Imagine a retirement program that paid recipients a defined benefit for as long as they live after retirement and also paid death benefits to survivors and that had the added attraction of paying for disability. We already have such a program. It is called social security.

Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan recently proposed cutting back on social security benefits in order to reduce the $521 billion federal budget deficit. The biggest causes of the federal budget deficit are tax cuts favoring the wealthy.  Greenspan’s proposal is the latest assault on a system that not only provides the benefits outlined above but will be solvent for the next 38 years. Because of anti-social security propaganda most Americans are unaware that social security works well for them and fewer know why it must be defended from attacks by the right wing. We have been told repeatedly that social security doesn’t work, that it is going broke, that it is not benefiting Black people and that it is in need of some unspecified reform.

Mr. Greenspan is correctly worried about federal budget deficits. Of course, he could have proposed phasing out the tax cuts that benefited the wealthy. He could have proposed that the U.S. military leave Iraq. That dubious venture has already cost the American tax payer $200 billion. But neither of those common sense solutions crossed his mind. Like any other true believer in upper class entitlement, Greenspan wants to cut social security benefits. Give to the rich, hurt the federal budget in the process, and then make working class and middle class workers pay.

The inarticulate but shrewd George W. Bush doesn’t come out and say he is hostile to social security. In 2001 Bush appointed a Commission to Strengthen Social Security. It is difficult to argue against strengthening social security. But then again the President couldn’t call it the Commission to Fleece Working People. That name certainly would raise eyebrows but that is precisely what Republicans want to do. In our media-emasculated, one-party ruled political system the right are becoming less and less fearful of even the most obvious attempts at wealth redistribution favoring the wealthy.

The President says he trusts us to invest our own money. He speaks of giving investment choice to younger workers. Republicans know that the term privatization is dangerous, so they don’t use it. They speak of individual accounts for younger workers. These accounts would be administered by private investment firms and in the process bring a windfall to Wall Street. All members of the Commission were in favor of private accounts, and none represented organized labor or public interest groups. Two very rich Black people, Robert Johnson, Black media and sports mogul, and Richard Parsons, AOL Time Warner mogul sat on the Commission. If you are going to destroy a system that helps working class people one or two Black faces are required for the seal of approval.

Despite having made fortunes, neither Parsons nor Johnson said anything about social security that made sense. Both said they want Black people to build wealth. They will find few who oppose them on that issue, but they neglected to mention how the current social security system prevents Black people from building wealth. It didn’t occur to either of these gentlemen that perhaps racism and the low wages that it produces have an effect on the ability of Blacks to earn more and thus build wealth. Telling the truth about the way Black people are treated in our society just isn’t allowed anymore. But nonsensical theories on strengthening an already strong social security system are a perfect match for the current political climate.

The anti-social security argument is that lower life expectancy for Blacks, especially males, makes social security a bad financial deal. The brutal reality is that most Black men won’t live long enough to collect retirement benefits. However, it is unlikely that conservatives care about the lives of Black men. If they did they might enact a national health insurance program or come up with a Medicare drug plan that actually lowered the price of prescriptions. But they have done none of these things. Claiming concern for the downtrodden is a sure ticket to political legitimacy. 

Despite the reality of shorter life expectancy, Black workers benefit quite well from the current social security system. The sad truth is that early deaths benefit surviving spouses and minor children. Low wage workers also have a larger percentage of earnings from social security. They are also more likely to become disabled. The end result is that Blacks receive the same amount of benefits from social security as whites even though life expectancy is less.

The Republicans pretend to run from Greenspan’s remarks, but only until after Election Day. At that point we will be told that the Iraq occupation needs more of our tax dollars, the draft will begin again and we will find out why there are no Weapons of Mass Destruction. The President may not even bother with a phony social security commission. He will frighten Americans into radically changing the nation’s only true safety net program. Private investment accounts will become a reality but under another name. They will be called Individual Freedom Accounts or Patriot Act Accounts or something else that sounds good and soothing. They will not be called Budget Busting Accounts or Leave No Investment Banker Behind Accounts. Dick Parsons and Robert Johnson will keep getting rich and fool many of us into thinking we can be rich too if we just ditch social security.

Margaret Kimberley’s Freedom Rider column appears weekly in .  Ms. Kimberley is a freelance writer living in New York City.  She can be reached via e-Mail at [email protected]. You can read more of Ms. Kimberley's writings at http://freedomrider.blogspot.com/

March 4 2004
Issue 80

is published every Thursday.