-20 to con- ation will have to be given in order togentleman yield? tinue minimum benefits not just for meet the concerns and needs of those Mr. ROUSSELOT. I yield to my col-certain groups of retirees, but for all who will be. retiring in the next cen-league, the gentleman from New York.current and luture social security re- tury. (Mr OILMAN asked and was givencipients. And finally, H.R. 4331, even viewedpermission to revise and extend his re. On each of these occasions, I voted as a quick-fix, fails to address the lossmarks.) to retain the minimumbenefit.bedause Dècern1er 16, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE H 9731 I.firmly believe thatcontinuationofnesota (Mr. VENTO), and ask my.col-what is here rather than what we this benefit Is both necessary aid de-leagues in the Eouse to vote "no" onwant some people to think is here. sirable. The minimumbenefitoffersthe conference report. We do not want While I am on what is here, I think the pledge that any worker who quail-two groups of senior citizens: Oneit is important to note what has hap- -fiesfor benefits under social securitygroup that is lucky because they werepened to social security in the last will receive sufficient monthly pay.62 years of age before January 1, 1982,year. AU we hear is we are not doing ments to guarantee a decent retire-and the other unfortunate group thatanything with the program. Perhaps ment. This guarantee has been a basicwas 62 years of age after January,we have not done enough. Perhaps we andlong-Standingpromiseofthe1982. The conference committee canare going to have to do more, and I social security program. do better than this for Our poorerhope we can, even though I am dis- By restoring the minimumbenefitsenior citizens. couraged by the chronology on this only for current beneficiaries, the leg- Mr. ROSTENKOWSKL Mr. Speak-event. islation deprives future-retirees of thiser, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman But in the last year we have cut the guarantee. It violates the basic com-from Missouri (Mr. GEPHABDT). minimum benefit; we have cut benefits pact between the Federal Government (Mr. GEPHAR])T asked and wasfor students. We have cut disability and workers that,in exchange forgiven permission to revise and extendbenefits. We have rounded benefits to years of FICA tax contributions, ahis remarks.) save money. We have knocked out decent level of support will• be pro- Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I risemoney for people that are getting vided in retirement. We cannot elimito support this conference report andworkmen's compensation nd social se- nate this key guarantee without un-urge Members to vote for it.I alsocurity. And we have done something dermining the support and confidencewould like to point out that while thiswith the earnings test to save money. of current workers that is so critical todoes not solve all of the problems ofOver the next 5 years we are going to the future of the social security pro-social security, I think a review of thesave $22.4 billion for the trust funds grain. chronology of the events surroundingfrom what we have done to social secu- My voteagainsttheconferencethis issue give us some sense of whyrity this year. report is therefore not an expressionwe find it so difficult to deal with this All we continue to hear about is the of opposition to continuing the mini-issue. charge on one side that we are not •mum benefit, but a Call to return this Here we have a minimum benefitdoing this and then a charge on the legislation to conference so that athat is about $122 a month to peopleother side that we are not doing that. compromise can be obtained that iswho for some reason did not qualify more in line with the House positionfor a higher benefit. I would suggest the only way to deal on this issue. with social security is to lower the I think it' unfortunate that several On February 18 the White House re-rhetoric, to deal with the facts, to be needed provisions have been added toleased major details about its programhonest with one another, to say it like this legislation by tile Senate in an at-for economic recovery and in thatit is, and to not continually play legis- tempt to buy Eouse votes to end thethey completely cut out the minimumlative and political games with the minimum benefit. Certainly there is abenefit a part of their budget propos-most important program to the elderly need for the procedures in the bill toal. people of the United States and, I In June, on a bipartisan basis, thewould say, to the people of th United help curb the continued payment ofSubcommittee on Social Security of benefits to prison inmates and de-the Ways and Means CommitteeStates. ceasedbeneficiaries.Moreover,theknocked out the minimum benefit pro- Mr. Speaker, I yield back the baF provision permitting unqualified bor-spectively but restored it and kept itance of my time. rowing between the three social ecu-on a retrospective basis. Everybody on Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, .1 yield 3 rity trust funds is a change I have longthe subcommittee I am aware of votedminutes to the gentlewoman from New advocated and strongly support. for that bill. Jersey (Mrs. ROUKEMA). However, this is clearly not the vehi- (Mrs. ROUKEMA asked and was cle to make these changes. The House We then came to the floor in recon- ciliation. The Rules Committee askedgiven, permission to revise and extend version of H.R. 4331 provides only for her remarks.) the restoration of minimum benefitsfor a rule that would allow a separate for all current and future benèficl-.vote in Gramrn-Latta on that question: Mrs. ROUKEMA. Mr. Speaker, I rise aries. The Senate action to add majorThat was. refused and there was onlyin support of the conference report on program changes to the legislation isan up or down vote on Gramm-Latta.H.R. 4331, a bill to restore the social not only unnecessary, it violates theIn Gramm-Latta, as my colleaguessecurity minimum benefit. pledge made by President Reagan inknow, the minimum was knocked out Mr. Speaker, for some months now it September that no changes in socialcompletely, retrospectively and pro.has beconie apparent that Congress security benefits would be consideredspectively, a position which, to mydid not intend to totally eliminate the until after a special task force onknowledge, nobody endorsed in theminimum social security benefit for social security had provided specificCongress but, Indeed, that was the p0-currentrecipients.LastJuly,the recommendations to Congress. sition the Congress voted for by votingHouse voted to reinstate the minimum Mr. Speaker, while I think it is im-for that bill. benefit for current beneficiaries, and perative that legislationis adopted Then in September, after a lot of ar•today's conference report is the culmi- that restores the social security mini-gument back and forth, the presidentnation or several months of difficult mum benefit, the provisions in thegot on television and said we ought tonegotiations by the social security con- conference report before us are unac-restore the minimum benefit. ferees.I think that, on the whole, ceptable.Iurge my colleaguesto Now here we are 2 or 3 months laterthey have done a good job and are to defeat the report and send it back tofinally getting that done on the verybe commended for their balanced ap- conference for further conskierationsame basis which we did it in the Comproach to this difficult issue. of the House position on this issue. mittee on Ways and Means 8 or 9 I believe this bill shows compassion Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak-months ago. for those who are receiving the mini. er, I yield such time as he may con- If we have this much trouble in themum benefit and for those in great sume to the gentleman from OhioCongress dealing with an issue that isneed. At the same time, it recognizes (Mr. Morn). so clear cut as this one, I ask my col-the need for reform within the system. (Mr. MOTEL asked and was givenleagues how are we going to deal withCertainly we still have a long way to permission to revise and extend. his re.social security in the overall. if wego toward a social security reform bill marks.) cannot be more honest with one an-that will restore the fund to a sound Mr. MOTI'L. Mr. Speaker, I want. toother, if we cannot deal with factsfinancial basis for present and future associate myself with and endorse thebetter than, that, and If we cannotretirees. This is a step in the right di- remarks of the gentleman from Minreally sit down and try to deal withrection. H 9732 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD HOUSE Decembei"le, .198.1 Mr. Speaker, this billmakesessen-later than 1986. We must act now totration can see no alternative but cut tial corrections by restoring the mini.avert financial disaster for the Socialbenefits. As the gentleman from Mis- mumbenefitfor current beneficiariesSecurity System. souri has just said, they have already and those who will retire by December I am encouraged by the fact that athis year cut benefits, equivalent to 31. In addition, it permits Interfundtask force has been appointed at theabout $19 billion over the next five borrowing until the end of 1982, whichPresident's request to study and devel.years, even giving them credit for the Isat least a temporary, positive Inop solutions to the social securityrestoration of the $6 billion which we keeping the system solvent. problem. However, I fear that theserestore In this conference report. The bill will also tighten reportingsolutions may cometoo• late. We These cuts -are only the tip of the requirementsrelatingtoconvictedcannot afford to waste more valuableiceberg. The administration has pend- felons who are in prison. In additionstime while the social security systeming before the Congress recommenda- it requires the Secreta1y to report oncontinues to lose $12,000 a minute.tions for further cuts that would equal what- actions are being taken to pre-The time to act is now. $37 billion a year for the next 75 vent deceased recipients from continu- Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak-years. ing to receive benefits. These are aller, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman When we talk about permanent solu- reforms that legitimately and rightful.from Florida (Mr. PEPPER). tions for social security we have to ly- concern people, and I congratulate Mr. PEPPER. Mr. Speaker, I warmlymake up our mind about one single the Committee and the conferees forcommend our committee for what itthing. Do we want to solve the prob. addressing themselves to these issues. has accomplished in this conference,lems of social security by cutting bene- In reviewing this bill in its entirety,against all of the pressure of the ad-fits or do we not? we shouldnoteseveralimportantministration and the other body. You points: First, it keeps the faith withhave made this a happier Christmas The other day Lou Harris released a our elderly miniMum benefit recipi-for about 3 million of our fellownationwide survey about social secu. ents by restoring a benefit they hadAmericans who anticipated that byrity. He said if there is one fact un- counted on—and received—for manythe action we had previously takenequivocally established in the minds of years. At the same time,itlimitsunder the duress of the administrationthe American people, it is their sup- future beneficiaries to a sum relatedthey would not get their minimumport of the social security system, not to the amount they actually put intosocial security check after the first ofonly from theold but from the the system; second, it permits inter.March of next year. The House con.middle-aged and the young. Over. fund borrowing to help get us throughferees also rejected the provision inwhelmingly, Americans of all ages sup. the short-term deficit; third, it is thethe Senate bill, proposed by the adport the current level of social security first step txward financial responsibili-ministration, Installing a family capbenefits, ever to the extent that they ty because it tightens reporting proce-which would have taken $1.4 billion'are willing to pay higher taxes for it. dures relating to waste and fraud; andout of the pockets of social security re-What concerns me is what the young fourth, ft presents the beginning of acipients. So I commend our confereespeople say: What will I get out there at the time of reform process that will protect thefor what they have achieved. Theymy entitlement if they are playing, as they benefits of current and future .recipi-have fought off efforts on the part ofare today, with the figures about future nts while, at the same time, returningthe other body to make many more vi-social security benefits for those whose the social security system to a soundcious cuts in the social security pro-rights have not yet been vested? financial basis. This generation andgram. So we are playing on dangerous future generations cannot afford to be But regrettably, and I am sure thegroundshereinjeopardizingthe held hostage by the politicization ofregret was no more poignant any-future right of people who have paid, this issue; we owe them no less than awhere than in the minds of those con-according to the law, into social secu- social security system that is soundferees who are so dedicated to the elrity benefits. Mr. Speaker, as we ap- • and stable. derly people of this country, it was at Mrs. FENWICK. Mr. Speaker, willthe expense of 7,000 people a monthproach that season of the year when the gentlewoman yield? after January 1 who will not get thewe are accustomed to think of new re. Mrs. ROUKEMA. I yield to the gen-$122 a month minimum that we havesolve and good resolutions, I hope it tlewoman from New Jersey. restored to.the 3 million elderly peoplewill be the solemn covenant of this Mrs. FENWICK. Mr. Speaker,'Iof this country. They are the hostagesHouse with the American people that thank my colleague for yielding.Iwho had to be given up for the benefitwe will not tolerate, we will not permit would like to associate myself with herof the others. the cutting of social security benefits' remarks. This reminds me of a visit by myto the people of this Nation. We would Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, will thewife and myself to a English home areestablish by the integrity of this gentlewoman yield? few years ago where the only son andHouse in that commitment faith and Mrs. ROUKEMA. I yield to the gen-daughter had departed to the war andconfidenceinthesocialsecurity .tléman from Ohio (Mr. Oxuw). never returned. In the great hall ofsystem, the greatest bulwark we have (Mr. OXLEY asked and was giventhat home were these words: for a better life for the people of this country. - permission, to revise and extend his re- - Youwho come here marks.) go home and say Mr.ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, it is well we gave our tomorrow minute to the gentlewoman from New. past time to begin addressing the seri- for your today. Jersey (Mrs. FENWICK). ous problems facing the social security Was it necessary that they give their Mrs. FENWICK. Mr. Speaker,I system. So far we have taken no moretomorrow, these 7,000 people a monththank my colleague. I am very sorry to than a band-aid approach aimed atwho were those people who were cov-hear such a partisan approach to the temporarily patching• up the systemered by the social security program,problem of social security..I would like rather than addressing the severe fi-who paid into it for their 25 quarters,to associate myself with the remarks nancial drain facing the three trustor who would have had their entitle-of the distinguished gentleman on the funds. Even under optimistic economicment January 1 of next year? But thatother side of the aisle, the gentleman assumptions, the old-age and survivorsis a part of the price that we arefrom Missouri (Mr. GErHARDT). His insurance trust fund, the largest ofhaving to pay for the resolve of thoseway is the one which is going to solve the three, will have depleted its re-highest ii authority in this Govern-the problem arid if we do not approach. serves and will be unable to pay timelyment, that the way to approach theit in that spirit we are not going to get benefit8 to over 32 million people bysocial security problem is to cut bene-anywhere. 1983, and perhaps as early as fall offits. I know the devotion of my distin- 1982. FInancing of-'the Disability In- We have proposed means by whichguished chairman, Mr. PEPPER;his surance and Hospital Insurance trustthis program can be saved and itisheart and mine are in the same place. funds will remain sound probably noeasily done. But it seems the adminis-We must have a sound social security Deëember 16, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE H 9733 system. But we are not going to get itThis legislation would establish stifferconferees on the minimum benefit leg- if we approach the solution of the difpenalties for the misuse of sOcial secu-islation to urge them to eliminate this ficulties in a partisan spirit. It is goingrity cards by making such activity aunfair provision from the conference to requite the highest statesmanshipfelonyandinstitutingsubstantialreport. Federal workers took their jobs and the highest sense ofdUty and obli-fines. Another provision in H.R. 4331and planned their retirements with gation. as was stated by the gentlemanwouldrequirethe Departmentof.their social security and Government from Missouri When he spoke earlier. IHealth and Human Services to reportpension in mind. By changing the would like to associate myself with histo Congress within 90 days of enact-rules in the middle of the game, the remarks. ment of H.R. 4331 the efforts it hasFederal Government would have been 01130 undertaken to prevent social securitybreaking a commitment to provide payments to deceased persons. H.R.these earned benefits. It is that attitude that is going to4331 would also allow a waiver of cer- bring about a solution of great impor-tain sections of the Privacy Act to I was pleased to learn that the con- tance to so many people in this coun-allow States to provide the Social Se-ferees agreed to restore the minimum try. curity AdminiBtration with informa-benefit for all recipients receiving pay- Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, I yieldtion necessary to prohibit individualsments before it was eliminated and for such time as he may consume to thefrom receiving social security disabil-those who would have become eligible gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.ityand studentbenefitswhileinunderprereconciliationlawbefore COUGHLIN). prison. January 1,1982. For those retiring (Mr. COUGHLIN asked and was Addressing the needs of our seniorafter December 31, 1981, benefits will given permission to revise and extendcitizens is one of our Nation's highestbe paid according to the formula es- his remarks.) priorities and we must continue totablished under reconciliation, which Mr. COUGHLIN. Mr. Speaker, I risestrive to create a society in which oldprovided that benefits wifi be based on In strong support of the conferenceage is rewarded with respect and digni-the 'actual earnings of beneficiaries report on H.R. 4331, legislation to re-ty rather than loneliness and dispair. Iand according to recomputation proce- storethe$122-a-monthminimumbelieve that confidence in our socialdures prescribed in regulations issued social security benefit for 3 millionsecurity program and confidence inbytheSecretaryofHealthand current recipients. the coming days will be restored forHuman Services. The Omnibus Budget Reconciliationthe 3 million current recipients of the To protect the financial integrity of Act, which was signed into law inminimum payment today by the ap-the social security system, the Confer- August,eliminatedtheminimumproval of the conference report onees have allowed the borrowing be- benefit for new retirees in DecemberH.R. 4331. tween the three social security trust and current recipients next March. Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, I yieldfunds through December 31,1982. Congress had intended by th1 actionsuch time as he may consume to theThis will give the Congress and the ad- to curtail windfall benefits for manygentleman from Virginia (Mr. P*RRI5).ministration enough time to work on a individuals who worked onlylong (Mr. PARRIS asked and was givenmore permanent remedy to the sys- enough under social security to estab-permission to revise and extend his re-tems ailing financial condition. lishtheireligibilityfor retirementmarks.) The conferees also took other steps benefits. However, the total elimina- Mr. PARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I am ex-which will help ease the financial tion of minimum benefits would alsotremely pleased-thatthe House andburden which social security is cur- have affected those low-wage earnersSenate conferees on the minimumrently experiencing. Stiffer penalties for whom the original provision wassocial security benefit legislation de-have been provided for the misuse of established. The House and Senate,cided to restore the minimum benefitsocial security cards, including making therefore, quickly passed H.R. 4331 re-for all recipients receiving paymentssuch activities felonies and establish- storing minimum benefits under thebefore it was eliminated and for thoseing a $5,000 fine for knowingly alter- Social Security Act. who will become eligible before Janu-ing or counterfeiting a social security The differences between the Houseary 1, 1982. card, or buying, selling, or possessing a and Senate legislation have been re- A few months ago, a vast majority incounterfeit card. The conferees have solved so that those who are depend-the House voted to restore the mini-also included language that requires ent upon social security will not be de-mum social security benefit. I JoinedHHS to report to Congress within 90 prived of their benefits. Through en-my colleagues at that time to correctdays ofenactment on actions taken to actment of H.R. 4331, we will hopeful-an inequity which would have adverse-prevent social security payments to de- ly regain the confidence of our olderly affected 3 million senior citizens. Iceased persons. The conferees have Americans to whom we have given ourwas very disturbed to learn- that whenalso taken steps to- prevent persons commitment that current benefits willthe Senate considered its minimumfrom receiving social security disabil- not be cut, that the safety net will notbenefit legislation, it added languageityand student benefitswhilein be torn apart. Today, we can assurewhich would have severely penalizedprison. the millions of Americans currentlyFederal retirees. Under the Senate I believe that the conferees have receiving the social security minimumproposal,retiredFederalworkerstaken some positive action in reform- benefit that Congress will not breakwould have had their Social Securitying the social security system to keep faith with them. - benefits reduced because they were In it financially sound without unfairly addition to restoring the currentalso receiving Government pensions.penalizing any one group of individ- $122 minimum social security pay-They would have been required touals. ment, H.R. 4331 allows interfund bor-have theirsocialsecuritybenefits I commend the conferees on rowing anong the three Federal pay-offset, dollar for dollar, when theirtheir efforts and I strongly urge my roll trust funds next year and the tax-Government pension exceeded $300 acolleagues in the House to vote in sup. ation of the fIrst 6 months of sick pay,month. port of this conference report. except worker's compensation. The This was an unjust proposal which Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speaker, I conference report on HR. 4331 alsowould have unfairly penalized aboutyield such time as he may consume to stipulatesthat the Department of350,000 senior citizens who have cOn-the gentleman from Puerto Rico (Mr. Health and Human Services set uptributed greatly to their country. I CORRADA). currently authorized AFDC/medicaidhave stated on numerous occasions (Mr. CORRADA askedand was demonstration projects in at least 7that these Individuals should not begiven permission to revise and extend States to provide better health serv-asked to bear the burden of the socialhis remarks.) ices for poor families. security system's financial problems. Mr. CORRADA. Mr. Speaker, I rise I am pleased that HR. 4331 address- I have made several statements onIn support of the conference report on es the problem of fraud and abusethe House floor in opposition to thisH.R. 4331 to restore the minimum within the social security program.proposal and I have written all thebenefits under the Social Security Act H 9734 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE December 16, 1981 Which have been eliminated by thebenefit past Christmas until the firstprogran. Now, if nobody collected any Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1981. of next year. That gave at least a nodbenefits from the social security pro- Restoring these monthly paymentsto the House position. gram at all, that would solve the fi- of $122 to more than 3 million social House Members may recall that thenancing.In. fact,therewouldbe security pensioners throughout theHousebillrestoredthe minimumenough money left over to finance a Nation, including over 100,000 pen-benefit-"period." The Other body re-war in El Salvador. sioners in Puerto Rico who are now re-stored the minimum benefit-"except." All I hope is that when the Congress ceiving those payments, is an act ofYou might even say that the philo-adopts its permanent solution to social justice and fairness to these elderlysopy underlying that restoration wassecurity, it will not amount to a final people who can barely subsist with"give them some day their daily breadsolution for the recipients. $122 per month and who would haveunder certain conditions"—the condi- Mr. PICKLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 been subjected to great hardship andtion that they not be Federal employ-minutes to the gentleman fromMassa- even penury and misery if such bene-ees in the past, the condition thatchusetts (Mr. SHANNON), a member of fits had been cut by more than half inthey already have been eligible on No-the subcommittee. many instances. In the case of Puertovember 1, 1981. Rico, while our people are subject to The conferees for the House strug- Mr. SHANNON. I thank the gentle- the payment of social security taxes ingled and, in the end, obtained someman for yielding. exactly the same manner as Ameri-little recognition of the House's posi- Mr. Speaker, last July, the House cans residing in the States, the elimi-tion in that regard. voted nearly unanimously to restore nation of the minimum benefits would I want to direct the Members' atten-the minimum benefit for all current have been aggravated by the fact thattiOn to the so-called Gramni-Latta IIand future retirees.I deeply regret the benefits of the supplementary se•legislationin which the minimumthat the Senate insisted on cutting curity income (SSI) have not yet beenbenefit was eliminated instanter, prac•benefits for those eligible to receive extended to the island, a situationtically, for the people to whom Mr.them next year, and in years after which I hope the Congress will rectifyPEPPER referred a few moments ago. that. Most of'those people who receive in the near future. I regret that we are If there were Members of this bodythe minimumbenefitareelderly not also restoring these benefits towho felt compelled to vote for thatwomen, and many of them will have prospective pensioners after Januaryreconciliationlegislation,Iremindno option but to apply for welfare. 