John Larson

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Madam Speaker, if the gentlewoman would yield, on that point, we heard the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin) discuss that earlier, that even the President's so-called privatization plan does nothing to close the gap or the shortfalls that potentially exist in Social Security if we do not act on a bipartisan basis. So to the gentleman's point, this is all about ideology and politics and not substantively about doing what is in the best interest of the American public. I think that is what has citizens so outraged, that this seems to be from the very get-go, from whether you go back to Hoover and Landon and Friedman and Stockman, who said we must starve the beast, that beast being Social Security, that is what has American citizens outraged at this proposal. That is what has them writing thousands of letters to each and every one of us because of their deep- seated concern of where this administration is taking us, to a ``me'' society versus ``us.'' The gentleman said it very eloquently and passionately, and again, I want to thank the gentlewoman for arranging this dialogue and these letters which I hope we continue to come to the floor and discuss.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Wisconsin again for her diligence and hard work in this effort and deeply appreciate the opportunity to be here this evening. I honestly believe that Congress should do more of this. I hope that people all across this country are listening to these heartfelt responses from our constituents, and in so many ways, they are often more eloquent than any Member of the United States Congress because their needs and concerns are so heartfelt and real, and this is what I think makes this such a special evening for this Special Order. I would just like to read one more letter that I have, with the gentlewoman's permission, and this is from a woman in Newington in my district who writes, I am very concerned about what Mr. Bush is doing to the country. I have been working for 37 years, and I have been at my current position for 28 years. From day one, I was told that I would be given a pension at the end of my tenure. Over the years, the company has changed hands and, in fact, changed leaders. Now, the pension has been changed to a cash balance. Because of this change, I will be getting about one-quarter of what I would have been getting in my pension, and now, Mr. Bush claims that under his privatization plan, Social Security benefits would go up. Yet the Congressional Budget Office says Bush's privatization plan will cut benefits by 45 percent or more for seniors. The Bush plan will reduce benefits for all seniors, even those who choose not to invest in private accounts. I am too old to build up a substantial plan and account. Have we not been traumatized enough under this man? I do not want you to vote on this plan or make such a drastic change to the system. If the politicians put a lock on it, like Mr. Gore wanted to, we most likely would not be in this situation. Mr. Bush should stop spending the money. We have the money for Iraq but not for our seniors in this country. I am asking you, please, not to vote for this. She, like so many others we have heard tonight, I think speaks to what is their concern. Some of our colleagues on the other side have said that these are fear tactics. Hardly. Grace Vignean again points out that we were a strong generation that persevered through the Great Depression, a Second World War, the Korean and Vietnam Wars. We raised families, rebuilt these countries. We do not scare easy. What we want is the truth. What we need, I think, is for all of us to come together with an understanding, and it is my sincere hope that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are listening, as well as the President. President Roosevelt said it best. He said he was concerned that they had become frozen in the ice of their own indifference. Frozen in the ice of their own indifference towards collapsing pensions and shriveled up savings that, for the most part, have to go for the care of your health. Indifference to the 45 million people in this country that are uninsured, indifference to the women and minorities whose drops off in benefits will be so dramatic. That is why the voices of these citizens need to be heard and why this Congress needs to act in a responsible and bipartisan manner in order to continue to strengthen and preserve the most successful social program and governmental program in the history of this country. Again, I thank the gentlewoman for providing us the opportunity to discuss these letters and the concern of our constituents.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Madam Speaker, I wanted to ask the leading Democrat on Social Security on the Committee on Ways and Means, the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Baldwin) discussed very eloquently and poignantly, as the gentlewoman pointed out in her letters, the number of people outside of the retirement benefits, but survivors benefits and also those on disability, what are the statistics on that?

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. I thank the gentleman for clarifying that.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Has the administration now admitted that that will not in any way, shape, manner or form close the gap that exists?

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. So when the gentleman says the President's good blueprint will in fact weaken Social Security, that is exactly what it is doing?

