53 Senators vote to raid the Social Security trust fund

TownHall.com ^ | 3/17/06 | Tim Chapman

[eeevil conservative]

53 Senators vote to raid the Social Security trust fund

Yesterday, Senators Jim DeMint and Mike Crapo introduced an amendment to prevent the current Social Security Surplus from continuing to be spent. 53 Senators voted against it.

After the vote, DeMint issued the following statement:

“Sadly, fifty-three senators turned their backs on America’s seniors,” Senator DeMint said. “There is simply no way to save Social Security if we don’t have the courage stop using the surplus as a secret slush fund. I’m thankful there were forty-six senators who stood with America’s seniors to end the raid. We will not be deterred by cynics who offer no solutions.”

“Those who voted against this amendment voted to raid Social Security,” said Senator DeMint. “Now, every senator will be on record whether they oppose or support the raid. This said absolutely nothing about personal accounts, it was about whether you believe Social Security should be saved or allowed to wither on the vine.”

Details about the amendment via a DeMint press release are in the extended section.

UPDATE: Pasted below are the 53 Senators who voted to raid the fund -- Republicans who should no better are in bold. Click here to see the whole breakdown.

Akaka (D-HI) Baucus (D-MT) Bayh (D-IN) Biden (D-DE) Bingaman (D-NM) Boxer (D-CA) Burns (R-MT) Byrd (D-WV) Cantwell (D-WA) Carper (D-DE) Chafee (R-RI) Clinton (D-NY) Collins (R-ME) Conrad (D-ND) Dayton (D-MN) Dodd (D-CT) Domenici (R-NM) Dorgan (D-ND) Durbin (D-IL) Feingold (D-WI) Feinstein (D-CA) Harkin (D-IA) Inouye (D-HI) Jeffords (I-VT) Johnson (D-SD) Kennedy (D-MA) Kerry (D-MA) Kohl (D-WI) Landrieu (D-LA) Lautenberg (D-NJ) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) Lieberman (D-CT) Lincoln (D-AR) Lugar (R-IN) Menendez (D-NJ) Mikulski (D-MD) Murray (D-WA) Nelson (D-FL) Nelson (D-NE) Obama (D-IL) Pryor (D-AR) Reed (D-RI) Reid (D-NV) Rockefeller (D-WV) Salazar (D-CO) Sarbanes (D-MD) Schumer (D-NY) Smith (R-OR) Snowe (R-ME) Stabenow (D-MI) Talent (R-MO) Wyden (D-OR)

---

The current Social Security system allows Congress to spend the Social Security surplus on other government programs. Including interest, Congress has raided $1.7 trillion from Social Security since 1985. The surplus now only consists of IOU’s stacked in a vault in West Virginia that can only be paid back by raising taxes or cutting spending.

The DeMint-Crapo Amendment to Stop the Raid on Social Security would have allowed the Senate to pass legislation with the following requirements:

· Social Security surpluses must be used to help pay for future benefits

· That it make no changes to the benefits of those Americans born before January 1, 1950

· That it provide a voluntary option for younger Americans to obtain legally binding ownership of a portion of their benefits.

[JRios1968]

Boxer and Feinswine are the senators for the state I am living in (they are NOT my senators!) Need I say how they voted?

Won't matter, though...the sheeple of California keep voting for the bloated ones.

[JayNorth]

I do not really care. I am young enough social security will have long collapsed by the time I retire.

It has nothing to do with retirement. It has to do with Congress spending trillions more than income. That can only result in higher taxes down the road, and that will affect you, retired or not.

[Racer1]

But I will added that its not because of this issue. Its just because I think they have been in there too long. These jobs should not be career jobs that collect huge pensions and pay increases.

[eeevil conservative]

ROFLLLLL!!

hey, I have a bridge in Alaska I would like to sell you...

really....

[eeevil conservative]

TREMENDOUS POST!

GREAT WORK!

thanks!

[CheyennePress]

Eh, are you aware of the fact that the bill would have prevented dipping into social security funds for purposes other than social security?

As in Specter and Santorum both voted for keeping social security stockpiles solely for social security. Seems to me that they voted on the right side of this issue (that is, if we can't have reform).

[JayNorth]

Both PA Senators voted yea. I will not be voting for either one next time.

On this vote, the "Yea" vote are the good guys.

[goldstategop]

Its a Ponzi Scheme. Which is why the Dems and RINOs made sure Bush's plan died so they could continue to steal from retirees. The government is acting like a bunco artist when its takes money that's set aside for the American people's golden years for whatever use the politicians see fit. Now you know why these people are not to be taken at their word when you hear them swear they will protect and strengthen Social Security. Its a joke.

(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")

[SouthTexas]

Both of mine voted "Aye". Some of ya'll have work to do!

[radar101]

Republicans who should no better are in bold........................................ They are NOT REPUBLICANS> They Are RINO's or "Moderates"..................................... Moderate= stick your finger in the wind, see where the wind is going, go there.

[raybbr]

Yes. The government is already investing social security money by buying bonds.

Can I ask where the interest comes from on those bonds?

[Diana in Wisconsin]

"I do not really care. I am young enough social security will have long collapsed by the time I retire."

Good for you! What percentage of your income are you currently putting into your 401K or your IRA? 10%? 20% 25%? (Save half of your money starting tomorrow if you're smart.)

You do realize that those coming up behind you, such as your younger siblings and future children, WILL be paying for YOU one way or another; through payroll taxes or some other new program that the socialists use to bilk money out of future Generations, right? ;)

[Bigun]

Both PA Senators voted yea. I will not be voting for either one next time.

Suit yourself but a YEA vote was the correct one on this issue.

[DannyTN]

Correction...the 45 that voted for it are the worst kind of politicians. Not surprisingly a review of the list reveals mostly democrats voting for it.

[onyx]

On your list the YEA vote is the good one.
Not so on the original post.

I will soothe myself knowing that my two senators voted correctly.

[stylin19a]

This is the lock-box scheme we derided Gore for.
all of a sudden it's a good idea ?

Buying bonds\notes aint the answer either, that's what we are doing now and they have to be paid some day...with what ?

Pres. Bush offered a viable option that is a good beginning, and it once again made SS the 3rd rail of politics.

[VOYAGER]

DEM BUTTS: You can SMELL 'EM as far as you can see their voting RECORDS!

[kenth]

I'm betting that you have a large phone bill every month.

[Cobra64]

I think we're using the wrong language when discussing Social Security. We can start by calling "raiding" what it really is: the purchase of government bonds that earn interest. And what entity is paying the interest? The government. Where does the government get the money to pay the interest? Taxpayers.

I'd feel better if the "surplus" were invested in the private sector. Silly me.

[John Filson]

The kicker is the privatization element. This worries many voters because they think the government is a more reliable steward of others' money.