For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
June 8, 2005
President Discusses Strengthening Social Security in Washington, D.C.
Capitol Hilton Hotel
Washington, D.C.
In Focus: Social Security
1:19 P.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all. Please be seated. Thanks for
coming. Thanks for the warm welcome. Thanks for the kind
introduction, Gary, it's good to keep it in the old Texas family.
(Laughter.) All you other Texans who are here, make sure you behave
yourself. (Laughter.)
But I'm really honored to be here. I appreciate ABC, I appreciate
your leadership, I appreciate the entrepreneurial spirit, I appreciate
the fact that you're hiring people and making your communities better
in which you live.
I want to thank Carole Bionda and Kirk Pickerel and the board of
directors for having me here. You made a mistake, you should have
invited Laura -- (laughter) -- to be your speaker, if you were looking
for the A-team in our family. She's become quite the comedienne.
(Laughter.) I'm pleased to report, though, that she's doing great.
I'm a lucky man when she said "yes" when I asked her to marry me. And
I think the country is lucky to have her as the First Lady.
(Applause.)
You know, I came to Washington to get some things done. This isn't
my permanent home. I'm going to give it my all, put my energy into the
job, and pour my soul into my work, and when time is up, I'm going to
head back home. But I want it to be said that my administration came
to Washington, D.C. to solve problems. And when we had a problem that
we square -- that we dealt with it squarely. And we did it based upon
principle. And we've been presented with some problems in this
administration. One of them was a recession, because of an enemy
attack and the down-cycle in the economy. We had to deal with the
recession.
And at the heart of my decision making was my understanding that
most new jobs in America are created by small businesses -- (applause)
-- and therefore any relief, any decisions as to how to deal with the
recession had to be good policy for small businesses. And the tax
relief we passed made a difference for our small businesses here in
America. (Applause.)
And the economic policy is working. I mean, after all, more people
work in America today than ever before in our nation's history. The
unemployment rate is down to 5.1 percent. Small businesses are
flourishing, the entrepreneurial spirit is strong. But there's more
work to be done, there's more work to be done.
One of the main jobs we have here in Washington is to protect our
country. You see, not only did the attacks help accelerate a
recession, the attacks reminded us that we are at war. It's a
different kind of war. It's a war that has taken the country a while
to adjust to, because we're not facing nation states, we're facing
terrorist organizations that know no border, terrorist organizations
that know no conduct the way civilized nations know it when it comes to
fighting war. They'll kill innocent people like that in order to
justify a hateful ideology.
Which means that we've got to do a couple of things here out of
Washington. One, we've got to do everything we can to protect the
homeland. And we are. We're doing a better job of collecting and
analyzing intelligence and sharing intelligence. Tomorrow I'm going to
go to Columbus, Ohio, to talk about the renewal of the Patriot Act,
which is an important piece of legislation that on the one hand
guarantees the civil liberties of the American people, but on the other
hand, gives our terror fighters the same tools that we use to deal with
drug lords or white collar criminals. (Applause.) We're making
progress about making sure federal agencies do a better job of
communicating.
The best way to defend the homeland, though, is to stay on the
offense, is to find these people, is to defeat them abroad so we don't
have to face them at home. And that's exactly what the United States
of America is doing. (Applause.) And for those of you who have got a
loved one in the United States military, I want to say two things to
you: one, we'll make sure your loved one has whatever is necessary to
protect America; and, secondly, thank you for their sacrifice.
(Applause.)
And the second way to defeat the terrorists is to spread freedom.
You see, the best way to defeat a society that is -- doesn't have hope,
a society where people become so angry they're willing to become
suiciders, is to spread freedom, is to spread democracy. You know,
during the course of the last campaign, I used to tell people about the
power of liberty to transform societies. And what I meant by that was
that one of my close associates in world politics is Prime Minister
Koizumi of Japan. He's a buddy. He's a friend. He's the kind of guy
you can sit down at the table and say, what are we going to do together
to help keep the peace, how best to deal with the -- with Kim Jong-il
in North Korea, for example. We strategize. All aimed at making the
world a more peaceful place.
