Interesting email I received

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Interesting email I received
11
Thu, 08-19-2004 - 10:48am
I received the following email from a friend of mine, and while I knew some of the information contained within it, I did not know some of the others.

Take a read and see what you think:

Do you recall something like this in your youth ?

SOCIAL SECURITY:

Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA)

Program. He promised:

1.) That participation in the Program would be completely voluntary,

2.) That the participants would only have to pay

1% of the first $1,400 of their annual incomes into the Program,

3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be

deductible from their income for tax purposes each year,

4.) That the money the participants put into the independent "Trust Fund"

rather than into the General operating fund, and therefore, would only be

used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government

program, and,

5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as

income.

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a

Social Security check every month -- and then finding that we are getting

taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government to "put away,"

you may be interested in the following:

Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the independent "Trust"

fund and put it into the General fund so that Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the Democratically-controlled House and Senate.

Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social

Security (FICA) withholding?

A: The Democratic Party.

Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?

A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the "tie-breaking" deciding

vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the U.S.

Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to

immigrants?

MY FAVORITE :

A: That's right! Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party. Immigrants moved

into this country, and at age 65, began to receive SSI Social Security

payments! The Democratic Party gave these payments to them, even though

they never paid a dime into it!

Then, after doing all this lying and thieving and violation of the original

contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans

want to take your Social Security away!

And the worst part about it is, uninformed citizens believe it!

perhaps we are asking the wrong questions during this 2004 election year!

If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of awareness will be planted and

maybe good changes will evolve.

How many people can YOU send this to?

Keep this going clear up through the 2004 election!! We need to be heard!

Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to

realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.



I knew points #1, #3, #4, and #5, but with #2, I thought that people would have to pay in $1,400 per year...maybe I was confused.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-17-2004
Thu, 08-19-2004 - 12:14pm
This message would make no difference to me. I am not a dyed in the wool Democrat. I couldn't stand Lyndon Johnson.

This election is about the man in charge of our country and that man should not be in charge of the greatest and most powerful country in the world.

The Social Security issue is a serious one. No one likes the fact that this program is not the one we were promised (so why don't our elected politicians DO something about it?) But this has been going on for a while.

The more urgent problem is the removal of a president who would bomb another country - just 'cause he could. He needs to be removed, now! If he stays in power we may not live long enough to collect S.S.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-07-2004
Thu, 08-19-2004 - 1:02pm
misrepresentations, half truths & LIES LIES LIES.

Which president signed into law the severe restrictions on SSI for immigrants? Clinton did in the 1996 Welfare Reform Act. And SSI isn't the same as Social Security, so the email you received was both wrong AND misleading.

That's just one example.

Or if you are really interested in the truth, here it is from your own government;

http://www.ssa.gov/history/InternetMyths2.html


MYTHS AND MISINFORMATION ABOUT SOCIAL SECURITY- Part 2

Myths and misstatements of fact frequently circulate on the Internet, in email and on websites, and are repeated in endless loops of misinformation. One common set of such misinformation involves a series of questions about the history of the Social Security system.


One Common Form of the Questions:

Q1: Which political party took Social Security from the independent trust fund and put it into the general fund so that Congress could spend it?

Q2: Which political party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

Q3: Which political party started taxing Social Security annuities?

Q4: Which political party increased the taxes on Social Security annuities?

Q5: Which political party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants?





THE CORRECT ANSWERS TO THE FIVE QUESTIONS

Q1. Which political party took Social Security from the independent trust fund and put it into the general fund so that Congress could spend it?

A1: There has never been any change in the way the Social Security program is financed or the way that Social Security payroll taxes are used by the federal government. The Social Security Trust Fund was created in 1939 as part of the Amendments enacted in that year. From its inception, the Trust Fund has always worked the same way. The Social Security Trust Fund has never been "put into the general fund of the government."

(For a detailed explanation of how the Trust Fund works, provided by the Social Security Administration's actuaries, see the material available elsewhere on our website.)

