The Big Picture

[National Dialogue Moderator <moderator>]

Let's step back a bit from the details and look at the big picture on
Social Security plans. President Clinton wants to use 62% of anticipated
future surpluses, or $2.8 trillion over 15 years, to pay down the
national debt. At the same time, he gives the Social Securitty trust
fund a promissory note for the 2.8 trillion, which extends its life
about 20 years. This is ok under budget rules. But what if the surplus
doens't materialize. A future Congress will have to make good the
promise with general tax revenues. Same for the Republican plan by Reps.
Bill Archer and Clay Shaw. They want to reserve $1.8 trillion over 10
years for the trust fund. This too is a promissory note and in effect a
pledge of future tax revenues if needed. For the panel and the public:
is it fair to promise these additional future revenues to a program for
retirees, when there is a high rate of poverty and health problems among
children, and millions of Americans don't have health coverage? Are the
President and the Republicans equally guilty of ducking hard choices
about Social Security, and simply betting on surpluses, the way a person
might anticipate winning the lottery. Let's hear your thoughts.

Bob Rosenblatt
Los Angles Times