The Fierce Urgency of Now & Social Security
“We are now faced with the fact that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history, there “is” such a thing as being too late. This is no time for apathy or complacency. This is a time for vigorous and positive action.”
The words above were spoken by Martin Luther King, Jr. at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington D.C. on August 28, 1963. They were part of King’s fiery “I Have A Dream” speech, though this passage is less well known and remembered than other sections. King was calling for racial and social justice and reminded Americans that we are stronger when we march forward together.
We’ve come a long way in the 61 years since 1963, and King himself, if he were alive today, may very well note that blacks have indeed made it to the “promised land.” But what if we took King’s words and applied them to America’s most well-known social insurance program—Social Security? They fit. Here’s how.
Social Security is in the red— it is paying out more in benefits than it collects in revenue. Nearly all revenue is derived from the combined 12.4% payroll tax levied on employers and workers. The only reason benefits have not yet been slashed is that Social Security is drawing on decades of surpluses (reserves) to keep benefits whole. Since the 1983 reforms up until 2021, revenue has exceeded benefit payouts, and big surpluses have piled up.
The surpluses will soon be gone. Projections for depletion are by 2033 or 2034. Of course this news is not even close to being new. The Social Security Administration has put out yearly reports for a decade warning of impending insolvency and an inability to pay full benefits. Most members of Congress, presidents, and candidates for office have yawned. After all, if the problem isn’t right now (as in this month), then there isn’t a problem at all in the view of most. Why reform something when the only risk is your political opponent saying you’re taking away people’s Social Security? It’s generally been political suicide to even bring up the topic.
But bring it up we must. The cuts will be 23% across the board, and they will be automatic. By law, Social Security can only pay out what is has on hand or saved from the past. Any candidate who says, “leave Social Security alone” (and that is nearly all but Nikki Haley) tacitly accepts this fate, or prefers to just let his/her successor try to fix it.
Back to King. There is a “fierce urgency of now” because Social Security is not just for those currently collecting but a universal program that should be protected for successive generations. That’s where AMAC’s Social Security Guarantee comes in with its mantra of “preserve and modernize” the program. Modest changes now rather than the 23% cuts that would impoverish millions surely are to be preferred—if only candidates for federal office and the general public truly understood and were honest about the issue.