It’s good enough for us but not legislators?

Published 9:00 pm Saturday, March 16, 2002

Regarding Social Security vs. the congressional retirement plan:

Perhaps we are asking the wrong question during election years. Our senators and congressmen do not pay into Social Security nor do they collect from it. Social Security benefits were not considered suitable for persons of elevated stature. They felt they should have a special benefit plan. In more recent years, no congressperson has felt the need to change their great plan.

Their special plan works simply. When they retire, they continue to draw their same pay until they die. They might even receive a cost-of-living adjustment (that exceeds the increase in Medicare premium, which they neither pay nor receive). You and I pick up the tab for this plan. The funds for this excellent plan come from the general funds – our tax dollars at work!

Compare that to our own Social Security plan. We pay each payday, with a matching payment from our employer, until we retire. Presently, after we retire, we can expect an average of $1,000 per month (minus Medicare B premiums, without prescription coverage). Simplistically stated, we would have to draw benefits for a minimum of 325 years to match theirs.

We all know that Social Security carries many burdens not envisioned for the program when it was originated. Social Security might still become a viable program with some responsible tinkering. Instead of splintering Social Security further by allowing private investment, let’s prop it up. Let’s jerk the golden fleece retirement plan out from under the legislators. Let’s put the legislators into the Social (in)Security plan and see just how fast it becomes a real program.

Brier