On Tuesday, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.)
outlined a number of reforms for Social Security at the National
Press Club in Washington.
His speech dealt with public
policy on retirement in the 21st century, including a 4-point change to Social
Security:
1. Eliminate the payroll tax for
anyone over age 65 who continues to work.
2. Remove the retirement earnings
test for seniors 62 and over
3. Raise the Social Security retirement
age for those under the age of 55.
4. Increase benefits for low-income
seniors and reduce scheduled
initial benefit levels for wealthy retirees.
His words were strong. Rubio warned
the audience, "(By 2038), Social Security will have been bankrupt for
years. This is not a scare tactic. It is a mathematical certainty. The longer
we wait to address this the harder it will be to fix, and the more disruptive
those fixes will be.” These words contrasts sharply with the 2012 election in
which we heard "Social Security is - you know - structurally sound."
It is refreshing to see a politician speak
candidly about Social Security for all Americans. At the same time, his
comments paint a clear picture that the even the most courageous politicians
remain distrait from a system on which they do not depend.
Oddly enough, a considerable portion of his
proposal will make
Social Security less solvent. Reducing payroll taxes will not help Social
Security, particularly for seniors who, as Rubio notes, may get very little in
return for their contribution. Removing the retirement earnings test will only encourage
more people to start drawing benefits at 62, which creates near term pressure
on the system. Likewise, increasing Social Security benefits for anyone makes
Social Security less solvent.
There are two parts of
his policy that will improve Social Security's finances. One will increasing the age of
retirement for those who are 54 and younger.
The other targets wealthy retirees for lower benefit levels. So would these
adjustments rescue Social Security for those under the age of 54?
The Social Security
Administration has scored similar concepts, and the results generate little
confidence that Rubio's changes will add "years" as he claims. The research from the Social Security
Administration suggests that it is closer to months. It isn't even possible to
say that these adjustments will offset the negative impacts of his other
proposals.
These are scores of comparable
ideas. None of these ideas increase the exhaustion point of the Trust Fund past
2033. The Social Security Administration :
·
scored
a proposal to increase the retirement age for people 54 and younger. This
change addresses about 12% of the financing gap.
·
projected
that slowing the initial benefits of senior retiring in 2026 addresses 2% of
the shortfall financing.
·
scored
the changed to Chain-CPI would address 14% of the projected shortfall. That
assumes of course that we change the system in 2016 rather than 2026, and apply
the cost controls on all seniors rather than just those who reach normal
retirement age after 2026.
There are some problems
with Senator Rubio's proposals. Specifically, Social Security does not have
insight into a retiree's wealth. His proposals use past income which may be
connected to wealth, but it isn't possible to say that his changes will even
target wealthy retirees.
It is
difficult to criticize someone who has the courage to step forward when no one
else will. It is however a tiny step, one that does almost nothing. In the
words of Senator Rubio, "anyone
who is in favor of doing nothing about Social Security is in favor of
bankrupting Social Security." He is effectively doing nothing.
No comments:
Post a Comment