Most likely this question comes from a confusion between the financing of the Social Security program and the way the Social Security Trust Fund is treated in federal budget accounting. Starting in 1969 (due to action by the Johnson Administration in 1968) the transactions to the Trust Fund were included in what is known as the "unified budget." This means that every function of the federal government is included in a single budget. This is sometimes described by saying that the Social Security Trust Funds are "on-budget." This budget treatment of the Social Security Trust Fund continued until 1990 when the Trust Funds were again taken "off-budget." This means only that they are shown as a separate account in the federal budget. But whether the Trust Funds are "on-budget" or "off-budget" is primarily a question of accounting practices--it has no affect on the actual operations of the Trust Fund itself. (The budget treatment of the Trust Funds is explained in more detail elsewhere on our website.)



Q2: Which political party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A2: There was never any provision of law making the Social Security taxes paid by employees deductible for income tax purposes. In fact, the 1935 law expressly forbid this idea, in Section 803 of Title VIII.

(The text of Title VIII. can be found elsewhere on our website.)



Q3. Which political party started taxing Social Security annuities?

A3. The taxation of Social Security began in 1984 following passage of a set of Amendments in 1983, which were signed into law by President Reagan in April 1983. These amendments passed the Congress in 1983 on an overwhelmingly bi-partisan vote.

The basic rule put in place was that up to 50% of Social Security benefits could be added to taxable income, if the taxpayer's total income exceeded certain thresholds.

The taxation of benefits was a proposal which came from the Greenspan Commission appointed by President Reagan and chaired by Alan Greenspan, who is presently serving as Chairman of the Federal Reserve.

The full text of the Greenspan Commission report is available on our website.

President's Reagan's signing statement for the 1983 Amendments can also be found on our website.

A detailed explanation of the provisions of the 1983 law is also available on the website.



Q4. Which political party increased the taxes on Social Security annuities?

A4. In 1993, legislation was enacted which had the effect of increasing the tax put in place under the 1983 law. It raised from 50% to 85% the portion of Social Security benefits subject to taxation; but the increased percentage only applied to "higher income" beneficiaries. Beneficiaries of modest incomes might still be subject to the 50% rate, or to no taxation at all, depending on their overall taxable income.

The details of these provisions can be found on our website.

This change in the tax rate was one provision in a massive Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) passed that year. The OBRA 1993 legislation was deadlocked in the Senate on a tie vote of 50-50 and Vice President Al Gore cast the deciding vote in favor of passage.

(You can find a brief historical summary of the development of taxation of Social Security benefits on the Social Security website.)



Q5. Which political party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants?

A5. Neither immigrants nor anyone else is able to collect Social Security benefits without someone paying Social Security payroll taxes into the system. The conditions under which Social Security benefits are payable, and to whom, can be found in the pamphlets available on our website.

The question confuses the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program with Social Security. SSI is a federal welfare program and no contributions, from immigrants or citizens or anyone else, is required for eligibility. Under certain conditions, immigrants can qualify for SSI benefits. The SSI program was an initiative of the Nixon Administration and was signed into law by President Nixon on October 30, 1972.

An explanation of the basics of Social Security, and the distinction between Social Security and SSI, can be found on the Social Security

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Thu, 08-19-2004 - 1:12pm
Typical response from a blinded Liberal.

SSI = Social Security Insurance.

Sorry, it is the same, and the facts in the email are correct if you bother to check them out. (with the exception of the 1% of the first $1,400 which I am still checking on)

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-07-2004
Thu, 08-19-2004 - 1:21pm
Wrong. SSI stands for Supplemental Security Income, it is a welfare benefit funded by general revenue, not by the trust fund.

No, it is NOT the same.

Do a bit of research before you insult people.

No, the facts are not correct in the email, I did bother to check them out at WWW.SSA.GOV.




Typical response from a blinded Liberal.

SSI = Social Security Insurance.