1, 1982 bUt at least, by approving thisevery Member, I remind the Nation Earlier this fall, the Senate voted to conference report, benefits will be re-that there was a motion in connectioncutsocialsecurityfamilybenefits stored to current pensioners and thosewith the procedures surrounding thatdrastically, and to impose a means test who may become eligible before Janu-reconciliation legislation which wouldon Government employees currently ary 1, 1982. have permitted the House to vote indi-receiving the minimum benefit. I com- I urge my colleagues to support thisvidually on the social security ques-mend the House conferees for rejectS conference report. tion. ing these unwarranted and unfair pro- Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak- I remember well that the gentlemanvisions. er, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlemanin the chair now, the majority leader, Throughoutthisyear'songoing from New York (Mr. RANGEL). argued for that motion, pointing outdebate over how to address the fund- (Mr. RANGEL asked and was givento the House, in his usual eloquenceing problems facing the social security permission to revise and extend his re•and not uncertain terms, that with thesystem, the administration has paid marks.) approval of that motion, Membersvery little attention to the needs of (Mr. RANGEL addressed the House.would have the opportunity to votethe elderly, or to whether the benefits His remarks will appear hereafter inseparately to save the minimum bene•paid out by the system are adequate. the Extensions of Remarks.] fit under social security and then goIf there had been concern over the Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, I yieldon to vote for the reconciliation legis-economic security of elderly Amen. such time as he may consume to thelation if they chose to do so. cans, then the President would never gentleman from California (Mr. LAGO- Now, there have been suggestionshave proposed drastic benefit reduc- MARSINO). that the gentleman from Florida hastions back in May, and we would not (Mr. LAGOMARSINO asked andbeen partisan in his remarks. The gen-be here today having to fight to re- was given permission to revise andtleman from Florida served in thestore a $122 per month for elderly extend his remarks.) CongresswhenthegreatHarrymen and women. Mr. LAGOMARSINO. Mr. Speaker,Truman was President of the United Irise in support of the conference I am glad that the conference report States, and I believe that Presidentat least restores the minimum benefit report. was accused of being partisan, too. Hefor those currently receiving it. We (Mr. LAGOMARSINO addressed thesaid he gave the Republicans whatevercan face the people at home over the House. His remarks will appear hereaf-the opposite of Heaven is, and theChristmas recess knowing that the ter in the Extensions of Remarks.] Presidentreplied—andthiscouldSocialSecurity Administrationwill Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, may Iapply to what Mr. PEPPERsaidtoday—not be sending out notices to 3 milliOn inquire as to how much time is left on"I don't give the Republicans (blank),retirees telling them that their bene- both sides? I just tell the truth about them and itfits will be cut. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr.sounds like (blank)." WRIGHT). The gentleman from Illinois Mr. PEPPER told the exact truth But we draw the line here. We are (Mr. R05TENK0w5KI) has 16 minutesabout what happened on that recon-not going to let the administration cut remaining, and the gentleman fromciliation occasion. The House was notbenefits for elderly Americans solely Texas (Mr. ARCHER) has 21 minutes re-faced with an up or down vote on rec-as a budgetary tool. maining. onciliation, take it or leave it, all of The conference report on social se- Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5the good things that some Memberscurity does not go as far as the House minutes of our time to the chairmanperceived in that motion and the bad;wanted it to go. But, it will prevent of the committee, the gentleman fromthe House was faced with a decision ofcurrent retirees from losing vital bene- Illinois (Mr. R05TENK0w5KI). dividing the question and voting indi-fits, and it does help address the sys- Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak-vidually on the social security ques-tem's financing problems in a way that er, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlemantion. And on that question a very par-will mean the least amount of disrup- from Indiana (Mr. JACOBS). tisan and party line vote ensued, mytion and distress for the country's el- Mr. JACOBS. Mr. Speaker, first Iparty lost on that vote and the mini-derly. For these reasons, I am gOing to want to express my gratitude to themum benefit was killed. support it. gentlemen of the conference commit- Reference has been made to the Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 tee who agreed at least—at least—toPresident's suggestion for a perma-minute to the gentleman from Califor- extend the deadline for the minimumnent solution to the social securitynia (Mr. ROU55ELOT). December 16',1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE H 9735 Mr.ROUSSELOT. Mr. Speaker, IIowa about how we can save social se-colleaguea to uport this conference just want to correct one thing. The im-curityIn the long term. Throughreport. I also aak my colleagues to join pression by the discussion here todayforums conducted in June throughoutme in keeping the fight going to pre- would lead you to believe that mythe SixthDistrict,through publicserve and save our social security Democratic colleagues, In the recon-meetingsIheldinAugust,andsystem. ciliationbill,had no reduction inthrough many valuable letters, I have Ms. OAKAR. Mr. Speaker, 1 chaIr social security benefits. They did. Andreceived helpful suggestions from mya task force for social security and ita it should be made very clear that theconstituents on how we can preservetreatment toward women,for the difference is one of degree on howour social security system in a fair andAging Committee. Every time we iave much of a decrease in future social se-even-handed manner. As a result, justcuts in social Becurity we especially curity benefits. .So I think it should bea few weeks ago I introduced threeaffect the poorest person in this coun- clear right now and here that the rec-bills which would save the systemtry—the older woman. Of course, older onciliation bill offered by the Demo.without hurting present and future re-men do not do too much better. cratic Party in this House, known astirees. Some of the first benefit cuts in the the Jones reconciliation bill, had re- My package of bills, Mr. Speaker,history of the system were made In ductions in social security benefits. Sowould include the following provisions:the budget resolution offered by this the difference is one of dollars. First, would preclude payment of alladnilnistratfon; $25 billion of benefita Mr. CONABLE. Mr. Speaker, willsocial security benefits to convictedwere taken away in an effort to bal- the gentleman yield? criminals: second, would increase theance the budget on the backs of the el- • Mr. ROUSSELOT. I yield to thecost-of-living adjustments by eitherderly and our disabled. The first step gentleman from New York. the rise in the CPI or the wage index,in, solving the problems of social secu- Mr. CONABLE. Mr.Speaker,Iwhichever is lower; and third, would would like to point out also that theredirect the system back toward itsrity is to removd the trust fund from minimum benefit Is being phased outoriginal purpose by financing hospitalthe unified budget so that no adminis- under the decision of the majority ininsurance from general revèrues. tration will be tempted to balancethe December of1977. The minimum Experts tell us that the retirementbudget by cutting social security bene- benefit was frozen as of that time andand survivors fund will come up shortfits, the second largest pot in the will phase out between now and theby an estimated $80.9 bfflion in thebudget. time the last recipient of the mini-next 5 years and that the system wifi With reference to this conference mum benefit dies. need $110.6 billion in the years 1987—report, I want to commend the gentle. Mr. ROUSSELOT. Then, actually,90. Thus, as best we can tell, social seman from Illinois for his efforts in re- the Democrats want to do that? curity will need about $191.5 billionstoring the minimum benefit for cur- Mr. CONABLE. They wanted tomore in 1981—90 in order to continuerent beneficiaries. In addition, the bifi phase it out, also, over a period ofpaying benefits. haa a positive addition by providing time. My social security package is pro-for .interfundborrowing for 1 year. Mr. ROUSSELOT. Oh, you wouldjected to save social security at. leastHowever, this version is far different not know that today, would you? $213 billion. I say at least because I amfrom our House version in one major Mr. PICKLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2referring only to my bills which ad-area, and I hope we do not deceive the minutes tothe gentlewoman fromdress the cost-of-living adjustmentsAmerican people into thinking that Ohio (Ms. OAKAR). and the funding of hospital Insurance.this bill restores the minimum benefit Mr. BEDELL. Mr. Speaker, will theAdditional savings would result fromtotally. gentlewoman yield? the elimination of social security bene- I am extremely disturbed by the in- Ms. OAKAR. I yield to the gentle-fits to prisoners—about $17 mfflion incomplete restoration of the minimum man from Iowa. 1982. benefit. Three million people will rest (Mr. BEDELL asked and was given I believe that my proposals addressmore easily at Christmas because they permission to revise and extend his re-both the short- and long-term prob-can be assured of their minimum bene- marks.) lems of the social security system. It isfit check, but 7,000 people coming on Mr. BEDELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise Innot a Band-Aid plan that will fix thethe rolls in January will not have a support of the conference report to ac-systemtemporarily.Rather,theseholiday. Who are these people? These company H.R. 4331, the social securitybills, if adopted, will assure financialpeople are mostly women, our mothers minimum benefit restoration bill.Istability at least through the nextandgrandmothers,anddisplaced want to commend the conferees ondecade. homemakers who have the nec'essary their hard work on this crucial matter. It is my feeling that once and fér aUnumber of quarters but because of We all realize that a social securitywe must solve the financial problemstheir low wages and intermittent work conference is never easy, and the seri-of our social Security system. In thepattern wifi not receive the current ous nature of the financial difficultiespast we have not been accurate in esti-minimum of $122 per month. These facing our social security system mademating the financial needs of thepeople also Include the disabled and this conference report very important.system and we have time and timewidowsandwidowersofeligible From the beginning, I have protest-again relied on raising taxes. I believespouses. They will be denied the mini- ed the administration's plan to elimi-that we do not have to resort to rais-mum. Their potential benefits will be natethe minimum benefit.Iaming taxes or significantly cutting bene-reduced an average $60 per month, al- pleased that the conference committeefits by accepting a plan that will clear-lowing them an income of only $720 a agreed to reverse repeal of the mini-ly restore the integrity to the systemyear mum benefit for current recipients.and build confidence in social security. This conference report falls flat of This action is a positive first step. By accepting the conféreñce. reportour. original Intent of complete resto- The conference, report before us au-on H.R. 4331, we are taking the firstration of the social security minimum thorizes interfund borrowing amongstep, a positive step in the right direc-benefit. Eighty-four thousand people all three social security trust fundstion. The restoration of the minimumwifi be denied the minimum benefit until December 31, 1982. This provi-benefit for current retirees will finallyduring 1982. For many people, the sion addresses the immediate short-put an end to the uncertainty that sominimum benefit Is their only source term financial problems of the socialmany retirees had to face during theof income. securIty system, but it is not a remedypast months. Today I am introducing a bill to re- for the long-range ills of the system. From the beginning, I felt that westore the minimum benefit to future The need remains clear and strong forshould not have inflicted such uncer-beneficiaries I am proud to have Sen- more substantive action. tainty and fear upon our elderly by in-ator PEPPER,ourmajority leader and In this regard, I have been doing aaction in this vital area. it has been aothersas major sponsors.IInvite lot of research and studying and talk-difficult fight in Congress, but I, forothers to cosponsor this bill to restore ing to my constituents in northwestone, am ready to do more. I urge mythe minimum benefit so that when we H 9736 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE December 16, '1981 returnwe truly restore the minimumtaking action to reverse one of the Mr.SKELTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise benefit. mistakes that was made in the recon-in support of the conference report ciliation bill. At that time .1 indIcatedwhich will restore the minimum social 0 1145 that this House was making a gravesecurity benefit to the 3 mIllion elder- Mr. CONABLE. Mr. Speaker, willmistake in taklnrthe action that It didly currently receiving It. This Is wel- the gentlewoman yield? and'I want to express my appreciationcome news, and 'certainly comes as a Ms. OAKAR. I yield to the gentle-to the House in helping the Presidentgreat Christmas present to the senior man from New York. undo the mistake that he made. citizens who were facing the prospect Mr. CONABLE. I thank the gentle- It is one thing when we say that weof losing this vital part of their Income woman for yielding. have to reform social security. It is an-within just a few weeks. I am curious If the bill adds cost-of-other thing to simply attempt to This conference report also provides living adjustments to the minimumreform in the name of reform by elimi-for interfund borrowing within the benefit which the gentlewoman is re-nating people who have been drawing• social security trust funds.This is a storing prospectively, because theresocial security for many years, theconcept which I have advocated in the has been no Increase in the minimumvery poor, the very low income people.past. benefit under the bill that the gentle- At that time, I voted against recon- Mr. Speaker, the most important woman's party passed In December ofciliation based primarily upon the fact 1977. provision of this conference report, Ms. OAKAR. I would love to re-that this body was making a gravehowever, remains to be the restoration spond to that about my party. mistake In following the lead of theof the minimum benefit. We cannot Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, 1 yieldPresident In arbitrarily and uniformlypull the rug out from under people such time as he may consume to thedisallowing people who had paid intowho have Worked out a lifestyle for gentleman from California (Mr. Rous-social security, albeit on a low-Incomethemselves based on a limited income szr.or). basis, and had been drawing social se-duringtheirretirement. Not only (Mr. ROUSSELOT asked and wascurity for many years. would this have been grossly unfair, It given permission to revise and extend I Want to say to the gentleman fromwould have been devastating to the his remarks.) Texas (Mr. PIcIa.E) and to the Mem-social security system which depends Mr. ROUSSELOT. Mr. Speaker, inbers from this side of the aisle that Ion the confidence of the people in reality there are two primary aspectsrealize that this would not have beenorder to Work at alL I had opposed the of H.R. 4331. One aspect deals withdone had It not been for the Insistenceelimination of the minimum benefit the short-term financing of the pro-of the Democratic Members of thefrom the beginning, and voted to re- gram; namely, the interfund borrow-House, and I think that the gentlemanstore the benefit this past July. Elimi- ing provision. deserves the appreciation of the oldnation of the minimum' benefit was a The other main aspect restores thepeople of this land. poor attempt to make the Government minimum benefit for those presently I would hope that, in the future, thisbooks look good on short notice, but It receiving It and for those who will beHouse will never again blindly followdid not work. The minimum benefit ,,,ellgible to receive the benefit throughany President, simpl3' because he maywas part of a contract that was made the end of thisyear. AlthoughIbe popular at the moment. It is our re-between the people and the Govern- cannot support the stopgap financingsponsibilitytoexamine and studyment and we should not, under any aspect of H.R. 4331, I do support theevery proposal before voting for It. Wecircumstances, deny this commItment restoration of the minimum benefit asdid not do. that In the reconciliationI continue to stand firm In my efforts provided by the conferees. bill. I would urge and plead with thoseof fiscal responsibility as I have In the We all know that changes will haveMembers, especially those from thepast, but I also intend to stand up for to be made in the social security pro-Republican side, who previously votedthe pact already made through the gram. Itis important that we giveto take avay these benefits from 3social security system with the people those who areaffected by thesemillion elderly Americans, to reverseof this country. changes time to adequately preparetheir position and correct their mis- We should be ever mindful that the for them. Itis my bellef that thetake, by voting for this conferenceintegrity of the social security system elimination of the minimum benefit inreport. should be kept intact—not only for the the Omnibus Reconciliation Act of The SPEAKER pro tempore. Theelderly, who depend, upon It, but for 1981 was too abrupt and unfair toChair will state that the gentlemanthose who are working and paying Into those who have come to reply uponfromIllinois(Mr.RosrErKowsKI),the system at the present time. They their minimum benefit as a supple-represented by the gentleman fromlook at what Is being done, and by re- mental source of Income. ChangingTexas (Mr. PICKLE), has 12 minutes re-storing this minimum benefit, they are the rules in midstream is poor policy.maining and that the gentleman frombeing reassured that we in Congress The prospective elimination of theTexas (Mr. ARCHER) has 15 mInutes re-intend to protect the integrity of the minimum benefit will make certainmaining. system. that beneficiaries will receive social se- Mr. PICKLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield Mr. PICKLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 curity benefits based on their actualsuch time as he may consume to theminute to the gentleman from North earnings record. Let me stress to mygentleman from Michigan (Mr.Carolina (Mr. FowrrAni). colleagues that even the prospectiveFORD). ('Mr. FOUNTAIN asked and was elimination of the minimum benefit (Mr. FORD of Michigan asked andgiven permission to revise' and extend will not adversely affect those howas given permission to revise andhis remarks.) would have received this benefit in theextend his remarks.) future. There is a Federal safety net Mr. FORD of MichIgan. Mr. Speak- Mr. FOUNTAIN. Mr. Speaker,I which provides for those low-incomeer, I rise in support of the conferencesimply want to associate myself with elderly in need. This social safety net those who have spoken in behalf of In my State of California consists ofreport. this conference report which restores potential payments and benefits under (Mr FORD of Michigan addressed'the minimum Social security benefits Federal SSI, State SSI supplements,the House. His remarks will appearto current recipients. I have always food stamps, and medicine. hereafter in the Extensions of Re-felt that the most precious crop we Mr. PICKLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1'marks.] grow in America Is our children, and minute to the gentleman from Georgia Mr. PICKLE. Mr Speaker, I yieldnext to them, so far as I am con- (Mr. JsmuNs), such time as he may consume to thecerned, the most precious human crop (Mr. JENKINS asked and was givengentleman from Missouri (Mr. SKzr.-we have left is our talented and expe perm1ssio to revise and extend his re-TON). rlenced reservoir of senior citizens. Un- marks.) (Mr. SKELTON asked and was givenfortunately, too many of them have Mr. JENKINS. Mr. Speaker. I ampermission to revise and extend his re-little to look forward to In a material very pleased that the House today ismarks.) way December 16,1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE 119737 Asthe gentleman from Georgia said,most of whom are not aware of theand our actions today In passing this I too voted against the reconciliationlaw as it exists today, most of whomconference report will avert that spec• proposal In large part because of .itsdo not know that on March 1 they willtre. Equally as disturbing would be the damaging effect upon some of ourno longer receive their checks, most ofsituation involved for those elderly senior citlens. whom will be shocked and it will havewho might not be notified in advance My desire to reduce expenditures,a devastating effect on their health, ifof the cutoff—and suddenly in April of excessive expenditures, has not dimln•not their lives, when they receive that1982 they do not receive their monthly Ished; but, it must be accomplished Innotice in this Christmas season. minimum benefit check. Passage of a reasonable manner. I sincerely hope I would urge the Members of thisthis conference report will avert that that in our efforts to provide a moreHouse to contemplate very seriouslytragedy as well. permanent structure for social secu-whether they vote for or against this Let us review the steps that lead us rity In the years that lie ahead, we willconference report, althoughit mayto where we are today. Shortly after do nothing to endanger these citizensnot be the alpha-omega, it may not bewe enacted the Budget Reconciliation whom we are now trying to protect.all we desire, it certainly is the best ofAct—I had the occasion to speak per- We cannot, we must not, let thema bad bargain and what it in fact ac•sonally with President Reagan in con- down now. complishes is the restoration of bene-junction with our consideration of the Older Americans, Americans whofits to those 3 million. tax cut bill. I told the President of my have worked hard all their lives in Mr. Speaker, I remember the vote ontotal opposition to his proposal as ap- support of their families, their com•the Budget Reconciliation Act. I votedproved by Congress which eliminated munities,andtheirNation,haveagainst it and opposed it vigorously be-the social security minimum benefit. I counteduponthesocialsecuritycause it called for the eliminating ofindicatedthatifhe would work system to supplement their incomes inthe minimum benefit. I have a person-toward the restoration of the mini- their later years. al interest in this matter, a special per-mum benefit—I would consider sup- The social security system is notsonal interest—the President of theporting his tax proposal. The Presi- withoutitsproblems—serious prob-United States called me and asked medent advised me that it was never his lems. But, this does not give us licenseto vote for his tax package and I said Iintention to harm the truly needy to change the rules in the middle ofwould if he would give considerationamong the minimum benefit recipients the game. to the restoration of those minimumand that he would work for the resto- .1 fully support the conference reportbenefits and he said he would protectration for these individuals. Based on which would restore the minimumthe truly needy. that pledge, I supported final paggage benefit for all those who are currently Shortly thereafter the. bill was intro•of the tax bill which is now law. receiving benefits. duced by the gentleman from Missouri Just days after this conversation, Additionally, this conference report(Mr. BOLtING), H.R. 4331, and waswhich did receive a great amount of would authorize interfund borrowingadopted virtually unanimously. Thenational attention, the House passed among social security trust funds, andvery same people who voted for thetheoriginalversionof H.R. 4331 that will give the Congress time toBudget Reconciliation Act which ter•which restored the minimum benefit find responsible and long-lasting solu-minated those benefits, reversed them-for all persons present and future. The tions to the long- and short-term prob-selves. They were given liberty to voteSenate, in a somewhat more deliberate lems in the system. for that measure. fashion, passed a modified version of Furthermore, the conference report Their consciences should not bethe legislation. The conference report makes other changes in social securityeased by their later vote on this meas-before us reflects the compromises which will, hopefully, aid the Socialure. I voted for the tax package and asstruck. After our action today—the Security Administration in reducingfar as I am concerned, the President'slegislation goes to the President for fraud and mismanagement which robscommitment will be completely ful-his signature. His approval will reflect rightful recipients of their benefits. filled, when he signs this bill into lawthe fulfillment of his commitment to Many ideas have been advanced asand completes the legislation saga of to how the socialsecurity systemthe minimum benefits for the elderly.me and to the American Ieople. It should be reformed to keep it finan- Mr. Speaker, no matter what wemay help to restore some faith among cially sound. This is an Issue whichmight feel about all of the provisionsour seniors who have been shattered of this conference report, I implore myby the actions of this administration will not go away, and a wide range of and Congress concerning social secu- solutions must be studied. colleagues to support final passage for we must end a nightmare for 3 millionrity. Let us use this legislation as a And in the long run, it will doubtless catalyst for more comprehensive social become necessary to change the bene-of our elderly citizens. The nightmare fit structure somewhat and to broadenbegan almost 6 months ago when Con-security reforms, which are desperate- the source of income for the social se-gress, at the direct request of thely needed. curity system to fulfillits require-President of the United States, voted Clearly, the most important provi- ments. for the Budget Reconciliation Actsion in this conference report is the Clearly, responsible changes must bewhich called for the elimination of therestoration of the minimum benefit made in social security to keep it actu-social security minimum benefit for allfor all those persons presently receiv- arially sound; but, we must also insurethose presently receiving it, effectiveing it. We are talking about 3 million that those who have paid into theon March 1, 1982. elderly, an overwhelming ma3ority of system continue to receive what they We then found ourselves in the un.whom are women. We are talking are entitled to. precedented position of being the firstabout hard-working men and women IfullysupportthisconferenceCongress in history to ever reducewho were in jobs which did not pay report, and I call upon the .Congress tosocial security benefits for currentthem a sufficient enough wage to work-diligently' andforthrightlybeneficiaries. Since that fateful day—allow them to contribute to social se- toward a sound ocial security system.these 3 million elderly—who I mightcurity in an amount that would at Mr. PICKLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2point out—are among the poorest ofleast, equal $122 a month. The mini- minutes to the gentleman from Newourelderlypopulation—havebeenmum benefit guarantees this level of York.