But it wasn't all that long ago that an 18-year-old Navy pilot
named George H.W. Bush -- and I'm confident some of your relatives --
were at war with Japan. When you really think about it, 60 years isn't
all that long ago, is it? And yet today, the enemy has become a
friend. And the reason why that enemy is a friend is because of
freedom and democracy. Democracy has got the capacity to change the
world. (Applause.)
I believe everybody wants to be free. I believe mothers all across
the world, regardless of their religion or where they live, want to
bring up their children in a free society. I believe that is a
universal drive and a universal desire. And it has been proven that
democracies are peaceful. The best way to defeat terrorism in the long
run and the best way to leave behind a foundation for peace for a
generation of Americans coming up is to spread freedom and democracy
around the world. And freedom is on the march.
For the youngsters here today, I want you to pay attention to
what's in the news. You're living in a remarkable period. Just think
about what has happened in a quick period of time. Millions voted in
Afghanistan. Millions defied the suiciders in Iraq to vote. People
turned out in the town squares across Lebanon demanding freedom. In
the Ukraine there was a freedom revolution. People in the world want
to be free, and the United States of America will promote democracy and
promote freedom movements for the sake of peace and stability.
(Applause.)
So while we'll continue to work to do our duty to secure you, we
got to work here at home to keep this economy growing. And here's some
practical ways to do that. First, I understand that health care is an
issue for small businesses. See, if most new jobs are created by small
businesses, it makes sense to have good economic policies that help
small businesses. And so, therefore, one of the things we've got to do
is to be wise about how we help small businesses deal with insurance,
health insurance.
One thing is for certain, to deal with health insurance is we need
to pass medical liability reform. One reason your premiums are high is
because of the junk and frivolous lawsuits that are running good
doctors out of practice and running up the cost of medicine.
(Applause.) When I first came to Washington I wasn't so sure this was
a federal issue. You know, being the former governor of a state, I
kind of felt like the states could take care of medical liability
issues. But you see, all these lawsuits cause docs to practice what
they call defensive medicine. They practice more medicine than
necessary just in case they get sued. And all these lawsuits are
running up the cost of medicine because premiums go up that they pass
on to the bill payer. Well, it just so happened the federal government
pays a lot of medical bills. So you were paying Medicare and Medicaid
and veterans benefits. It is estimated that these junk lawsuits are
costing taxpayers about $27 billion a year.
And so I decided, well, maybe this wasn't a state issue; maybe this
was a federal issue since it's affecting our federal budget so much,
and it's a federal issue that requires a federal response. And so I
put a good bill out, the House passed it, it's stuck in the United
States Senate. For the sake of affordable health care, the Senate
needs to get a good medical liability bill out of that -- (applause.)
A couple of other practical ideas that small businesses need to
look at and that Congress needs to act upon, one of them is health
savings accounts. I urge you to take a good look at HSAs as a good way
to help deal with the rising cost of health care, and at the same time,
make sure your employees have got coverage. Take a look at it.
A second plan that makes sense is to allow small businesses to pool
risk across jurisdictional boundaries, what's called association health
care plans. It means that if you're a small business in Texas and
you're a small business in New Jersey, that you can be in the same risk
pool if you share the same type of industry -- restauranteur, for
example, in Maine, and a restauranteur in Florida can be in the same
risk pool. Obviously, the more people in the pool, the more you spread
risk, the lower the cost.
The way I like to put it is this: Congress ought to allow small
businesses to join together so they can buy insurance at the same
discount that big businesses get to do, for the sake of health care for
small businesses and their employees. (Applause.)
One way to make sure this economy continues to grow is to show the
markets and the people that we're wise about how we spend your money.
I sent some budgets up to Congress that are lean, that said, well,
let's -- why don't we set priorities and also ask the question of, you
know, some of these programs we're funding, are they working. And if
they're not working, let's stop funding them -- kind of a
results-oriented system. I'm pleased to report both the House and the
Senate passed my budget -- which, by the way, will mean that we can cut
the deficit in half in a five-year period of time without raising your
taxes. (Applause.)
