Unelected officials make progress

Editor's note: The following is a "best of " Ken Root's weekly columns. It originally ran in May of 2005. In this week following elections it still seems to fit.

"No one is more honest than a democrat who's not in office." --Will Rogers

I wrote a brief summation on Social Security in an early year column. I suggested that there was so much time and life left in the political argument for change that it would be best for Washington to use the system to breed divisiveness rather than fix the problems for at least four more presidential cycles.

The divisiveness has certainly happened as Democrats and Republicans have been openly warring since they divvyed up turf and both pronounced that they were the party of the people. Meanwhile the "people" who have taken the identified problems and solutions seriously are trying to determine if congress and the president can fix social security or if their wrangling will destroy it.

Former Texas Congressman, Charlie Stenholm, along with former Minnesota Congressman, Tim Penny, have formed an organization called: "For Our Grandchildren" and Stenholm presented his case to me and other farm broadcasters gathered in Washington.

Stenholm held a west Texas seat for over 25 years by being a conservative Democrat. He finally was the victim of Republican driven redistricting of the state to the point that his "blue dog Democrat" politics couldn't keep him in office. I once asked him if a "blue dog" was the opposite of a "yellow dog" in his party. He was obliged to be offended by association since the Oklahoma term "yellow dog" meant that some Democrats were so partisan that they would vote for a yellow dog if he was the party's candidate for any office.

Stenholm was one of the most respected House agriculture committee members of our time because he worked with everyone and had no problem crossing party lines if it meant a better deal for his constituents and farmers in general. It's hard to believe that the Republicans targeted him and forced him out of office because he wouldn't put his political ideology ahead of his desire to find solutions to problems.

In that vein, he and Penny began a campaign to bring some reason back to the social security debate. I can't honestly find any tricks or ties within his arguments that show me they are operatives for either party. The website is: forourgrandchildren.org

Stenholm is now in a position to dispute myths that we've taken as fact. He confided in our group that there is no social security trust fund. This alone is a major disappointment for those who believed they were paying in to a retirement account that would be there when they reached the age to qualify. He didn't use the political advantage and turn to who was to blame. He just said that he believed that the first call on every tax dollar has to go to pay the promised benefits to those who retire.

His next argument is one we don't want to hear: The system is going to fail because the baby boom generation is going to overload it. Those of us born from 1945 to 1964 are that magic generation who will spike the drain on benefits beginning in 2008, when the first of us turn 62 and continue to decrease the ratio of retirees until we start to die at age 77.

Therein lies the problem Stenholm wants to fix. We set the system up when Americans had a life expectancy of 63 years and never changed it. Doing so now makes it appear that the contract with workers who pay into the system is being modified against their will.

I remember the class of 1964 in my school as I followed them by three years. They took a wide swath because there were about 25 percent more than any class before or after. It is remarkable that we have ignored this giant wave for so long but I guess it's human nature to take care of ourselves even knowing we leave the future in jeopardy.

Back to the politics, Stenholm and Penny have been attracting attention as they show the need to raise the age for social security payments to 70 or higher and to initiate personal retirement accounts, another political football.

It is a fact that the payroll tax that is the contribution for social security is disproportionately paid by the low income worker. Income taxes are disproportionately paid by the high income worker. The social security system has paid out benefits based on length and level of contributions. The plan that's endorsed by Republicans and remarkably opposed by Democrats is to "means test" the retirees and pay more to the person who has no other income while allowing those who wish to build additional revenue to contribute to a personal retirement account during the course of their employment.

Stenholm says that any sitting congressional member today who says the way to fix social security is to cut benefits or raise taxes will get themselves "unelected" at the first opportunity. This puts the issue past political maneuvering and back in our laps.

As a young man I did not think I'd get any social security, but I paid in because I knew my parents would get back more than they paid in. My father lived to age 92 so he cashed in big time. Now that I'm old enough to see retirement, I want to get my full benefits and have to slap myself to realize that I'm going to be paid by my children and grandchildren.

So, do we have the will to realign this retirement system "for our grandchildren" so that we can continue to have a safety net under us when we become disabled, lose a wage earner spouse or determine that we are ready to draw our entitlement and enjoy life?

No matter our politics, it is a sad fact that the behavior of our elected officials is really a reflection of us. Now we know why congressmen have to have been "unelected" before they can honestly offer solutions to our problems.

Editor's note: Ken Root is now celebrating his 34th year as an agricultural professional. His career began as a vocational agriculture teacher then turned to agricultural broadcasting and writing as well as environmental consulting and association management. He was the original host of AgriTalk (1994-2001) and now is lead farm broadcaster for WHO Radio in Des Moines, Iowa. Ken also contributes to the Midwest Ag Report electronic newsletter each Friday. A free e-mail subscription is available by going to www.hpj.com and clicking on Midwest Ag Report.

Date: 11/8/06

	Web hpj.com

Copyright/Privacy
Copyright 1995-2008.  High Plains Publishers, Inc.  All rights reserved.  Any republishing of these pages, including electronic reproduction of the editorial archives or classified advertising, is strictly prohibited. If you have questions or comments you can reach us at High Plains Journal 1500 E. Wyatt Earp Blvd., P.O. Box 760, Dodge City, KS 67801 or call 1-800-452-7171. Email: webmaster@hpj.com