(Mr. BIAGGI). anxiously watching events in Wash-income for these individuals. (Mr.BIAGGI asked and ''as givenington. They have also been living in .1 join with my colleagues who are permission to revise and extend his re-imminent fear of receiving the officiaiangered by the arbitrary cutoff date marks.) letter from the Social Security Admin•with respect to prospective benefici- Mr. BIAGGI. Mr. Speaker, contem•istration advising them of the cutoffaries but even this must be viewed in plate what occurs if this conferenceOf the minimum benefit. The thoughtperspective. I support the fact that fails today. The Social Security Ad•of that letter being sent out to 3 mu.theconferees exempted nuns and ministration is prepared to send outlionseniors—duringthe holidayothers who pledge to the vow of pover- notices to 3 million elderly citizens,season—was most distressing to me—ty for service from the language bar- H 9738 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE December'16 1981 ring any new minimum benefit recipi- Some of us would like our party toalso capable of supplementing retire- ents. It Is also Important to note thatbe clearer in its ideology from time toment income with work. the cutoff date for new recipients wastime, but the fact of the matter is par- On the same day that the House ap- to be November 1, 1981. Under thistisanship on this issue does at least re-proved the omnibus budget bill,it legislation, it is delayed until Januaryflect the differences in the two partiesvoted 404-20 to restore the minimum 1, 1982. and there is nothing to be ashamed ofbenefit completely, to both current Another Important provision In thishere. and future recipients.It did so by conference report isits rejection of passing H.R. 4331. theillproposed Senate agreement There is a difference. There was a which would not have restored thedifferent point of view on this side of Then, the Senate spent months de minimum benefit for those retireesthe aisle and it has been properly re-laying approval of H.R. 4331, trying to with Federal, State, or local pensionsflected.Partiesdo perform usefulfind ways in which to preserve cuts In which exceed $300 a month. Therefunctions. When a group of peoplesocial securitybenefits. While the was never any sensible justification fordoes not have anybody to stand up forSenatedallied,.thePresident an this and in reality, it smacked of dis-them and they need someone to standnounced in early September that he crimination and the conferees wereup for them, a party does perform astill wanted, to delay the 1982 cost-of wise to reject it. useful function. I am proud of myliving-adjustment (COLA). He did not I am an ardent supporter of the pro-party for what it has done on social se-explain, however, in what manner he visions dealing with Interfund borrow-curity and I am proud of the peopleplanned to delay the impact of infla- ing which are contained in this confer-who have made courageous votes ontion on the incomes ofrecipients ence report. Interfund borrowing Is es-this side of the aisle and I do notwhose COLA's were to be delayed. The sential and makes good commonsense.think we should bemoan the fact, Ipublic reaction was again so negative Two of the three social security trustsay to my dear friend from Newthat the President was forced to go on funds have operating surpluses—theJersey, that there have been partisantelevision, on September 24, to reas- one• that does not—Is the largest one,tones in this debate. It is merely a per-sure the public that he did not plan to the old-age and survivors fund. Inter-fect reflection of the differences in thecut benefits. fund borrowing will avert any inter•two parties, and if the gentlewoman is Once again, however, his allies In ruption in the providing of benefits.uncomfortable with the position ofthe Senate got to work, on doing just While I would have preferred a longerher party, which I sense she is, I thinkthat—cuttingbenefits.Whenthe period of• authority for interfund bor-all of us have a great deal of sympathySenate had approved its version of rowing, this is an Important first step.for that, but it does not in any way di-H.R. 4331, there were major cuts: The I commend the conferees for also re-minish or decrease that difference. monthly minimum was eliminated for Jecting the Senate provision which During the election campaign lastall future recipients; the minimum was would have limitedthe maximumyear, President Reagan made the fol-also eliminated for all curent recipi- family benefit for retirees and survi-lowing pledge to protect social securityents living outside the United States; vors to that applicable to families ofbenefits before the Aniertcan Associ-there was a discriminatory dollar-for- disabled individuals. According to ouration of Retired Persons: dollar cut in benefits for those persons distinguished chairman, this provision Any reform of the social security systemreceiving public service pensions over would have reduced benefits by somemust have one overriding goal—that the$300 a month, but not for anyone re- $3 bililon over the next 5 years pri-benefits' of those now receiving—or lookingceiving other kinds of pensions; the marily at the expense of families of in-forward to receiving—social security mustmaximum family benefit was lowered; sured deceased individuals wtth morebe protected, and that payments keep paceand social security taxes were to be de- than three dependents. with the cost of living. ducted from the first 6 months of sick Let us today put an end to one of Despite this pledge, virtually everypay. -the sorriest episodes in modern publlcproposal made by the President since The Senate version of H.R. 4331 was policy history. Let us remove a blackhe entered office has been an attemptin the true spirit of the administra- mark which blemishes the record ofto eliminate or cut back social securitytion—while proclaiming protection for the 97th Congress—namely that this isbenefits for millions of Americans.social security, It set about gutting it the first Congress in history to haveLast May, the President announced afor millions of Americans. The House ever voted to reduce social securitynumber of proposals that were aimedand Senate then had to have a confer- benefits for existing beneficiaries. Letat drastically reducing benefits. Theseence on H.R. 4331, to come up with us by voting for this conference reportincluded reducing the percentages ofcommon language. Yet the so-called begin the process of reestablishing thebenefits paid to early retirees, restrict-compromise violates the pledges made Congress as the true defenders of theing eligibility for disability benefits,by the President, time after time, social security system. Let us stopdelaying the annual costof-living-ad-before the Nation, to protect social se threatening its integrity and insteadjustment, taxing sick pay, placing acurity.Itdoessowithparticular work for its preservation and strength-cap on family benefits, and eliminat-impact on future recipients, by unfair- ening. ing the monthly minimum for bothly and abruptly eliminating the mini- Mr. PICKLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2current and future recipients. Despitemum benefit for all new recipients minutes to the gentleman from Con-the overwhelmingly negative public re-after January 1, 1982—all of 2 weeks necticut (Mr. MoFTT). actions to this blatant attack on socialfrom now. Mr. MOFFETT. Mr. Speaker, somesecurity, the President and his allies This compromise, which we are con- of our colleagues have been bemoan-succeededin. pushing through thesidering today, will penalize the poor- ing the fact that there have been par-elimination of the monthly minimumest citizens of our society the most, tisan tones to the debate. I think therefor both current and future recipientsboth now and in the future. For what are some issues on which partisanshipas part of the omnibus reconciliationit means Is that starting in 2 weeks, we is not useful, but Ronald Reagan hasbudget bill last summer. Among otherwill no longer assure all retired Ameri- taught us that a party should standthings, the elimination of $122 month-cans that they will receive an absolute for something after all and that aly minimum would have severely cutminimum of $122 a month in social se- party should have an ideology, and itthe benefits of 3.1 million Americans,curity benefits. Instead, benefits will seehs to me that the Republicanof whom two-thirds were over the agebe based on what is called one's earn- Party,the minority partyinthisof 70, and 85 percent of whom wereings history. But what thisreally House, has been honing its ideologywomen. Morevér, 500,000 of these re-means is that those who have had the forthelast20 years and movingcipients were over the age of 80, andlowest salaries will be getting benefits toward a more conservative position,16,000 over the age of 95. Yet the ad-of $40 or $50 a month, rather than the and I think we should have respect forministration saw fit to try to slashcurrent minimum of $122. The $122 that, that the party does stand fortheir benefits. apparently on the pre-was the way in which we made sure something. sumption that anyone who Is alive isthat all retired Americans had some December 16,1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD HOUSE 119739 pitifullysmall mhiimum to support Mr. Speaker, it lB not enough that As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, them; $122 a month does not go a longwe have preserved minimum benefitswhen we look at the fact that we initi- way—it Is only- barely $4 a day. Yetforcurrent recipients—that shouldated just a couple of years ago the the Reagan administration anditsnever even have been an issue, but thelargest tax increase in the history of Senate supporters have now found an-President and the Senate made it one.this Nation, to fund social security, other way to punish those who areIt is not enough that we have prevent-and we see it has not done the job poor—by eliminating even this grosslyed other grossly unfair alterations inthen we know we have problems. inadequate minimum base for survival.benefit formulas. There is simply no I would like to commend the gentle- When we already know that tens ofdecent reason for the "compromise"man from Texas (Mr. PICKLE). He has thousands of our elderly eat pet food,that the House conferees agreed to,done an outstanding job. This commit- because they cannot afford real food,violating the trust that millions oftee has tried to do an outstanding job. it is a travesty and a disgrace to fur-Americans have in the social securityBut, Mr. Speaker, I think itis the ther impoverish and humiliate them. system. If we go through with theseheight of hypocrisy when the Commit- The elimination of the minimum asabrupt and unfair changes, which citi-tee on Ways and Means is in fact in- of January 1 also violates any sense ofzen will ever again have trust in thestructed by the majority leadership giving adequate warning to future re-supposed protections that social secu-not to bring a bill out to solve the tirees that a major cut in benefits wasrity, offers against poverty in old age?problemofsocialsecurity because impending. What are elderly Ameri-If we agree to these compromises, wethey want the political issue. cans near retirement supposed to do,will be further undermining the trust I think quite frankly that the Ameri• who were counting on the $122 mini-of Americans in their political system.can people should know that that is mum? Are they supposed to go out Mr. Speaker, we have seen that theexactly what we are hearing here and find a second job? How are they toPresident has no intention of living uptoday partisan rhetoric, not a solution. survive on $60 a month instead ofto his pledge to protect the social secu- Mr. PICKLE. Mr. Speaker. I yield $122? What kind of nation does this tority benefits of Americans. Because ofsuch time as he may consume to the its elderly poor? the Senate's delays, we are in the posi-gentlemanfrom New York,(Mr. Another utterly unfair cut in socialtion of accepting this punitive compro-PEY5ER). securitybenefitsinthisdistortedmise, or forever eliminating the mini- (Mr. PEYSER asked and was given mum benefit for all retirees. It is anpermission to revise and extend his re- "compromise" is the imposition of theunconscionable position for the House. socialsecurity tax on thefirst6 marks.) — months of sick pay. Is it not enough Mrs. FENWICK. Mr. Speaker, will Mr.PEYSER. I rise in support of that a person Is so ill that they cannotthe gentleman yield? the social security conference report. work? Do we really have to tax their Mr. MOFFETT. I yield to the gen-The Congress should be ashamed of sick pay? It is patently cruel to add totlewoman from New Jersey. the fact that it supported the adminis- the burdens of the seriously ill as the Mrs. FENWCK.Mr.Speaker, mytration's program to eliminate the 3 tax on sick pay does. charming young colleague— millionpersons who were covered Mr. MOFFE'IT. I thank the gentle- plan. The amount of money generated bywoman. under the minumum benefit these cuts is absolutely insignificant, Mrs. FENWICK (continuing). Is tooThese were the poor and the elderly. I compared to the total deficit of theyoung to remember, but I am not, thatam pleased that this action will re- social security system or the nationalthe father of social security in thisstorethe benefitstothese needy budget. Experts estimate that eliminaHouse was Republican Robert Win-people. tion of the minimum benefit will savethrop Kean, a Representative from Mr. Speaker, I am unhappy, howev- only $125 million a year. This com-New Jersey. er, that we did not leave the program pares to the $138 million we will spend Mr. MOFFETT, I thank the gentle-as it was orginally. After January 1, in fiscal year 1983 for golf, bowling,woman for that information. 1982,therewillbenoadditional softball, and tennis on military bases. Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2people eligible for the program. I hope Or the $102 million for military bands.minutes to the gentleman from Southin 1982 the Congress will address this Or the $12 a meal subsidy on everyCarolina (Mr. CAMPBELL). problem. meal at the officers' dining rooms at (Mr. CAMPBELL asked and was Mr. PICKLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 the Pentagon. Or the $60 billioi in taxgiven permission to revise nd extendminutes to the gentleman from Con- loopholes we gave corporations,his remarks.) necticut (Mr. RATCHFORD). through leasing of tax credits over the Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. Speaker, I am (Mr. RATCHFORD asked and was next few years. Those favoring thesedeeply disturbed asIlisten to thegiven permission to revise and extend cuts in benefits claim that this is nec-rhetoric that is coming forth concern-his remarks.) essaryto keep thesocialsecuritying social security. This issue is most Mr. RATCHFORD. Mr.Speaker, system solvent. Yet the amount ofimportant to all Americans, young and -what we find today is typical of the money to be saved is so small thatold.As we look at history and we seesometimes impossible choices at the major work will still be needed. But wethat when we initiate the system weend of any legislative session. General- have repeatedly refused to do awayhad 16 Americans paying for 1 retireely they focus on an area where the with tax loopholes that would yieldand today we have 3 paying for each 1choices are those that neither side more than enough funds to keep socialretiree, it does not take a mathemat-likes. We have that type of situation security solvent indefinitely—such asical genius to know that we have probtoday. the $12 billion a year tax gift given tolems. I cannot help recalling the earlier the oil companies in the Reagan tax When we look at the fact that backreference to an old movie series, the bill. How isit that we have enoughin the 1950's we initiated an early re-"Perils of Pauline." In that silent money to give the oil companies $12tirement program and that we indexedmove scenario, after much tension and billion a year, but not enough to pro-that later to inflation, it does not takehigh drama at the last moment the tect our elderly fropi the ravages ofa genius to know that we are drainingheroine was always saved. poverty and sickness? Think of it—wethe system. We engage in that type of saving will save $125 million a year by elimi- When we look at the fact that we lettoday, but I would say to those who nating the minimum benefit, while im-people, retire under another retire-participated in the drama that the posing severe hardship on the poorestment program and work a short periodhigh drama and tension really was not of our elderly. Our spending prioritiesof time and then become eligible tonecessary. That tension falls on those have become a disgrace. Is this thedraw minimum social security bene-who need it the least, the frail elderly. way in which the President fulfills hisfits—not the poor, but those who inIn this case, 3 million Americans in "overriding goal"—protecting thefact have money—and then at thattheir seventies, eighties, and nineties. benefits of afl current and future re-time drain the system from those who Let us look at a script. It did not cipients? need it, we know we have problems. begin with a previous administration, • H 9740. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE December16, 1.981 it beganwiththis administration, at (Mr. PICKLE asked and was givenal cent of tax revenues to pay for that the White House, with David Stock-permission to revise and extend his re-increase. It was an irresponsible act on man. It continued with the script thatmarks.) the part of this body and it helped was called Gramm-Latta. It continued Mr. PICKLE. Mr. Speaker, we arebring the social security trust funds to with a vote on reconciliation, andnearing the end of this debate withthe edge of bankruptcy later in th today I cannot find one Member whoonly one or two speakers remaining. decade. admitsthatwhenhevotedfor I would point out that there is very Only a few of us in this Chamber Gramm-Latta they voted to eliminategeneral agreement on the conference.today were present on that occasion, 3 million Americans on social security.I would hope we would receive afewer still may remember it. There unanimous or near unanimous vote onwere only 35 votes, including mine, 0 1200 this conference. against the motion. Well, now we are finally doing some- There are only two areas where If this one step had not been taken, thing about it. We are going to do thethere is some contention, that is in thethe system would not have faced the humane and right thing. We are goingquestion of the use of interfund bor-crisis that erupted in1977. But a to restore those benefits. rowing and the question of eliminatingmajor crisis did develop and Congrcs This,indeed,isthe only properprospectively the minimum benefit.again handled it inadequately. thing to do. A satisfied choice, no. I doBoth of these issues will be faced by Some of my Republican colleagues not like what we are doing to futurethe Congress a year from now when-and I offered a program that year to beneficiaries. I do not like a tax onever we address these problems. strengthen the system, not only finan- sick benefits. I do not like what we are The main thing to remember now iscially,butstructurally.The trust saying to those currently receivingthat we are in general agreement onfunds would have been placed on a benefits, because we are saying Gov-the overall purpose of this bill. This issounder basis over the short run and ernment,this Government,ispre-approved by the Social Security Ad-the long run and, importantly, the pared to cut those who have a con-ministrator, Mr. Svahn. equity of social security would have tract with the American Government; It is approved by the conferees. been improved dramatically; but that but the choice is ours and other op- Ithas the endorsement ofMr.proposal was dismissed almost out of tions do not exist at this late date. Wilbur Cohen, former Secretary ofhand by the same majority which con- To the Committee on Ways andHEW and HHS; Mr. Bill Driver, thetrols the House today. Means, I applaud your effort. It is theformer SSA Administrator, and of Instead, the Congress enacted the only proper thing to do. Let us be onRobert Ball, the former SSA Adminis-largest peacetime tax increase in our with it before we adjourn today. trator. history, and then President Carter and Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak- Ithink nearly allparties are in er, I yield 1 minute to the gentlemanagreement that this conference reportthe leaders of this body told the from New York (Mr. Dowy). should be adopted. As we adopt it, letNation they had made the social secu- (Mr. DOWNEY asked and was givenus be resolved that we will responsiblyrity system solvent for at least 25 permission to revise and extend his re-address the problems of the wholeyears. They were short by only 20 marks.) social security program next year—years. Mr. DOWNEY. Mr. Speaker, weand do the responsible thing and the When it became obvious recently to have learned a whole new politicalright thing for our elderly citizens. anyone who bothered to read the lexicon over the last few years. We Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, I yieldtrustees' reports that the trust funds have heard that a double dipper Ismyself 12 minutes. were going broke again, a new drive somebody who has earned the right to (Mr. ARCHER asked and was givenbegan to stabilize social security. A two pensions and is suddenly some-permission to revise and extend his re-leader in this effort was, and continues body to be looked upon as a graspingmarks.) to be, the chairman of our subcommit- and conniving selfish individual be- Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, over thetee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. cause they are concerned with theiryears too little time and attention hasPICKLE). retirement; that the whole notion ofbeen paid to social security and all of Under his leadership, the subcom- why we are here can only be stated inits complexities and ramifications bymittee made real progress, on a bi- one simple and clear way. One partythe Congress of the United States, de-partisan basis, toward a reasonable set views the people who had been receiv-spite the fact that it was growing to aof solutions to the myriad problems ing minimum benefits as the front linelevel where it is today only second tobesetting the system, reforms that are soldiers in the sacrifice for inflation.defense in the total number of dollarsfair to young as well as old Americans. Another party recognizes that govern-that flow out of Washington. Seekinghelpfromtheexecutive ments are organized to help people I think it is well today to briefly ex-branch, the chairman and some sub- and, indeed, the poorest of the poor toamine the history of the Congress andcommittee members, including me, put be able to fend over the high cost ofthe social security system over thestrong pressure on the administration living. past 15 years. Unfortunately, it is notto come up with its own proposal. I think that my party, as pointed outan attractive narrative in fiscalre- In response to this importuning, the by the gentleman from Connecticut,sponsibility. The latest chapter beingadministration did propose a compre- Mr. MOFFETT stands for something. Itwritten today does not Improve onhensive package. Not all of its provi- stands for the minimum benefit. Wethat record. Here are just a few of thesions were embraced enthusiastically would not be here today if we had notepisodes from the chronological factsby the subcommittee, the public, or by cut it originally, in my opinion, a vainin the Journal. Throughout all theme; but it did provide the framework and futile attempt to deal with Infla-years in which the Congress votedfor Congress to hammer out bipartisan tion by screwing the people who arebenefits to social security recipients,reforms. Unfortunately, we failed to least able to afford it. usually just before election time, thosetake advantage of that opportunity. Mr. ARCHER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1benefits on a cumulative basis far out- Mr. ROUSSELOT. Mr. Speaker, will minute to the gentleman from Newstripped advances in the cost of living.the gentleman yield? York (Mr. CoNABi). For example, over a 5-year span from Mr. ARCHER. I would be happy to Mr. CONABLE. Mr. Speaker, I have1968 to 1972, the Congress increasedyield to the gentleman from Califor no objection to people earning twobenefits nearly 72 percent across thenia. pensions, but it does seem to me thatboard at a time when the Consumer Mr. ROUSSELOT. So we could have when part of one pension is unearned,Price Index was rising at at a rate ofhad a reform bill here on the floor, they are th an odd position to say thatless than 5 percent per year. this session, because we were making we have earned our unearned benefits. In one of those years, 1972, the Con-progress in the subcommittee had the Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak-gress really outdid itself. It passed aDemocratic leadership decided other er, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman20-percent across-the-board Increase inwise? from Texas (Mr. PIcii). benefits, without providing 1 addItion- Mr. ARCHER. Absolutely. tiecembr 16,1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --HOUSE H9741 Mr.ROUSSELOT. And the chair- It seems clear that If the top leader-'be forcing ourselves precipitously to' man, the gentleman from Texas (Mr.ship of this body hadflot stood in thethe edge of a Social security default PIcKLE), as the gentleman has Indicat-way, our subcommittee would have alcliff. ed, has tried on avery bipartisan basisready completed markup, as the gen- to try to bring that to the floor, thetleman from California said, on a bi- a 1215 reform of the social security system. partisanbilladdressing the tough, We should be cOping with theSe Mr. ARCHER. Yes; the gentleman iscritical decisions needed now to stabi-Issues now, election year or not. correct. lize the social security system, short A responsible *hswer tosoclal ScurI- Mr. ROUSSELOT. To save it. and long term; and I am convincedty's core problems