'The Proof Is In The Pudding': Lloyd Smucker Spars With Larson Over Social Security Funding

4 months ago

During a House Ways & Means Committee hearing on Tuesday, Rep. Lloyd Smucker (R-PA) spoke about social security funding.

Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:

https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript

Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com

Transcript

00:00 Mr. Smucker, you're now recognized for five minutes.

00:03 >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

00:04 I refer to something Mr. Larson said.

00:07 I'm not even sure where to start here.

00:09 There's a lot to talk about.

00:11 This has been a great conversation.

00:13 A few things I want to mention, I think.

00:16 Mr. Goss, you had responded in answer to a question

00:21 from Mr. Gustaf about the commission or the deal in '83

00:26 and talked very positively about that.

00:28 Really people coming together and resolving this,

00:32 putting everything on the table

00:34 and making it solvent for years to come.

00:36 We could do that again, right?

00:39 And we should do that.

00:41 >> Absolutely.

00:43 We're much looking forward to that.

00:44 >> Yeah. And I'd like to suggest to Mr. Larson and others

00:48 who I think are sincere about the desire

00:53 to fix Social Security, there's a difference

00:56 between proposing a bill that doesn't go anywhere

00:59 and having a real bipartisan discussion about resolving this.

01:04 And so I guess I'd like to suggest the fiscal commission

01:08 that we had recommended that looks at both debt

01:13 and Social Security really is an attempt to do that.

01:18 And I know you've spoken out --

01:19 >> Would the gentleman yield?

01:20 >> Let me finish my sentence and I'll be happy to.

01:22 I know you've spoken out against that.

01:25 And, you know, I'm telling you in all sincerity that I think

01:30 that we could resolve this if we had that kind of conversation

01:34 with the American people.

01:35 We could do what has been done in '83.

01:39 And we could take your bill and others and put them together

01:43 and really resolve this for the American people.

01:46 I can tell you that I'm certainly interested

01:48 in doing that.

01:49 People on our side are interested in doing that.

01:52 And we're willing to put everything on the table.

01:55 And so, yes, I'll yield.

01:56 >> So what is it you're putting on the table, number one?

01:59 And there are many Social Security proposals

02:05 that exist out there, not just Social Security 2100.

02:08 But also there's a big difference

02:12 between the Greenspan Commission and the commission

02:15 that was proposed behind closed doors with only a select group

02:19 of people with a decision

02:22 that would require only an up or down vote.

02:25 That is -- that's not a democratic,

02:28 let's sort through this, let's have this exposed to the public,

02:32 let's go through this, and let's put all those discussions

02:36 on the table.

02:37 And I totally agree with you that people like yourself

02:42 and others are very sincere about this,

02:44 except the proof is in the pudding.

02:47 >> So it -- and I'll take my time because I'd love to get

02:50 to a lot more here.

02:51 But I would love to continue to have that discussion.

02:53 I would love to not just get a no on that

02:56 because I can tell you we're sincere about it

02:58 and we could put everything on the table to try to solve this.

03:02 I do want to -- on your point on the debt, so very briefly

03:07 so that people understand this,

03:08 initially when Social Security was put in place,

03:12 we were taking in more money coming

03:14 in than was going out, correct?

03:17 When did that change?

03:18 When did Social Security no longer begin

03:22 to receive more money annually than they were paying out?

03:25 Mr. Goss?

03:26 >> Well, most recently that has occurred in 2010.

03:31 It was expected to be in 2020 at the time of the '83 amendments.

03:36 But because of some of the changes --

03:38 >> Since 2010, we've been paying out more

03:40 than we've been taking in?

03:41 >> Exactly.

03:42 >> And by -- within nine years, the difference --

03:47 the trust, which was the difference

03:49 that has been accumulating over time,

03:51 that has been borrowed and is being paid back,

03:53 in nine years that expires, right?

03:56 We -- that is gone.

03:58 We no longer have excess funds.

04:00 Am I right on that?

04:01 >> On a combined basis, maybe 10 years on that order.

04:04 >> So at that point, unless something changes,

04:08 people will no longer get all of their Social Security benefits

04:11 because we don't have money to pay it, correct?

04:13 >> Under current law, we cannot pay what's not in the fund.

04:16 >> Or if at that time Congress decides to make it up by taking

04:21 on additional debt, that's a choice we could make, right?

04:24 We could continue to pay benefits if nothing has changed

04:28 by taking on additional debt and paying for those benefits.

04:31 >> Unprecedented, but anything is possible.

04:33 >> But at that point, it would add to the debt, right?

04:37 >> If Congress were to change the law and say

04:40 that we will put -- we will borrow from the public --

04:43 >> The only point I'm making, and I'd love

04:45 to have more conversation about this publicly.

04:48 That's why we need a commission to talk about this.

04:51 Is that this will contribute.

04:53 There's a fundamental problem.

04:55 We have far less workers than we did -- than we do retirees.

05:00 That ratio is far different.

05:01 And so we need more workers.

05:04 By the way, I agree with Ms. Sanchez,

05:06 who I don't often agree with, on immigration.

05:08 It is something that's a partial solution here.

05:12 We need a lot more workers.

05:13 We should be talking about legal immigration.

05:15 But it's a great conversation.

05:18 I wish others would agree that we need to continue

05:22 to have this conversation.

05:23 This is how I think a commission could work.

05:26 We would take this conversation across America.

05:29 We would begin to have a real understanding

05:32 of the facts and how they exist.

05:35 We just can't have that conversation

05:36 in five minutes each here.

05:37 I only get four if I give some to you.

05:40 But like I'd love to continue this conversation.

05:43 But thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your indulgence of time here.

05:45 >> Thank you, Mr. Smucker.

05:47 next we'll go to our dear friend from the great state of Illinois Mr.

'The Proof Is In The Pudding': Lloyd Smucker Spars With Larson Over Social Security Funding

Category

Transcript

Recommended