Speaking about taxes, if we want this economy continuing to grow,
we got to keep them low. The Congress ought to make the tax relief we
passed permanent. (Applause.) Part of that tax relief was a provision
I know you might be interested in. You see, I believe a person ought
to be allowed to pass their assets on to whomever they want without the
government taxing them twice, once while you're alive and right after
you die. (Applause.) We put the death tax on the way to extinction,
except unfortunately the law says that in 2011, it's going to come back
to life again. That's not fair. And it's not right. The Congress
needs to make sure that death tax is gone forever, for the sake of
small businesses. (Applause.)
I'm going to make two other points about how to make sure this
economy grows. One of them is going to be -- I'm going to talk about
Social Security. I think that's an economic issue. It's a funding
issue. It's an issue that says we got a lot of debt that we owe
people, and the fundamental question is how are we going to pay for
it.
The other issue, before I get there, is energy. You know, when I
first came to Washington, I recognized that we were -- our dependency
upon foreign sources of oil was going to be a problem for us. You see,
if you're depending upon somebody else to provide energy, at some point
in time it becomes an issue -- either an economic issue or a national
security issue, or both. And so I put a strategy up to the United
States Congress, said, look, why don't we do something smart. Why
don't we put an energy strategy into law that will accomplish some
important goals. They've been debating this energy strategy for four
years. And so I'm here to describe to you our strategy, and at the
same time, remind the United States Congress that for the sake of
economic security and national security, they need to get an energy
bill to my desk by August of this year. (Applause.)
American families and small businesses are paying higher gasoline
bills, which is like a tax. And I understand that this has -- that
this tax has a drag on our economy. It's money that's going out of
your coffers that could be otherwise used to pay a laborer, or pay for
health care. And the reason why your gasoline bills are going up is
because we are dependent on foreign sources of energy. We import over
60 percent of the crude oil, which is the major stock for gasoline,
from overseas -- or about 60 percent. That's a lot. And, therefore,
when global demand is such and price goes up, we pay for it at the
pump.
And so I said to Congress, we need to diversify away from a
hydrocarbon society. And that's going to take awhile, but we need to
lay the groundwork to do so. And what does that mean? It means we've
got to be better conservers of energy; we've got to have an incentive
for people to conserve more. We can do a better job of being wise
about how we use our resources.
Secondly, we need to spend money on research and development to
figure out how to use soybeans, for example, to develop fuel. Now, I
went to a plant the other day in Virginia, a small soybean refinery,
where they're making soy diesel -- diesel fuel out of soybeans, called
biodiesel. The more diesel engines there are that can use soybean
fuel, the less dependent we are on foreign sources of energy. It makes
sense to explore ways to make sure that we can use corn or soybeans to
diversify away from oil that come from a foreign country. We're
spending money on clean coal technology. Do you realize we've got 250
million [sic] years of coal? But coal has got environmental hazards to
it, but there's -- I'm convinced, and I know, that we -- technology can
be developed so we can have zero-emissions coal-fired electricity
plants.
We ought to be using nuclear power. It's a renewable source of
energy. I know that technology has changed where I could say to the
American people, nuclear power is a lot safer than it ever has been in
the past. These are all parts of this energy bill that Congress needs
to pass to encourage renewable sources of energy, different sources of
energy, clean sources of energy that will enable us to be less
dependent on foreign sources of energy.
We need to be, by the way, exploring for oil and gas in our own
hemisphere in environmentally friendly ways. You know, a hot issue
here is ANWR, the big track of land in Alaska. It's millions and
millions and millions of acres. And, yet, because of the advance of
technology, we can find oil and gas on those millions of acres in a
track of land about 2,000 acres in size. It's an amazing technological
advance. But we ought to be using this technology to make us less
dependent on foreign sources of energy.