never will be found Mr. ARCHER. The gentleman is cor-that truly constructive social securitypainlessly. No construciive solution rect again. reform can occur only, through a bi-will be easier with the pasae of time. Now, at this point I should make itpartisan effort. I think we are kidding ourselves .on absolutely clear that the administra- But the House majority leadershipthis point. tion package, which addressed bothprecluded us from taking any steps short- and long-term social securityforward, and now thisconference.The device of Interfund borrowing is Issues, did not include a provision toreport will delay us even more. a tricky one which should not be used While the House was being strait-except as part of a larger, more com- eliminate the minimum benefit retro- socialsecurityreform spectively. jacketed by its leaders, the other bodyprehensive Mr. ROUSSELOT. Mr. Speaker, willpassed legislation which at best wouldpackage. Standing alone,ithas a the gentleman yield at that point? have postponed for about a year the"primrose path" aspect, wIththe po- Mr. ARCHER. I will be happy tobankruptcy ofthe system's majortential for luring us closer to the gen- yield. trust fund, the retirement fund.Ieral revenue financing trap. If we fall Mr. ROUSSELOT. The gentlemancannot say that they acted responsi-Intothat one,thesocialsecurity had better repeat that. I do not thinkbly, because at worst, their bill couldsystem falls with uS. we all understand that. have led to Irreparable damage by There are no general revenues, and Mr. ARCHER. The administrationpaving the way for general revenue fi-once the Treasury starts borrowing proposal, made at the Importuning ofnancing of social security. money to pay social security benefits, thesocialsecuritychairman and Because this Chamber did nothing,several consequences are' as Inevitable myself, did not include a provision tothe prospects for a satisfactory confer-as sunset. First,Interest rates and eliminate the minimum benefit retroence were grim from the very start.then the Inflation rate will start rising spectively. With the possibilities for action rang-again. Second, pressure will mount to That provision,which• originateding between zero and the pitiful pack-control benefit escalation through a neither In the Department of Healthage presented by the other body, thereneeds test. Third, social security as we and Human Services nor In the Socialsimply was no hope for a truly con-have known it will no longer exist;. it Security Administration, came to us-structivecompromise. will become just another set of welfare separately as one of many recommen The only way out on a reasonableprograms. dations In the budget reconciliationbasis for the conferees was to retain There is another major flaw In the bill. the minimum benefit f9r thoseal-conference report, Mr. Speaker. It has My views on this particular itemready receiving it, to eliminate it forto do with subjecting additional so- remain unchanged. Althoughitisthose coming on therollsIn thecalled sick-pay income to the social se- philosophically supportable, I thoughtfuture, and to do nothing else; to stripcurity tax. This Is a very complicated it was a bad idea In that context and I• all the Interfund borrowing out of theissue, with ramifications which we agreed with my colleagues on the subSbill and to strip the coverage of sickhave not yet even Identified, much lees committee that the minimum shouldpay out of the bill, and that was whatexamined. There have been no hear- be eliminated only on a prospectiveI urged in the conference committee.Ings on the subject, and it Is clear the basis. If we had done that, the Congressaction taken even exceeded the proper I emphasize that point, because thewould have had to bite the bulletscope of the conference. minimum benefit is not the problemwhich has been talked about so much. The SPEAKER pso tempore. The here today in this conference report.We would have been forced to taketime of the gentleman has expired. We have all agreed to restore It retromore definitive action within the next (By unanimous consent, Mr. Aaciiza actively, and if that were the only prornfew months. The Congress would notwas allowed to proceed for 1 addItional visioninthis conference report,Ihave been able to sidestep the crucialminute.) would support it. test any longer, because if nothing is But to get back to the chronologicaldone, the old age and survivors insur- Mr.ARCHER.Mr. Speaker, the record,the administration deservesance trust fund will run out of money,Senate bill covered "sick pay" paid di- credit for sending us a major reformstarting next fall, and the Congressrectly by the 'employer, but did not in- package on social security to preventnever would let that happen. It woulddude all "sick pay" covered by lnsir- its bankruptcy. simply have to act, and act now. ance companies. The conference agree- Unfortunately, that package was not Under the conference agreement,ment goes even further and includes an impetus in our deliberations, bethe problem can be swept again under"sick pay" covered by insurance com- cause the leadership of this body usedthe congressional rug, and so will endpanies, which Is normally less than the one feature of it, along with a fabricat-another sorry segment of the social se-average take-home pay of the employ- ed furor over the minimum benefit, tocurity story, because once again, theee, and now this conference report will turn the entire social security debateconferees asked us to make a decisionstrap on that employee another pay- into a namecalling, arm-waving sidefor purely political reasons. Instead ofroll deduction at a time when he can show. putting the interests of beneficiariesleast afford it. This Is not the answer In the midst of this unpleasantness,and taxpayers first, It Is clear that thisto the long-term or the short-term some of us have remained in lockstepconference report Is designed solely toproblems In social security. with the gentleman from Texas (Mr.get us through the next election. Let us not grind away at the vulner- PIcKLE), trying in vain to keep social The mostcompellingreasontoable worker In our haste to make a security in perspective. I think theoppose this measure is that it causesshow In this bill, but as elected oUt- chairman of the Committee on Waysus to lose almost a year of leadtime,cials let us find a thoughtful approach and Means, the gentleman from Illi-which we badly need to phase in someto truly reform the social security nois (Mr. R05TENK0w5KI) shares ourof the reforms we might elect to em-system and restore confidence In Its concern. I think he, too, would like tobrace. 1 doubt that anyone In thislong-term stability. address the full range of social secu-Chamber wants to act precipitously in I truly believe that if the conference rity issues responsibly and directly;making social security changes; yet bychanges become laW, we will consume but his hands also appear to be tied. failing to require action now, we willmuch time and effort In the future, H 9742 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD HOUSE eribei1c 0 trying to correct the mistakes we willdiaproportionate chare of the buroce©ty. b]I end' t.the other; be making today. of trying to balance thIs budget, bcdy never ntrioduced a bU Or ad- Forallof these reasons, Mr. 8peak• And let there be no mIstake whtvanced their own poSItion. er,I am opposed to the conferenceever that the so-called pckage of ollUcflr perhaoa, both sides were report on H.R. 4331. I know that I rep-forms that was offered to us earlie?corectLegsIattve1y,we ae wrong In resent a minority, and a very smallth1 year in the name of the admI1-not doing ometh1ng. I think we ought one at that. But the years ahead will-tratlonby Secretary Schwelker Iud ato just stop the finger-pointing and confirm the accuracy of my statement.Its primary and principal purpose r-get back to work neit ye_ Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak-ducing the deficit on the backs of the Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, the er. I yIeld 5 minutes to the gentlemansocialsecuritybeneficiaries.ThatSocial Security Adinin1atrtion Is send.. from Texas (Mr. WRIGHT) to concludepackage o so-called reforms wouMing socisecurIty checks to beneflcl- - debate. have reduced payments to sociJ secu-riewho are no longer lIvlng WhilO Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I rise inrity beefIcIar1es by some $70 billionTeaonab1 people nay argue over the support of the conference committeeover the next 5 years. Xth purpose w&sappropriate o1utIons to the general report. It evokes from me, as I think itrather cynically atated by the Directorproblems faced by the socIal security does from most of our Members, aof the Office, of Management andsystem,surelyeveryoie cn agree that combination of gratification and disap-Budget in the Atlantic Monthly &tIc1eoc1ai ecurfty benefit ckeckh are. too pointment. when he said: "preclou8 to be, paid to anyone but th We are gratified because at long It The social seewity prob'em s not 1mp1yUvng. we have been given an opportunity toone of satisfying actuaries; it Is one of Deceased benekIar1és receive socaI restore to some of the oldest and poor-fying the here nd now o budget requ3ecurlty checks because the SoIal Se- est and most politically defenselessments. curftyAd1nI2tratlon h no system. people in our society the benefits And then perhap$ the mo3t YUICtIc way of knowing when a person which were taken fromthem when wething of all revealed !n that artick;has died. Once n American goes on passed, almost sight unseen and Un-"despite the political uproar,"ftsaysth ocI1 securIty benefit rolla, he Is knowingly the document known ason page 45, "Stockman thought a com-all toø often likely to remain there Grannn-Latta II. promise would eventually emerge onwiles his death Is voluntarily report- We are disappointed, of course, be-social securty.' And I quQte from theed by hI relatives, the Po8talSerVlCe, cause even with this restoration towords attributed there to ML tcckthe funer home director or, if the de- those 3 million elderly Americans ofman: cdnt died Ii th course cf hospttI- the benefits that they had enjoyed I tll think we will recover a good de1 ofzation covered by medicare, br the ground from this .. Itwill permit the before they were taken away frompollticns to piske It look like they arehositaJl to tile Health Care Financing them by the GrammLatta proposi-doing ometh1ng for the beneficiary popula-Adm1n1traton, which In turn report8 tion. in exchange and as a pound oftion when they re doing something to utthe death to the Social Security Ad- flesh demanded by the other body, wewhich they normally would not have themnstraton. have had to deny future beneficiariescourage to undertake. ER. 5076, whIch the gentleman these same benefits and have had to I want to address myself to ope nils-fron Loui1na ifltroduced on Novem. require that those receiving sick payconceptJon. ber 20, 191 foi h2niaelf, 20 orIginal shall be taxed. There has been a tateient tothecosponsors, and 2 ddItioua1 cospon-. Probably the cruelest and most un-effectthat the majority leadership would have the 50 States 8bare feeling injury inflicted on the day thathas prevented the Ways nd Meanstheir death atatlEtics with:jthe Social. 'we passed Granirn-Latta II, a compen-Committee from biinglng to the floorSecurity Adm1nItration on a seinlan- dium of cruel and bloodless deeds writ-a bill which ou1d cure the probIenual b1s. Every State requires that ten by the Office of Management andof social security. That b ot true. Iea'th death 1b recorded, nd the nfor. Budget, was taking from these 3 milam the majority leader, I made no remation s retainedinaretrieval lion Americans this meager $122• astriction, nor uttered any such dIssystem thatis automated to some month benefit. couragement. But let me assure you9extent, except In the State of Arizona But let us not decide ourselves. Weso long as I may be the majorftyand the District of Columbia and the have not restored to those Americans,leader, I will doggone well try to useVirgthIs1aid. nor let them be deceived into thinkingwhatever Influence I may possess to A recent Investigation by the Office that we have, all the cruel things thatassure that we shall not,, under theof the InEpector General of the have been performed by this andmisbegotten name of reform, reducepartmént of Health and Human Serv- other deeds in this Congress, to the el-social security beneficiarez' paymentsices proves that the current piecemeal. derly of our land. that our elderly Americans have enUsystem of death notification is grosaly Students, children dependent upontied themselves to over a lifetime ofinadequate, and that State death rec- social security beneficiaries, have hadwork. orda must be made available to the theireducationalbenefitsstripped I am committed to the propositionSoIai Security Administration. The away. that we shall preserve nd protect theinvestigation, known a Project Spec Other retirees, military and civilian,integrity of the social securtty trusttre, has revealed about 8,500 cases have had their benefits reduced. Rail-fund,andthat we cn and shall dowhere medicare ecord3 showed a road retirees have suffered harsh re-this by means other than reducingperson was dead, but social security ductions in the benefits to which theybenefits. benefit checks kept going out. fiBS es- were entitled at the beginning of this This bill restores one of those bene-timates that over $60 million in bene- year. fits. It originated .in the House. It ws.sf itovraymentà—which counta8 Such programs as Meals on Wheelsdiluted In the SenateIt representadebitsciithesocial security trust for the elderly shut-ins have beenmovement in the right direction. It de-funds, whether or not the checks are harshly cut bythisGramni-Lattaserves to be supported. cashed will have been found when all proposition and by other reductions in Mr. PICKLE. Mr. Speaker, will theof these 8;500 cases have been fully in- programs to benefit the elderly of thisgentleman yield? vestigated. To date, however, the In. land. Mr. WRIGHT. I yield to the gentle-Spector General has , foundthat in Only a week ago we voted to takemanfromTexas. about 1,100 of these casea, checks to- $100 million from the funds that were Mr. PICKLE. Mr. Speaker, I, too,talling $14.3 million were 8ent to'de- available to administer social securityregret that we were not able to pro-ceased beneficiaries. HH$ pre8ently es benefits. ceed in the House and that the leader.timates that it will save $28 million—in So let us make no mistake about it.ship deferred for action to the Senate.• the fir8t year alone—once It rernovea Social security beneficiaries and theI equally regret that the Presidentthe xrnmes of the dead from the bene elderly of our country have borne anever formally sent to the Congress afit rolls. December 161981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE 119743 Whilethe loss of these millions Is Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to seeupon for basic existence. Even worse, disturbing enough, it should be re-that the House and Senate have takentheir checks were cut off as of October membered also that these figures doaction on the social security minimum1. not take into áccoltht the administra.benefit Issue. The move to eliminate The conference report we are faced tive costs and ptinthig costs of prlntthe minimum benefit, as contained inwith today restoresthis minimum Ing unnecessary checlth In the firstthe omnibus reconciliation bill, wasbenefit to those who had been receiv- place, mailing they checks, Investigat-something I opposed from the begin.ing it. But it does not offer a solution ing possible overpayments, recoveringning. which I can wholeheartedly support— overpayments, and handllhg and proc- My vote against final passage of thebecause it fails to continue the benefit essing checks that are returned byomnibus reconciliation bill was predi•for those retirees who turn 62 after conscientious survivors of the deceasedcated on my disagreements with var-December 31 of this year and members beneficiary. As the General Account-ious provisions in that bill to Includeof religious orders who turn 62 after ing Office has noted, in 1978 alonethe elimination of the social securityOctober 1, 1991. I am also disturbed by some 1.5 million benefit checks weremimimum benefit. I felt that in pass-the Senate amendment embodied in returned to and handled by the Socialing such a provision, the Congress wasthe conference report which makes Security Administration. violating a convenant between thethe first 6 months of sick pay subject The millions of dollars in overpay-Government and the citizens who re-to the social security tax—except for ments also do notreflect the frustra-ceive the minimum. worker compensation payments and tion of some diligent survivors who try To me, the social security, program,employee contributions to a sick pay to have the checks stopped by report-despite some shortcomings, is an idealplan. These limits betray the trust our ing the beneficiary's death, only tosocial program that has worked wellworking men and women have put in find that somehow this simple mes-since its beginning In the mid•1930's.their Government to live up to its part sage "does not compute": the checksThere is no question that we need toof the social security contract. keep coming. The gentleman has onemake some changes to the program to But I will vote for the conference constituent who, until last month, re-keep pace with the times. But thereport because itt is essential to contin- ceived benefit checks payable to hischanges should not be made in a piece-ue the benefit for present recipients. late mother, who passed away in 1973.meal fashion at the expense of thoseAlso, the conference report prudently After a number of attempts, both bywho receive tile benefits. authorizes interfund borrowing telephone and In writing, to have the As one who voted to restore thethrough December 1982 to Insure the checks stopped, the 100-plus checks—minimum benefit in late July, I feltfiscal viability of the social security noneof whichhad, been cashed,that we in the Congress, as representa-system until Congress acts on a more though each of which counted as atives of those who receive the mini-permanent solution to the social secu- "withdrawal" from the trust funds—mum benefit, could reverse ourselvesrity funding problem. were sent by.the gentleman's constitu-in the wake of what I consider to be It is my hope that when Congress ent and are in the process of being re-an oversight on the part of this body. • Mr. RODINO. Mr. Speaker, I thinktakes up this task in the near future, turned. By the way, these checks were the fate of our Nation's elderly will be in amounts ranging from $175 to $369it is shameful that we find it necessaryhandled with greater thought, com- and totalled thousands of dollars—justto consider this social security mini- for one person. mum benefit bill at all. The 3 millionpassion and consideration than it has Americans—most of them low-incomebeen during the months of contradic- There is only one place to attackelderly—who receive the $122 monthlytions put forth by the Reagan admin- this problem: at the source. We mustcheck should never have been cut offistration on the minimum benefit give the Social Security Administra-so senselessly by their Government. Issue. I hope that in the future the ad- tion the tools it needs to keep these LastJunetheadministration'sministration will be more sensitive to checks from going out in the firstbudget proposal eliminated thethe needs of our elderly citizens before place. A GAO report sums up the situ.monthly minimum benefit in the in-formulating its budget policies. ation nicely in its title: "Social Secu-terests of fiscal austerity. I strongly The monthly minimum benefit is rity Should Obtain and Use Stateobjected to this proposal as a cruelthe difference between starvation and Data to Verify Benefits for All Its Pro-and impractical way to balance thesubsistence for many older Americans, grams" (Report HRD-80--4, Octoberbudget. I pointed out that more thanand this conference report will correct 16, 1979). H.R. 5076 would accomplish500,000 people who receive the month-an injustice that was done them earli- this. Moreover, it would conlorm toly minimum benefit are over 80 yearser this year. I support it. At the same State laws that make death informa-old and rely almost exclusively on thetime, I look forward to full considera- tion private, In that it would amendprogram for survival. Also,a stafftion of the issues it leaves unresolved current law so as to allow, access to thestudy of the House Aging Committeefor providing a guaranteed social secu- State provided information only bypointed out that it would cost therity system for America's future.s close relatives of the decedent. • Government more money to eliminate Mrs. SCHNEIDER. Mr. Speaker, I Mr Speaker, the Social Security Ad-the minimum benefit than to leave itrise in strong support of the confer- ministration is diligently working onalone—because about 600,000 peopleence report to accompany H.R. 4331 this problem, which it discovered. Butwould be forced onto the welfare rolls.and urge its approval by the House. it needs the help of the Congress and Yet, the House rushed blindly into I have spok'n on the floor on many the States, just as it provides help topassing a reconciliation bill which em-occasions in the past concerning the the Congress and the States throughbodied the President's plan, and then,vital need to restore the $122 mini- the 70 million personal beneficiaryrealizing its folly, passed a separatemum social security benefit. In our files it gives to the States to help themresolution restoring the benefit. much-needed attempt to bring solven- administer progams like food stamps, Two months later, after millions ofcy and long-term health to the social medicaid, supplemental securityAmericans voicedtheir shock andsecurity trust funds, itis important Income, and aidfor families with de-anger at the administration's social se-that we examine approaches which do pendent children. curity cuts, President Reagan declarednot mean a reduction in benefits re- Let us complete the exchange of in-he .hadchanged his mind and wasceived by current recipients. This bill formation so as to assure the effectiveabandoning his proposal. The Senatewill correct the inequity caused earlier administration of all taxpayer-fundedthen passed a resolution partially re-this year in that regard. While this programs. Surely we are seeing onlystoring the monthly minimum benefit.report will not provide the minimum the tip of the iceberg in the $60 mil- Throughoutallthesetwists andbenefit for those entering the rolls lion In social security checks to theturns millions of elderly men andafter January 1, 198, it will bring dead discovered sofar. We cannotwomen endured the uncertainty of'notneeded relief to millions of recipients afford not to correct this most seriousknowing if they would receive thewho saw their benefits reduced. I, for problem. monthly benefit they had come to relyone, would like to include the question 'H 9744 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE December 16,1981 of a permanent minimum benefit fortionwhichcouldsodeleteriouslythecourage to allow a' major social se- new recipients as an item for debateaffect such a significant number of mycurity bill to be considered before the when the social security question isconstituency. I am now pleased that1982 elections. Lameduck Congresses addressed In a more comprehensivethe Conference Committee has electedhave never been a good environment manner In the next session. It is im-to recognize that retired public em-toconsider majorlegislation,and portant to remember that the vast ma- ployees have made contributions tothere is no indication that next year jority of minimum benefit recipientsthe social security system In the. samewill be any different. are older, widowed, or single women. manner as any other social security'There is another problem which is The committee's work with regard tobeneficiary and deserve thereby com-more difficult to define. The conferees Interfund borrowing is to be commend- mensurate benefits. added a Senate amendment which had ed as well. This will allow for a longer My specific concern on the publicthe laudable intention of balancing period of serious examination and employee offset provision by no meansrevenue loss to social security from re- debate over the social security systemdiminishes my interest and supportinstating the minimum benefit with -asa whole. It is unfortunate that thefor the restoration of social securitynew revenues derived from taxing for committee chose to include the first 6 'minimum benefits for currentsocial security certain sick pay bene- months of sick pay as income. While. beneficiaries. I have been an advocatefits. That is a good idea, but the House this move will recover a great deal ofof this critical social security benefithas had no hearings on the subject. the cost of restoration of the mini-program given thedemographicWe do not know the effect of the new mum benefit, I would like to includenature of the population affected. Ittax. We do not know who is affected. this as well in the more comprehensivehas been estimated that 75 percent ofThere are enough unanswered ques- review to come. the current 3 million beneficiaries aretions to make me very nervous about In short, this conference report rep-aged women, many of whom are olderthis feature of the bilL resents a reasonable and necessarythan 75. These are retired and dis- The bill reaffirms the Congress com- reaffirmation of this Nation's comthlt-abled women workers, or widows of re-mitment not to reduce the benefits of ment to a viable, equitable social secu-tired and disabled workers who needcurrent beneficiaries, by maintaining rity system and restores the faiththe benefit to survive. These are per-the minimum ,benefit for those indi- placed in the system by millions ofsons who have contributed substan-viduals who are currently receiving it. Americans who receive the minimum tially to the economic viability of thisThe bill also eliminates the social se- benefit. I strongly encourage a favora-country. I believe this Nation is suff i-curity minimum benefit for future ble vote. ciently wealthy to afford these per-beneficiaries. This will result in the • Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I rise tosons $122 per month in retirementbenefits of all future retirees being applaud the decision of the conferencebenefits so that they may maintaincomputed according to the same gen- committee'in sustaining the right of some dignity in the closing years oferal formula. It will also eliminate a all retired public employees to equaltheir lives. I applaud the conference.major revenue drain on the system's protection under our Federal social se-committee's recognition of this•finances which has been created by in- curity laws. The conference committee humane principa1. dividuals paying negligible amounts has selected to reject that provision in • Mr. FRENZEL. Mr. Speaker, the billinto the system, and receiving compar• the Senate bill which would have re-before us today represents another la-itively sizable benefits in return. quired an offset of. public employees'mentable chapter in the book of con- Today's bill, brings us one step closer socialsecurityminimumbenefitsgressional