Senate Debate Roundup: SOCIAL SECURITY

With Iraq, immigration and energy issues continuing to drive this race, we haven't really heard much about social security or proposals to reform it. But a question at Friday's debate forced the two top U.S. Senate candidates to address a looming fiscal issue the country will be forced to deal with eventually.

Claire McCaskill said she is against the privatization of social security; Sen. Jim Talent seconded that motion. But how they said it was very different.

"Sometimes the best idea is stopping a bad idea," McCaskill said. "Privatizing social security is a bad idea."

"We need to protect it and we need to protect current retirees to make the system work for future retirees and that means we can't do nothing," replied Talent. "I'm strongly opposed to privatization. The people for privatization are the people for doing nothing. If we don't do anything the funds are going to run out and what are people going to be left with, their private savings. That's privatization."

McCaskill said Sen. Talent cosponsored legislation to privatize social security. "A trillion dollars to Wall Street is not the way we should fix the security of Americans as they reach retirement," McCaskill said.

So did you, fired back Talent.

"I've looked at personal accounts as an options, so has my Democratic opponent," Talent said. "She said she looked at that provided that minimum guarantees were met and other guarantees were met."

How to fix it?

McCaskill said the key is fiscal responsibility, doing things like conducting cost-benefit analysis reports on Congressional projects. "The idea that Republicans were going to balance the budget and show fiscal responsibility has become a work of fiction," McCaskill said.

Talent said the key was to use the money funneled into social security FOR social security, first to pay the current retirees and then to save some for the future.

Columnist Bob Novak has written that the President is planning to revive his social security reform proposal after the 2006 midterms, so maybe we should be asking the candidates more about it.