William A. Alexander – 7/3/05

This page was last updated on July 3, 2005.

Form letter faulted; William A. Alexander; Beaver County Times; July 3, 2005.

This is at least the fifth letter from Mr. Alexander since March opposing any Socialist Security changes other than tax increases and benefit reductions. Mr. Alexander incorrectly claims others propose Socialist Security tax increases and benefit reductions and then criticizes them. What’s really odd is those “fixes” are exactly what Mr. Alexander himself proposes!

Below is a detailed critique of the letter.

“I have previously contacted my senators and representative about our Social Security problem. I received U.S. Rep. Melissa Hart’s form letter responding to her constituents’ inquiries on Social Security.

“She makes a big point that the trust fund we have built up since 1987 has been used for other things. During the Bush 1 and 2’s years, the trust fund has been squandered mainly for tax breaks for the rich and GW’s folly in Iraq.”

[RWC] “Tax breaks for the rich.” Mr. Alexander and his kind conveniently ignore that everyone received tax rate cuts and the “evil rich” still pay a disproportionately large share of taxes. For tax year 2002, the top 25% of earners paid 66% of the total federal income tax collected. In other words, these evil rich guys paid over two and a half times their fair share. The bottom 50% paid only 3.5%! In other words, this group paid only 7% (1/14^th) of its fair share.

“If you recall, the GOP always spoke derogatorily about the ‘Social Security lockbox’ when it was discussed.”

[RWC] I haven’t seen the letter to which Mr. Alexander refers, so I’ll reluctantly assume Ms. Hart uses the term “trust fund.” If she did, Ms. Hart was mistaken. There is not and never has been a Socialist Security “trust fund” or “lockbox.” Administrations of both parties have spent SS taxes for non-SS purposes.

“Hart stated that to replace this trust fund would be too painful for taxpayers and other solutions must be found. Then, she went on to list six dates where various Republican-controlled House committees have held meetings about Social Security with no details on what if anything was decided nor any plans to solve the problem.

“For Washington to tell us now that the trust fund it has borrowed from every year for other purposes is too hard to put back is wrong. Then, to indicate that we should accept lower benefits or higher Social Security tax rates while maintaining the $90,000 cap so their rich friends and contributors pay less than their fair share is a crime.”

[RWC] Mr. Alexander seems to oppose lower benefits, yet that is one of his suggestions (increasing the retirement age) below. Further, I don’t believe President Bush advocated reducing benefits beyond indexing benefit increases to income. Quoting from a White House Socialist Security “fact” sheet, “Under any plan to reform Social Security, future generations should receive benefits equal to or greater than the benefits that seniors receive today.”

Regarding “higher Social Security tax rates,” I’ve never heard President Bush make that recommendation. If I’m not mistaken, he said he opposed increasing Socialist Security taxes because it has never worked. Mr. Alexander, however, advocates SS tax increases beyond those already mandated by law. This or last year’s $90,000 max taxed earnings cap increases every year by law. It more than doubled in the last 18 years alone and increased nearly $14,000 since 2000! Increasing the retirement age also raises the effective SS tax rates by lengthening the time you pay those taxes.

The idea that you “pay less than [your] fair share” of Socialist Security taxes if you earn more than the max taxed earnings cap is BS. SS benefits are based on your lifelong SS taxes. The more you pay in taxes the more you get in benefits up to a limit.

If President Bush is so worried about his “rich friends and contributors,” why did he support a liberal recommendation that SS COLA benefits should increase faster for low-income retirees faster than for high-income retirees?

“If you feel strongly about this problem, please contact your senators and representative to let them know we care. Voting Hart and Santorum out in 2006 and putting in people who will represent us would not be a bad idea either.

“The solution, as I have written before in this forum, is a combination of raising the cap above $90,000, increasing the retirement age over time and not renewing some of the tax cuts for the rich that G.W. Bush temporarily installed.”

[RWC] As I wrote at the beginning of this critique, Mr. Alexander’s “solution” is raising taxes (eliminating the max tax earnings cap and increasing the retirement age) and benefit cuts (increasing the retirement age).

As I asked in my critique of a previous Alexander letter, does Mr. Alexander read his own letters? Perhaps a second question is, “Does Mr. Alexander understand what his letters say?”