cowardice concerning theto a major social security financial dollar-f or-dollar if their civil servicesocial security system. crisis, without a comprehensive solu- pension exceeds $300amonth This This year,' the Congress had an op-tion. I do still, however, harbor some offset requirement would haveat-portunity, and an obligation, to makehope that the Congress will take the tached exclusively to retired, publicfundamental changes in the social senecessary steps to develop a compre. employees, and not private sector an-curity system in order to insure itshensivesocialsecurityrefinancing nuitants. . . long-termsOlvency. Instead, the Houseprogram, so that 35 million Americans I was particularly alarmed at the po. .majorityleadership, against all of thewho rely on social security for their tent jaladverse consequences which, advice of the most distthguished ex•retirement support, and the 117 mil• this inequitable provision could haveperts, inside and outside of Govern-lion who are paying into the system, had on many,of my constituents who 'ment, deliberately chose not to consid,will not have to live in fear of ever residein my congressional district.er any comprehensive social security The Third Congressional District ofrefinancing plan. losing their earned benefits. California includes the State capital of This meager bill is the only 'social se-• Mr. ALBOSTA. Mr. Speaker, one of California and the regional headquar-curity bill the leadership would allowthe most difficult and challenging ters of numerous Federal programs.to come to the floor, although severalIssues facing the Congress this year is Many of my constituents are retiredcomprehensive refinancing plans werereforming the social security system. public employees who have committed. proposed,andconsidered,bythe The Congress has a responsibility to their professional careers to servingSocial Security Subcommittee. I be-keep Its commitment to those who lieve the House has copped out. It hashave retired or are nearing retirement. these public agencies. Currently resid- We cannot back down from this com- ing in my, district are 11,417 constitu-refused to make social security secure.mitment and I am convinced that we , However,the, billis not a ,totally ents who receive Federal retirement will not. Furthermore, Congress will benefits.In . addition,Sacramento wasted effort, and does take care of a County has 1,716 county and 1,230 cityfew of the myriad of problems facingbe working in the months ahead to retired employees within its bounds.the social security system. For thatinsure that the social security system California has 21,551 retired State em-reason I shall vote for it even thoughremains solvent. Financial problems of ployees who receive both social secu-it does not do the full job. the long and short term must be ad- rity and State retirement benefits. De• The' bill extends interfund borrow-dressed. spite many inquiries to the Social' Se ing between the various social security No proposal has generated as much curityAdministration,Icould nottrust funds for another year. This willpublic debate and controversy as the obtainexactInformation on how help to delay the arrival of a majorproposed elimination of the minimum many of these individuals would havesocial security crisis for. a short time.benefit. The social security minimum been subject to this discriminatory And it has the advantage of forcingbenefit represents the sole income of provision, another decision at the end of theapproximately 3' million of the 36 mil- Given the potential harm of thisyear. Unfortunately,itWill put anlion social security recipients. This Senate provision on my district, I ad-even wore critical social security fi-minimum benefit provision, which was vised the chairman of the Ways andnancial crisis squarely in the lap of afirst enacted in 1939, is designed to in- Means Committee in early November lameduck Congress, as it is doubtfulcrease' retirement income for those that I could never s,upport any legisla-that the majority leadership will havewith low-wage histories and for those Decembr 16',1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H 9745 whoseemploymentwasprimarilyproposal would have been miniscule inport a compromise bill that granted before social security covered theircomparison to the human sufferingbenefits to future beneficiaries as well. work inthesystem's earlyyears.that would have resulted. In view of the fact that immediate Those persons who are now receiving I remain concerned, however, aboutsteps are required to restore the mini- the $122 monthly minimum benefitthe conferees' agreement to eliminatemum, I will cast my vote for H.R. 4331 are generally elderly women who didthe minimum benefit for older Amen-with these reservations and will con- not have an opportunity to work fullcans retiring after December 31, 1981.tinue to work for fuU restoration of time or earn a reasonable salary. MoreFor many of these retirees, the mini-the minimum benefit. than one-half of minimum benefit re-mum benefit could be their sole or pri-• Mr. NELLIGAN. Mr. Speaker, I will cipients are over 70 and more thanmary source of income. In this time ofvote in support of this conference 500,000 are over the age of 80. It isgrave economic instability and spiral-report on minimum benefits today, clear that the elimination of these in-ing thfiation rates, this monthly bene-but I feel it is only half a loaf. dividuals could only mean additionalfit could provide a smaU but importait I am very pleased that current mini- hardship. source of income for these retirees.mum benefit recipients and those that In addition to restoring the mini-Coupled with President Reagan's cutswill become eligible before the end of mum benefit for all current recipients,in programs to aid the elderly poor,this year will continue to receive the the conference report calls for interthe elimination of the minimum bene-benefit. fund borrowing. I have long supportedf it could bring severe hardship to this the concept of borrowing between thegroup of Americans. I am glad that the provisions the old age and retirement trust fund, the Despite my objection to this provi-Senate added to take away the mini- disability Insurance trust fund and thesion of the conference agreement, Imum benefit from certain Govern- health insurance trust fund. I believefeel that the bill before us is the bestment pensioners has been eliminated. this action Is necessary to help the re-possible compromise that could have And I believe that it is only appro- tirement trust fund through this timebeen reached by the House and Senatepriate and fair that members of reli- of great concern. conferees at this time. It addresses onegious orders continue to be covered by There have been many attacks onof my primary concerns, as weU as thethe minimum benefit, which they will the social security system, questioningconcerns of a majority of my Housebe under this legislation. it solvency. It distresses me greatlycoUeagues—.safeguarding social secu- This conference report has the fur- that so many Americans have beenrity minimum benefits for those nowther advantage of Insuring the short. caused tremendous and I might add,receiving them. I urge my colleaguesterm solvency of the social security unnecessary, anxiety over their socialto support the conference version ofsystem by allowing funds to be bor- security. My constituents of the 10ththis leglslation. rowed from the health and disability CongressionalDistriótof Michigan• Mr. BENNErr. Mr. Speaker, I risetrust funds for use in the hardpressed have contacted me expressing theirtoday to commend the members of theretirement fund. fear and anger regarding the proposalconference on H;R. 4331 for their These are the positive points in this to reduce and/or eliminate social secu-agreement on restoration of the mini-conference report, but I regret to say ritybenefits. Let thisaction heremum benefit for those persons cur-that there are at least two negative today send a clear signal to our citi-rently receiving it and for those eligi-points. zens that the Congress is reaffirmingble to receive it up to January 1, 1982. First, the minimum benefit will not its commitment to maintaining a f i- I think virtually all of us wouldbe continued for those coming onto nancially sound social security systemagreethattheminimumbenefitthe social security rolls next year and without cutting benefits. This actionshould be restored.Its eliminationthereafter. The 1977 social security should reassure all Americans, thosethrough the Omnibus Reconciliationlegislation already includes provisions working and those who are retired,Act of this summer caught most of usto aUow for the gradual phaseout of that the Congress is dedicated to re-by surprise, and put all of us in a posi-the minimum benefit. I oppose accel- solving the problems facing the socialtion we'd now like to reverse. erating this process. security system and that the Congres Immediately after passage of the Why should we dens' these benefits will continue to work toward thatOmnibus Reconciliation Act of 1981,almost overnight to thousands of de- •end In introduced H.R. 4212 to restore theserving people? I, myself, am particu- Mr. HEFrEL. Mr. Speaker, I riseminimum social security benefit tolarly concerned over the thousands of today In support of the conferencethose who are currently receiving ithomemakers who had the responsibili- version of H.R. 4331, concerning socialand to those who would have becomety of keeping house and raising fami- security minimum benefits for retir-eligible to receive it over the next 3lies, and who could not go out and ees.I am pleased that House andyears. I am certainly pleased that thework in the labor force for the years Senate conferees have reached anconference has brought us a part ofrequiredtoobtain more adequate agreement on this issue which is criti-what I recommended and I urge allsocial security benefits. cal to millions of older Americans. the Members of this body to vote in This conference report also allows The importance of retaining thefavor of it. for the first 6 months of sick leave to social security minimum benefit for Mr. HOLLENBECK. Mr. Speaker, Ibe taxed. I find it unfortunate that current retirees has prevailed in con-riseinsupport of theconferencethose who are struck by misfortune ference, and I am pleased that Senatereport on H.R. 4331, legislation restor-must be taxed. Why take from one conferees have followed the Houseing the minimum social security bene-needy group, the sick, to give to an- lead on this issue. The overwhelmingfit for all current recipients. other needygroup,the minimum House vote of 404 to 20 earlier this This action is necessary to insurebenefit recipients? year to retain these benefits fOr cur-that the 3 million Americans currently Mr. Speaker, I feel that I must vote rent retirees is evidence of the un-entitledtothe minimum benefit,for this conference report because the yielding support by the House for ourmany of whom have few. If any othergood outweighs the bad. If we do not Nation's senior citizens. sources of income, do not suffer unduepass this conference report, present AsfirstproposedbyPresidenthardship. minimum benefit recipients will lose Reagan earlier this year, elimination I am pleased that my colleagues onout, and that it is something I cannot of the minimum benefit for 3.1 miUionthe conference committee agreed tocondome. I feel it is important that we retirees who have come to dependabandon the Senate provision whichdo what we can now, but I hope that upon this small, monthly check fordiscriminated against the Federal re-legislation can be passed in the future their livelihood would have been antiree. However, as a past strong sup-to continue the minimum benefit for unconscionable act. The economic se-porteroflegislationrestoringtheprospective recipients curity of this segment of our Nation'sminimum benefit for everyone eligible, Equity must prevail. elderly population was at stake. Theboth present and future, I regret that• Ivir. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to cost savings from such a shorthightedmy colleagues did .not see fit to sup-voice my strong support in favor of H 9746 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD —HOUSE December 16', 1981 the conference report which accompa- The House conferees, under theseme, that consideration is of overriding nies H.R. 4331. If we do not today passcircumstances, made what I must con-importance; it is the principal reason I this report, then we will indeed be per-cede is the best compromise we canam supporting the conference agree- petrating a cruel hoax on the millionsexpect. The cut in family benefits wasment. of people who depend on receiving therejected, the minimum benefit was re- Requiring social security taxes to be minimumbenefit.Balancingthestoredforallcurrent beneficiariespaid on the first 6 months of sick pay budget at the expense of those whowithout 'exception,andborrowingsounds, at first blush, rather harsh. depend on this benefit is simply an un-among the three social security trustOn more careful analysis, however, it acceptable alternative. We in CongressfundswasProvided,'50thatallclearlyisa valuable protection for have an obligation to treat social secu-beneficiaries canrestassured thatwage earners. In short, while this pro- rity beneficiaries with the utmost oftheir benefit payments will continuevision exacts a price, it also offers a dignity and respect. without interruption. long-term benefit. Unless FICA taxes I would also add that the provision I very much regret that the Houseon income are paid, these wages will of this report which authorizes inter-conferees could not have gone further,be excluded when benefits are deter- fund borrowing between the OASIand held their position on restorationmined at time of retirement, disability, fund and the health and disability in-of the minimum benefit for futureor death. Including sick pay as regu- surance funds is both timely and, es-beneficiaries as well! But I do notlar, FICA-taxable income can be espe- sential if we are to maintain the short-think any better compromise can becially important for younger disabled term solvency of social security. In theexpected, even if we reject this reportworkers who are allowed fewer drop- long run, however, difficult decisionsnow and require and conferees to meetout years when benefits are computed must be made to protect the financialagain now or in January. onthebasisofaveragelifetime integrity of the entire social security I cannot in good conscience voteincomeS In short, treating sick pay as system. These efforts must be sincereagainst this report now, knowing thatincome now means countingitfor and bi-partisan. Social security is tooif no agreement is reached before webenefit purposes later, and that is a importanttotoo many peopletoadjourntoday, 3 millionelderlyplusforretireesanddisability simply be bandied about as a politicalAmericans will receive a notice on Jan-beneficiaries alike. football. uary 6, informing them of the loss of The bill includes another very im- • Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, we havetheir benefits in March. The sufferingportant feature: temporary authority before us today a conference agree-and confusion this would cause mustfor interfund borrowing. Thiswill ment onsocialsecurity minimumbe avoided at all costs and we must actallow the transfer of funds, as re- benefits that. does not completely re-now to remove all doubt from these el-quired, between the old age and survi- store those benefits. It does restorederly people's minds about whethervors trust fund, the disability trust them for the 3 million current recipi-their benefits will continue. It is forfund, and the hospital insurance trust ents, but those who become eligiblethis reason, and because I do not feelfund. This authority will assure ade- after this year will still lose the mini-any better solution will be reachedquate social security funds to pay mum benefit floor. I am not happylater, even if we delay; that I reluc-benefits at least through most of 1983. about this compromise, butIrisetantly support the• conference agree-This breathing space will give Con- today inreluctant support of thement. gress time to reassess the performance agreement, because 1 believe it is cru-• Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker,Iof the economy and make any addi- cial to restore benefits for the 3 mil-riseinsupportofthe conferencetional, long-term changes which may lion elderly poor citizens who havereport on H.R. 4331. I do so, not withbe necessary to carry the trust funds been held in cruel suspense since July,enthusiam, but out of a sense of real-through the 1980's and beyond. not knowing whether their benefits, inism, that this is the best we can do for Rather than chopping away at social manycasestheirsolesourceofthe• needy of our society under thesecurity benefit protection piecemeal, income, would be taken away fromReagan administration and in this dis-we, as a nation, need to reassess the them. passionate Congress. proper role of social security as a re- This conference report is not per- I do want to express my respect forflection of the economy and as a vital fect, and it is not what I would haveChairman PICKLE and the other Housepart of an overall retirement income wished to see; I would have preferredconferees on H.R. 4331 who held fastconcept. In the course of that reassess- to see the House hold firm on its posi-in opposition to the Senate's attemptment, a number of important ques- tion to restore the minimum for all re-to use the plight of minimum benefittions must be answered, including: cipients, both current and future. Therecipients as a weapon to force sub- annuity plansin House very properly reversed itself onstantial reductions in social security Are alternative eliminating this benefit last August, atbenefits to families. The Senate's pro-place if the role of social security is re- the very moment that we were finallyposed restrictions on restoration ofduced? approving the massive budget cuts inthe minimum benefit as wellas their Are those alternatives guaranteed the omnibus reconciliationbill. Weproposed cap on maximum familyand will they be adjusted for future recognized then, as I do now, thatbenefits was, in my opinion, a continu-changes in the cost of living? elimination of the minimum benefitation of overreaction to the adminis- What portion of our national retire- constituted the most blatant exampletration's scare tactics. Had these provi-mentincomeshouldbeadvance of balancing the budget at the expensesions received the thorough considera-funded, what portion pay-as-you-go? of the elderly poor, and we voted to re-tion they deservedin both bodies What percentage of the projected store the benefit completely. before approval, we would not be de-long-range deficitisattributable to The Senate, however, made exten-bating this legislation in the closingthe income replacement provisions of sive changes in ourbill, limiting resto-hours of this session of Congress. social security; what percentage is at- ration of the minimum benefit only to I voted for H.R. 4331 to completelytributable to anticipated future medi- some current beneficiaries, penalizingrestore the minimum benefit to bothcal care needs of our aging population? those current recipients with Govern-present and future retirees when the Should general revenue be used to ment pensions severely, and eliminat-House considered that measure onpartially finance benefits? ing the benefit for future benefici-July 31.Itismanifestly unfair to The answers to these questions will aries. Furthermore, as the price forreduce promised, benefits without pro-help us chart a responsible course for eventhis meagerrestoration,theviding time for people to adjust theirthe future of social security. Senate wanted to severely cut benefitsretirement plans. Although this con- Benefit reductions such as we have for families of retired and deceasedference report does not restoreallseen this year would not be necessary workers. In other words, they restoredminimum beneficiaries to their statusin a full employment economy. In- the minimum benefit for some currentquo, it does insure that present annu-creases in the already high rate of un- beneficiaries at the expense .of widowsitants will not face a cut in theiremployment will, in the near future, and children receiving family benefits.monthly checks on April 3, 1982. Tobring more pressurefor additional December 16, 1981 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H 9747 cuts in retirement and survivor income Mr. ROSTENKOWSKI. Mr. Speak- benfits, further reducing the protec-er, on that I demand the yeas andMitchell (MD) Roberts (KS) Staton Mitchell (NY) Roberts (SD) Stenholm tion for people in an increasingly un-nays. Moakley Robinson Stokes certain economy. The yeas and nays were ordered. Molfett Rodino Stratton The Congress needs time to evaluate Molinari Roe Studds The vote was taken by electronicMollohan Roemer Stump the economic picture and more care-device, and there were—yeas 412, naysMontgomery Rogers Swift fully assess the need for changes in10, not voting 11, as follows: Moore Rose Synar social security benefits or taxes with- Morrison Rosenthal Tauke (Roll No. 365] Murphy Rostenkowskj Tauzin out the threat of bankruptcy hanging YEAS—412 Murtha Roth Taylor over our heads. That is why the tem- Myers Roukema Thomas Addabbo Derrick Hatcher Napier porary financial solution offered byAkaka Derwinski Hawkins Roybal Traxler the conference agreement is Albosta Natcher Rudd tdall vitally Dickinson Heckler Neat Sabo vander Jagt necessary. I urge my colleagues to sup-•Alexander Dicks Hefner Nelligan Anderson Dingell Santini volkmer port this measure. Heftel Nelson Savage Wa]gren Andrews Dixon Hendon Nichols • Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, I am Annunzio Donnelly Hertel Sawyer Walker Anthony Nowak Scheuer Wampler both pleased and disappointed with Dorgan Hightower O'Brien Applegate Dornan Hiler Schneider Washington the outcome of the minimum social se-Ashbrook Oakar Schroeder Watkins Dowdy Hillis Oberstar Schulze curity benefit conference report. TheApin Downey Holland Waxman Obey Schumer Weaver minimumbenefit hasrightfullyAtkinson Dreler Hollenbeck Ottinger Badham Duncan Holt Seiberling Weber (MN) caused much concern during the past Oxley SensenbrennerWeber (OH) Bafalis Dunn Hopkins Panetta few months, ever since the administra- Bailey (MO) Dwyer Horton Shamansky Weiss Bailey (PA) Parris Shannon White tion first proposed to eliminate this Dymally Howard Pasháyan Sharp Whitehurst benefit forall Barnard Dyson Hoyer Patman current and futureBarnes Early Hubbard Shaw Whitley beneficiaries. By restoring the benefit Beard Eckart Patterson Shelby Whittaker Huckaby Pease Shumway Whitten for current beneficiaries until Decem- Bedell Edgar Rughes Pepper Beilenson Edwards (AL) Shuster Williams (OH) ber 31, the conference committee has Hunter Perkins Siljander Wilson Benedict Edwards (CA) Hutto Petri calmed some nerves—the nerves of Benjamin Edwards (OK) Simon Winu Hyde Peyser Skeen Wirth those who have been losing their mini-Bennett Emerson Ireland Pickle mum benefit and those nearing retire-Bereuer Emery Jacobs Skelton Wolf Bethune Porter Smith (AL) Wolpe English Jeffords Price ment who are unsure of what toBevill Erdahl Jeffries Smith (LA) Wortley expect at retirement. I will vote forBiaggi Pritchard Smith (NE) Wright Erlenborn Jenkins Pursell Smith (NJ) the conference report because it is aBingham Ertel Jone3 (NC) Wyden Blanchard Evans(DE) Quillen Smith (OR)' Wylie positive action. Jones (OK) Rahall Smith (PA) Yates Bliley Evans (GA) Jones (TN) Railsback Yet It is a limited, gutless action. It Boggs Evans (IA) Kastenmeier Snowe Yatron Rangel Snyder Young (AK) still leaves those future beneficiaries,Boland Evans (IN) Kázen Ratchford Boner Fary Kemp Solarz Young (FL) approximately 84,000 in total for 1982, Regula Solomon Young (MO) Bolkior Fa.scell Kildee Reuss hanging. Tertnination of the minimumBonker Fazio Spence zablocki Kindness Rhodes St Gerrriain zeferetti benefitmeansthat.elderlypoorBouquard Fenwick Kogovsek Bowen Richmond Stangeland beneficiariesbeginningin Ferraro Kramer Rinaldo Stanton JanuaryBreaux Fledler LaFalce 1982 will be forced to find some otherBrinkley Fields Lagomarsino NAYS—lO source of income, be it SSI or StateBrodhead Findley Lantos general assistance. Some 7,000 people,Brooks Fish Latta Archer Johnston Rousselot Broornfield Fithian Leach Crane, Daniel Lundine WU1ams (MT) mostly women, who would be coming Brown (CA) Flippo Leath Crane, Philip Mottl • on the rolls in January will be hitBrown (CO) Florlo LeBoutillier Oilman Paul hard. Some Christmas present. Brown (OH) Föglietta Lee NOT VOTING—li Broyhill Foley Lehman My colleague, Congresswoman MARYBurton. PhillipFord (MI) Lent AuCoin Dougherty Russo ROSE OAK.AR,isintroducing abillButler Ford (TN) Levitas BoIling Leland Trible today which calls for restoration ofByron Forsythe Lewis Burgener McDonald Vento Campbell Fountain Livingston Burton, John Moorhead theminimumbenefitforfutureCarman Fowler Loeffler beneficiaries. I strongly urge my col-Carney Frank Long (LA) 0 1230 leagues to join me in supporting thisChappell Frenzel Long (MD) Chapple Frost Lott The Clerk announced the following affirmative measure. Let us keep inCheney Fuqua Lowery (CA) pairs: mind we are tallçlng about individuals,Chisholm Garcia Lowry (WA) including the disabled, widows, widow-Clausen Gaydos Lu Jan On this vote: ers, displaced homemakers, who willClay GeJdenson Luken Mr. AuCoin and Mr. Leland for, with Mr. Clinger Gephardt Lungren Vento against. lose an average of $60 per month, leav-Coats Gibbons Madigan ing them with an income of $780 aCoelho Gingrich Markey Messrs..RANGEL,HILLIS,and year. These people have worked the Coleman Oinn Marks D'AMOURS changed their votes from Collins (IL) Glickman Marlenee necessary number of quarters, but be-Collins (TX) Ooldwater Marriott "nay" to "yea." cause of their low wages and Intermit- Conable Gonzalez Martin (IL) So (two-thirds having voted in favor tent work pattern will not receive the Conte Qoodling Martin (NC) thereof) the rules were suspended and current minimum of $122 per month—Coryers Gore Martin (NY) Corcoran Gradison Matsui the conference report was agreed to. unless we act. Recognizing this, I amCoughlln Gramm MatLox The resultof the vote was an- embarassed. I am humiliated and dis-Courter Gray Mavrouies nounced as above recorded. gusted. I only hope my colleagues willCoyne, James Green Mà7zoli recognize what this will mean to manyCoyne, WilliamGregg MClory A motion to reconsider was laid on Craig Grisham McCloskey the table. older citizensin1982, and in theCrockett Guartni McCoUurn Christmas spirit act to reinstate the D'Amours Gunderson McCurdy benefit for these deserving people.i Dan,el. Dan Hagedorn McDade paniel, R. W. Hall (OH) MCEWen The SPEAKER pro tempore. TheDanielson Hall, Ralph MoOrath question is on the motion offered byDannemeyer Hall, Barn McHugh Da8chle Hamilton McKinney the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Ros-Daub Hammerschmidt Mica TENK0w5KI) that the House suspend Davis Hance Michel the rules and agree to the conference de Ia Garza Hansen (ID) Mlkulskl report on the bill, H.R. 4331. Deckard Hansen,(UT) Miller (CA) Dellums I3arkin Miller (OH) The question was taken. DeNardls Hartnett Mineta

