by Gary O'Neill

Created on: December 06, 2008

The Social Security pension and its related program for medical benefits, known as Medicare, were enacted through laws by the Congress of the United States beginning in the 1930s. They have both become an integral part of our society and have generally served their purpose: providing financial means to people after they reach retirement age. The programs will continue to exist as long as Congress maintains the appropriations and laws which support them. Both programs now account for more than $1 Trillion dollars of government funding annually, and they are forecast to grow to much greater levels in the years to come.

The real question is "What Changes will be made to the programs in order to continue them in the future?" For the last ten to fifteen years, a number of experts have tried to explain that the current system will create an enormous financial burden on the government in the near future, and that changes must be made. President Bush made a strong effort to get the country involved in studying the issue and taking action to make the programs sustainable in 2004-5, but he was largely ignored by the members of Congress and the Senate from both parties.

Because we are talking about an enormous program with significant, long term effects to individuals, any changes must be made gradually and carefully in order to prevent catastrophe. Think of how a large ocean liner is brought to a harbor pier: the huge ship is brought in at very slow speed, with small, continuous corrections made at the direction of the captain and harbor pilot, and aided by tugboats. This is a pretty good description of what must be done to either sustain these programs or transition to a different system. Both alternatives deserve careful study, serious debate and then decisions based on what's best for the country. We cannot afford to allow politicians to make outrageous claims about elderly citizens being cast into the street to distract the rest of us from really thinking through this issue.

If we choose to maintain the program as it is, projections of income and payouts over the next twenty to thirty years clearly show that there is not enough money to continue the system without some change. Experts have offered some alternatives, such as delaying the retirement age to 67 or 70 years old, increasing the amount of money deducted from all workers, or 'means testing' the eligibility for receiving retirement funds. Mean testing essentially would deny benefits to those who are considered

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>