OnTheIssuesLogo

Chuck Hagel on Social Security

Republican Jr Senator (NE)


Do not alter government workers' pension plans

I don't need to remind you of issues like entitlements, like Social Security and healthcare issues. Our actuaries are quite clear on that -- we can't sustain the entitlement programs that we now have on the books -- for no other reason than we have a baby-boom generation, 78 million strong, I'm in the front end of that -- that will overload the services, that will crush the system.

We have time to fix some of these things. We need leaders who will face up to that. We need leaders who will bring bipartisan consensus on working on the issues.

Obviously [that includes] Social Security. I have a comprehensive Social Security bill that does not alter or change the current status of local and state government pension plans.

Source: 2007 IAFF Presidential Forum in Washington DC Mar 14, 2007

Voted YES on establishing reserve funds & pre-funding for Social Security.

Voting YES would:
  1. require that the Federal Old Age and Survivors Trust Fund be used only to finance retirement income of future beneficiaries;
  2. ensure that there is no change to benefits for individuals born before January 1, 1951
  3. provide participants with the benefits of savings and investment while permitting the pre-funding of at least some portion of future benefits; and
  4. ensure that the funds made available to finance such legislation do not exceed the amounts estimated to be actuarially available.

Proponents recommend voting YES because:

Perhaps the worst example of wasteful spending is when we take the taxes people pay for Social Security and, instead of saving them, we spend them on other things. Even worse than spending Social Security on other things is we do not count it as debt when we talk about the deficit every year. So using the Social Security money is actually a way to hide even more wasteful spending without counting it as debt. This Amendment would change that.

Opponents recommend voting NO because:

This amendment has a fatal flaw. It leaves the door open for private Social Security accounts by providing participants with the option of "pre-funding of at least some portion of future benefits."