Welcome to the Roundtable

[National Dialogue Moderator <moderator>]

Welcome to the Women and Minorities Roundtable. I'm Maureen West,
senior reporter for the Arizona Republic in Phoenix. I have been
reporting on aging and retirement issues for the past two years
and will be moderating this discussion.

Our panelists are: John Banks-Brooks of Tax Management, Inc., Heidi
Hartmann of the Institute for Women's Policy Research, Kilolo
Kijakazi of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Darcy Olsen
of the Cato Institute, Anna Rappaport of William M. Mercer, Inc.,
Past President of the Society of Actuaries, and Dr. William Spriggs
of the National Urban League.  I would like to invite each of the
panelists to give a brief introductory statement and to respond to
the following question:

Before we can fix Social Security, let's see if we agree on what
the Social Security System is supposed to be.  Is it a safety net?
A forced savings account for retirement? Is it the mechanism by
which young, working people take care of their elders in a
post-extended family era?  We need to know what the purpose of the
system is before we can design it with justice for racial and gender
groups who may have longer or shorter working lives and lifespans.
Native American men, for example, tend to die a decade sooner than
White men. If Social Security is, or will become, a savings plan,
should Native American men be able to use their funds sooner --while
they are alive to enjoy them?  But if Social Security is not savings,
but insurance against the possibility of finding oneself impoverished
in old age, perhaps we don't have to provide for those who die
early?  And if it is insurance, aren't we overcharging those minority
groups who die early and don't collect? (Aren't men generally
overpaying, since they die sooner than women?) So, friends, what
kind of system are we building here?  What's its primary purpose,
and what does that purpose lead us to do in justice for women and
minorities? Is it possible that it is insurance not for individuals,
but for society itself, paid for with a payroll tax, so that we
are not a society where old people starve on our otherwise tidy
streets?  Have we lost that community perspective in the debate?

Maureen West
Arizona Republic