Political Promises, Promises, Promises…

Posted by Tina

Politicians compete to win our votes by assuring us that they have our best interests in mind. They make promises to deliver legislation that will solve our problems and improve the quality of our lives. But is this true in practice or just a bunch of well intended hooey. We are fools to take them at their word. Politics is a game and the stakes are very high. The game has led to a sense that citizens who rise to this grand state of service somehow will behave with extraordinary abilities and devise brilliant solutions. We would do better to rely on ourselves to solve most problems because the fixes they devise never deliver as promised and have proven through the years to be wasteful, inefficient, and costly both in human terms and in terms of every individuals economic opportunity, economic stability, and buying power. Most of the modern web of tangled legislation and regulation began in the 1930’s.

President Roosevelt’s Message to Congress contained the following:

In the important field of security for our old people, it seems necessary to adopt three principles: First, noncontributory old-age pensions for those who are now too old to build up their own insurance. It is, of course, clear that for perhaps 30 years to come funds will have to be provided by the States and the Federal Government to meet these pensions. Second, compulsory contributory annuities which in time will establish a self-supporting system for those now young and for future generations. Third, voluntary contributory annuities by which individual initiative can increase the annual amounts received in old age. It is proposed that the Federal Government assume one-half of the cost of the old-age pension plan, which ought ultimately to be supplanted by self-supporting annuity plans.

The grand vision was that the original government initiated plan should be “supplanted” by “self-supporting annuity plans.” How well did that proposal play out?

The original vision Roosevelt had was a government plan to secure old folks hurt by the depression in that time and to secure future generations from devastation in old age with self-supporting annuity plans. It was never meant to replace savings and investment, it was never meant to be a permanent government solution, and it was never meant as a piggy bank for legislators to borrow from whenever they got themselves into a bind through mismanagement of the people’s money!

The Social Security program, signed into law by Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1935 was promoted with an assurance to the citizenry that each worker would get his social security benefits “regardless of the amount of property or income you may have.”

It didn’t take long for the original vision to melt away. The government plan was never replaced with individual annuity accounts, the original low rates climbed higher and taxes were imposed on wealthier contributors. Just the Facts reports that workers “with incomes of more than $25,000/year and couples with incomes of more than $32,000/year must pay income taxes on up to 50%” of their benefits. Those “with incomes of more than $34,000/year and couples with incomes of more than $44,000/year must pay income taxes on up to 85% ” of their benefits and the thresholds for taxation are not automatically indexed for inflation or wage growth. The 1935 Social Security promise does not resemble the reality workers experience today. The program does not deliver returns as promised. In fact, Social Security has been used as a means to secure more revenues through taxation and borrowing while the politicians promised these actions would stand this unsustainable program on its feet:

In 1977, after nearly three years of Social Security deficits,[130] the 95th Congress passed and Democratic President Jimmy Carter signed a bill that increased Social Security taxes and changed the formula governing benefit increases.[131] Carter termed it “the most important Social Security legislation since the program was established,” and at the signing ceremony, he stated: “It is never easy for a politically elected person to raise taxes. But the Congress has shown sound judgment and political courage in restoring the Social Security system to a sound basis. … Now this legislation will guarantee that from 1980 to the year 2030, the Social Security funds will be sound.”[132]

The bill was passed on December 20, 1977, and the Social Security program ran deficits every year for the next four years (not accounting for inflation).[133] Accounting for inflation, the Social Security Trust Fund declined in value every year from 1973 to 1983,[134] at which time, the 98th Congress and Republican President Ronald Reagan increased taxes, raised the retirement age, and made other changes to keep the program solvent.[135]

As we know these changes also didn’t work and the SS Administration acknowledges the ugly truth on its website, according to Just the Truth:

The Social Security Administration’s web site states: “There has been a temptation throughout the program’s history for some people to suppose that their FICA payroll taxes entitle them to a benefit in a legal, contractual sense…. Congress clearly had no such limitation in mind when crafting the law. … Benefits which are granted at one time can be withdrawn….”[265]

Yep, they can always change what they have set in place…including ending your benefits at will.

There are many examples of promises made by politicians to solve our problems at the federal level. A short list:

*The income tax will apply only to the wealthiest individuals and will never go above 6 percent.

*Social Security will always be there for you, and the tax will be only 2 percent.

*Federal aid to education will never mean federal control of education.

*The Medicare program will never allow bureaucrats to interfere with your doctor’s medical decisions.

*Gun-control laws will keep guns away from criminals, but not interfere with the rights of law-abiding citizens.

*Read my lips; no new taxes.

*The Affordable Patient Protection Act will make healthcare and premiums more affordable. We will be able to keep our insurance and our doctor and the uninsured will finally be covered. Those with preexisting conditions will not be denied coverage.

These promises and many more have proven to be untrue or more expensive and unworkable for the American people than promised.

I have one final example for all who follow the immigration debate. The Immigration Reform Act of 1965 was proposed by Ted Kennedy and signed into law by Lyndon Johnson:

The 1965 law was advertised by the politicians as a modest reform that would end the “discriminatory” national origins system, make the U.S. “look good” to the rest of the world, and treat all prospective immigrants equally, no matter what their color or country of origin. The supporters of the bill promised that the new law would have no significant effect on either the total number of immigrants admitted or the
future ethnic balance of the nation.

Senator Ted Kennedy, co-chairman of the Senate Immigration Subcommittee and floor manager of the bill, dismissed the opposition to the bill, saying: “What the bill will not do: First our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. Under the proposed bill, the present level of immigration remains essentially the same. . . . Contrary to the charges in some quarters, S. 500 will not inundate America with immigrants from one country or area.

Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach testified that the purpose of the bill was to eliminate the national origins quota system, not to increase immigration, saying that the annual quota would only be raised from 158,000 to 166,000.

Senator Kennedy estimated that passage of the bill would increase immigration by only 62,000 a year.

…How reliable were the promises of the nation’s political leaders? As a result of the Third World chain migration (one immigrant sending for relatives who in turn send for other relatives) permitted and encouraged by the new law, total legal immigration grew dramatically from an average of 252,000 per year in the decade of the 1950s, to around 600,000 per year by the mid-80s.

Read the paper from the The American Immigration Control Foundation here. Read about AIC by going here.

The best thing that could happen in America would be that the people become more independent, self-reliant, and self-sustaining. Individual citizens taking it upon themselves to make sure their children are educated, to make sure their retirement years are funded and to make sure that healthcare, for instance is affordable by being the consummer that will not tolerate goods and services that cost too much. The individual is the conscience and stop sign that is missing from government management. Putting ourselves at the mercy of politicians in Washington has led to unsustainable programs, massive debt, inefficiency and waste, more dependency in the people, more of our children lacking proper education, and a general moral and economic decline. How do we know when a politician is feeding us a story…his lips are moving. He promises what he cannot deliver and delivers up a whole lot of mess in the process of trying to deliver.

America as a nation of hearty individuals and families that rely on themselves and their neighbors will always make better decisions and hold each other accountable. Why? Because when people are encouraged to take responsibility they mature, they learn they must be strong and accountable through the trial and error of their life experiences. We don’t need empty or broken promises from politicians cloaked in self importance and operating in an unaccountable political machine. We need freedom.

I encourage young people especially to turn away from big government solutions and the promises that politicians make. History teaches us that giving our money to the federal government is wasteful and unfair and placing our faith in politicians to deliver a better life is just plain crazy when with a little planning and work we can do a much better job ourselves.