Sorry, it is the same, and the facts in the email are correct if you bother to check them out. (with the exception of the 1% of the first $1,400 which I am still checking on)

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Thu, 08-19-2004 - 1:21pm

It's a good idea to check before posting 'these factual' emails.

http://www.snopes.com/snopes.asp

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-05-2003
Thu, 08-19-2004 - 1:47pm
Snopes is very good at trying to "game" the system here ala Kerry. The taxes for example in 1983 which supposedly a Republican put in were FICA related, and not a general tax or income tax on social security benefits. See the specifics link from the SSA.GOV website for this ... "Advances scheduled increases in Social Security tax rates. Social Security tax rates (which include the Hospital Insurance tax rates) for employers and employees will increase to 7.0 percent in 1984, {1} 7.05 percent in 1985, 7.15 percent in 1986-87, 7.51 percent in 1988-89 and 7.65 percent in 1990 and thereafter. " at http://www.ssa.gov/history/1983amend.html

It WAS Democrat Bill Clinton with a Democratic controlled Congress (both houses) who added social security benefits to income tax for the first time ever.

SNOPES is a liberal biased group pretending to be fair... they are trying very hard to provide misinformation as information... those who buy into it do so because it's self serving... not because it's good information.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Thu, 08-19-2004 - 2:10pm
Sorry, you are correct about the SSI.

The other facts (the ones that I referred to in my original post, meaning #'s 1` through 5) are correct, although I still cannot find the correct fact about the $1,400.

I was always under the impression that the $1,400 was the amount that was paid into the fund, not 1% of the first $1,400.

Also, the fact about Johnson raiding the fund is correct.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2004
Thu, 08-19-2004 - 2:13pm
-->"Q: Which party put a tax on Social Security?

A: The Democratic party.

FALSE

Actually, it was Ronald Reagan, a Republican, who signed a bill taxing

Social Security benefits.

http://www.ssa.gov/history/briefhistory3.html

You might want to check through your data again on that one.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2003
Thu, 08-19-2004 - 3:13pm
About the only thing I know, IMO, is that it's fairly irresponsible to forward any e-mail or make statements that are supposedly facts unless one has the time and resources to prove what is being spread is in fact true. Then, of course, sometimes things are neither true or false, simply opinion or observations. I would say that the links from www.ssa.gov (interesting posters on both sides of this argument have linked to this site)are true!

Here's a link from www.factcheck.org that certainly questions the veracity of the

e-mail's claims:

Since my first article on lying e-mails, I've gotten dozens of inquiries about a snarky little message blaming Democrats alone for all sorts of bad changes to Social Security. I'm calling it "Lying E-mail #2" because it is so full of laughably inaccurate claims.


Lying E-mail #2

SOCIAL SECURITY:

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Security check every month -- and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the federal government to "put away," you may be interested in the following:

Q: Which party took Social Security from an independent fund and put it in the general fund so that Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the

Democratic-controlled House and

Senate.

Q: Which party put a tax on Social Security?

A: The Democratic party.

Q: Which party increased the tax on Social Security?

A: The Democratic Party with Al Gore casting the deciding vote.

Q: Which party decided to give money to immigrants?

A: That's right, immigrants moved into this country and at 65 got SSI Social Security. The Democratic Party gave that to them although they never paid a dime into it.

Then, after doing all this, the Democrats turn around and tell you the Republicans want to take your Social Security.

And the worst part about it is, people believe it!

Pass it on please!

2004 Election Issue

This must be an issue in "04." Please! Keep it going.



Who Taxed Benefits?

The most glaring falsehood in this one is a claim that it was "the Democratic party" that "put a tax on Social Security."

Oh yeah?

Here's a link to a picture of that tax being signed into law. The year was 1983, and the President who signed it was Ronald Reagan.

Note Republican senators Bob Dole and Howard Baker -- both of whom had a hand in passing the law through the Republican -controlled Senate -- are looking on approvingly, along with a number of Democrats.

The tax, in fact, was part of a bipartisan measure to address Social Security's shaky finances. And it was recommended by a bipartisan commission headed by another Republican -- Alan Greenspan -- who had been appointed by Reagan. You can read about the Greenspan Commission (and see a picture of a much younger Greenspan) here , at a site the Social Security Administration maintains to document the history of the program. There is a full history of how benefits came to be taxed here .

And by the way, the tax only applied to a relatively small percentage of retirees -- those whose income totaled over $32,000 for a married couple. And the tax fell on only 50% of their Social Security benefits.

Who Gave SSI To Immigrants?

