I was especially interested that the Senator from Utah described as a fiscal gimmick separating out the Social Security trust fund from the rest of the Federal budget, because, if I am not mistaken, the Senator from Utah himself voted for that very proposition in 1990. In fact, we had a vote right on the floor of the U.S. Senate on the specific question of whether or not we were going to count the Social Security trust fund as part of the overall budget or not. I believe separating out the Social Security trust fund received 97 or 98 votes. I believe the Senator from Utah was recorded in favor of the proposition that he now describes as a gimmick. I do not believe that he felt it was a gimmick then, and I do not believe that anybody who voted for it believed it was a gimmick then. It was a move to try to stop the nefarious practice of using Social Security trust fund surpluses to mask the true size of the operating deficit in this country. Now what they are seeking to do is put that flawed principle in the Constitution of the United States.
Kent Conrad: “I was especially interested that the Senator from Utah described as a fiscal gimmick separating out the Social Security…”
On the recordFebruary 12, 1997
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Discussing the separation of the Social Security trust fund from the federal budget during Senate debate.
Share
More from Kent Conrad
Apr 4, 2017
I would just say our Retirement Security Plans and our Retirement Security Clearinghouses are responding to the underlying dynamic that Professor Mead has done such a good job in describing.
Oct 18, 2023
We admire that, and I can say on both sides of the aisle, people recognize the job he did as Budget Committee Chairman.
Oct 18, 2023
Can I just respond quickly, Mr. Chairman, and say when Simpson-Bowles went down, a group of six of us in the Senate, three Democrats, three Republicans, were asked by leadership to see if we couldn't come up with a way forward to adopt the…





