From: Richard Arsinow <richard.arsinow@rauland.com>
Subject: Representatives: Take SS off budget?
Several commenters have made the valid point that there should be no talk of "investing" the "surplus" in Social Security, because every bit of the "unified surplus" is Social Security's money already. The government (with the exception of the Social Security program) is running a defecit. It's not as big a defecit as in years past, but a defecit nonetheless. The Social Security program is running a surplus, as it must to prepare to pay future benefits to baby boomers as they retire. Social Security's surplus is larger than the government's defecit, so when the two are combined in a "unified" budget, it appears that there is an overall surplus. Were the budget not "unified", I doubt there would be talk of "What should we do with the budget surplus?" because the government budget would be in defecit and it is obvious that Social Security needs to run a surplus now in anticipation of the boomers' retirement. Further, the worthy goal of balancing the federal budget has not truly been met. Only the "unified" budget has been balanced, with the help of the easily-foreseen Social Security surplus. The goal should really be to balance the federal budget and acknowledge the need for Social Security to build a surplus at this time.
But why is the budget "unified"? As I understand the history, until the mid-60s it was not. Prior to that time, as I understand it, government spending was in defecit and Social Security also ran a small defecit, and both contributed to an increasing national debt. But around 1965 or so, Social Security began to run a surplus instead, and President Johnson (so I am told) asked that it be included in his proposed budget, to make his defecit appear smaller. Congress approved it that way, and ever since, presidents have been proposing and Congress has been approving "unified" budgets.
Here is the question for the four members of the Ways and Means Committee:
Are you in favor of separating the accounting of the Social Security system from that of the remainder of the federal government (i.e. taking Social Security off-budget), and why or why not?