PUBLIC LAW 97-123—DEC. 29, 1981 95 STAT. 1659

Public Law 97—123 97th Congress An Act To amend the Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1981 to restore minimum benefits Dec. 29, 1981 under the Social Security Act. [HR. 4331] Beitenactedby the Senate andHou8e of Representatives of the United State8ofAmericain Congress assembkd, Social Security amendment. INTERFUND BORROWING SEcFION 1. (a)Section 201of the SocialSecurity Actis amended by42 USC 401. adding at the end thereof the following new subsection: "(lxi) if at anytimeprior to January1983the Managing Trustee determines that borrowmg authorized under this subsection is appro- priate in order to best meet the need for financing the benefit payments from the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund or the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund, the Managing Trustee may borrow such amounts as he determines to be appropri- ate from the other such Trust Fund, or from the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund established under section 1817, for transfer to42 USC 1395i. and deposit in the Trust Fund whose need for financing is involved. "(2) Iii any case where a loan has been made to a Trust Fund underInterest. paragraph (1), there shall be transferred from time to timer from the borrowing Trust Fund to the lending Trust Fund, interest with respect to the unrepaid balance of such loan at a rate equal to the rate which the lending Trust Fund would earn on the amount involved if the loan were an mvestment under subsection (d). "(3) if in any month after a loan has been made to a Trust Fund Repayments. under paragraph (1), the Managing Trustee determines that the assets of such Trust Fund are sufficient to permit repayment of all or part of any loans made to such Fund under paragraph (1), he shall make such repayments as he determines to be appropriate. "(4) The Board of Trustees shall make a timely report to theReport to Congress of any amounts transferred (including interest payments)Congress. under this subsection.". (b) Section 1817 of such Act is amended by adding at the end thereof42 USC 1395i. the following new subsection: "jXi) if at any time prior to January 1983 the Managing Trustee determines that borrowing authorized under this subsection is appro- priate in order to best meet the need for financing the benefit payments from the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund, the Managing Trustee may borrow such amounts as he determines to be apprqpriate from either the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insur- ance Trust Fund or the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund for transfer to and deposit in the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund. "(2) In any case where a loan has been made to the Federal HospitalInterest Insurance Prust Fund under paragraph (1), there shall be transferred from time to time, from such Trust Fund to the lending Trust Fund, interest with respect to the unrepaid balance of such loan at a rate equal to the rate which the lending Trust Fund would earn on the amount involved if the loan were an investment under subsection (c).

89—1390 — 82 (134) 95 STAT. 1660 PUBLIC LAW 97-123—DEC. 29, 1981

Repayments. "(3) If in any month afteraloan has been made to the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund under paragraph (1), the Managing Trustee determines that the assets of such Trust Fund are sufficient to permit repayment of all or part of any loans made to such Fund under paragraph (1), he shall make such repayments as he deter- mines to be appropriate. Report to "(4) The Board of Trustees shall make a timely report to the Congress. Congress of any amounts transferred (including interest payments) under this subsection.". Effective date. (c) The amendments made by this section shall be effective on the 42 USC 401 note.date of the enaCtment of this Act.

CONTINUATION OF MINIMUM BENEFITSFOREXISTING BENEFICIARIES

SEC.2.(a)(1) Section 215(aX5) of the Social Security Act (as amended Ante, p. 830. by section 2201 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981) is further amended— (A) in the first sentence, by striking out ",andthe table for determining primary insurance amounts and maximum family benefits contained m this section in December 1978 shall be modified as specified in paragraph (6)"; and (B) in the last sentence, by striking out ",modifiedby the application of paragraph (6),". (2) Section 215(a)(6)(A) of the Social Security Act (as added by section 2201 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981) is amended by striking out "The table of benefits" and all that follows down through "shall be extended" and inserting in lieu thereof the following "In applying the table of benefits in effect in December 1978 under this section for purposes of the last sentence of paragraph (4), such table, revised as provided by subsection (i), as applicable, shall be extended". (1) Section 215(0(7) of the Social Security Act (as amended by section 2201 of the Omnibus Budget Reconcffiation Act of 1981) is further amended— (1) by striking out the period at the end of the second sentence and inserting in lieu thereof ",and(effective January 1982) the recomputation shall be modified by the application of subsection (a)(6) where applicable."; and (2) by striking out the last sentence. (c) Section 215(i)(2)(A)(iii) of the Social Security Act (as amended by section 2201 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981) is further amended by inserting after "this title" the following: "and, with respect to a primary insurance amount determined under subsection (a)(1)(C)(i)(I) in the case of an individual to whom that subsection (as in effect in December 1981) applied, subject to the provisions of subsection (a)(1)(C)(i) and clauses (iv) and (v) of this subparagraph (as then in effect)". (d) Section 215(iX4) of the Social Security Act (as amended by section 2201 of the Omnibus Budet Reconciliation Act of 1981) is further amended by striking out',modifiedby the application of subsection (aX6)," each place it appears. (e) Section 202(q) of the Social Security Act (as amended by section Ante, p. 830. 2201 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981) is further amended— (1) in paragraph (4), by striking out "changed" and "change" each place they appear and inserting in lieu thereof "increased" and' mcrease' ,respectively; and PUBLIC LAW 97-123—DEC. 29, 1981 95 STAT. 1661 (2) in paragraph (10), by striking out "changed", "change", and "changes"each place they appear and inserting hilieuthereof "increased", "increase", and "increases", respectively. (f) Section 203(aX8) of the Social Security Act (as amended by section 2201 of the Omnibus Budet Reconciliation Act of 1981) isAnte, p. 830. furtheramended by striking out',modifiedby the application of section 215(aX6),". (g) Section 217(bXl) of the Social Security Act (as amended by section 2201 of the Omnibus Budet Reconciliation Act of 1981) is further amended by striking out', and as modified by the applica- tion of section 215(aX6),". (h) Section 1622 of the Social Security Act (as added by section 2201Repeal. of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981) is repealedAnte, p. 830. (i) Subsection (e) of section 2201 of the Omnibus Budget Reconcili-42 USC 415 note. ationAct of 1981 is repealed. Ante, p. 830. (j)(1) Subsection (Ii) of section 2201 of the Omnibus Budget Recon-42 USC 1382 ciiation Act of 1981 is repealed, effective September 1, 1981. note. (2) Except as provided in paragraphs (3) and (4), the amendments 42 USC 415 note. made by section 2201 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 (other than subsection (f) thereof), together with the amend- menta made by the preceding subsections of this section, shall apply with respect to benefita for months after December 1981; and the amendment made by subsection (f) of such section 2201 shall apply with respect to deaths occurring after December 1981. (3) Such aniendmenta shall not apply— (A) in the case of an old-age insurance benefit, if the individual who is entitled to such benefit first became eligible (as defined in section 215(a)(3XB) of the Social Security Act) for such benefit42 USC 415. before January 1982, (B) in the case of a disability insurance benefit, if the individual who is entitled to such benefit first became eligible (as so defined) for such benefit before January 1982, or attained age sixty-two before January 1982, (C) in the case of a wife's or husband's insurance benefit, or a child's insurance benefit based on the wages and self-employ- ment income of a living individual, if the individual on whose wages and self-employment income such benefit is based is entitled to an old-age or disability insurance benefit with respect to which such amendmenta do not apply, or (D) in the case ofa survivors insurance benefit, if the individual on whose wages and self-employment income such benefit is based died before January 1982, or dies in or after January 1982 and at the time of his death is eligible (as so defined) for an old- age or disability insurance benefit with respect to which such amendments do not apply. (4) In the case of an individual who is a member of a religious order (within the meaning of section 3121(rX2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954), or an autonomous subdivision of such order, whose26 USC 3121. members are required to take a vow of poverty, and which order or subdivision elected coverage under title II of the Social Security Act42 USC 401. before the date of the enactment of this Act, or who would be suc!i a member except that such individual is considered retired because of old age or total disability, paragraphs (2) and (3) shall appl7, except that each reference therein to "December 1981" or 'January 1982"shall be considered a reference to "December 1991" or "Janu- ary 1992", respectively. 95 STAT. 1662 PUBLIC LAW 97-123—DEC. 29, 1981

rENSION OF COVERAGETO FIRST SIXMONTHS OF SICK PAY 42 Usc 409. SEC. 3. (a) Clause (2) of section 209(b) of the Social Security Act is amended by inserting immediately after "sickness or accident dis- ability" the following: "(but, in the case of payments made to an emplqyee or any of his dependents, this clause shall exclude from the term wages' only payments which are received under a workmen's compensation law) (b)(1) Subparagraph (B) of section 3121(aX2) of the Internal Revenue 26 usc3121. Code of 1954 (defmmg wages for purposes of the Federal Insurance 26 USC 3126. Contributions Act) is amended to read as follows: "(B) sickness or accident disability (but, in the case of payments made to an employee or any of his dependents, this subparagraph shall exclude from the term 'wages' only payments which are received under a workmen's compensa- tion law), or". (2) Section 3 121(a) of such Code is further amended by adding at the end thereof (after and below paragraph (18)) the following new sentence: "Except as otherwise provided in regulations prescribed by the .Secretary, any third party which makes a payment included in wages solely by reason of the parenthetical matter contained in subpara- graph (B) of paragraph (2) shall be treated for purposes of this chapter 26 USC 3201 et andchapter 22 as the employer with respect to such wages." 26 USC 323 (c) Subsection (e) of section 3231 of such Code (defining compensa- 26 usc 3233 tion for purposes of the Railroad Retirement Tax Act) is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new paragraph: "(4)(A) For purposes of applying sections 3201(b) and 3221(b) (and so much of section 3211(a) as relates to the rates of the taxes imposed by sections 3101 and 3111), in the case of payments made to an employee or any of his dependents on account of sickness or accident disability, clause (i) of the second sentence of paragraph (1) shall exclude from the term 'compensation' only— "(i) payments which are received under a workmen's compensation law, and "(ii) benefits received under the Railroad Retirement Act 45 Usc 231t. of 1974. "(B) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for purposes of the sections specified in subparagraph (A), the term compen- sation' shall include benefits paid under section 2(a) of the 45 Usc 352. Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act for days of sickness, except to the extent that such sickness (as determined in accord- ance with standards prescribed by the Railroad Retirement Board) is the result of on-the-job injury. "(C) Under regilations prescribed by the Secretary, subpara- graphs (A) and (B) shall not apply to payments made after the expiration of a 6-month period comparable to the 6-month period described in section 3121(aX4). "(D) Except as otherwise provided in regulations prescribed by the Secretary, any third party which makes a payment included in compensation solely by reason of subparagraph (A) or (B) shall be treated for purposes of this chapter as the employer with respect to such compensation." 26 USC 3121 (d)(1) The regulations prescribed under the last sentence of section note. 3121(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, and the regulations USc 3121. UP prescribed under subparagraph (D) of section 3231(e)(4) of such Code, . shallprovide procedures under which, if (with respect to any em- ployee) the third party promptly— PUBLIC LAW 97-123—DEC. 29, 1981 95 STAT. 1663 (A) withhold8 the employee portion of the taxes involved, (B) deposits such portion under section 6302 of such Code, and 26 USC 6302. (C) notifies the employer of the amount of the wages or compensation involved, the employer (and not the third party) shall be liable for the employer portion of the taxes involved and for meeting the requirements of section 6051 of such Code (relating to receipts for employees) with respects to the wages or compensation involved. (2) For purposes of paragraph (1)— Definitions. (A) the term "employer" means the employer for whom serv- ices are normally rendered, (B) the term "taxes involved" means, in the case of any employee, the taxes under chapters 21 and 22 which are payable26 USC 3101 et solely'by reason of the parenthetical matter contained in subpar-seq., 3201 et seq. agraph (B) of section 3121(aX2) of such Code, or solely by reason of paragraph (4) of section 323 1(e) of such Code, and (C) the term "wages or compensation involved" means, in the case of any employee, wages or compensation with respect to which taxes described in subparagraph (B) are imposed. (e) For purposes of applying section 209 of the Social Security Act,26 USC 3121 section 3121(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, and section 3231(e) of such Code with respect to the parenthetical matter con- 409 tamed in section 209(bX2) of the Social Security Act or section 26 USC 3121 3121(aX2XB) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, or with respect to section 3231(eX4) of such Code (as the case may be), payments under a State temporary disability law shall be treated as remuneration for service. U) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no penalties or26 USC 3101 interest shall be assessed on account of any failure to make timelynote. payment of taxes, imposed by section 3101, 3111, 3201(b), 3211, or 8221(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 with respect to pay-26 USC 3101, ments made for the period beginning January 1, 1982, and ending 3201,3211, June 30, 1982, to the extent that such taxes are attributable to this section (or the amendments made by this section) and that such failure is due to reasonable cause and not to willful neglect. (gXl) Except as provided in paragraph (2), this section (and the26 USC 3121 amendments made by this section) shall apply to remuneration paid note. after December 31, 1981. (2) This section (and the amendments made by this section) shall not apply with respect to any payment made by a third party to an employee pursuant to a contractual relationship of an employer with such third party entered into before December 14, 1981, if— (A) coverage by such third party for the group in which such enployee falls ceases before March 1, 1982, and (B) no payment by such third party is made to such employee under such relationship after February 28,1982.

PENALTIESFOR MISUSE OFSOCIAL SECURiTY NUMBERS SEC. 4. (a) Section 208(g) of the Social Security Act is amended—42 USC 408. (1) by inserting "or for the purpose of obtaining anything of value from any person," before "or for any other purpose" in the matter preceding paragraph (1); and (2) by adding after paragraph (2) the following new paragraph: "(3) knowingly. alters a social security card issued by the Secretary, buys or sells a card that is, or purports to be, a card so issued, counterfeits a social security card, or possesaes a social 95 STAT. 1664 PUBLIC LAW 97-123—DEC. 29, 1981

security card or counterfeitsocialsecurity card with intent to sell or alter it; or". 42 Usc 408. (b) Section 208 of such Actisfurther amended by striking out "shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both" in the matter following subsection (h) and inserting in lieu thereof "shall be guilty of a felony and upon conviction thereof shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both". Effective date. (c) The amendments made by subsections (a) and (b) shall be 42 U5C 408 note.effective with respect to violation8 committed after the date of the enactment of this Act.

STATUTORY DEADLINE FOR IMPLEMENTING AFDC HOME HEALTH AIDE DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS SEC. 5. The last sentence of subsection (c)(2) of section 966 of the 42 Usc 632a. Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1980 (as added by section 2156 of the Ante, i. 802. Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981) is amended by inserting "with at least seven States" after "agreements".

INFORMATION WITH RFSPECT TO PRISONERS 42Usc 423. SEC. 6. Section 223(f) of the Social Security Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new paragraph: "(3) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 552a of title 5, United States Code, or any other provision of Federal or State law, any agency of the United States Government or of any State (or political subdivision thereof) shall make available to the Secretary, upon written request, the name and social security account number of any individual who is confined in a jail, prison, Or other penal institution or correctional facility under the jurisdiction of such agency, pursuant to his conviction of an offense which constituted a felony under applicable law, which the Secretary may require to carry out the provision8 of this subsection.". PUBLIC LAW 97-123—DEC. 29, 1981 95 STAT. 1665

REPORT TO CONGRESS SEc. 7. The Secretary of Health andHun,nServices shall report to the Congress within ninety days after the date of the enactment of this Act with respect to the actions being taken to prevent paymenta from being made under title II of the Social Security Act to deceased42 Usc 401. individuals, including to the extent possible the use of the death records available under the medicare program to screen the cash benefit rolls for such deceased individuals. Approved December 29, 1981.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—HR. 4331: HOUSE REPORT No. 97-409 (comm. of conference). CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 127 (1981): July 31, considered and passed House. July 31, Oct. 14, 15, considered and passed Senate, amended. Dec. 15, Senate agreed to conference report. Dec. 16, House agreed to conference report. WEEKLY COMPILATION OF PRESIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS, Vol. 17, No. 53(1981): Dec. 29, Presidential statement. 0

Dec. 29 / AdministrationofRonald Reagan, 1981

Social Security Legislation First, we must preserve the integrity of the trust funds and the basic social security Statement onSigningHR. 4331 Into Law. benefit structure. December 29, 1981 Second, we must eliminate abuses within the system and elements of the system I have signed into lawHR.4331, a bill which duplicate other programs, both of that substantially incorporates the social se-which could rob beneficiaries of their hard- curity changeswhich I urged in my addressearned benefits. of September 24 to the Nation—restoration Third, we must hold down the tax burden of the minimum benefit for people receiv-on current and future workers. ing that benefit, and interfund borrowing to I believe in those principles, and Ithink tide the system over while the new Nation-thatagreatmajorityof the American al Commission on Social Security Reformpeople believe in them, too.

develops a bipartisan plan to achieve long- I believe in the social security system.I lasting solutions to social security's financing believe thatitwill survive and keep its problems. -promise to this generation of beneficiaries I commend the Congress for its action onand those to come. this bill, especially the chairmen and mem- bers of the House Committee on Ways andNole: As enacted, H.R. 4331 is Public Law Means and Senate Committee on Finance. 9 7—123, approted December 29. Thereisno more important domestic issue on which we have to have a national consensus than social security, because it af- fects just about all of us either as current beneficiaries or current taxpayers. Continu- ingtheminimumbenefitforpresent beneficiaries reflects a bipartisan consensus, which I strongly support. We all know that interfund borrowing is just a temporary solution to the financing difficulties ahead for social security, which are real and serious. The bill authorizes in- terfund borrowing until the end of 1982, the same time the new National Commis- sion on Social Security Reform is scheduled to report its recommendations. I am determined that we put social secu- rity back on a sound financial footing and restore the confidence and peace of mind of the American public in its social security system. That is the reason for the National Commission which I proposed in Septem- ber and the members of which Majority Leader Baker, Speaker O'Neill, and I have just selected. I am confident that after they have reviewed all the options and agreed on a plan to assure the fiscal integrity of social security, the administration and the Congress will work together swiftly to enact legislation to restore the financial soundness of the social security system. I believe that we should build any social securityrescue plan around threevery basic principles:

1426

Restoration of Certain Minimum Benefits and other OASDI Program Changes: Legislative History and Summary of Provisions

by John A. Svahn

Reprinted from the Social Security Bulletin,March1982 Social Security Administration U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES SSAPublication No. I 3-I 1700

Restoration of Certain Minimum Benefits and Other OASDI Program Changes: Legislative History and Summary of Pirovisions by John A. Svahn*

The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 (Public Law 97—35),enactedon August 13, 1981, contained a provision to eliminate the minimum-benefit provision under the Socialecu- rity program for both current and future beneficiaries. Al- though a large majority of the members of both Houses of Congress accepted the measure in the broad context of the Rec- onciliation Act, there was considerable reaction against it and the provision was reconsidered. On December 29, 1981, new legislation restored the minimum benefit for current, but not future, beneficiaries. To lessen the cash-flow problems of the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) program, Public Law 97—123 also authorizes borrowing among the several trust funds and calls for the coverage, for Social Security tax and benefit purposes, of sick pay during the first 6 months of nonwork. In this article, the Commissioner of Social Security traces the leg- islative development of these and other provisions contained in the new law. He points out that, although the added expendi- tures for minimum benefits ultimately will be offset by the cov- erage of sick pay, the net short-term effect of the two provi- sions will be higher program costs. The interfund borrowing provision, however, could permit the payment of benefits on a timely basis throughout 1982 and the first 6 months of 1983.

