Transcript
PETER ORSZAG: First, it does restore long-term sustainable solvency to Social Security, putting the system on a solid financial footing for the long term, and it does not destroy the program in order to save it. In other words, we do not think it is necessary to completely overhaul the program in order to put it on a sustainable basis.
So, when we say Social Security, we mean saving it both from its financial problems and from those who would use those financial problems as an excuse to completely overhaul a system that we think in structure is actually a fairly good one.
In addition, there are no accounting gimmicks or magic asterisks in the plan. So there is no reliance on general revenue transfers, and there's no ignoring the risks associated with stocks relative to other financial assets. This is I think in marked contrast to some of the other recent plans that have been put forward even in the last few days, and that may be the subject of some discussion after this presentation.
Finally, we combined benefit reductions and revenue increases rather than relying solely on one or the other, trying to follow the precedent of the 1983 Greenspan reforms, which again did involve both benefit reductions and revenue increases.
It's also a progressive reform. We protect the most vulnerable beneficiaries, disabled workers, young surviving children, lifetime low earners and widows. We ask average earners to accept some modest sacrifices in restoring long-term balance to this program and then ask higher earners who have enjoyed particularly rapid earnings growth over the past two decades and who just enjoyed some tax cuts,
also, to play a somewhat larger role in reaching long-term balance within Social Security.
Read the full event transcript. (PDF—95KB)
View Full Transcript »