Lateefah Simon: “But to do it in terms of a constitutional amendment, I believe, is unwise for several reasons; one of them being the…”

“But to do it in terms of a constitutional amendment, I believe, is unwise for several reasons; one of them being the reality that starting in the year 2024 Social Security is not running a surplus, but a deficit. That means that anyone 35 years of age or younger right now would, if this amendment were adopted, be in some jeopardy. So I favor statutorily doing that. I do not favor blocking that off in terms of the Constitution because of the long-term implications. And then I would finally say, the need to pass something. When Senator Riegle says it is just a slip of paper that is there, that is what is there for Social Security trust funds right now, called U.S. bonds. And where are we headed? Every other nation, when we go down that road, every other nation has monetized the debt, had hyperinflation. The most recent example is Mexico. In 1988, they had a 12.5-percent deficit relative to GDP. They had 114 percent inflation. That 114 percent inflation means cutting the Social Security trust funds in half, cutting savings in half, and everything else.”