There's a lot of things we need to be doing and are doing. I don't
know if you remember, but I put out a new initiative for exploring the
possibility of using hydrogen to power automobiles. See, I believe in
10 years' time, with the wise use of taxpayer's money, a new generation
of Americans will be driving automobiles driven by hydrogen, not by oil
and gas.
Congress needs to stop debating this issue and stop playing
politics and get this bill at my desk so I can say to the American
people, this country has got a strategy which may not pay off
yesterday, but will pay off tomorrow for the American people.
(Applause.)
There's one other issue I want to talk about, that's Social
Security. First, Social Security worked great for a lot of folks for a
long period of time. My predecessor, Franklin D. Roosevelt, did a
smart thing in setting up the Social Security system. Social Security
provided a safety net for a lot of seniors, and it was an important
safety net. So you know, I'm traveling -- or you may not know, I'll
tell you now, you will know -- (laughter) -- I'm traveling a lot
talking about Social Security. I'm meeting people that say, I'm
dependent upon my Social Security check. I'm confident you know folks
that say, I need my check; it's a part of my life.
And so the system has worked fine for a lot of folks. As a matter
of fact, it's going to work fine for everybody born prior to 1950. So
if you're a senior getting your Social Security check out there, you
have nothing to worry about, the system is solvent for you. You're in
good shape -- I don't care what the politicians say, I don't care what
the ads say, the pamphlets say. Don't let them scare you; you're going
to get your check. And that's important for people to understand.
But if you're a younger citizen, you'd better be paying attention
to this issue. And here's the reason why -- here's the reason why:
There's a lot of people like me -- we're called the baby boomers -- who
are getting ready to retire. See, my retirement date is 2008.
(Laughter.) I'm turning 62 years old on 2008. (Laughter and
applause.) It's a convenient time. (Laughter.) And I'm just the
beginning of the baby boomers. See, I was born in 1946, we're called
the leading edge of the baby boomers. And there's a lot of others
behind me.
Do you realize that there's about 40 million Americans retired
today; by the time the baby boomer generation fully retires, there will
be 72 million Americans, more or less. There is a lot of us. We're
living longer than the previous generation. You know, we're living
longer, I hope, than any other generation. I'm pulling for that part
of my generation. (Laughter.) And a lot of politicians have run prior
-- in prior years, and said, vote for me, I'll increase the benefits
for a generation coming up. And you know what? They did. And so,
therefore, my generation, our generation, which will be living longer
--and more of us -- have been promised greater benefits, which is okay
until you realize this aspect of the problem: fewer people are now
paying into the system.
In 1950, there was about 15 workers per every retiree. In other
words, the load was pretty well spread across a group of people paying
payroll taxes. Today, there's 3.3 workers per retiree. Soon there's
going to be two workers per retiree, trying to take care of a
generation which is going to be living longer with greater benefits and
a lot of us. So that's the problem. That's the math. That's the
beginning of your understanding -- or the country's understanding of
why we have a problem.
Let me put it in terms of dollars for you. In 2017, the system
goes into the red. In other words, more benefits going out than
payroll taxes coming in. In about 2027, it's about $200 billion
short. In other words, every year from 2017, the red -- the red -- the
deficit gets larger and larger and larger. In 2027, it's $200
billion. In the 2030's, it's about $300 billion. In 2041, the system
is bust.
Now, think about that for a minute. We're fine, by the way, those
of us born before 1950. All seniors are getting their check. You're
in good shape. But you need to start asking people who have been
elected to office what we intend to do about this problem for your
children and grandchildren, because we're asking young Americans to
come up in a system and pay a pretty sizeable payroll tax into a system
where those of us in Washington who look at the facts understand it's
going broke. That doesn't seem to make sense to me. That doesn't seem
like good stewardship of the people's money, nor does it seem like good
leadership. See, my job as the President of the United States is
confront a problem if I see one, and not pass it on to future
Presidents and future Congresses. (Applause.)
I see a problem. I've just defined it to you. And it's clear.
