Social Security is vital to women, Democrats say

President Bush's "radical" proposal to overhaul Social Security threatens a successful program that is especially important for women, four female Democratic U.S. senators said at a Seattle forum yesterday.

"Because we live longer, often we depend more on Social Security in retirement," Maria Cantwell of Washington state said. She was joined by the state's other senator, Patty Murray, and by Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Barbara Mikulski of Maryland.


		Gilbert W. Arias / P-I
	Sen. Patty Murray, center with arm raised, greets Sen. Barbara Mikulski on stage at Town Hall yesterday for a forum on President Bush's Social Security proposals. At far right is Sen. Maria Cantwell. Sen. Mary Landrieu is second from left.

Women often earn less than men and may take time off from work to raise a family, so their Social Security benefits are less to begin with, Mikulski said. And many women work for smaller employers who don't provide pension plans, she said.

"None of us can afford to sit on our bottoms," Mikulski told the enthusiastic and largely gray-haired audience that filled Town Hall to overflowing. "We've got to organize and mobilize and stop George Bush's radical plan to privatize Social Security. He wants to take a guaranteed benefit and turn it into a gamble."

Although no specific proposal has been developed, the Bush plan would allow workers younger than 55 to voluntarily set aside a portion of their Social Security payroll taxes so the money could be invested in the stock market or other securities.

Bush insists that diverting money to private accounts would pay off because the return on them would outpace what Social Security earns.

But the money taken from Social Security would create a funding shortfall estimated at $1 trillion to $5 trillion.

The shortage would be the difference between the benefits Social Security is required to pay and the taxes collected to cover them. Bush has not said how the gap would be closed but that all options "are on the table."

The other, even bigger problem that Bush must surmount is that private accounts do nothing to ensure the long-term viability of Social Security. Federal analysts say Social Security will exhaust its reserves between 2042 and 2052 and would be able to pay only 70 percent of guaranteed benefits unless changes are made.

"Is it like a slowly leaking tire? Yes," Mikulski said. "Why get rid of the car if you have a slow leak?"

The Democrats urged a bipartisan approach to patching the leak and preserving a program that they said has proved to be a national boon since its inception 70 years ago.

But the problem, state Republican Party Chairman Chris Vance said in a telephone interview, is that the Democrats will not say exactly what kind of patch they have in mind.

There are three options, Vance said: raise Social Security taxes, cut benefits or overhaul the system.

The president has taken what he calls the reform path, Vance said.

"These Democrats are opposed to it because George W. Bush proposed it," Vance said. "Instead of grandstanding, they ought to come up with a plan of their own and let's actually debate it."

Bush is promoting his proposal in appearances nationwide. The Democrats are countering with events like the one at Town Hall.

"We're going to make sure that Social Security is there for seniors of today and the seniors of tomorrow," Murray said.

But Murray noted that the program helps more than retirees. It also pays benefits to disabled workers -- such as her father, who in his 30s was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis, which confined him to a wheelchair and forced him to stop working.

Thanks to Social Security, Murray said, she and her six brothers and sisters were able to go to college and earn their degrees.

P-I reporter Gregory Roberts can be reached at 206-448-8022 or gregoryroberts@seattlepi.com P-I Washington correspondent Charles Pope contributed to this report.

Add P-I Local headlines to