Social Security is lifelline when you can no longer work due to disability

It seems to me I hear so called "conservatives"  getting all riled up about wanting to rip apart America's social safety net.     I really pray that they never manage to.     As a multiply-disabled person  I very sadly came to a point where my health did not permit me to continue in my library job.     Fortunately,   I was experienced with the process of applying for Social Security benefits and understood going in that even if they approved me their version of "right away"  it could still easily be a year before I received my first check,  so as soon as I was off the payroll I went to my local DSHS office  and applied for "medically needy"  benefits.    Since my income was zero and I have no real assetts,   they immediately approved me for food stamps.   After my "psych evaluation" interview with the DSHS in house psychologist they stamped my file "bi-polar"   and quickly issued me a medicaid health insurance card which allowed me to get routine health care at a local clinic.    Even though I was on welfare,  I had a primary care provider who saw me every visit and made referrals for my other serious health needs like a hearing evaluation and replacement hearing aid and a diabetic visual exam and new glasses.

In my gut,   when my local welfare office approved me right away on my first application for the small ($329 per month) cash stipend and the medicaid card,  I knew immediately that social security would approve my claim rather quickly for them.    Yesterday I went into my local social security office to bring in some documentation which was required and meet with my case worker.    Who handed me a letter stating that Social Security will begin paying me $1228 per month on the second Wednesday of each month.    First direct deposit will be September 8th.     During the nine months it took Social Security to approve me,  they determined I was entitled to benefits of over $5,000 dollars of which $2,000 some odd will go back to the welfare department and a direct deposit for the balance will post to my bank account within 7--10 days.

I got my first job when I was sixteen years old.   And while there were times that I did not work for one reason or another,   I  clocked more than 20 years of full-time employment and a handful of years of part time work.    And in every single job I've had over the last thirty years I have paid OASDI  (Old Age, Survivors and Diability) and Medicare taxes on every dollar that I ever earned.    Those  taxes which I paid in theory defray the cost of providing for me now that I am unable to work.     Social Security is, imho,  a contract that says if you work hard you have the right to be taken care of when you get old or become unable to work.     Social Security means that we don't leave people to die out in the streets when they are unable to work.     Disabilities can take many different forms.     But  it really comforts me to know that Social Security will allow me to retire with a little dignity and enough money to get by.   

Have you or a family member ever had to go on disability?

Ron Paul: Lockbox Illegal Aliens Out Of Social Security

Having written about the Hype surrounding the Ron Paul campaign and having gotten an interesting comment from Zagurim (who by the way has an excellent breakdown of the funding sources that go beyond the fund raising totals mentioned in my Hype post) who asked how I would vote in a Hillary vs Ron Paul match-up.

Anyone who has read my Hillary post knows that I think she is the only chance the Democrats have of losing this November and that I personally Would NOT vote for her. I replied to Zagurim that I would either vote for Dr. Paul or for Mickey Mouse and that I have NO intention of ever coming any closer than that to pledging to vote RP in the general. But blanking my ballot is not a real attractive option. So I realized maybe I should take a closer look at Ron Paul on the issues, beyond the hype. And today I start with Social Security.

First, a thanks to my Blog Catalog buddy, Cindy, who kindly provided me with a link for ronpaullibrary.org which has a wealth of Dr. Paul's position papers and other writings. I found a concise document out-lining Paul's Social Security positions, which can be summed up by referencing three bills related to Social Security introduced by Rep. Paul in January 2007 at the start of the 110th Congress:

H.R. 191 Senior Citizens Tax Elimination Act

H.R. 219 Social Security Preservation Act

H.R. 190 The Social Security for Americans Only Act

(click on any bill number to read summary or full text information at OpenCongress.org)

The first of these bills, I happen to agree with completely. American workers paid taxes on the income that they contributed into the Social Security trust fund and it seems wrong to tax that income again when it is paid out of the trust fund as benefits.

The second bill sounds good. It seems to say simply that Social Security funds must be invested in interest bearing accounts and can not be lent to other government entities interest free nor used to pay any other government obligations. This sounds to be a great deal like the "lockbox" concept that was a key element of many plans that have been floated to save Social Security and it does sound good. The problem for me it that I haven't a sophisticated enough understanding of law or finance to really know if the bill will as promised insure Social Security's continued solvency. Does this bill really address any of the fundamental problems with Social Security that are often attributed to demographic changes and increasing longevity rather than Congress' raiding the cookie jar?

The third bill is the one where I Know I'm going to piss off friends and make new enemies. I confess to being the only Liberal extant who is opposed to illegal immigration, opposed to "amnesty" and on this issue find myself strangely standing in a corner with the freepers. (And man do they creep me out.) The following is quoted from a post on my books blog, The Thin Red Line:

And then this issue of illegal immigration seems to re-draw these lines rather strangely, and to a large extent I find myself cast uncomfortably on the side of the freepers.

I believe that illegal immigrants depress wages for all Americans and utterly reject the argument that we must have illegal immigrants because there are so many jobs that American's just won't do. (It seems to me that argument is really an insistence on being allowed to have illegal immigrants so as not to be forced to provide the level of wages, benefits and working conditions most Americans would likely demand.) Certainly, I believe that America should continue to welcome immigrants, that we should develop a fair process for rationing the privilege of coming here that takes into account both the needs of business for additional labor and the limits of our resources to care for, succor and support new arrivals, while actively and effectively enforcing our immigration laws, primarily through stiff financial and criminal penalties for those who employ illegals.

The "compromise" immigration reform currently being debated in Washington does none of this.

I do, however, have a problem with the fact that this bill would not in any way exempt illegal aliens from paying into the Social Security trust fund through OASDI deductions (which are of course Mandatory) on paychecks earned in the United States. I am uncomfortable with the idea of forcing undocumented workers to supplement the retirements of everyone else. As Ron Paul argues strongly elsewhere money you pay into Social Security out of every paycheck is there for you to live on when you get old or sick and not for the government to spend on anything else. So I think that if you pay into the fund you earn the right to draw out of the fund.

My biggest concern about all three of these bills, however is that since being introduced and referred to committee in January, absolutely Nothing has happened on any of these bills. No hearings, no votes, no nothing. Which leaves me wondering "is any of this actual serious legislation that Ron Paul had any intention of pushing through Congress or are these three bills basically campaign promises written in the Congressional Record, the use of a Congressional Seat as a Presidential Platform printing department?

On the surface I like much of what Ron Paul says about Social Security. But I lack faith that his prescribed solutions would solve the real problems. And I also wonder whether he is legislating or grand-standing with these bills.