I wrote an email to my U.S. Congressional Representative, Robert (Bud) Cramer, requesting that he support the "privatization" of Social Security as proposed by President Bush. I asked that he ignore the pressure of his Socialist Democrat buddies. When I sent the email I made two predictions.
I was correct on both accounts! If I were only that good in predicting the stock market... Read on for the original email I sent along with his response.
Here is the original email I sent to Mr. Cramer:
Mr. Cramer,
I'm writing to encourage you to support the Social Security reform measure as proposed by President Bush. I know some of the Socialist members of your party, such as the insane Nancy Pelosi, will pressure you to vote against it for political reasons and because they hate George Bush. But this is too important. Social Security is nothing but a Ponzi scheme that should never have been foisted upon the citizens of the United States to begin with. If I had my way, I'd like to see it completely dismantled *today*. (I'll take care of my retired father myself, thank you.) But since that possibility is remote, I'll settle for President Bush's plan.
My mother passed away at age 53. Every penny she put into Social Security is gone forever (well, except for funding some of your buddies' pork projects). I don't want to see *all* my money going down the same rathole. I'd like to pass on some tiny fraction of it that I actually *own*.
And here is his response:
February 9, 2005
Dear Mr. Thompson
I have received your e-mail expressing your concerns regarding Social Security. I have always and will continue to be a strong supporter and defender of the Social Security program. Financial security is a vital issue for countless families across the country and I understand the need to guard against cuts that would harm Social Security. When people talk about cutting these essential programs, I think of my parents and my grandfather, and how they have worked all of their lives. Those who have spent their working years paying into the Social Security system deserve their full benefits.
At the current rate, Social Security payments are expected to exceed payroll tax revenues around the year 2018. In 1950, the payments of 16 workers were required to support each retiree, compared to 3.3 workers per retiree today. Under the current pay-as-you-go retirement system, it is projected that by the year 2030, the payments of 2 workers will be required to support each retiree. When the baby boomers retire, Social Security and Medicare are expected to take up 52.7% of the general tax revenues by 2030. By the year 2070, when today's toddlers retire, Medicare and Social Security are expected to take up not only all of their projected payroll taxes but all other government revenue as well.
As you may know, private accounts are central in the debate about reforming Social Security. There are serious concerns about the Bush Administration's plan to allow younger workers to privately invest a portion of their Social Security taxes into individual accounts. Those who question the privatization of Social Security are primarily concerned with how these individual accounts would be financed and the future solvency of Social Security in general. Some argue that privatization of Social Security could involve certain risks, including financial uncertainty and unequal treatment of Social Security recipients. I believe that we should work to ensure that benefits will be secure for seniors today and for future generations.
Social Security is sure to be a major issue during the 109th Congress. The Bush Administration has yet to present a detailed plan to reform the Social Security system but is expected to begin unveiling its plan in February. As proposals regarding Social Security are presented, please know I will keep your concerns in mind as we address the future of this vital program.
Sincerely,
[signed]
Bud Cramer
Member of Congress
So, you tell me what he thinks about reform. On one had he all but admits the Ponzi scheme is doomed to catastriphic failure, but then worries about the "risks" of partial privatization. I'll tell you how he will wind up voting on it: he will do whatever his Socialist masters like Nancy Pelosi tell him to do. Regardless of the merrits of the Bush proposal, if Pelosi says "vote no because we hate Bush," Bud will do as commanded.
He talks about how Social Security is a "vital" program. If you've ever looked at how Bud Cramer votes, you'd know just about every spending program that ever makes its way through Congress is "vital" as far as he is concerned. I rarely see him vote against a spending proposal.
Bud Cramer likes to act like a "blue dog" Democrat to the public in the firmly "red state" of Alabama. Don't be fooled. He is completely owned by the liberals and Socialists. If you don't believe me, just go to the House web site and see how he votes.