Under the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of On December 29, 1981, President Reagan signed into 1981 (Public Law 97—35), enacted on August 13, 1981, law HR. 4331, a bill "to amend the Omnibus Budget persons initially becoming eligible for Social Security Reconciliation Act of 1981 to restore minimum benefits after October 1981 were to be entitled only to a wage- under the Social.Security Act" (Public Law 97—123). related benefit, not the regular minimum benefit,if The new legislation restores such benefits to those who higher. For all other beneficiaries, the minimum bene- became eligible for them before January 1982 and fit was similarly eliminated for months after February makes changes that will lessen the cash-flow problems 1982. Persons aged 60—64 whose benefits were reduced of the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund in under this provision and who would have been eligi- 1982. The major provisions of Public Law 97—123 are: ble for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments (1) Minimum benefit. The minimum benefit is re- had they been aged 65 or older were to be eligible for stored for persons who became eligible in 1981 a special SSI payment in an amount not to exceed the or earlier. The minimum benefit is eliminated difference between their newly reduced Social Security only for new beneficiaries—those who reach benefit and the amount that they had been receiving un- age 62 or become disabled after 1981 and the der prior law.' survivors of those who die after that year. — *Commisslonerof Social Security. However, under a special exception, the mini- lFordetails on the provisions of Public Law 97—35,seeJohn A. Svahn, "Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1981: Legislative History and mum benefit is retained for individuals eligible Summary of the OASDI and Medicare Provisions," Social Security after 1981 and before 11992 who are members of Bulletin,October 1981,pages 3—24. a religious order under a vow of poverty which

Social Security Bulletin, March 1982/Vol. 45, No. 3 3 had elected to be covered under Social Security note of the concern that the provision for the elimi- before December 29, 1981 (the date of enact- nation of the minimum benefit (which provision had ment). been enacted in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation (2) Interfund borrowing. The Old-Age and Survi- Act) may have affected some people who were, in fact, vors Insurance (OASI), Disability Insurance in financial need. He stated: "I am therefore asking (DI), and Hospital Insurance (HI) Trust Funds for restoration of the minimum payment and for are authorized to borrow from one another interfund borrowing as a temporary measure to give us through December 31, 1982 (with provision for some time to seek a permanent solution." The Presi- repayment with interest). dent also announced the establishment of a 15-member bipartisan commission—with five members nominated (3) Sick pay. Coverage as wages for Social Security by the House of Representatives, five by the Senate, tax and benefit purposes is provided for all sick and five appointed by him—to review the status of pay through the first 6 calendar months of non- work. Included are payments by insurance the OASDI program and make recommendations to as- companies and payments under State tempo- sure the financial integrity of the system. (This Nation- rary disability insurance laws (and under the al Commission on Social Security Reform, which was railroad temporary disability insurance pro- appointed on December 16, 1981, after final congres- gram). Any portion of such sickness benefits sional consideration of H.R. 4331, is due to submit its final report by December31, 1982.) paid for by employee contributions will not be covered. Action in the House of Representatives Background and Legislative History As noted earlier, on July 31, 1981, the House passed Throughout the first half of 1981, while the Omnibus (404 to 20) H.R. 4331, a bill to restore the minimum So- cial Security benefit as in effect before enactment of the Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 (Public Law 97—35) was under consideration, there was substantial discus- Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 (Public Law 97—35) for all current and future beneficiaries. The sion about the proposal to eliminate the Social Security minimum benefit, which was included in that legisla- House did not again consider major Social Security leg- tion. For example, Chairman Pickle of the Subcommit- islation until after Senate consideration of H.R. 4331. tee on Social Security of the House Ways and Means Committee introduced a bill (H.R. 3207) which would Action in the Senate have retained the minimum benefit for those on the The House-passed bill was sent to the Senate on July rolls, but not for future eligibles. In June, the Senate de- 31, where it was "held at the desk" so that it could be feated, by a vote of 53 to 45, a proposal by Senator Rie- called up for consideration at any time, rather than be- gle that would have retained the minimum benefit for ing referred to the Senate Finance Committee. those on the rolls. As briefly discussed in the October is- Senate Finance Committee action. On July 7, Secre- sue of the Social Security Bulletin,2 the House of Repre- tary of Health and Human Services Richard S. Schweik- sentatives passed oil July 31—the same day that it gave er testified before the Subcommittee on Social Security final approval to the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation and Income Maintenance Programs of the Senate Fi- Act of 1981—a bill (H.R. 4331) to fully restore the mini- nance Committee on the financial status of the OASDI mum Social Security benefit, not only for those on the program and on the Administration's long-range pro- rolls, but also for all future eligibles. posals. The Finance Committee held further public Also, as the time remaining for additional sub- hearings on July 9 and 10. Subsequently, on September stantial legislation in 1981 grew shorter, there was in- 23 and 24, the Committee met to discuss further the creasing interest in action to deal with the fact that overall financial status of the program and alternative the financing projections for Social Security contin- proposals which, with new legislation relating to the res- ued to show that the OASI Trust Fund would be un- toration of the minimum benefit, might at least main- able to meet its benefit obligations in a timely manner tain the near-term financial situation. In other words, it in late 1982. In September, the Senate Finance Commit- was believed that any increased cost arising from the tee held hearings to review the financial status of the restoration of the minimum-benefit provision should be program and alternative proposals for dealing with the met by other changes (either decreasing benefit outgo or long-range problems. In a nationwide address on Sep- increasing tax income, or both). teiiiber 24, President Reagan discussed the financial condition of the Social Security program and took

Thenames of Commission members appear on page I of the Janu- 2JohnA. Svahn, op.cii. ary 1982 issue of the Social Security Bulletin.

Social Security Bulletin, March 1982/Vol. 45, No. 3 On September 24, the Senate Finance Committee ap- pected to be passed very quickly. It was decided, how- proved (19 to 0) a Social Security package that pro- ever, that the Social Security changes would be drafted posed: in the form of a substitute for the House-passed provi- sions of H. R. 4331, the bill to restore the Social Security (1) Restoring the minimum benefit for persons eli- minimum benefit. gible before November 1981, except for those When the Senate took up H.R. 4331 on October 14, who were receiving Federal, State, or local gov- Senator Dole, Chairman of the Senate Finance Commit- ernment-employee pensions in excess of $300 a tee, offered the Committee's amendment as a complete month and those residing outside the United substitute for the House bill. The Senate accepted the States. Persons receiving government-employee Committee amendment by voice vote. In the course of pensions of more than $300 a month would the Senate floor debate, a number of additional propos- have been entitled to a Social Security benefit als and a substitute sick pay provision were agreed to. based on their actual covered earnings or, if As passed by the Senate (95 to 0) on October 15, H.R. larger, the minimum benefit reduced by the 4331 contained the following provisions in addition to amount by which their government-employee those agreed to by the Senate Finance Committee: pension exceeded $300. Also, entitlement to the minimum benefit would have been retained for (1) Extend Social Security coverage of sick pay. individuals eligible after October 1981 and be- Under a floor amendment, all sick pay paid fore November 1991 if they were covered under through the first 6 calendar months would have the 1972 provision which permits coverage of been covered, except payments under a State members of religious orders under a vow of temporary disability insurance law or workers' poverty, at the election of the order. compensation plan, or certain payments made (2) Reallocating Social Security taxes among the by insurance companies. OASI, DI, and HI Trust Funds to address the (2) Require the General Accounting Officeto short-range financing problems of the 1980's. study the management efficiency, employee productivity, and technical capacities of the So- (3) Providing authority for interfund borrowing between the OASI and DI Trust Funds as a fall- cial Security Administration. back measure. (The HI Trust Fund, however, (3) Require a new separate annual statement of re- would not have been permitted to borrow from quests for new budget authority, estimates of or lend to the OAS1 and DI Trust Funds.) Such outlays and revenues, and estimates of deficits authorization would have beeneffective only or surpluses for the Social Security trust funds. through December 31, 1990. (4) Require agencies of the U.S. Government or of (4) Extending Social Security coverage and taxes to any State or locality to release information nec- sick pay through the first 6 calendar months of essary to carry out the provision relating to the sick pay in certain cases (generally, when paid prohibition of payments to prisoners. directly by the employer under a plan and from (5) Require a report within 90 days on the opti- the regular wage and salary account of the em- mum system to improve the current "report of ployer). death" procedures. (5) Extendingthe disability maximum family bene- (6) Increase the maximum penalties for the misuse fit—iSO percentof the Primary Insurance of Social Security numbers and other Social Se- Amount (PIA), but not more than 85 percent curity related offenses. of average indexed monthly earnings (and not (7) Resolve that it is the sense of the Congress that less than 100 percent of PIA)—to retirement future legislative changes will not reduce the and survivor cases. OASDI benefits to which individuals are enti- tled in the month of enactment. Proposals somewhat similar to the last four of these provisions had been included in the Administration's (8) Require that Social Security cards be issued on tentative long-range package as announced on May l2. bank note-quality paper. Senate floor action. There was, in late September, (9) Require the establishment of at least seven some uncertainty as to the form that floor actionmight demonstration projects involving the use of take. For example, some thought was given to possibly AFDC recipients as home health aides. adding the Social Security proposals to other legislation, (10)Provide increased revenues for the Highway such as a bill to extend the debt ceiling, which was ex- Trust Fund (anunrelatedDepartment of SeeiohnA. Svahn, opcit., page6. Transportation matter).

Social Security Bulletin, March 1982/Vol. 45, No. 3 5 Subsequent Action in the Some House conferees took the position that (a) the House of Representatives repeal of the minimum benefit under Public Law 97—35 had simply been a mistake, (b) no "savings" should When H.R. 4331 was passed by the Senate and sent have been attributed to that change initially, and (c) back to the House of Representatives, the House did not therefore, no additional financing or offsetting reduc- immediately act on the bill and appoint conferees. In- tions in future benefits should be required to restore the stead, the House leadership and the Committee on minimum. (Restoration of the minimum benefit for cur- Ways and Means deliberated on whether there might be rent beneficiaries was expected to cost from $6 billion to support for adopting more far-reaching financing and $7 billion over the period 1982—86.) Some House con- benefit changes as part of H.R. 4331. On November 4, ferees thought that if the House accepted the Senate the Ways and Means Committee voted on several alter- proposal for sick-pay coverage (involving additional in- native approaches, as follows: come of, at most, $4.4 billion over the 5-year period) and yielded to the Senate with respect to elimination of (1) A proposal by Chairman Pickle of the Subcom- the minimum benefit for future beneficiaries, it should mittee on Social Security and Representative not also accept the Senate provision that would have Conable which would have (a) adjusted the dol- limited the amount of the maximum family benefit for lar bend points in the PIA benefit formula each families of workers who reached age 62 or who died be- yeir in 1983—85 by 50 percent (rather than 100 fore reaching age 62 in 1982 or later. Also, some House percent) of wage increases,5 (b) increased the conferees thought that it would be undesirable to in age of eligibility for full benefits from 65 to 67 dude in this bill financing or other measures that might over the period 1990—2000, and (c) based cost- reduce pressures for more lasting financing solutions in of-living increases on the lesser of wage or price 1982. increases, beginning in 1983. This proposal was On the other hand, the Senate conferees believed that defeated 18 to 14. they could not accept a bill partially restoring the mini- (2) A proposal by Representative Gradison to mum benefit unless it would leave the OASI and DI separate the operations of the Social Security Trust Funds in at least as strong a position as they trust funds from the unified budget. This pro- would have been in if the provision eliminating the mini- posal was defeated 18 to 15. mum benefit for those currently on the rolls and for fu- ture new eligibles were to have remained in effect. Be- Thus, the decision was to go to conference with the Sen- cause the additional revenues from the extension of cov- ate, on the basis of the complete restoration of the mini- erage to certain sick pay would not be sufficient over the mum benefit, as in H.R. 4331 as passed by the House of short range to cover the cost of restoration of the mini- Representatives in July. mum benefit for those on the rolls, they believed that Later on November 4, the House formally appointed some further limitation on family benefits for future conferees on H.R. 4331. They were instructed, under a cases over that in existing law should be included in the motion by Representative Conable (ranking minority bill. member on the Ways and Means Committee), to assure As time for action on the minimum benefit grew short that persons currently receiving Social Security would and as it was increasingly clear that, regardless of what not have their benefits reduced and to reject provisions actions were taken with respect to the maximum family relating to changes in Social Security tax allocations. benefit, the Congress would need to consider basic So- cialSecurity financing and benefit proposals soon again, the minimum-benefit issue took precedence over Action in House-Senate Conference the issue of the net short-range fiscal impact of the The Conference Committee on H.R. 4331 met on No- changes in H.R. 4331. The Senate conferees agreed to vember 4 and 16 and again on December 14, when it drop the proposed prospective lower maximum family reached agreement. Although the staffs of the House benefits for families of retired and deceased workers. Ways and Means and the Senate Finance Committees Another area of difficulty concerned the Senate- were active throughout November in seeking to work passed provisions for reallocation of OASDI-HI tax out compromises, the conferees were close to deadlock rates. Shortly after the reyised tax schedules had been over the extent to which the legislation should include adopted by the Senate Finance Committee (in the form measures to offset the cost of restoring the minimum later passed by the Senate), significant revisions in the benefit. cost estimates for the Hospital Insurance program were released. On the basis of these new estimates, the pro- posed revisions in the tax schedules would no longer be Thisapproach was similar to a May 1981 Administration pro- posal, except that the latter reduction woud have been effective in appropriate. Therefore, to overcome difficulties associ- 1982—87. SeeJohnA. Svahn, opciL,page6. ated with precise shifts in the tax-rate schedules, the

Social Security Bulletin, March 1982/Vol. 45, No. 3 Conference Committee agreed to drop the Senate pro- work as wages for Social Security tax and bene- vision relating to these schedules, and to include the fit purposes. Hospital Insurance Trust Fund in the provision for (4) Penalties for misuse of Social Security numbers interfund borrowing authority. Although in a tech- and other Social Security related offenses. An nical sense this agreement went somewhat beyond the increasein the maximum penalties for misuse scope of the conference, it was clearly in line with the of Social Security numbers and other Social Se- intent of the Senate bill and the instruction to the curity related offenses. House conferees. Thus, it was acceptable to the con- (5) Demonstrationprojects under section 1115. A ferees. During the conference, and later when this provi- requirementthat there be at least seven demon- sion was considered on the floor of both Houses, there stration projects involving the hiring of AFDC was discussion of the likelihood that the December 31, recipients to serve as home health aides, as au- 1982, termination date for the borrowing authority thorized under the Omnibus Reconciliation Act might lead to further financing legislation late in the sec- of 1980. ond session of the 97th Congress—possibly by a lame- duck, post-election session. (6) Informationto implement prisoner legislation. Once agreement was reached on the major benefit Authorizationfor Federal and State agencies to and financing aspects of the bill, and in the press of furnish information needed to implement the business of the concluding few days of the first session 1980 legislation limiting benefit payments to of the 97th Congress, the conferees moved quickly to re- certain prisoners. solve remaining differences, dropping a number of the (7) Reports of death. A requirement that the Secre- items that had been adopted on the Senate floor, but in- tary of Health and Human Services submit a cluding others. The final bill, as agreed to by the con- report within 90 days of enactment on ways to ferees on December 14, was passed by the Senate on De- improve current ''report of death" procedures. cember 15 (96 to 0) and, on December 16, by the House of Representatives (412 to 10). Thus, in its final form, The Conference Committee agreed to drop a number the bill contained the following provisions: of provisions that had been included in H.R. 4331 as passed by the Senate. The omitted provisions relate to a (1) Minimum benefit. Restoration of the minimum reduction in the maximum family benefit in OAS1 cases benefit for current beneficiaries. The minimum (to the maximum applicable for DI cases), revised tax- would be eliminated only for new benefici- rate allocations among the trust funds, issuance of aries—persons who reach age 62 or become dis- Social Security cards on banknote-quality paper, a abled before reaching age 62 after 1981 and the General Accounting Office study of the administrative survivors of those who die after that year (1991 capacity of the Social Security Administration, modi- in the case of certain persons under a vow of fication of budget accounting procedures for the trust poverty—as in the Senate version of the bill). funds, a resolution relating to future preservation of benefit rights for persons on the rolls when amend- (a) Since no current beneficiaries would be af- ments to the Social Security Act are enacted, and exten- fected, the provision to provide special SSI sion of excise taxes for the Highway Trust Fund. payments (under Public Law 97—35) was eliminated. (b) The Senate version of the bill would not have fully restored the minimum benefit Summary of Provisions for those receiving government-employee Restoration of Minimum Benefits pensions in excess of $300 a month or those residing outside the United States. These The new law restores the Social Security minimum provisions were dropped in the conference benefit for individuals who first became eligible for agreement. benefits (that is, attained age 62 or became disabled) be- fore January 1982 or whose benefits are based on a (2) Interfundborrowing.Authority for the OASI, worker's eligibility or death before January 1982. (With DI, and HI Trust Funds to borrow from one the restoration of the minimum benefit for current another through December 31, 1982 (with pro- beneficiaries, the special SSI payments for persons un- vision for repayment with interest). der age 65 providedunder Public Law 97—35, the Omni- (3) Sick pay. Coverage of all sick pay (other than bus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981, were eliminat- workers' compensation and sickness benefits ed.) Other persons will have their benefits computed on attributable to employee contributions) paid the basis of actual covered earnings with no minimum- through the first 6 calendar months of non- benefit provision (the method provided under Public

Social Security Bulletin, March 1982/Vol. 45, No. 3 7 Law 97—35). With respect to members of a religious or- road Retirement Tax Act to achieve a comparable result der under a vow of poverty which had elected to be cov- with respect to the taxation of sick pay under that Act. ered under Social Security before December 29, 1981 Payments under a workers' compensation law and (the date of enactment), the elimination of the minimum sick pay paid more than 6 calendar r.ionths after the em- benefit for future beneficiaries applies only to those ployee last worked will continue to be excluded from the who will become eligible after 1991. definition of wages, as under present law. Payments at- tributable to an employee's contributions to the plan will also be excluded. Interfund Borrowing The removal of the coverage exclusion is generally ef- fective with respect to remuneration paid after 1981. Public Law 97—123 authorizes borrowing among the The conferees recognized that the January 1, 1982, ef- Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund, the Disa- fective date could pose some difficulties for employers bility Insurance Trust Fund, and the Hospital Insurance and agreed therefore to provide that no penalties or in- Trust Fund until January 1983, whenever the Managing terest will be assessed for failure to make tim&y pay- Trustee6 determines that such borrowing is appropriate ments of taxes on sick pay paid between January 1 and to finance the benefit payments from the borrowing June 30, 1982, if the failure is not due to willful neglect. trust fund. The Conference Report states in this respect (Technically, the law specifies that such failure must be that "In no case shall such interfund borrowing make "due to reasonable cause and not to willful neglect" adjustments in the trust funds insuring benefit payments and the Conference Report fails to provide clarifying for a period more than 6 months beyond the date of language. However, a colloquy on the Senate floor be- such determination." tween Senators Dole and Heinz makes it clear that the Whenever borrowing occurs,the borrowing trust reference to "reasonable cause" was included inadvert- fund must pay the lending trust fund interest at a rate ently, that the conferees did not intend any burden on equal to that which the lending trust fund would have the employer to show reasonable cause, and that the earned if the monies loaned had been invested. Repay- only determinationtobe made (by the enforcing ment of principal is to be made whenever the Managing agency) was intended to be one of "willful neglect."8) Trustee determines that the assets of the borrowing trust Further, sick pay will not be taxed or credited for Social fund are sufficient to permit repayment of all or part of Security purposes if it is paid by a third party pursuant any loans outstanding. to a contract between the employer and the third party entered into before December 14,1981,if the third party's coverage for that employer's group ceases be- Coverage of Sick Pay fore March 1, 1982, and no payment is made to the em- Public Law 97—123 removes the exclusion from the ployee under the contract after February 28, 1982. definition of wages for tax and coverage purposes of certain sick pay under a plan or system through the first 6 calendar months that the employee is off work. It in- Penalties for Misuse of Social Security Cards cludes in the definition of wages those payments made Thenew law adds to the list of actions that constitute under a sick pay plan to an employee or dependent by a misuse of Social Security cards by making it unlawful to third party and payments under a State temporary dis- buy, sell, alter, or counterfeit a Social Security card or ability insurance law. In cases where a third party makes to possess a valid or counterfeit card with intent to sell the sick payments, the third party is liable for paying the or alter it. It also changes the classification of the crimes Social Security taxes and for reporting the payments for enumerated in section 208 of the Social Security Act (in- Social Security wage-record purposes; however, the law cluding misuse of Social Security cards and numbers) provides that third parties may be relieved of liability from misdemeanor to felony, increases the maximum for Social Security employer taxes on sick payments fine from $1,000 to $5,000, and increases the maximum under regulations to be prescribed by the Secretary of prison term from 1 year to 5years.The provision is ef- the Treasury. Under the prescribed regulations, liability fective with respect to violations committed after De- for the Social Security employer taxes would shift from cember29, 1981. the third party to the employer once the third party withheld and deposited the employee portion of the So- cial Security taxes and notified the employer of the Demonstration Projects Using AFDC amount of sick pay paid. The bill also amends the Rail- Recipients as Home Health Aides

6By law, the Board of Trustees consists of the Secretaries of Health This provision amends the Omnibus Reconciliation and Human Services, Treasury, and Labor, with the Secretary of he Act of 1980 (as previously amended by section 2156 of Treasury serving as the Managing Trustee. House Report No. 97—409, 97th Congress, page 10. 8Congressional Record, Dec. 151981, page 5.I 5279.