This is a -- these are solid numbers that I'm talking about. You can't
-- people in Washington can't say baby boomers aren't getting ready to
retire and there's a lot of us who have been promised more benefits and
we're living longer. That's a fact. And it's a fact that fewer people
are paying into the system. And it's a fact this system is going
bankrupt. I'm -- and so I'm going to keep talking about it.
My strategy is pretty simple: Explain the problem to the American
people, and keep explaining it and explaining it, and assuring seniors
that you're going to get your check. And then at some point, the
people of this country are going to say to Republicans and Democrats
alike, why aren't you doing something about the problem. I'm beginning
to understand the problem as a citizen, now how come you, as an elected
official, aren't doing something about it. And we're making progress.
People understand there's a problem.
I remember early on after I got elected, I told members of
Congress, I said, I'm going to take this issue on. Frankly, there
wasn't all that much applause when I said it. (Laughter.) Some folks
up here would rather take the easy path and do nothing. See, it's the
easy path to say, well, we'll just let somebody else take care of it,
vote for me. But that's not -- to me, that's not how you define
leadership. That's not what the people expect. The people expect us
regardless of our political party to come up here and solve problems.
And we've got some Republicans talking about the issue, which is good.
And we've got some Democrats talking about it. And my attitude toward
them is bring your ideas forward. I'm interested in building a
consensus so that we can say we have done our duty for a younger
generation of Americans coming up.
Here are some principles by which I am conducting discussions.
One, the reform system must say to future generations you'll get
benefits equal to or greater than the current generation. I think
that's a wise principle to be able to say to somebody putting money
into the system -- remember, you've got these youngsters now putting
money into the system to pay for us, and they're wondering where the
system is going to be for them. And the answer is a reform system for
people coming up ought to be -- you ought to get benefits equal or
greater than the current benefit structure.
Secondly, I think this principle is very important. And that is if
you've worked all your life, you've worked hard at a job, and you've
contributed into Social Security, you shouldn't retire into poverty. I
mean, the safety net is more than just providing a check. The safety
net is to provide, you know, peace of mind in retirement. So I like
the idea of sending this principle to Congress. You can work hard, but
you're not going to retire into poverty.
And there's a way to make the system do that, and here it is --
it's called progressive indexing, an idea that I embraced in a press
conference the other day, in the East Room of the White House. And it
said this -- it says -- by the way, right now, benefits increase --
they're all increasing, but for everybody they increase at the rate of
wage increases, not price increases. Wages go up faster than price.
And so the benefits are going up faster than the cost of living.
And so what I think Congress ought to consider doing is saying that
for the poorest of Americans, your benefits, future benefits will go up
based upon wage increases, and for the wealthier of Americans, your
benefits go up based upon price increases. You know, it's everybody's
benefits -- calculated benefits for the future. Again, we're talking
about a younger generation of Americans coming. Those of us born in
1950 -- prior to 1950, nothing changes. It's really important for
Americans to understand that. It's for the new generation coming up,
as we calculate a reformed plan that permanently fixes Social
Security.
One idea is to say, for the poor Americans, your benefits --
calculated benefits over time go up with the rate of wage increases.
For wealthy Americans, it goes up at the rate of inflation, cost of
living. And in between, there's a scale. Now, that's a system where
we can say, poor Americans won't retire into poverty. But
interestingly enough, if that were to be passed by Congress, that alone
would permanently fix a majority, a significant portion of the Social
Security problem. Isn't that interesting? Just that alone, just that
change alone would go a long way, a significant way for doing our duty
to permanently fix the Social Security problem for a younger generation
of Americans.
And I've got one other idea that Congress needs to understand. And
by the way, under this system, 99 percent of Americans would -- 1
percent of Americans would have the same purchasing power they have
today, 99 percent would have greater purchasing power under this kind
of system.
Today the average American worker gets $14,800 a year in benefits
from Social Security. Under the plan I just described, that would grow
in real terms to $17,750 by 2055. And yet the system would be -- most
of the system would be permanently solved, most of the problem would be
permanently solved.