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman, and I commend the gentlewoman from Wisconsin for truly putting this together and taking the time to make sure that all of America gets to hear what has got to be a mosaic of concern all across this country, because, like the gentlewoman and myself, several others have conducted town hall meetings and forums and have received letters of concern from our constituents all across this great country of ours. It is quite compelling when you both read the mail and you listen to the citizens of this great country speak their minds. I was particularly struck by a gentleman from Windsor, Connecticut, who wrote me and said: ``I would like to encourage you to oppose President Bush's Social Security personal accounts with every resource possible. I turned 54 this year, missing the cutoff for retaining my full promised benefit by 7 months. I am not a spend-thrift who has wasted his money over the years. In fact, I have placed at least 10 percent of my earnings in retirement savings plans since 1978. I fully fund my 401(k) and my Roth. But I have no pension, and my wife is not even eligible for a 401(k) or equivalent since she works for the Manchester School District as a tutor. ``Despite all my efforts to save, I will not have enough to retire on without the guarantee of Social Security. Why? Because I worked for five companies between 1984 and 2000 that all went out of business or left Connecticut: Heublein, Ames, Shawmut, Northeast Savings and International Paper. Each time I was forced to find another job, I lost a year of contribution to my 401(k) and another year of employer match, through no fault of my own. That adds up to quite a bit of savings that have been lost. I am putting one child through college and I have another yet to go. I have no more to save. I have always supported my family and paid my own way. I am relying on the Social Security system my employers and I have already contributed about $200,000 to, to live up to its promises. If the government of the United States can turn its back on its promises to its own citizens, of what value is it? ``Please, help me and every other person in my shoes.'' It is this kind of poignant response that we have heard from our citizens all across the country that screams out for this Congress to take action. One little woman in my district, part of the golden girls, her name is Gracie Vigneau, stood up and said, I understand that there are three legs to this stool. I understand the importance, having lived through the Great Depression, having fought and persevered through the Second World War, having come home and rebuilt this Nation, but I always felt that we had this special contract, that guarantee from our government, that third leg of the stool, if you will, that was the Social Security guarantee. It provided the floor, the safety net from which nobody could fall through. That was the contract that came out of the, well, the Great Depression and its aftermath, and what it did to so many people and how it ruined their lives. Yet, today, we see the problems that exist both in pensions and personal savings, which are in far greater crisis than Social Security.'' And so she asks, ``Why would we place any element of risk in the program that is there for our guarantee?'' She said, ``I will be long gone.'' She said, ``I am concerned about my children and their children and their children's children.'' This has been the most successful program in the history of this country, and it has kept so many people out of the depths of poverty. Just last week we talked about the impact that this program has had on women and how they are disproportionately disadvantaged and how crippled they would become if the so-called Bush plan were ever to go into effect. So I commend the gentlewoman. I have other things, other letters to read as well in this dialogue that we have here this evening, this important dialogue with the American public, that they have with us placed their trust, and where we have sworn to give our very best. I know that we are joined by the gentleman from New Jersey, and I will yield back to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin so that she may recognize another outstanding member of this caucus.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Madam Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Ray McKenna of East Hartford, a community sports leader, champion, and friend, who passed away Tuesday, March 1, 2005. A hometown hero, Ray defined integrity, commitment, and generosity of spirit and vision to his family and the East Hartford community. For kids like me growing up in East Hartford, the man from Burnside--Ray McKenna was a legend. At East Hartford High, Ray demonstrated his competitive nature in athletics and excelled at basketball, football and baseball. In 1939, he was the instrumental cog in East Hartford's first Connecticut state basketball championship. With a sense of duty to his country, Ray enlisted in the U.S. Navy during World War II and was stationed in the Philippines and the Aleutian Islands. Upon his return, Ray organized a local fast-pitch softball team, the legendary Burnside Dovelettes in 1947. For 30 years, he lead the Dovelettes to the top of the semipro league with a record of 1,831-339. While employed by the East Hartford Post Office, Ray formed the Marco Polo Explorers basketball team and coached them to 13 New England Basketball Association titles. In 35 years, the semipro team held an unparallel record of 1,123 to 245. Ray also founded and directed the annual Tap- Off Club Hall of Fame dinner to honor East Hartford athletes for 28 years. Although Ray retired from the Post Office in 1985, his long interest in sports continued and he became Sports Editor for the East Hartford Gazette--the most widely read column in the town. The impact Ray has had on the town of East Hartford is inspirational. In 1984, East Hartford honored Ray's devotion to athletics by dedicating a local sports field in his name. For over two decades, Ray McKenna Field has been the home for baseball teams of all ages, including the Hartford Hawks. In 1985, Ray was presented with the Gold Key, the most prestigious sports' award in the state of Connecticut. The Gold Key is awarded by the Connecticut Sports Writer's Alliance to those like Ray, who have made noteworthy contributions to athletics in Connecticut. Representing one of Connecticut's finest, Ray was also inducted into the New England Basketball Hall of Fame at the University of Rhode Island in 2003. With all his good works and awards of recognition, Ray will most be remembered for his honest love of the game. He lived everyday giving back to his community and inspired the best in all of us. To Ray, true victory was the result of discipline, confidence, and heart. His giving nature, generous laugh and Irish wit will be missed by all those who knew him. For my family and myself, we will forever treasure and value this wonderful man who so loved the game, the competition, and the camaraderie of sports and made it the centerpiece of his life in East Hartford, the state of Connecticut and throughout the Nation. Our hearts go out to the entire McKenna family, especially his beloved wife Josephine, his son Michael, and daughters Dorene, Susan and Carol, eight grandchildren and four great-grandchildren.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin) again for his insight and his outstanding service to the Committee on Ways and Means in this United States Congress. I think Roosevelt said it best when referring to our distinguished colleagues on the other side of the aisle. With regard to Social Security and its impact and the plight that so many citizens go through, he said, they are frozen in the ice of their own indifference, the indifference to what ordinary Americans face on a daily basis. No one understands that better than the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky), who works on their behalf every single day and fights for them and has done an outstanding job in her district and beyond and also held public hearings and is here this evening to add to this dialogue. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. The gentlewoman is absolutely correct. And I thank her for pointing that out. I would like to yield to both the gentlewomen from California to finish off the remainder of our time and focus on the specific needs and concerns that you both articulate so well Mrs. Capps.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I know the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) left here and spoke earlier, eloquently as always, left here so he could be with you and share remarks with you over there as well.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, let me echo the sentiments of the gentlewoman and commend the outstanding leadership that has been provided by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis). I yield to the gentlewoman.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for articulating that point. I am pleased now to turn to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps), who also has spoken and held hearings in her district and is here this evening to contribute to this very important dialogue about the strengthening of Social Security and pointing out the direct impact that it has on women who rely so heavily on Social Security.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, many have said to me in my forums as well, and I am sure the gentlewoman heard the same thing, and I am pleased to announce we have been joined by two distinguished Members from the Great State of California as well to contribute to this dialogue, but many have said at the hearings that I have conducted how Social Security for so many of them is their only source of income, and they look out and they see their pensions disappearing, they see cuts that are being made on a regular basis, and so they ask aloud for the government to please honor, honor, what it has promised and guaranteed them and what they have worked so hard for throughout all of their life. I think it is important, as the gentleman from Arizona said, that we get the facts out there and expose the myths that have been put forward.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. The monthly retirement benefit for a woman is $798. In America, could you live on $798 a month? This is what the guarantee is. But it does prevent these people from falling into the depths of poverty. It is what Franklin Delano Roosevelt promised to the American people.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, it might also surprise people too, when we are talking about Social Security, I know for many people, from Hoover to Landon to Friedman to Stockman, that Social Security is anathema. It is something that they would just as soon do away with. Mr. Stockman said it is ``a beast that needs to be starved.'' When we look at the policies emanating from this administration, you wonder if this is not still the plan that they are marching forward with, to privatize and to further starve the moneys that are needed. How much money do people receive on average? What does someone get who has worked hard and played by the rules and sacrificed all their life, whether they be people that are currently serving in Afghanistan or Iraq, or whether they are firefighters or our police, or whether they are in the hospitals as nurses or other people?