Social Security Bulletin, March 1982/Vol. 45, No. 3 ttle Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981) to re- Short-Range Implications quire the Secretary to enter into agreements with at least seven States for demonstration projects relating to the Thetables in this article summarize the estimated short-range financial effects of Public Law 97—123 training of AFDC recipients as home health aides by the Tables 1—3 show the estimated additional Old-Age, Sur- deadline of January 1,1982. vivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) benefit pay- ments and additional Old-Age, Survivors, Disability, and Hospital Insurance (OASDHI) tax income (result- Prisoners ing from the minimum benefit and sick-pay provisions) Federal,State, and local government agencies are re- under three alternative sets of assumptions—the Al- quired to make available to the Secretary of Health and ternative Il—B and "worst-case" assumptions of the Human Services the name and Social Security number 1981 Trustees Report and the assumptions underlying of any felon imprisoned under the jurisdiction of the the President's 1983 Budget. The 1983 Budget assump- agency whenever the Secretary requests, in writing,the tions are somewhat more optimistic than the Alternative information to carry out the provisions of section 223(f) Il—B assumptions of the 1981 Trustees Report over the of the Social Security Act concerning the suspension of period considered but are less optimistic than the Alter- benefits to certain imprisoned felons, effective Decem- native Il—A assumptions. As indicated, the combined ber29, 1981. effect of these two provisions is an estimated net loss to the trust funds of about $2.0 billion to $2.6 billion over the period 1982—86, depending on future economic con- Reportto Congress dition s. The estimated operations of the OASI, DI, and HI TheSecretary is required to report to the Congress by Trust Funds under Public Law 97—123 on the basis of March 29, 1982 (90 days after enactment) on actions the three sets of assumptions, taking account of the being taken to prevent the payment of Social Security maximum potential effects of interfund borrowing, are checks with respect to deceased individuals, including shown in tables 4—6. the use of death records available under the Medicare With regard to the operation of the interfund borrow- program. ing provision, it should be noted that such things as the specific loans, repayments, timing of interest payments, and so forth are largely at the Managing Trustee's dis- FinancialImplications of cretion. For purposes of illustration, the effect of a Public Law 97-123 PublicLaw 97—123 could have the effect of assuring, through the provision for interfund borrowing, that the Table1.—Estimatedshort-range financial effect of OASI Trust Fund (as well as the DI and HI Trust Public Law 97—123 on the basis of the Alternative11—B Funds) will be able to meet all benefit obligations on a assumptionsof the 1981 Trustees Report, 1982—86 timely basis throughout 1982 and for as much as the In miHiOlis] first 6 months of 1983. However, the legislation will re- . Calendar year sult in increased expenditures for minimum benefits that ToaI, will more than exceed the increase in revenues due to the 1982— ()ASI)l-H I pros ii0I1 982 983 1984 1985 1986 36 coverage of sick pay for a number of years into the future. Eventually, the additional revenues arising as a Add ito nal ()A SD Ihcu1eliI payrnen is res ult ng Fruni result of the legislation will exceed expenditures there- restoration (ii minimum under—by an average of about 0.02 percent of taxable benetitsor peron eligible For beneFits before 1982 93()$1275$1300$1,330$1,320$6.1 55 payroll over the 75-year valuation period. Additional OASDI and H The short-range financial status of the Social Security ix income resulting rum program, in summary, is adversely affected on a net coverageoF ri 6ii oiflh ot .ick Ieavc,elf-il su ra nce, basisby the combined effect of the minimum benefit prl a Ici nu ra nce, and and sick-pay provisions. However, it is in a better posi- iiia ndated public u ra nce tion on an overall basis when the restricted interfund henehI I1OL aLifihuLahie to . employee contributions 641 703 765 874 956 3939 borrowing isalso considered, because OASI benefit payments could continue for a longer period than under The removal oF the coverage excluioii Went into e11ei on Jan. 1, 1982. EsLirnte hOwn are based n ihe sun1pLiofl that substantial ta avoidance prior law. But the OASI Trust Fund is still expected to would occur as reuIL ul an accounting procedure involving the packaging ol be unable to meet benefit payments beginning after mid- sick py pla us wjth other Iorni oF p rotecIloil toward (he Cost of which the eni pl()e mv make a direct contribution. II10 tax avoidance were to take pIice. 1983, and additional corrective legislation is a necessity he IOLUI tax income Fur this provision is estimated to be $4.3 billion in 1982—86. in the near future. oi about0 percent greater than the e,tinile shown.

Social Security Bulletin, March 1982/Vol. 45, No. 3 9 "maximum" borrowing approach is included in tables 4 mit OASIbenefits tobe paid on time. After December through 6. 31, 1982, borrowing is no longer authorized and, under Lesser borrowing is also theoretically possible. Under this "minimum"approach,benefits for January or a "niinimum" borrowing approach, for example, the February 1983 could not be paid on time. OASITrustFundwouldborrow just the amount needed Under the "maximum"approach,in December 1982 at the beginning of any particular month in order toper- the Managing Trustee would make large transfers from the DI and HI Trust Funds to the OASI Trust Fund so Table 2.—Estimated short-range financial effect of that timely payment of OASI benefits could be made for Public Law 97—123 on the basis of the "Worst-case" as- the maximumperiodprescribed by the Conference Re- sumptions of the 1981 Trustees Report, 1982—86 port, as described previously. For the "maximum" ap- (In ntilliomisj proach, then, it is assumed that on December 31, 1982, the OASITrustFund wouldborrowsufficient amounts Calendar sear from the other two trust funds to permit timely payment Total, of benefits through June 3, 1983. 982— OASDI-HI provision 1982 1983 1984 985 1986 86 Table 4.—Estimated operations of the OASI, DI, and Audit innal ().ASI) Iheiiefit Pa iiiu'nis result tieroitt HITrustFunds under Public Law 97—123 (assuming I vOoration sif itt toni 11111 maximuminterfundborrowing) on the basis of the Al- benefitsor persons eligible fir benefits before 1982 $960$1330$1400$1,470$1,49056.660 ternative 11—B assumptions of the 1981 Trustees Report, 1980-90 Additional OASDI and HI

ui s invottie reuliine I rum . (Amounts itt billions( vu' cram' of first 6 niotolis 01 leave. sell-i UsC rut nyc, iris ate insurance. and Cutlettdutr year OASI DI OASDI HI OASDI-HI n.niilatecl public insurance bend itstot attributable to I 1,007 4,027 ennplunvev cutitrilnutiuins 641 698 776 905 Iticome

nit Jan. I.(982. The removal of the coverage cacluoun ivent into dIed 1981) $105.8 $13.9 $119.7 $26.1 $145.8 I lie assitniptiun that substa ntial tas as ondance oininates hioss n are based ott 98! (23.3 17.0 140.2 35.2 175.5 lie packaging ol 55 ilUiLl occur as a result oh an aecou ntiutg procedure involving 1982 (37.9 19.4 157.3 40.2 197.5 ivk punY plaits u iii other forms oh pruiecticiti to ard the cost oh svhiclt (lie ciii- 1983 147.3 27.7 174.9 45.! 220.0 pluvec nay make a direct vontrihutioti. If no tax avoidatice were to take place. 984 161.5 31.2 192.6 49.9 242.5 liv total tax itnyonue for this pros isiun is estimated to he $4.4 billion in (982—56. 9)15 83.0 39.8 222.7 56.6 279.3 Or a iou i0 percent g rca er t haiti he es tint ate how n. 986 198.8 44.7 243.5 65.7 309.2 987 2(4.2 49.6 263.8 71.2 335.0 1988 229.2 54.5 283.7 76.2 359.9 Table 3.—Estimated short-range financial effect of 1989 243.7 59.5 303.2 80.7 384.0 PublicLaw 97—123 on the basis of the assumptions (99(1 278.7 73.1 351.8 85.! 436.9 underlying the President's 1983 Budget, 1982—86 Outgo (Ittntilhiottsj

19811 $107.7 $15.9 $123.5 $25.6 $149.1 Caletidar year 1981 127.0 18.0 (45.0 30.6 175.5 1982 143(1 19.3 162.3 35.1 197.4 Total, (983 161.0 20.6 181.5 40.8 222.3 1982— 1984 180.0 22.2 202.2 47.3 249.5 (IASDI-HI pros isioti (982 (983 (983 985 (986 86 (985 20h).3 23.9 224.2 54.9 279.1 (986 220.8 25.7 246.5 63.2 309.6 .Aulsiitiunah OASDI benefit 1987 241.3 27.6 268.9 72.2 341.1 liutynients resultuigI roni 1988 261.4 29.8 291.2 81.8 373.0 restoration of ni inintuni 1989 280.6 31.9 312.4 91.7 404.1 Iscnnefni.or persons eligible 1991) 299.3 34.0 333.4 103.0 436.4 (or benefits before 1982 $930 $1250$12411$1215$1165$5,800 Net increase Additional OASDI and HI in futtds ta.\icutite resulting front coverage of first 6 months of

sick leave, self -itisurance, . (980 —$1.8 —$2.0 —$3.8 $0.5 —$3.3

private insurance, and 1981 — 3.7 — I. I — 4.7 4.7 — .1 niaiidated public insurance 1982 —5.2 .1 —5.0 5.! .1 betieiis not attributable to 1983 —(3.7 7.1 —6.6 4.3 —2.3 eitiplovee cottiributions I 63! 690 739 841 924 3.835 1984 —(8.6 9.0 —9,6 2.6 —7.0 (985 — 17.4 15.9 —1.5 1.7 .2 (986 — 22.1 19.! — 3.0 2.5 — .5 The removal of the coverage exclusion went into effect on Jan. I,1982. 1987 —27.2 22.0 —5.2 —.9 —6.1 Estimates showtt are based on the assumptioti that substantial tax avoidatice —7.5 would occur as a result of an accounting procedure itivolvitig the packaging uif 1988 —32.2 24.8 —5.6 — (3.! sick pay plans with other forms of protection toward the cost of which the em- (989 —36.9 27.6 —9.2 — 10.9 —20.! —17.9 .5 ployee ntay make a direct contribution. If no tax avoidatice were to take place, (990 —20.6 39.0 18.4 the total tax income for this provision is estimated to be $4.2 billioti in (982—86. or about 10 percent greater tItan the estimate shown. See fooltiote.s at cud ol table.

Social Security Bulletin, March 1982/Vol. 45, No.3 Table 4.—Estimated operations of the OASI, DI, and Table 5.—Estimated operations of the OASI, DI, and HI Trust Funds under Public Law 97—123 (assuming HI Trust Funds under Public Law 97-123 (assuming maximum interfund borrowing) on the basis of the Al- maximum interfund borrowing) on the basis of the ternative 11-B assumptions of the 1981 Trustees Report, "Worst-case" assumptions of the 1981 Trustees Report, 1980—90—Continued 1980—86 (Amountsin billionsj lAmounts in billions]

Calendar year OASI W OASDI HI OASDI—HI Calendaryear OASI Dl OASDI HI OASDI-n

Funds at end Income of year

1980 $105.8 $13.9 $119.7 $26. I $145.8 1980 $22.8 $3.6 $26.5 $13.7 $40.2 1981 122.8 17.0 139.8 35.2 175.0 1981 19.1 2.6 21.7 18.4 40.! 1982 145.1 18.8 163.9 33.6 197.5 1982 14.0 2.7 16.7 23.6 40.2 1983 143.9 27.3 171.2 44.5 215.7 1983 .3 9.8 10.1 27.9 37.9 1984 160.9 31.6 192.5 50.5 243.0 1984 —18.3 18.8 .5 30.5 31.0 1985 86.5 41.5 227.9 58.8 286.7 1985 —35.7 34.7 —1.0 32.2 31.2 1986 206.9 47.9 254.8 69.9 324.7 1986 —57.7 53.7 —4.0 34.8 30.7 33.8 24.6 1987 —84.9 75.7 —9.2 OuLgo 1988 —117.1 100.4 —16.7 28.2 11.5 1989 —154.0 128.1 —25.9 17.3 —8.6 1990 — 174.6 167.1 —7.5 —.6 —8.1 1980 $107.7 $15.9 $123.5 $25.6 $149.1 1981 127.0 18.0 145.0 30.6 75.5 1982 146.1 19.7 165.8 35.5 201.4 Assets at beginning of year 1983 169.7 21.7 191.4 41.8 233.2 as percentage of outgo during year 1984 194.5 23.8 218.4 49.5 267.8 1985 221.4 26.1 247.5 58.1 305.5 1980 23 35 25 52 29 1986 248.7 28.4 277.! 67.6 344.7 1981 18 20 18 45 23 13 52 20 1982 13 13 NeL increase in funds 1983 9 13 9 58 18 1984 (I) 5 59 15 1985 —9 79 (I) 56 II 1980 —$1.8 —$2.0 —$3.8 $0.5 —$3.3 1986 —16 135 () 51 10 1981 —4.2 —1.0 — 5.2 4.7 —.6 1987 —24 194 —2 48 9 1982 —1.0 —.9 —1.9 — .9 —3.9 1988 —32 254 —3 41 7 1983 —25.8 5.6 —20.2 2.7 — 7.5 1989 —42 315 —5 3! 3 1984 —33.6 7.8 — 25.8 1.0 —24.8 1990 —5! 376 —8 17 —2 1985 —34.9 15.4 — 19.5 .7 18.8 1986 —41.8 19.5 — 22.3 2.3 —20.0 Between 0 and 0.5 percent. 2 Between 0 and —0.5 percent. Funds at end of year Note.: (I) The income figures for 1982, and the end-of-year asset figures for 1982 and laLer, reFlect the transfer of $4.5 billion from the DI TrusL Fund to the 1980 $22.8 $3.6 $2o.S $13.7 S40.2 OASI Trust Fund under the niertund borrowing authority provided by P. L. 1981 18.6 2.6 21.2 18.4 39.6 97—12 3. 1982 17.6 1.7 19.3 16.5 35.7 (2) The estimated operations for OAS, OASDI, and toLal OASDI 1983 —8.2 7.3 — .9 19.1 18.2 and HI in 1983 and later are theoretical since, following the expiratoI1 of the 1984 —41.8 15.1 —26.7 present law interfund borrowing authority, the OASI Trust Fund would be- 20.2 —6.6 1985 —76.7 30.5 —46.2 20.8 — 2.4 come depleted in the second half of 1983 when assets become iiisufficent to pay 1986 — 118.6 50.0 — 68.6 23.1 — 45.5 benefits when due.

Assets at begin nine of year as percentage of outgo during year

Long-Range Implications 1980 23 35 29 52 29 1981 18 20 18 45 23 Over the 75-year projection period, average OASDI 1982 13 13 13 52 20 1983 10 8 l0 39 15 (I) expenditures as a percentage of taxable payroll are esti- 1984 —4 31 38 7 mated to decrease by 0.02 percent. This change repre- 1985 — 19 58 — II 35 —2 sents the combined effect of (1) higher expenditures due 1986 —31 107 —'7 3' —7 to the restoration of the minimum benefit for current I Between 0 and —0.5 pcrccnt. beneficiaries and to additional benefits arising from NoLes (I) The income tigures for 1982, and Lhe end-of-year asset Figures or coverage of sick pay and (2)anincrease in taxable pay- 1982 and later, reflect the rarsier of funds from the DI and HI Trust Funds io the OASI Trust Fund under Lhe I Lerund borrowing authortv proidcd by roll from the coverage of sick pay. On balance, the addi- P. L. 97—123. Under this set of assumptions, a total of $1 1.8 billion would be transkred to 0A51 in 1982, $5.2 billion from DI, and S6.6 hitlion troin HI. tional tax income would more than offset the additional (2) The estimated operations for OASI, OA5DI, and bLat OASDI benefit payments in the long run. The interfund borrow- and HI in 1983 and later are theoretical since, following Lhe expiration 01 he presenL law interfund borrowing authority, the OASI Trust Fund would be- ing authority would have no net effect on the long-range come depleted in Lhe second hatf of 1983 when assets become insuffkien to pay status of the OASDI program. benefits when due.

Social Security Bulletin, March 1982/Vol. 45, No. 3 11 Table 6.—Estimatedoperations of the OASI, DI, and Table 6.—Estimatedoperations of the OASI, DI, and HI Trust FundsunderPublic Law 97—123 (assuming HI Trust Funds under Public Law 97—123 (assuming maximum interfund borrowing) on the basis of the as- maximum interfund borrowing) on the basis of the as- sumptions underlying the President's 1983 Budget, sumptions underlying the President's 1983 Budget, 1980—87 1980—87—Continued Amounts in billionsj Amountsin billions]

Calendar year ()ASI DI OASD! HI OASDI-HI Catendar year OASI Dl OASDI HI OASDI-H I

Income Funds at end of year

$40.2 1980 $105.8 $13.9 $119.7 $26.1 $145.8 980 $22.8 $3.6 $26.5 I3.7 42.8 981 24.8 17.1 141.9 35.7 77.6 1981 20.9 3.1 24.0 18.7 1982 136.6 17.2 153.8 39.0 192.8 1982 15.7 .7 17.4 22.2 39.6 983 39.4 26.7 166.1 42.7 208.8 1983 — 1.0 9.2 8.2 24.0 32.3 225.3 1984 —21.4 19.3 —21 23.5 21.4 984 149.4 29.8 179.2 46.1 () 1985 167.9 38.0 205.8 51.8 257.6 1985 —36.6 36.6 21.6. 21.6 27.3 1986 182.4 43.0 225.4 59.9 285.3 1986 —50.8 57.9 7.1 20.2 1987 98.4 47.9 246.4 65.0 311.4 1987 —63.6 83.0 19.4 15.4 34.8

Outgo Assets at beginning of year as percentage of outgo during year

1980 $107.7 $15.9 $123.5 $25.6 $149.1 29 1981 126.7 17.6 144.3 30.7 175.1 980 23 35 25 52 1982 141.8 8.6 60.4 35.6 196.0 981 8 2! 8 45 23 1983 56.2 19.1 75.3 40.9 216.2 1982 5 17 IS 53 22 1984 169.8 9.7 189.6 46.6 236.2 1983 10 9 10 54 18 14 1985 183.1 20.6 203.7 53.6 257.4 984 —I 47 4 51 986 196.6 21.7 218.3 61.2 279.6 1985 —12 93 —i 44 8 (2) 1987 211.2 22.9 234.1 69.8 303.9 1986 — 19 169 35 8 1987 —24 253 3 29 9

Net increase infunds Between $0 and $50 million. 2 Between 0 and 0.5 percent. 980 —l.8 —$2.0 —$3.8 0.5 —$3.3 Notes: (I) The income figures for 1982. and the end-of-year asset figures for 1981 — 1.9 — .5 — 2.4 5.0 2.6 1982 and lzier, reflect the t runsier of $6.4 bili ion from I he L) I T rust Fund tot he 1982 —5.2 —1.4 —6.6 3.5 —3.1 OASI Trust Fund under the iiitertund borrowing authority provided by P. L. 1983 — 6.7 7.6 —9.1 1.8 — 7.4 97—123. —20.4 10.0 — 10.3 — .5 —10.9 1984...... (2) The etintated operations for OASI, and total OASDI and HI in 1985 15.2 17.4 2.! —1.9 .2 1983 and later are theoretkal since, Following the expiration of the present law — 14.2 21.3 7.1 — 1.4 5.7 986...... iittcriund borrowing uuthority, the OASI Trust Fund would become depletedit 987 —12.8 25.1 12.3 —4.8 7.5 the second nih oF 1983 w lien iscts become nsufflcient to pay bend its when due. See footnotes at end of table.

982—i6 I— 182129 U. . GOVE(NTPRI:i[COFFICE

Social SecurityBulletin, March 1982/Vol. 45, No. 3

LISTING OF REFERENCE MATERIALS

U.S.Congress. House. Select Committee on Aging. Hearing on Elimination of Social Security Minimum Benefit. July 31, 1981. 97th Congress, 1st session. U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Ways and Means. Subcommittee on Social Security. Hearing on Elimination of Minimum Social Security Benefit Under Public Law 97-35. September 10, 1981. 97th Congress, 1st session. U.S. Congress. House. Select Committee on Aging. Subcommittee on Retirement Income and Employment. Hearing on Cutting the Minimum Social Security Benefit: Unneeded Savings and Hidden Costs. September 21, 1981. 97th Congress, 1st session.

*4)5.GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1987 173-693/173-693