WASHINGTON, DC – United States Senator John Sununu (R-NH) today (3/15) issued the following statement regarding Social Security reform on the floor of the United States Senate:

“Mr. President, I wanted to speak briefly to the concerns raised by the previous speaker (Senator Debbie Stabenow, D–MI) and in particular the three grave concerns with regard to Social Security. I take issue with those three items. The first one of the three items was that any Social Security reform proposal, modernization proposal as envisioned by the President, would result from massive amounts of debt. That is wrong in part but, even worse, it is misleading.

“The reason to take up Social Security reform legislation, which I have introduced in the previous session and will introduce again, is so we avoid $12 trillion of unfunded debt that our children and grandchildren will be stuck with if we don't act now.

“To suddenly say we can't deal with Social Security because we are worried about debt is simply a smokescreen, and it is a smokescreen that refuses to recognize the reality that under the current structure we have a huge unfunded debt our children and grandchildren will be stuck with.

“Second, there was a suggestion that personal accounts for younger workers and an optional system of personal accounts would result in huge administrative costs.

“This is absolutely ridiculous, and every bit of evidence from any similar plan, similar account, similar fund, argues against such a suggestion. The Thrift Savings Plan, which is probably the best model of the kind of personal accounts envisioned by the President in legislation that I have introduced, has 3.5 million members. Under Social Security, there would be significantly more than that. The administrative costs are less than two-tenths of 1 percent.

“So to suggest that administrative costs would be exorbitantly high -- I see numbers of 1 percent or 2 percent thrown out -- is wrong. There is no evidence, no model to suggest that would be even close to the truth.

“Third, the suggestion that any kind of a personal account proposal would require deep benefit cuts is again at best misleading, but at worst it is an effort to scare retirees and those who are near retirement. It is simply wrong.

“I have introduced legislation which is scored by the Social Security actuary that makes the system solvent, is scored as bringing the system into balance permanently, has significant personal accounts, and does not require benefit cuts.

“There are a lot of proposals out there that involve changes to the current system, or even changes to benefits for, say, those at the higher income level, but to suggest that deep cuts are required is simply misleading the American public.”

-30-