You know, a lot of folks, youngsters tell me that -- I have been
told about a survey of youngsters who have said they're more likely to
see a UFO than get a Social Security check. (Laughter.) If this idea
that says, if you're wealthier -- top 1 percent of the country -- your
benefits -- future benefits grow by cost of living, if you're poor,
they grow by wage and in between, is scaled up. And if you don't think
you're going to see anything, it seems like to me this makes sense for
you if you're a younger worker getting ready to put something in the
system.
Now, there's a way to make the whole system permanent. There's
other ideas, and I'll work with anybody who has got a good idea. But
my job is not to shirk the problem. It's to deal with the problem head
on and to bring solutions to the table. And here's a good idea I call
progressive indexing.
I want to talk about another idea that Congress needs to seriously
consider. As we permanently fix the system, we ought to make the
system a better deal for younger workers, as well. You see, here's the
issue with -- another issue with Social Security, it's called a
pay-as-you-go system. You pay your payroll tax and we go ahead and
spend it. (Laughter.) You see, some people think that the Social
Security system is a system where you pay in your Social Security tax
and we hold it for you, and then when you retire, we give it back to
you. That's not the way it works.
The way it works is this: you pay your payroll tax, we pay out to
current retirees, and then we spend your money on other government
programs. That's the way it works. And that's been going on for quite
awhile. I happen to believe there's a better way to do this than to
say there's a Social Security system where we're guarding your money
and not spending it on other programs.
And here it is: I think the best way to make sure that people have
got real assets in the Social Security system, not just IOUs in a file
cabinet, is to let younger workers take some of their own money, if
they so choose, a voluntary program, and set up a personal savings
account. (Applause.) In other words, the proposal I made to Congress
says you can take a third of your payroll tax and set it aside as part
of your Social Security retirement system.
And here's why I believe that it makes a lot of sense. First, I
like the idea of people owning their own assets in America; I like the
idea of people having ownership in something. And I also understand
the power of compound interest. In other words, when you set aside
money, it grows, it compounds over time. That's how money works.
Right now, in the Social Security system, we get about 1.8 percent on
your money for you, which is really low. (Laughter.) A conservative
mix of bonds and stocks is expected to pay about 4.6 percent annually
over time. It's been the historical average. Some of you do a heck of
a lot better than that. I was campaigning with -- on this issue with
Senator McCain, and he thought out loud that he had made about 7
percent on his own personal savings account, conservative mix.
In other words, you can do pretty well with a conservative mix of
bonds and stocks. Heck, you can put your money in T-bills alone and do
better than the 1.8 percent we get you. And over time, that money
grows. The difference between what we can get on your money and what
you can get in your own personal savings account, if you decide to set
one up, is pretty darn significant.
Let me give you an example. Say you've got children that are
coming up and they get married and enter the work force in 2011 -- one
is a nurse, say, and one is a police officer. Given the salary scales
today and given what a 4.6 percent growth rate would mean on money set
aside in a personal account, by the time that those folks retire at age
65, they would have a nest egg of $669,000, plus whatever is left for
them in the Social Security system. See, it's their money. That's how
money grows. That's what interest does. When you start setting aside
money at age 20 years old, and it's earning nearly 5 percent, it
grows. It tends to accelerate growth the older you get, by the way. A
lot of you know what I'm talking about.
It seems like to me that that makes sense to let younger workers
take advantage of the compound rate of interest. It makes sense to
give people a better rate of return on their own money. After all,
when we're talking about payroll taxes, we're not talking about the
government's money. That's your money. It's the money that you put
into the Treasury. (Applause.)
The money in the personal accounts, if you -- the government says
you can do it and if you decide to do it -- remember, this is
voluntary. This isn't to say -- the government is saying, you must do
this. See, some people won't be comfortable about putting money aside
in a voluntary personal account, and you won't have to. There will be
a Social Security -- reformed Social Security system available for
you. This just says you can put some of it, if you so choose to do
so.
