Washington 2006 Senate Debate: on Social Security

Bruce Guthrie: First, we must keep our promises to our senior citizens

CANTWELL: I want to protect Social Security. What I like about Social Security is that it’s a guaranteed benefit. It has progressivity, like for women who make less or live longer. To change that, by making it an investment as private accounts or personal accounts, changes the very nature of Social Security.

McGAVICK: You heard no plan from the incumbent for how to save Social Security. You only heard a list of what the incumbent opposes. I do have a proposal. We must guarantee benefits to those who are nearing retirement, while for younger workers, there should be personal accounts. But, I oppose them being privatized.

GUTHRIE: First, we must keep our promises to our senior citizens. But young people 25 and undershould have personal savings accounts. For the gap between 25 and 50, they can either opt-out and accept a lump-sum payment, or they can continue with the current system.

Bruce Guthrie: Personal accounts if under 25; opt-out if under 50

A: First, we must keep our promises to our senior citizens. We have an obligation to provide them with the benefits that they expect. But the young people I talk to, the guarantee rings hollow with them. Here’s what we need to do. For those 25 and under, their contribution should go into a personal savings account that would accrue interest and grow over time. For the gap between 25 and 50, they can either opt-out and accept a lump-sum payment, or they can continue with the current system. The demographics have changed on this issue, and the Democrats and the Republicans have no plan.

Maria Cantwell: Tax cut on $1.2M earners would keep system solvent 75 years

Maria Cantwell: Keep progressivity and guaranteed benefit

CANTWELL: I want to protect Social Security. What I like about Social Security is that it’s a guaranteed benefit. It has progressivity, like for women who make less or live longer. To change that, by making proposal. We must guarantee benefits to those who are nearing retirement, while for younger workers, there should be personal accounts. But, I oppose them being privatized.

GUTHRIE: First, we must keep our promises to our senior citizens. But young people 25 and undershould have personal savings accounts. For the gap between 25 and 50, they can either opt-out and accept a lump-sum payment, or they can continue with the current system.

Mike McGavick: Cantwell opposes new ideas but has no Soc. Sec. plan

CANTWELL: I want to protect Social Security. What I like about Social Security is that it’s a guaranteed benefit. It has progressivity, like for women who make less or live longer. To change that, by making proposal. We must guarantee benefits to those who are nearing retirement, while for younger workers, there should be personal accounts. But, I oppose them being privatized.

GUTHRIE: First, we must keep our promises to our senior citizens. But young people 25 and undershould have personal savings accounts. For the gap between 25 and 50, they can either opt-out and accept a lump-sum payment, or they can continue with the current system.

Mike McGavick: Personal accounts for younger workers, but not privatized

A: You heard no plan from the incumbent for how to save Social Security. You only heard a list of what the incumbent opposes. I do have a proposal. First, we must guarantee benefits to those who are retired or are nearing retirement. Second, to get at the financial crisis, encourage those who have enough from their private planning for retirement, to throw their Social Security back into the system, to prolong it for all of us. Third, for younger workers, there should be personal accounts. But, I oppose them being privatized. I think that’s a mistake. I don’t trust Wall Street to manage this money, and I don’t trust the individuals to manage this money. It should be a government-run program with continued guaranteed benefits.