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, it might surprise a number of our viewers, because I believe the gentleman from Arizona was talking before about the need to get the facts straight. I believe that the gentleman is correct about that, and there should be an open and honest and frank debate about this issue, and all the various proposals should be laid on the table. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) has asked for that, where we still have not seen any plan. We are told by Secretary Bolton and others that it is a ``work in progress,'' that we may see it in the future. In the meantime, I think a number of our listeners would be interested to know that in 2000, Social Security lifted 7 million senior women out of poverty. This means that without that safety net, without that floor which they cannot fall through because it has the full faith and credit of the American Government, it is the social contract we have with our people who have paid in to this system, that it is there for them. It is a guarantee.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, no, I did not. But I think the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), our distinguished leader on the Committee on Ways and Means, said earlier that clearly the President has asked us to wait until he brings forward a plan. He has withdrawn the fact that this is a crisis, but points out there are problems. Everyone recognizes that there are problems with Social Security and Social Security needs to be strengthened. But the President further goes on to now admit, as well as the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) points out, when the actuaries and the financial people have a chance to look at the proposed plan, that it does nothing to solve the problems that the President has spelled out in Social Security. So one has to come away with thinking as to why would they possibly then want to privatize or introduce risk in the most successful governmental program in the history of this country.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, the gentlewoman raises a very excellent point, and, again, it is the same point that was raised earlier by the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick) and also the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky). What we need, and the guarantee that we have provided every American through Social Security, is, as the gentlewoman pointed out, a safety net, a floor from which they cannot fall through. And, as the gentlewoman pointed out, our pension systems are already overstressed. We have gone from defined benefit to defined contribution to companies pulling out, wholesale, from providing benefits, to people's personal savings where, again, the gentlewoman points out the difficulty that people have, the lack of incentives that are there for them to save. So the question that a lot of the people at my forums ask is why would we introduce an element of risk in the only guarantee that we have on that three-legged stool that prevents us from falling through the floor and into the depths of poverty, which for a woman in this country is so vitally important.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, it is interesting that they were friends during the Medicare debate but now that they have spoken out against Social Security, they are now a special interest group.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, the gentlewoman may have heard what the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) said earlier.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. I yield to the gentlewoman from California.

Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, did most of the individuals who attended the gentlewoman's forums and public hearings understand that Social Security benefits were not just retirement benefits, that they also provided survivor benefits?