The next biggest whopper in this e-mail is a claim that it was "the Democratic party" that "decided to give money to immigrants" through the SSI program, "although they never paid a dime into it."

Actually it was Republican President Richard Nixon who both proposed and signed the legislation creating SSI -- the Supplemental Security Income program. When he signed it on Oct. 30, 1972, Nixon called it "landmark legislation." It was also bipartisan, approved by a Congress that was controlled by Democrats at the time.

Under Nixon's SSI law, immigrants were eligible for benefits from the start, as were all citizens, provided they were blind, disabled or elderly and destitute.

SSI is a federal welfare program funded out of general tax revenues, and is separate from the Social Security old-age pensions and disability insurance programs funded out of dedicated payroll taxes. While Social Security benefits are paid to those who have paid payroll taxes for a certain minimum period of time, SSI benefits were available to all -- citizens and resident aliens alike -- regardless of whether they had "paid a dime into it" or not.

The Social Security Administration published a history to mark the 20th anniversary of the SSI program, which you can read here.

It's true that Republicans did try to cut off SSI benefits for immigrants in 1996, but they quickly eased their stance amid a public outcry. The 1996 welfare-reform law cut off benefits for most immigrants. (Democratic President Bill Clinton protested, but signed the law anyway) An outcry arose when the Social Security Administration notified more than 660,000 aged, blind and disabled immigrants that their benefits would be cut off at the end of 1997, and newspapers carried reports of some who had committed suicide after being notified. Congress then restored benefits to those immigrants who were getting them before the welfare-reform law was signed. The measure that permanently restored benefits to pre-1996 immigrants (Public Law 105-306) passed the Republican House by voice vote and the Republican Senate by unanimous consent.

Tough restrictions remain for newer immigrants, which you can read here. But you can credit a Republican President for ceating SSI and a Republican Congress for giving SSI benefits back to hundreds of thousands of aged, blind and disabled immigrants.

Who Spent Trust Fund Money?

The e-mail gets history wrong again when it blames Democrats alone for spending Social Security tax revenues for other purposes. It is true that Democratic President Lyndon Johnson was the first to lump the accounting for Social Security (and many other federal trust funds) into the "unified" federal budget. He announced this in 1968 in his State of the Union address:

LBJ: This budget, therefore, for the first time accurately covers all Federal expenditures and all Federal receipts, including for the first time in one budget $47 billion from the social security, Medicare, highway, and other trust funds.

But the same accounting practice has been followed by every President and Congress since, Democrat or Republican. It's as bipartisan as can be.

And anyway, it's not the unified-budget accounting that's at fault for allowing Congress to divert Social Security taxes to other purposes. Indeed, not long after Johnson first put them into the budget the trust funds were soon running large deficits. For seven years, from 1975 through 1981, the money was flowing out, not in, and there was no extra Social Security tax money for Congress to spend. You can see how the trust funds ebbed and flowed here .

It's true that large Social Security surplusses have in more recent years been used for other purposes -- by Democratic and Republican presidents alike, with Democrats in control of Congress, or with Republicans. What created those tempting surplusses was the 1983 law (mentioned above) signed by Reagan, which raised Social Security taxes in an attempt to repair the system's finances. There's plenty of bipartisan blame to go around on this one, too.

One Thing Right

The one item this e-mail gets right is that Democrats were behind an increase in taxes on Social Security benefits. That happened in 1993, as part of Bill Clinton's huge package of spending cuts and tax increases. No Republican voted for that and Vice President Al Gore did cast a tie-breaking vote in the U.S. Senate. That increased tax goes to help pay for Medicare, and is paid only by those making $44,000 a year or more for a married couple. But as we've said before, neither party has made a serious move to repeal that tax since it was enacted. President Bush didn't propose repeal in either of his tax-cut bills for individuals in 2001 or 2003.

The author of "Lying e-mail #2" urges others to "pass it on" and "keep it going," and this collection of bogus claims does seem to be making the rounds. That's too bad. Anyone who believes this sort of trash won't be casting a very well-informed vote this Fall.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-18-2004
Thu, 08-19-2004 - 3:54pm

Hello danidon!


Welcome to the board!

Miffy - Co-CL For The Politics Today Board

Pages