If you decide to do so -- let me just give you a comparison between
the couple I just mentioned to you of today's system, and the future
system. The couple would receive $42,000 a year in Social Security
benefits. In a reformed system, the total amount of income from both
the personal accounts and the Social Security check would grow to
nearly $54,000 in today's dollars. See, that's what -- when you get
your money to grow and an asset base you call your own, it means you
have more money to retire with. And that's what we're trying to make
sure is available for all folks.
Let me tell you something else wrong with the current Social
Security system. If you both work, in your family, husband and wife
work, and one of you dies before 62 years old, the Social Security
system will pay for your burial benefits. And then, upon retirement,
the surviving spouse gets a choice between the deceased's benefit
structure or the survivor's benefit structure from Social Security, but
not both.
See, in other words, the system today says, you get to work all
your life, and if you die early, the money you put in the system just
goes away. I don't think that's fair. I don't think it's fair to say
to a citizen in this country who has been working hard to make a living
that the money you've earned through the payroll taxes isn't around
anymore, if you go on. Your spouse gets the greater of your benefits
or her benefits, but not both.
So think about what a personal account would mean: A voluntary
personal savings account would mean that there would be an asset base
from both the husband and wife. And if one of them unfortunately died
early, that asset base, that group of assets that had grown over time,
could be passed on to the husband or wife, whoever the spouse is, the
surviving spouse. That's fair, that makes sense. It means the money
that you have worked for just won't go away. It will be available to
help in times of need.
Now, people say to me, well, you know, this is going to be hard to
figure out how to invest. I said, it may be, except I want you to all
to remember, particularly you older folks here, like me, they've got
401(k)s in society today. I don't remember talking about 401(k)s when
I was growing up, or IRAs, but there's a whole investor society.
One of the most amazing events came when I was in Mississippi at an
automobile manufacturing plant. And I said, how many of you all have
got 401(k)s? This was quite a diverse audience, people from all walks
of life, mainly line workers. I'll bet you 95 percent of the hands
went up. You know, this isn't what you call the typical investor
class. These are people working hard to put food on the table. And
you know what? They're managing their own money. They're watching
their own asset base grow with time. That's healthy for our country,
saying to somebody, you can grow assets, and you can pass your assets
on to whomever you want is good for America. The more people who own
something in this country, the better off our country is. The more
people from all walks of life have got an asset to pass on to their
loved one, the better off America is.
I like the idea of saying you can take some of your own money if
you so choose and set up a personal savings account as a part of your
retirement plan. You know who else liked it? Members of the United
States Congress. (Laughter.) They've got what they call the Thrift
Savings Plan here in America. It's a plan that says it's okay if
you're a member of the United States Senate to take some of your own
money and set it aside and watch your money grow at a better rate of
return than government would get for you. It's called a Thrift Savings
Plan.
And here's my attitude: If a Thrift Savings Plan, if a personal
savings account is good enough for a member of the United States
Senate, it is good enough for working people all across America.
(Applause.)
Now is the time for Congress to come to the table and get something
done. It's important, because we've got unfunded liabilities out there
that can serve as a drag on our economy, and we've got a young
generation of Americans coming up that are going to be contributing to
a system that's broke. And that's not fair. I believe those of us
who've been elected have got a solemn obligation to tackle tough
problems. I know that's what the American people expect.
I'm confident we can get something done. I really am. I don't
care what all the naysayers say, or the people that are so political
they can't -- they can't get out of their current mind set here in
Washington. See, I believe when it's all said and done, the American
people are going to start speaking. And louder and louder, they're
going to say, we got the problem with Social Security folks -- now we
expect you in Washington to do something about it. And I'm ready to
take the lead on it, and continue to take the lead on it. There's no
doubt in my mind I'm doing the right thing addressing this issue, and
there's no doubt in my mind when Republicans and Democrats come
together to solve this problem, a lot of good people are going to be
saying, you know what, I've done my duty for the American people.
Thanks for letting me come by to say hello. God bless.
(Applause.)
END 2:06 P.M. EDT
|